The Reality of Living in Australia and Covid

[AKA-None]

Well if nothing else this conversation has led to some interesting ethics discussion

Seems some may be leaning towards the direction I posited

The ethics might be to let those who choose a position take full responsibility for the results even if that means their decision closes the door on protecting them from the impacts.

Ann came back with the position that a medical practitioner must treat someone even if their current medical status was fully, knowingly self chosen. That position assumes there is bandwidth to accommodate them (and is the normal position taken by almost every one, self included)
But what if you must ration? Do you prioritize someone who through no fault of their own needs medical care over someone who deliberately chose not to take precautions? Consider a situation where you can only help one or the other. You can try to help both but the potential outcomes for both are barely above helping neither of them in the first place.

I see more than a few comments that indirectly consider this specific scenario but I’d like you to think about it clearly, you don’t have to post your position but just think about it. Then consider it if one of the people in the scenario is someone you care for, or someone you can’t stand. Switch the people around in the scenario to see if you view it differently.

Then ask yourself about the situation in Australia what would you do if you were in a position of authority to do something, anything

Or just block me and don’t consider the ethics you propose

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

Well if nothing else this conversation has led to some interesting ethics discussion

Seems some may be leaning towards the direction I posited

The ethics might be to let those who choose a position take full responsibility for the results even if that means their decision closes the door on protecting them from the impacts.

Ann came back with the position that a medical practitioner must treat someone even if their current medical status was fully, knowingly self chosen. That position assumes there is bandwidth to accommodate them (and is the normal position taken by almost every one, self included)
But what if you must ration? Do you prioritize someone who through no fault of their own needs medical care over someone who deliberately chose not to take precautions? Consider a situation where you can only help one or the other. You can try to help both but the potential outcomes for both are barely above helping neither of them in the first place.. . . .

No need to reinvent the wheel. The ethics of triage is a very well-trodden path, with many shelves of books written on the subject.


Knock yourself out: https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org...ethics/2002-01

[Seaworthy Lass]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

Well if nothing else this conversation has led to some interesting ethics discussion

Seems some may be leaning towards the direction I posited

The ethics might be to let those who choose a position take full responsibility for the results even if that means their decision closes the door on protecting them from the impacts.

Ann came back with the position that a medical practitioner must treat someone even if their current medical status was fully, knowingly self chosen. That position assumes there is bandwidth to accommodate them (and is the normal position taken by almost every one, self included)
But what if you must ration? Do you prioritize someone who through no fault of their own needs medical care over someone who deliberately chose not to take precautions? Consider a situation where you can only help one or the other. You can try to help both but the potential outcomes for both are barely above helping neither of them in the first place.

I see more than a few comments that indirectly consider this specific scenario but I’d like you to think about it clearly, you don’t have to post your position but just think about it. Then consider it if one of the people in the scenario is someone you care for, or someone you can’t stand. Switch the people around in the scenario to see if you view it differently.

Then ask yourself about the situation in Australia what would you do if you were in a position of authority to do something, anything

Or just block me and don’t consider the ethics you propose

Rationing medical care when resources are short is referred to as triage. I think the most appropriate way to prioritise has been debated not just for centuries, but millennia . This has been relevant in allocating ICU beds during this pandemic.

The current criteria is generally to provide care to those in greatest need of treatment and most likely to survive, balancing that with probable life years left.

Withholding care during triage has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the person put themselves at risk to cause injury or illness.

It also has nothing to do with how much the person is liked, whether or not they are known or famous or how good they are or how much they contribute to society.

Nor do people currently have to personally pay for their medical treatment simply because they have put themselves at risk. This is fortunate for smokers, those who are obese, drink to much alcohol, engage in unsafe sex or enjoy being couch potatoes. These people tend to disproportionately contribute to our hospitals admissions. Also lucky for those who engage in dangerous sports and especially lucky for cruisers who experience emergencies out at sea . We have all put ourselves at risk.

SWL

[AKA-None]

And yet hospitals have been rescheduling surgery to allow for space related to COVID
As others have asked some of those rescheduled may die early simply to make room for self inflicted harm.
We can point to triage all day yet this thread is primarily about this very topic of ethics, is it not?

As far as sailing don’t we take precautions

Not aware of most people just hopping on a boat they bought 5 minutes ago and trying to cross an ocean
And if they do then do we ethically expect others to take up the slack. I know rescue does but should they one taking the risk expect it?

If I go to the hospital for a smoking related illness should I expect to bump someone there for something beyond their control if there is only resources for one of us?

To bring it back to Australia should those who tried be irritated with those who didn’t

So should those who say it’s their personal freedom expect priority over those who did the right thing?

Not trying to argue but to understand those who say it’s about them until it isn’t and then expect consideration from those who tried to help before it becomes an issue

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Pedants of the world, unite!

And, dyslectic [dyslexic?] pedants untie!

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

... Nor do people currently have to personally pay for their medical treatment simply because they have put themselves at risk. This is fortunate for smokers, those who are obese, drink to much alcohol, engage in unsafe sex or enjoy being couch potatoes. These people tend to disproportionately ...

Die younger/sooner, thereby reducing our overall health care costs.

Yea us!

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Die younger/sooner, thereby reducing our overall health care costs.

Yea us!

Well I smoke, drink (some say to much) and have never had to be treated for either.. but this couch potato Covid induced crap could be the death of me... keep your fingers crossed..

[sailingabe41ds]

I guess we should also let people die and not treat if they eat meat and cholesterol is high...or if they are overwt and they are diabetics. Maybe we shouldnt treat people with HIV because they can spread the disease and put others at risk...let them die for making bad personal choices.
Vaccinated people spread Covid as much as non vac. In fact they get a false sense of security brushing off mild symptoms as a cold while still going out here spreading disease. Wales UK 87% of those hospitalized with Covid
were vaccinated and 60% in Israel....you dont think they spread Covid before they got so sick.
Furthermore this is a leaky vaccine which the vaccinated may be sellecting for a super covid...are you then going to blame them.
It goes on and on...next thing is let our poor die since they contribute nothing to society...suck resources contributing to global warming that is going to kill us all
Unless you are a perfect human specimen becareful what you wish for...you might be next.

Abe

[GordMay]

Covid-19 in Wales: A third of positive cases are unvaccinated
The sheer numbers of people vaccinated - nearly 95% of those over 60 and 84% of those under 60 - mean that statistically, double-vaccinated people will still be a significant proportion of hospital patients.
Although 80% of [Covid-19] patients have been double-dosed with a vaccine, public health officials said this is not evidence that the vaccine is not working - and that vaccines keep 95% of people out of hospital.
Without its protection, the numbers in hospital would be far greater, they added.
➥ ➥ https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-58680204

Covid in Wales: What do the stats tell us?
➥ https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-52380643

[El Pinguino]

It would appear that Melbourne - after a number of falsh starts, recounts and audits - now holds the world record - depending on which bits you consider.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/v....html#comments

'In fact, the longest-lockdown title is up for debate. Take Santiago: this Friday, Chile finally lifted an 18-month curfew, and stay-at-home orders on weekends and public holidays in parts of the country including the capital. Still, a “mobility pass” proof of vaccination will be required to enter public spaces, public transport, restaurants, bars and events.
Not all lockdowns are equal. Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government “stringency index”, which compares countries’ most strict social-distancing policies, has never put Australia in top spot. Both Argentina and Chile were rated more stringent throughout the pandemic, even at our lockdown peaks. Melbourne never banned outdoor exercise entirely (like Spain and Argentina), or allowed only two visits to the shops a week (like Chile). Toronto banned indoor dining at restaurants for more than 400 days, finally opening up in July.

But there’s a weary consensus that Melbourne soon beats Buenos Aires, Dublin, London and Prague, fellow members of the “200 Club” for days under stay-at-home rules.'

What a shame Morrison so totally and utterly stuffed up vaccine procurement.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by GordMay

And, dyslectic [dyslexic?] pedants untie!

GordMay rules KO!

[JPA Cate]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

And yet hospitals have been rescheduling surgery to allow for space related to COVID
As others have asked some of those rescheduled may die early simply to make room for self inflicted harm.
We can point to triage all day yet this thread is primarily about this very topic of ethics, is it not?

As far as sailing don’t we take precautions

Not aware of most people just hopping on a boat they bought 5 minutes ago and trying to cross an ocean
And if they do then do we ethically expect others to take up the slack. I know rescue does but should they one taking the risk expect it?
Just my opinion here, but I think abuse of rescue services by folks lacking knowledge falls under the heading of unintended consequences. And for a long time, where there have been the resources, the lame and the halt have been helped to survive, even 11th century England kept alive and supported Downs Syndrome children into adulthood, as is done today in Australia. Human systems are imperfect. Should they expect rescue. Probably, it's how they were brought up.

If I go to the hospital for a smoking related illness should I expect to bump someone there for something beyond their control if there is only resources for one of us?

I do know of cases where smokers were denied surgeries. Dental implants in one case, and liver transplant in the other, due to the effects of smoking on the immune system. Problem is when you consider the problems people bring on themselves, we are like the other animals and some birds, who enjoy intoxication of varying kinds. We may actually think ourselves higher order than we are!

To bring it back to Australia should those who tried be irritated with those who didn’t

Ah, now you're talking about feelings, and the desire for things to be fair.
Maybe we should all read our Voltaire again. Don't know about you, but nobody promised me a rose garden. I am seeing many people expressing the notion that the anti-vaxers be punished. Unfortunately, if they stay with that, the disease may punish them, and harshly, as seen in the US, and in Canada. Someone in another thread called that Darwinism in action.

So should those who say it’s their personal freedom expect priority over those who did the right thing?

Well, the question is who gets to say it is the "right thing" to be vaccinated. Your question, phrased that way, has an assumption in it, like the question, "when did he stop beating his wife?" it assumes he was a perpetrator of domestic violence. As long as there are facilities for the care of both, yes, they ought to expect care, because that is how the medical system here is oriented.

Not trying to argue but to understand those who say it’s about them until it isn’t and then expect consideration from those who tried to help before it becomes an issue

The selfish behavior of people to the contrary of the common good is the basis of the concept of the "tragedy of the commons." It is a sad story repeated over thousands of years, due to people wanting to look out only for number one, and being too frightened of starvation to be willing to help others survive. Thus, the clue for survival in the story, "Stone Soup".

If you think they don't deserve help because they're human and made a poor decision, you get to say that. But if you want to help them change their mind, and they are sincere-- rather than playing a political agenda-- then you need to non-judgmentally explore their reluctance with them, in a kindly way.
Your choice.

I really think most reasonable people will remember they had to have smallpox vaccine to go to school, and most people nowadays in first world countries have been vaccinated against Diphtheria, Whooping Cough, Tetanus, Mumps, Measles, Polio, Hepatitis and some, against Shingles, and Chlamydia. It has worked well in their lives before now. Realizing that while the risks from the new Covid vaccines are not completely understood, it's early days, yet, they seem to be a lot lower than those of getting Covid and being hospitalized. It changes the risk/benefit computation. People who had doubts will be encouraged by the fiscal consequences to get inoculated, mostly. And we all will benefit, once there is less threat to the health care infrastructure....till the next pandemic. Getting this one dealt with will provide us with skills to carry forward till next time. It is the nature of DNA to replicate itself. There will be more. When is not known.

Apologies to all for being so long winded.

Ann

[sailingabe41ds]

Trust your government...Gladys Berejiklian from New South Wales resigns after exposed being given 10s of millions $ by AstraZeneca..Pfeizer to drive Covid policy.
Yes...your politicians and big Pharma are your friends. Do not question and follow their science blindly... obey...or you will be arrested and labeled as a flatearther and spreader.
For the record I really do not what the truth is any more since there are so many billions of dollars at stake. Whatever happened to questioning authority...specially big pharma and politicians? Now if you question you are labeled...kicked off twitter...youtube. Protect your freedoms while you can.
abe

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by mat jam

............
Also, the NSW premier who recently resigned, the msm are saying her relationship with someone is the reason is false. She is being investigated for taking huge payments from pharmas and the severe lockdowns.

Originally Posted by sailingabe41ds

Trust your government...Gladys Berejiklian from New South Wales resigns after exposed being given 10s of millions $ by AstraZeneca..Pfeizer to drive Covid policy.
.....

Where are you guys finding this fiction?

Or am I feeding the trolls(??).

[sv_pelagia]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Where are you guys finding this fiction?

Or am I feeding the trolls(??).

Careful, this is how the trolls get a thread shut down...