Exactly that is the problem Peter, that everyone thinks it is an illness of the others. It’s not. It can affect everybody and kill everybody.
Maybe if this finally arrives with the people then they will vaccinate, boost and use their masks for a change?
But while it’s a illness of the fat, unwashed, animal eaters, old farts e.t.c., why do we wonder why millenials and invincibles don’t care until they end up in the ICU?
My little girl and I were guests with a neighbour and schoolmate of hers, her mother works at the emergency ward of one of the larger hospitals here. She sees it every day and they are very close to triage, meaning they have to decide whom to treat and who will die because of capacity. Right now, young unvaccinated folks will have a better survival chance than me, who is 58, tripple vaccinated and obese so in case I fall ill, I can not count to be treated because these (censored) will take my place. Lovely ain’t it.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Absolutely and that is why their zero covid tactics can only work over time if they get everyone vaccinated at the same time.
Zero Covid tactics can’t work at all, because even in a 100% vaccinated population the virus will continue to circulate freely with enough infections, hospitalisations and deaths to make the news.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
She sees it every day and they are very close to triage, meaning they have to decide whom to treat and who will die because of capacity. Right now, young unvaccinated folks will have a better survival chance than me, who is 58, tripple vaccinated and obese so in case I fall ill, I can not count to be treated because these (censored) will take my place. Lovely ain’t it.
Where there is a shortage of capacity in emergency medicine, triage according to greatest chance of survival is a well-established principle. Are you suggesting a different system, for instance priority to the vaccinated?
Mooney_Driver wrote:
It can affect everybody and kill everybody.
It can. But unless you are elderly or in poor health, it is extremely unlikely to. So extremely unlikely as to not be worth worrying about.
Graham wrote:
Are you suggesting a different system, for instance priority to the vaccinated?
No but I do suggest mandiatory vaccinations.
Graham wrote:
So extremely unlikely as to not be worth worrying about.
You will repeat that mantra until affected yourself I am sure. I didn’t realize just how attractive that space just below the surface of the sand is.
A few months ago, we were discussing “who knows someone who died” then talking mostly about unvaccinated folks. Well, I know many, but in the mean time also a few vaccinated. None of them had multiple morbidity as it’s called I believe. They are dead anyway. See Carlos of Il Divo. 53, healthy, vaccinated and gone in less than a week. Also quite a few vaccinated folks got seriously ill, enough to be out for weeks.
It may be extremely unlikely but as long as it happens over and over again to people close to me I worry about it. A lot. So I do the most I can to avoid it. Is it asking too much of the rest of the sorry lot around me to do whatever they can?
maybe on top of the usual, how many hours did you fly this year topic we can do one on threads we wished would go away ;-)
Mooney_Driver wrote:
You will repeat that mantra until affected yourself I am sure. I didn’t realize just how attractive that space just below the surface of the sand is.
Whether I end up being personally affected or not is immaterial to the point made. An individual is extremely unlikely to die of Covid-19 if in good health and not elderly.
I’ve just looked over an ONS dataset of the UK’s Q3 2021 Covid-19 deaths.
76% were over the age of 65 and 83% had a pre-existing condition serious enough to warrant inclusion on the death certificate. The accompanying notes are very clear that they do not capture old age or just being in poor general health under this. The 83% are those who are really unwell with something else, and perhaps would have a relatively high risk of death in the event of any infection.
Graham wrote:
triage according to greatest chance of survival is a well-established principle. Are you suggesting a different system, for instance priority to the vaccinated
This is a very difficult discussion to have. At what point does the freedom to choose come with the responsibility to bear the consequences?
In our health systems, we have mostly shied away from that; the only currently accepted practice is to ask higher insurance premiums based on some sort of risk classification, and that is highly country dependent.
The “voluntarily unvaccinated go to the back of the queue for treatment” idea has a certain appeal to it, but is ethically highly questionable – I would like to know what @Malibuflyer and other physicians think about that. I would guess that prioritising an elderly with a 50% chance of survival over an unvaccinated youngster with an 80% chance of survival would fly in the face of all professional ethics.
I certainly would not want to have to make that sort of decision.
It’s funny, or not how what is called old age is changing. Over years 60 became the new 40, 70 the new 50. With Covid we now seem to be saying that 55 is old, perhaps soon 50 year olds will considered in the high risk category.
From experience, I can honestly say one minute you turn 40 the next you are 70. Unless Covid19 or something.else gets you in the meantime.
gallois wrote:
It’s funny, or not how what is called old age is changing. Over years 60 became the new 40, 70 the new 50. With Covid we now seem to be saying that 55 is old, perhaps soon 50 year olds will considered in the high risk category.
From experience, I can honestly say one minute you turn 40 the next you are 70. Unless Covid19 or something.else gets you in the meantime.
That’s just how they happened to group the data, 0-64 and 65+. It’s not what I’d define as old age and/or elderly, and the dataset might have been more informative if it had included more of a breakdown by age.
Or they could just offer a payment to get vaccinated, inversely proportional to your age and or risk profile. 10K for an 18 year old sliding to down to nothing for those approaching their pension…
Probably cheaper than all the government waste, and probably fairer economically when you consider the inflation that seems to have started…
Graham wrote:
That’s just how they happened to group the data, 0-64 and 65+.
Productive vs unproductive workforce. 65 is the normal retirement age in Europe.
Cobalt wrote:
At what point does the freedom to choose come with the responsibility to bear the consequences?
Consequences such as exclusion from most public life e.t.c. are one thing, which btw I fully support. Medically, as you say rightly, it is a very difficult line to walk.
Covid is one thing. What about smokers, what about fatsoes, what about ….
The major difference however is that in normal circumstances, triage is hardly ever an issue. Therefore, the quesiton does not arise whether to treat a smoker e.t.c. or not.
Now, however, it is a very clear issue. And it is not ethically or practically easy to answer.
Alone the fact that it is unclear how much the vaccinated vs unvaccinated will actually change the outlook. Does someone older who is vaccinated have a better outlook despite morbility than a younger guy who gets the full monty of a massive corona illness? How do you figure that out? In the stats, there are few younger ones, they only now come on line because the older variants did not affect them that much. So we might be looking at 30-40year olds thinking they have a better chance but loose them both?
In my view, this is the worst possible thing anyone can do to a health professional. Therefore, the only thing that can be done to stop this is to mandate vaccinations. I think there are not many who will claim that ICU overflows and general triage will happen if we have a 95% vaccination rate. And boost as much as we can to keep the effects of Omikron as managable as possible.
gallois wrote:
It’s funny, or not how what is called old age is changing. Over years 60 became the new 40, 70 the new 50. With Covid we now seem to be saying that 55 is old, perhaps soon 50 year olds will considered in the high risk category.
In the workplace you are old after 50. Unwanted after 40. So that is not exactly new. And I’ve had it told to my face the other day that people over 65 don’t matter anyway as they have no productive workforce. Retirees, the eariler they die the better so we can get the pension funds better stocked. Told by a approximately 40 year old HR puke, thankfully not of my company. He only walked away with all his teeth because I don’t do such stuff.
But in any case, Covid has turned most people into a dog eat dog mind set. I don’t care if you snuff it as long as I don’t. I don’t care if half of the restaurant/cinema/whatever dies if I have the freedom to buy my beer. Simple as that. Some stay cold fish even after they bury half their family and all their parents e.t.c. So what, more space for me. Disgust doesn’t come close to what I feel for such folks.
Unworthy life has nothing to do with age and I thought that hellish expression has died out with WW2. Well, it hasn’t. It’s alive and kicking. Triage is the very thing where they have to decide who is more likely to die or not. Thankfully, they don’t have to go the step further and euthanize those they have to let go, but who knows when that will happen. With the right people and right mindset, it would only be “logical” in those people’s minds.
