Jump to content

Do you need to vent about things COVID-19?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 123 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

My cousin is a geriatric nurse practitioner. She just received her first Covid-19 vaccination. Had that shot been given to one of her geriatric residents instead, she would remain a primary spread vector for everyone in her facility. Social distancing has already reduced the risk of resitent-to-resident infection considerably. Nobody comes into contact with more elderly than the care givers. The obvious thing to do to save the lives of the elderly is to vaccinate the most effective spreaders.

The same is true in hospitals and clinics. This is not so much about keeping the health care staff healthy, it's about preventing them from infecting the most vulnerable.

Thank you for a reality-based perspective! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

*****ing *****ed up mother *****ers are *****ing the whole *****ing *****ed up ****sucking *****head *****s. And then some.

Cutting in with a rando side comment because I haven’t kept up - I’m tired of all the conspiracy theories behind it, and all the Americans on my feeds (note: I am also an American) pointing fingers at

Welp y'all have been warned before about keeping this thread on topic but it continues to delve into Politics and other off topic subjects. So consider this thread closed. If something similar is star

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:
1 hour ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

By that logic, we shouldn't treat anything................ because everyone will die eventually anyway.

That's not how logic works!

It is when your response to someone talking about people dying under certain conditions is "All those same people are going to die someday".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't really think there was any debate about the front-line workers getting the first doses.  The only real debate I saw was whether or not the older folks should get it before the younger folks.  The argument being that the younger ones are the majority of the "spreaders", whereas the older ones are the most likely to die from it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I didn't really think there was any debate about the front-line workers getting the first doses.  The only real debate I saw was whether or not the older folks should get it before the younger folks.  The argument being that the younger ones are the majority of the "spreaders", whereas the older ones are the most likely to die from it.

Our FL governor publicly pushed an agenda to treat the elderly first - specifically before "healthy", "young" people. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We're operating on the assumption that those who get (fully) vaccinated and are therefore immune from contracting the virus also won't spread it. That's probably true, at least to a great extent, but it's not yet a demonstrated scientific fact about these vaccines. Epidemiologists can reasonably make that optimistic assumption in recommending who to vaccinate first, but it's a judgment call.

It's never going to be perfect. Ideally, we'd vaccinate liquor store cashiers before hospital administrators -- and before even anaesthesiologists because that particular discipline has a crazy low incidence of infection -- but there's no point making the perfect the enemy of the good. At some point, we have to just get on with putting a shot in somebody's arm with guidance simple enough that it can be followed.

Politicians, on the other hand, only warrant vaccination if they've been consistently supportive of public health measures to contain the pandemic, because then their willingness to be vaccinated at least confers their credibility on the vaccine. If, however they've previously downplayed the virus, they have no credibility to confer.

And if those discredited politicians are vaccinated and then turn around and in a spectacle of hypocrisy besmirch the reputation of actual scientists, well they can rot in hell on a ventilator.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

UK hospitals are filling up and one in London was on the news, as it's running low on oxygen supplies. It seems the nightmare situation they warned us about in March will come true in January...

I'm still worried but almost resigned to getting it now, even though I only leave home to go to the supermarket every three or four days 😐  

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me naive, uninformed, stupid or whatever, but I don't understand how it got this bad.

I have survived two lockdowns where only essential workers were allowed to leave the house, travel was banned, our borders were closed and no-one was allowed to come into the country, stores were closed (apart from essential ones like supermarkets), masks were worn, people stayed 6 ft apart, schools were closed etc.  TWICE I have had to live through this. 

Yes it sucked. 

I would be up at 7am to stand in line to go grocery shopping.  I was constantly feeling stressed because I was the only one leaving the house to go to work - because elderly people still needed help.  I was having to show ID and sign in whenever I went into homes, dealing with the anxiety and stress of clients, and that was an ordeal!  I was also struggling with wearing a mask - dealing with foggy glasses, feelings of claustrophobia etc. I felt like I was bathing in hand sanitiser and do not get me started on the smell of them.  But I did this because the alternative was worse to me - being infected or infecting someone else! 

I also live with a Covid denier...which added to my stress.  They would say its just a bad flu and nothing to be worried about.  But I was worried because my best friend in SL passed away almost 5 years ago...of the flu.  Plus it's easy to not be worried about it when you can work from home and never have to leave the house, so are in no danger of catching it.

So as a result of all this, we have 50 active cases at the moment, and all of them are people who came into the country ALREADY infected.  We have had just over 2100 total cases in the entire country since the pandemic started, and 25 fatalities. 

We got to spend Xmas with our families.  We are free to travel about the country and have group gatherings.  Life is pretty much normal here.

Couldn't everyone else done this?  

I know a lot of it comes down to the failures of leadership, but there is also a question of personal responsibility and putting other people's health and safety above the need for a haircut.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jordan Whitt said:

I know a lot of it comes down to the failures of leadership, but there is also a question of personal responsibility and putting other people's health and safety above the need for a haircut.

An increasing amount of people are starting to look at the economic impact as that haircutters and plenty of other people's livelihoods are being increasingly affected by the lockdowns. The local papers in my area have more and more articles about evictions for both residential and commercial places as people can no longer pay the rents when there is no money coming in and the government handouts aren't enough to cover those costs. I would say its less of being a "Covid denier" than a Covid minimizer. Is the cost worth it especially in light of the numbers of infected climbing regardless of masking, social distancing and lockdowns?

Edited by Arielle Popstar
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

An increasing amount of people are starting to look at the economic impact as that haircutters and plenty of other people's livelihoods are being increasingly affected by the lockdowns. 

It only took a month, four weeks, to get a grip on community transmission.  The death toll in the states was predicted to hit 180,000 by October and here we are in December with the death toll almost double that.  Four weeks vs over 300,000 dead.

5 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

...government handouts aren't enough to cover those costs...

And we did it WITHOUT these too,

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Rat Luv said:

UK hospitals are filling up and one in London was on the news, as it's running low on oxygen supplies. It seems the nightmare situation they warned us about in March will come true in January...

I'm still worried but almost resigned to getting it now, even though I only leave home to go to the supermarket every three or four days 😐  

 

https://www.infowars.com/posts/reports-emergency-hospitals-dismantled-despite-claim-hospitalisations-worse-than-first-wave/

https://youtu.be/wS2WPr1UpNM

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, iceing Braveheart said:

Well, you obviously got no further than the headline.

The Nightingale hospitals are in mothballs / being asset stripped as for some reason the NHS have been unable to staff them. 

Hospitals require a considerable amount of staff before they become even minimally viable.

The plan to use them failed because of HR constraints not because the virus isn't overwhelming the NHS.

 

This would have been obvious if you had taken 5 seconds to check the first information source cited.

 

Maybe your batch of brain force plus was defective.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

My cousin is a geriatric nurse practitioner. She just received her first Covid-19 vaccination. Had that shot been given to one of her geriatric residents instead, she would remain a primary spread vector for everyone in her facility. Social distancing has already reduced the risk of resitent-to-resident infection considerably. Nobody comes into contact with more elderly than the care givers. The obvious thing to do to save the lives of the elderly is to vaccinate the most effective spreaders.

The same is true in hospitals and clinics. This is not so much about keeping the health care staff healthy, it's about preventing them from infecting the most vulnerable.

Yours is a really odd perspective. Nice attempt at using the "authority" argument. But, it doesn't really support the idea of protecting the most vulnerable first.

Inoculating care givers makes a sort of intuitive sense but it is weak and doesn't stand up to broad consideration of the issues. But, if all the elderly in the facility are vaccinated first then the are protected from all the various infection vectors not just the single group 'caregivers'. Inoculating just the caregivers eliminates only one possibility.

If the elderly in the facility aren't vaccinated their isolation must continue. Friends and family can't visit. They can't go out. The elderly must remain in isolation until they are vaccinated and and continue suffering the mental deterioration that isolation inflicts. So I think not vaccinating the patients in elder-care facilities is cruel to them, their family, and friends. Prisons use isolation as a punishment.

We have ampule evidence the isolation is having a huge effect on everyone, not just the elderly.

Effective-efficient use of the vaccine, a limited resource, is to vaccinate the most vulnerable first. Each caregiver  is typically one of four people that fill a single 24x7 position. Care facility support staff tends to be one or two person per 8x7 position. Admin staff tends to be a single person for 8x5 positions. What about delivery people? How do we find ALL the people that come near the elderly? Plumbers? Do we let the toilets stay plugged or broken pipes to flow? Lights go out so we keep the electrician out or vaccinate them too? All these people have to be identified and vaccinated to protect the residents. Isn't it WAY more efficient to vaccinate the residents first?

The 'vaccinate caregivers first' idea for a group with a lower infection rate and a higher survival rate is a CDC doctrine. It doesn't make sense to me for the elder care community. 

19 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Thank you for a reality-based perspective! 

Reality? Hers is a very narrow perspective and a view proclaimed by the establishment. Reality is far broader. I think I gave you an example above of the broader consideration that deals with more of reality. 

Como went with the idea that hospital beds needed to be made available for the expected influx of covid patients. Trump sent a navy hospital ship to NY. Como had the hospitals send all their patients, even 'confirmed' covid positive patients, from elder-care facilities back to the facility. His executive order is online. Sounded good. On the face of it it made NO SENSE. It certainly didn't take all aspects of the situation (reality) into account. And at the time we didn't know if covid was an air borne infection.

The result is the hospitals remained empty... well... way below capacity. The overwhelming number of infections never materialized. So occupancy rates were low they were verging on bankruptcy and laying off staff. I think one person was placed in the hospital ship. If I remember correctly, that person wasn't even a covid patient. But many of those people sent home to their elder-care facility had covid. Several hospital and care facility administrations complained about the order and tried to fight it because they knew some of those being sent 'home' were confirmed to be infected with covid. NY still has the highest death rate among long term care facilities of any in the US because of Como's order. The corporate media thought and thinks it was a good idea. They cover for Como.

If you aren't consuming news from non-corporate independent sources I don't see how you can have any idea what is real.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nalates Urriah said:
19 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

 

Reality? Hers is a very narrow perspective and a view proclaimed by the establishment. Reality is far broader. I think I gave you an example above of the broader consideration that deals with more of reality. 

Sorry, I like science-based and reality-based society. *shrug*

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Sorry, I like science-based and reality-based society. *shrug*

Yes, me too yet some people are probably still touting the "herd immunity" crap before there was a vaccine.  Good thing the powers that be didn't listen to that.  Some people on!y believe in the science that backs their own agenda.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Nalates Urriah said:

I doubt that. If your claim is true, challenge the science I presented. Which is better? Stopping a single transmission vector or all of them?

Sorry you don't trust science. The scientists pick the best theory and follow that with an evidence-based approach. Which were the "science [you] presented" missing - a better theory, or an evidence-based proof by massive experimentation? Otherwise [your presented theories] would have become dominant. Don't trust the system? Or why don't YOU trust the approach chosen? No lazy conspiracy-based answers, if you can.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

Because Science!!!

Well, I quit paying attention to anything some people said after they continued to post about herd immunity.  If they had actually read anything factual or science based, they would have known that wasn't a viable option yet they never backed off the opinion.  I suppose losing millions in the US would be better than wearing masks, social distancing, quarantining or shutdowns?  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, RowanMinx said:

Well, I quit paying attention to anything some people said after they continued to post about herd immunity.  If they had actually read anything factual or science based, they would have known that wasn't a viable option yet they never backed off the opinion.  I suppose losing millions in the US would be better than wearing masks, social distancing, quarantining or shutdowns?  

Things like herd immunity and alternate medicines SEEM like a good idea, but then when they are only amplified by the "fringe" elements..you have to ask why: politics and/or money.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 123 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...