Italians over 80 'will be left to die' as country overwhelmed by coronavirus.

Pepper, calm down. Nobody is saying that we want to get used to being a third world country with crumbling infrastructure, etc. Don't put words in my mouth.

What we're dealing with now is a real emergency situation, not "the way we would like things to be." If you were managing a hospital right now, and had the situation I described, with all other things being equal, which one would you give the bed to?
 

Sunny said:
Pepper, calm down. Nobody is saying that we want to get used to being a third world country with crumbling infrastructure, etc. Don't put words in my mouth.

What we're dealing with now is a real emergency situation, not "the way we would like things to be." If you were managing a hospital right now, and had the situation I described, with all other things being equal, which one would you give the bed to?
Click to expand...
But, but, I meditated this morning, you mean it didn't work?
All things being equal, yes, of course, the person who is so comparatively young. You did give extreme ages.
 
But what if there were two individuals the same age, same degree of health, few if any differences between them?
Whether it's a situation like that, or whether one is young and one is old, who's to say one person's life is more valuable than another's?
 

Think about it another way what if the patient was 6o ... and the other was 15...does that make a difference?...

apparently our government have called for several other companies Rolls Royce included, to start making more respirators, but it would seem the problem is not only the lack of respirators for everyone, but the lack of trained staff to use them ...and then there's the lack of hopsital beds particularly in the UK , and no spare land like larger countries to build temporary hospitals nor do we have the staff to treat the patients, although it was stated on the news today that many NHS staff will be recalled out of retirement..

That begs another question as to why someone who is in the ''danger bracket age'' would want to return to work to potentially catch an illness which could kill them
 
JaniceM said:
But what if there were two individuals the same age, same degree of health, few if any differences between them?
Whether it's a situation like that, or whether one is young and one is old, who's to say one person's life is more valuable than another's?
Click to expand...
Well, you see, that's what a triage is. A medical professional coin toss.
 
You know what's a real sobering thought?... that any one of us on this forum could be in that position at any time....

Please God it doesn't happen , but the stats are that 80% of the population is likely to be infected with this virus, and the healthy under 60's most likely to survive it.... so this is why everybody here has to take really good care of themselves... because we could be the losers on the virtual coin toss..
 
The advice here in Scotland is somewhat vague. There is a reluctance to be as strict as in England, possibly because of the relatively low population density. In many of these small villages, social isolation may well be a way of life for some elderly people. I can go for a walk around and never see another soul - or maybe someone will wave as I pass.

Well, we're not 70 yet and we've little choice but to get in the car and drive to the shops.
So, we'll carry on as normal and avoid close contact with others.

As for police - that's a joke. If you saw one round here you would take a picture because otherwise no one would believe you.
 
Sunny said:
The tragic fact is, probably there is nothing left to do but to leave the oldest victims of this illness to die. Italy is partly in this mess because of lack of planning, but then it's easy to say after the fact. I think this pandemic pretty much caught everyone unawares.

So, let's say there are two victims, equally ill, one a 15-year-old, and the other a 95-year-old. There is only one respirator, and one hospital bed available. Which one should get it?
Click to expand...
Definitely, the 15 year old should get the chance to get the help. I would say that under ANY situation, even on a lifeboat or starvation situation. The old one already has had a life, the young one has not.
 
JaniceM said:
But what if there were two individuals the same age, same degree of health, few if any differences between them?
Whether it's a situation like that, or whether one is young and one is old, who's to say one person's life is more valuable than another's?
Click to expand...
It is better for ONE to die than for BOTH to die, if there is no other choice.
 
Capt Lightning said:
The advice here in Scotland is somewhat vague. There is a reluctance to be as strict as in England, possibly because of the relatively low population density. In many of these small villages, social isolation may well be a way of life for some elderly people. I can go for a walk around and never see another soul - or maybe someone will wave as I pass.

Well, we're not 70 yet and we've little choice but to get in the car and drive to the shops.
So, we'll carry on as normal and avoid close contact with others.

As for police - that's a joke. If you saw one round here you would take a picture because otherwise no one would believe you.
Click to expand...
Well the cities Glasgow , Edinburgh and Dundee et al, are densely packed like most cities in England although on a slightly smaller scale... the population who lives in villages in Scotland is low compared to the population as a whole... and that's not counting the millions of visitors every year particularly to Edinburgh and Glasgow
 
Last edited:
Wait a minute. The 15 year-old is most likely to survive without medical intervention. And when a map is shown detailing corona virus cases across the country, how come only West Virginia is clear?
 
Judycat said:
Wait a minute. The 15 year-old is most likely to survive without medical intervention.
Click to expand...

Likely, but not guaranteed. Would you take that chance? One is only 15 and COULD die, the other one might live another 5 years at the most or might not even respond to the treatments because of their age.

Sunny's theoretical question was, " So, let's say there are two victims, equally ill, one a 15-year-old, and the other a 95-year-old. There is only one respirator, and one hospital bed available. Which one should get it? ''
 
Yes, thank you, Catlady. That was exactly the scenario I was suggesting. Both of them equally ill, other things being equal, etc. The only variable that matters in this choice is the age of the person. Obviously, if one of them was deathly ill with some other disease and was dying anyway, I would not "waste" the resources on giving them a few more days of life.

But when it boils down to the age difference, I think the medical help has to go to the younger person. And why we have let things get to this disgusting situation is something we will have to reckon with, as a nation.
 
So we're talking about letting people die already? I shudder to think how things will be three months from now. Maybe the young people will decide ah let the boomers die.
 
Sunny said:
And why we have let things get to this disgusting situation is something we will have to reckon with, as a nation.
Click to expand...
I don't understand this statement. "Why we have let things get to this disgusting situation" meaning what? Do you think anyone could have stopped a virus that no one had ever heard of? What would you have done differently?

As for the 15 year old versus 85, the medication should go to the youngster. The 85 year old has had a life and the 15 year old has not. Easy choice for any reasonable person.
 
exwisehe said:
I noticed in the link that a doctor said: "[Who lives and who dies] is decided by age and by the [patient's] health conditions."

That's not what I have believed since I began attending church at 2yrs old (while sleeping in my mom's lap in the pews)
I was taught and still believe that life and death are in God's hands alone.
Click to expand...

People have be dying throughout human history that didn't meet triage criteria ...long before the concept of triage was formalized. A lot of older people died throughout history because limited resources (medical resources, food) were focused on those most likely to survive.

Saying that's not "in God's hands" is like one EU leader saying the other day that people will die "before their time." If you believe in God, when you die is in his hands and it is your time.
 
Last edited:
Well, this is interesting cause I doubt it would be a choice between a 15 year old and an over 70. The younger population, unless they have other issues are fairly safe. That’s been said time and time again. It would be so rare to have these patients, side by side, and choose between.

However, this choice, between patients happens all the time with kidney, liver, and heart failure patients of various ages. The organ goes to the person who is the least sick, has the greatest chance of survival, is at the top of the list, and ready to be transplanted.

As for the religious aspect of the discussion, there is an old joke which I won’t tell very well. Not good at jokes. There is a flood and a man is stranded on the top of his roof. Younger man floats by on a canoe; and yells out “climb on board, I’ll save you.”

The man replies: “That’s ok God will save me.” The water gets higher, a man comes by in a motor boat and yells; “Jump into the water, we will pull you into the boat.” The man on the roof waves them off. “That’s ok, God will save me!”

The water gets higher. A helicopter flies overhead and the guardsman yell; “climb up the ladder”; we will save you!” The man waves them off, “God, will save me,“ he yells.

The man drowns.

Once in heaven he says to God, “Why didn’t you save me?” God replied, “I sent you a canoe, a boat, and a helicopter. What else did you want?”

We have freedom of choice, we need to save ourselves. God will deal with what’s left.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top