-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Covid-19 will run its course.....
- Thread starter Leongsam
- Start date
Not all doctors know what they are talking about.
Doctors who rely on elective surgery for a living are not getting income when the hospitals have total focus on covid-19 cases.
I have to agree with you there. The stupid modelling projections of those so called experts is an absolute disgrace.
Total focus on empty wards because the projections never materialised.
Modelling is based on data and assumptions. You have a better model?
All models start with assumptions but as more data comes in the assumptions should be updated with real data in order to get a more accurate picture.
The early models did not take into account the fact that the virus was already widespread and therefore grossly overestimated the mortality rate.
Boss until now you still cannot understand the few points KNN
1. Covid19 is much more contagious than other virus KNN
2. It speeds up the death of elderly and anyone with other medical conditions eg diabetes and heart conditions etc which this group of people can live many more years without getting covid19 KNN
3. Although you can say the healthy people should proceed to live life as usual but they can transmit it to (2) easily KNN
4. Although you can say (2) should be isolated and (3) can proceed to live a normal life this also means (2) can no longer meet with (3) KNN which is also not acceptable KNN
5. When (3) live a usual life they also will all be sickly and will not be able to work as usual KNN
Based on all the above this shows that it cannot be taken lightly when compared to other viruses KNN
1. Covid19 is much more contagious than other virus KNN
2. It speeds up the death of elderly and anyone with other medical conditions eg diabetes and heart conditions etc which this group of people can live many more years without getting covid19 KNN
3. Although you can say the healthy people should proceed to live life as usual but they can transmit it to (2) easily KNN
4. Although you can say (2) should be isolated and (3) can proceed to live a normal life this also means (2) can no longer meet with (3) KNN which is also not acceptable KNN
5. When (3) live a usual life they also will all be sickly and will not be able to work as usual KNN
Based on all the above this shows that it cannot be taken lightly when compared to other viruses KNN
I never said it should be taken lightly. For certain portions of the population it can be deadly. All I'm saying is that it does not warrant shutting down a whole economy. Life is fraught with dangers and Covid-19 is just one of many.
The shutdown of the economy is to prevent point 1 to 5 from happening or else how to ? KNN
You will also need to consider this few points
1. Where should this portion of vulnerable population stay ? KNN
2. How are they going to meet the rest of the population? KNN
3. Does it mean after 50 years old or some even 40 and it's end of working life ? Since rikely they will all classified as vulnerables from this age KNN
The high mortality rate are mainly those who are in their 70s and 80s. For the rest of the population covid-19 is less serious than the flu.
There is no magic formula that will provide 100% safety for the elderly. I keep myself safe from the flu every winter because I almost died from flu a couple of decades ago and I know what it can be like. I do this by avoiding crowds, washing my hands frequently and avoiding touching my face as far as possible.
When I end up in a rest home I'll have rely on the measures taken by the rest homes to keep me safe. If they fail then I might die. That's something nobody can avoid forever.
If you rook at the overall cuntry data (not for sg at the time being) it doesn't rook rike only the 70s 80s have died KNN it also contained substantial death counts from the 40 to 60s with a little underlying medical conditions KNN furthernore the data you seeing now is based on lockdown periods KNN without lockdown the lumber should become much more alarming KNN
Boss, I like your attitude.
You told me one should aspire to earn at least usd 30k a month for his entirely life time. I take this seriously.
KNN boss after doing deep thinking of what you keep preaching my uncle now deep listening to this song in a not-so-good-feeling state of mind KNN pls take a min to listen to it to know how the vulnerables state of mind KNN
FYI .....
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus
�
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus
�
| Country, Other | Total Cases | New Cases | Total Deaths | New Deaths | Total Recovered | Active Cases | Serious, Critical | Tot Cases/ 1M pop | Deaths/ 1M pop | Total Tests | Tests/ 1M pop |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| World | 4,508,881 | +83,225 | 302,328 | +4,563 | 1,697,483 | 2,509,070 | 45,550 | 578 | 38.8 |
The wuhan virus will run its course if its treated like the flu. Right now, those that want the lock down will harp on 2 things. 1)Prevent hospitals from being flooded.
Because drs etc dont want to work n make ventilator n icu decisions. N common sense would dictate those that are too far gone should just be given pilitative care. No need to make mountains out of molehills
2) it's a new virus. Dont know wat it does or longterm implications. Medical tech is very advanced now. They have the research etc since jan. Have broken down the DNA etc of the virus. N it's just an evolved flu virus. From the data taken by recovered patients etc they should know wat it does. And every time a 'new' evidence shows up. Its basically the same as a flu. But yet the majority of the populace keeps justifying the lockdowns. A few do benefit financially from this but a majority of the followers do not know they are being boiled to death like a frog in the pot.
Commentary: COVID-19 presents ethical dilemmas for medicine even after the pandemic
The existing medical ethical frameworks were not devised for a pandemic and it shows, says Professor Judit Sándor.
The spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Mexico City
FILE PHOTO: Healthcare workers wearing protective suits transport a man suspected of being infected with the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), as the outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) continues, in Mexico City, Mexico May 11, 2020. REUTERS/Edgard Garrido
Bookmark
BUDAPEST: Since the SARS-CoV-2 virus spread from China to most of the world in February and March, we have all gradually become participants in textbook ethical dilemmas.
Above all, the COVID-19 pandemic has presented overloaded health systems with the huge question of how to continue caring for patients in a secure, fair, and effective way.
And, worryingly, the crisis has highlighted not only the unpreparedness of politicians and health-care systems, but also our failure to develop relevant ethical norms.
As the pandemic spread, many governments hastily implemented medical and social-distancing protocols that mirrored the Chinese authorities’ response.
Until early this year, richer countries had been discussing access to new health-care tools such as robotics and artificial intelligence, or how the state might finance artificial reproductive technologies.
But in the blink of an eye, their health systems surprisingly and unhesitatingly accepted utilitarian ethics – not only by performing drastic triage in intensive-care units (ICUs), but also by refusing to offer a range of other much-needed medical services.
ETHICS IN QUESTION
Ethics textbooks contain numerous philosophical dilemmas that call into question the morality of always applying a utilitarian calculus to human lives.
One of the most widely known was devised by the British philosopher Philippa Foot, and involves a runaway trolley rushing toward five people tied to a train track.
By pulling a switch, you can divert the trolley to another track and save those five lives, but the trolley will then kill one person on that track. What should you do?
Based solely on the mathematical outcome of the choice, many will likely consider it right to intervene and sacrifice one human life in order to save five others.
READ: Commentary: COVID-19 shows there is no place for panic in policymaking
But in both this dilemma and in real life, should we not take other values into account, too?
After all, the COVID-19 pandemic is presenting health workers with tragic situations they have never experienced before.
And if there are not enough health workers, ventilators, or hospital beds, then patients often will need to be categorised and prioritised to determine who receives or does not receive which care, and where.
Health workers wear protective face masks as they work at La Roseliere retirement home (EHPAD) in K
Health workers wear protective face masks as they work at La Roseliere retirement home (EHPAD) in Kunheim, near Colmar, during the outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in France, April 21, 2020. REUTERS/Christian Hartmann
In mid-March, the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care (SIAARTI) issued recommendations for allocating intensive-care treatment of COVID-19 patients.
These include adhering to the “first come, first served” principle in the worst-case scenario that no more ICU resources are available.
And in April, the Hungarian Medical Chamber released a series of mostly utilitarian triage guidelines that focus on saving more lives and giving priority to patients with a higher chance of survival.
NOT PANDEMIC READY
Questions regarding the treatment of patients not infected with SARS-CoV-2 are even more complicated.
Current bioethical norms provide little or no help, and this group of patients is often forgotten.
On Apr 7, for example, the Hungarian government ordered the country’s hospitals to free up to 60 per cent of their beds to accommodate COVID-19 patients.
But as the pandemic continues, other citizens whose conditions were not originally life-threatening may fall into the endangered category.
Our existing ethical frameworks were not devised for a pandemic – and it shows.
READ: Commentary: The great COVID-19 race for protective medical gear and ventilators
Over the last few decades, bioethics has focused on new technologies, such as genetic intervention, biobanks, gene-editing, and artificial reproduction.
Indeed, Europe’s most comprehensive and legally binding set of bioethical norms, the 1997 Oviedo Convention, prescribes that, “The interests and welfare of the human being shall prevail over the sole interest of society or science.”
But at that time, the document’s drafters were more concerned with cloning and genetic treatment than a disease outbreak.
Perhaps more applicable today is the convention’s Article 3: “Parties … shall take appropriate measures with a view to providing, within their jurisdiction, equitable access to health care of appropriate quality.”
But this principle, too, while important, does not address the difficult question of what to do when medical resources are suddenly in short supply, as they are now.
In mid-March, therefore, both The Hastings Center and the Nuffield Council on Bioethics released ethical guidelines for responding to COVID-19.
According to the Nuffield report, public-health measures should be evidence-based and proportionate, minimise coercion and intrusion into people’s lives, and treat people as moral equals.
Moreover, the goal of interventions, and the scientific knowledge, values, and judgment upon which they are based, should be made known to the public.
COMMUNITY CARE APPROACH
Then, on Apr 14, the Council of Europe’s Committee on Bioethics declared that, even in a context of scarce resources, access to health care should be equitable.
A patient under respiratory assistance in Strasbourg
A patient under respiratory assistance is escorted to the Strasbourg University Hospital by members of the medical staff of the SAMU-SMUR emergency services, in Strasbourg, on Mar 16, 2020 during a COVID-19 outbreak hitting Europe. (Photo: AFP/ Patrick HERTZOG)
Furthermore, it should be guided by medical criteria in order to prevent discrimination against vulnerable groups, such as people with disabilities, the elderly, refugees, and migrants.
One of the most significant ethical changes during the pandemic will arise from the need to complement previously patient-centered medical systems with so-called community care.
READ: Commentary: COVID-19 is sparking a new wave of tech innovation in India
Instead of “me-health,” we will need to talk about “we-health.”
To be sure, the doctor-patient relationship will still be guided by crucial ethical norms such as informing the patient, protecting him or her from harm, and maintaining loyalty and confidentiality.
But, in addition, there must be greater emphasis on communal, collective points of view regarding the distribution of limited medical resources than has hitherto been the case.
We must not toss basic bioethical principles aside in the COVID-19 panic.
Only by upholding the doctor-patient relationship and our obligations toward society as a whole can we ensure that health professionals’ heroic efforts do not go to waste, and that participants’ moral integrity is maintained.
After all, once the pandemic ends, we will still have to look one another in the eye, and not just on screen.
If they are elderly n infirmed n dependent on the age home for even basic needs n living in indignity. Would they be better off moving on?
@Leongsam you have to understand that doctors are the most spineless super scared and most bullied profession in the world.
If the college or the council says you cannot open clinics or do operations then you cannot. There is no such thing as "questioning" or "disagreeing"..
If you do the college or council will take away your licence and send you for remedial training.
This is why all the other doctors guai guai just suffer in silence because it has only been a few months. But as time goes on we shall see how long the doctors will allow themselves to be bullied. I suspect they will allow themselves to be bullied for as long as it takes.
Also doctors are not United. They dont stand with each other especially if the college or council disapproves of any collective action that is against their decisions.
Super top down approach.
Meanwhile the public health doctors will die die not have any deaths whatsoever on their hands. Wait kena sued!
So they will just stay the course and say no keep distancing. Dont reopen.
This is going no where lah.
Someone has to have the courage to say FUCKING HELL with you doctors shit nonsense. Let's get back to normal. Screw you. I will take responsibility.
People like Trump dare.
Wuflu Covd-19 will become endemic in the human race.
Sweden was right after all, it appears. Only that the initial death toll would not be acceptable in most nation, hence, the initial series of lockdowns. In subsequent years when CV-19 returns (I suspect on an annual basis), there will be no need for such lockdowns anymore.
Sweden was right after all, it appears. Only that the initial death toll would not be acceptable in most nation, hence, the initial series of lockdowns. In subsequent years when CV-19 returns (I suspect on an annual basis), there will be no need for such lockdowns anymore.
