Generic Virus Thread

[NoelVilla]

Denmark expected to end all restrictions from January 31. Announcement tomorrow.

They are also expected to not classify covid-19 as a socially dangerous disease(Google Translate), as of february 5.

 

 

[Xela]

The recent quietness of this thread is hopefully a good sign! 

[sidcow]

37 minutes ago, Xela said:

The recent quietness of this thread is hopefully a good sign! 

I miss the heady days of circular arguments about if measures were OTT or a waste of time. Intrusive or protectionist. People at constant loggerheads with nothing shifting the view of either side. The never ending, ever spiraling downwards bickering ultimately ending in immature and unnecessary insults between fellow posters. 

Heady days. 

Fortunately I can just throw myself right back into it by going into the transfer or any player thread. 

 

[blandy]

45 minutes ago, Xela said:

The recent quietness of this thread is hopefully a good sign! 

I hope so too.

I'm slightly concerned that what's happened is the trend has returned back to where it was/would have been, following the trend last year, before Omicron hit . Obviously cases now are maybe more Omicron than Delta, as far as we know, so even though they've doubled compared to early December that's maybe a positive thing. It also appears that testing has dropped a lot, but the number of cases hasn't continued dropping (though it's a bit preliminary at the moment). Hospitalisations are currently going down, which is good, and deaths are (excuse the term) flatlining. The testing dropping but cases not dropping suggests, a bit, that cases are still actually rising, perhaps as a consequence of lifting all the restrictions and the shorter incubation time.

I guess the boffins will explain what's going on in due course.

 

[El Zen]

7 hours ago, NoelVilla said:

Denmark expected to end all restrictions from January 31. Announcement tomorrow.

They are also expected to not classify covid-19 as a socially dangerous disease(Google Translate), as of february 5.

 

 

Good on them. I hope we (Norway) follow suit, but we tend to err on the side of (extreme) caution. We’ll be back to normal by springtime, though, I’m sure.

[Demitri_C]

Did anyone read that story coming out from the states where a guy desperately needs a heart transplant and they refusing to give him one as he is unvaccinated?

[Seat68]

1 minute ago, Demitri_C said:

Did anyone read that story coming out from the states where a guy desperately needs a heart transplant and they refusing to give him one as he is unvaccinated?

Do you have a link to it?

[cyrusr]

37 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

Do you have a link to it?

Here you go

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60132765
 

Quote

A US hospital has rejected a patient for a heart transplant at least in part because he is not vaccinated against Covid-19.

DJ Ferguson, 31, is in dire need of a new heart, but Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston took him off their list, said his father, David.

He said the Covid vaccine goes against his son's "basic principles, he doesn't believe in it".

The hospital said it was following policy.

Brigham and Women's Hospital told the BBC in a statement: "Given the shortage of available organs, we do everything we can to ensure that a patient who receives a transplanted organ has the greatest chance of survival."

A spokesman said the hospital requires "the Covid-19 vaccine, and lifestyle behaviours for transplant candidates to create both the best chance for a successful operation and to optimise the patient's survival after transplantation, given that their immune system is drastically suppressed".

The hospital's carefully worded statement may suggest other factors lie beyond the patient's unvaccinated status for his ineligibility, but it refused to discuss specifics, citing patient privacy.

…

Whilst there appears to be more to the reasoning other than the vaccine issue, it is still surprising that is a part of the justification to refuse the transplant.

[Genie]

Having a vaccine goes against his principles, but having a heart from another person is ok.

I wonder what the principles are and if he refuses all man made medicines.

[Seat68]

3 hours ago, cyrusr said:

Here you go

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60132765
 

Whilst there appears to be more to the reasoning other than the vaccine issue, it is still surprising that is a part of the justification to refuse the transplant.

I have to say I am with them, it's a rare thing a heart and they want to do all they can to ensure that it is successful. He doesn't trust vaccines, but suspect will trust the plethora of other drugs he is on and will be on, seems foolish. 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Seat68

[Genie]

3 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

I have to say I am with them, it's a rare thing a heart and they want to do all they can to ensure that it is successful. He doesn't trust vaccines,but suspect will trust the plethora of other drugs he is on and will be on, seems foolish. 

Yep.

Patient is exercising his right not to have the vaccine.

Hospital is exercising its right to give the organ to the person best placed to be successful. 

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, Seat68 said:

Do you have a link to it?

Sorry should have included but cyrusu has done it.

Wonder if this is going to be the new norm of the world now?

[Genie]

4 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Sorry should have included but cyrusu has done it.

Wonder if this is going to be the new norm of the world now?

 I don’t think it’s a new thing, organs have always been diverted to people who give them the very best possible chance of success.

[cyrusr]

28 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

I have to say I am with them, it's a rare thing a heart and they want to do all they can to ensure that it is successful. He doesn't trust vaccines,but suspect will trust the plethora of other drugs he is on and will be on, seems foolish. 

Whilst I definitely agree with that, it does in my head seem to go against the ideals of the Hippocratic Oath if it was on that sole basis he is being refused the transplant. Like the article insinuates though, there seems to be more reasons than just this point, this is just the headline grabbing point. I suspect that the doctors will probably have a much better understanding of the issue than we will though!

@Demitri_C, to answer your question I do suspect this will become the “new normal” or certainly much more common. I think people are just tired of others taking the p*** and not actually taking responsibility for their own actions/taking proper precautions to make sure that they are themselves OK. 

[Demitri_C]

12 minutes ago, Genie said:

 I don’t think it’s a new thing, organs have always been diverted to people who give them the very best possible chance of success.

Yoir point is correct. But what happens in the below example

 if the choice is between two liver patients ones a alcoholic that continues to drink but has been vaccinated or someone who has cirrhosis caused by NAFLD but isnt vaccinated who gets the new liver?

 

[StefanAVFC]

On 21/01/2022 at 19:39, Xela said:

We're expecting to head back into the office from Feb onwards. Still one day a week. I think it works best for the vast majority. You can go in more if you want, but don't think many people will do that.

I'll try and schedule mine with drinks or dinner with colleagues in town* afterwards

 

 

 

*mate

We can go when we want; I was supposed to today but I find it hard to motivate myself to drive 45 mins there, when no one will even be there. If I had a concrete reason to go I'd be much more up for it.

[Demitri_C]

9 minutes ago, cyrusr said:

Whilst I definitely agree with that, it does in my head seem to go against the ideals of the Hippocratic Oath if it was on that sole basis he is being refused the transplant. Like the article insinuates though, there seems to be more reasons than just this point, this is just the headline grabbing point. I suspect that the doctors will probably have a much better understanding of the issue than we will though!

@Demitri_C, I do suspect this will become the “new normal” or certainly much more common. I think people are just tired of others taking the p*** and not actually taking responsibility for their own actions/taking proper precautions to make sure that they are themselves OK. 

But the only thing i would say its not anything different from people ignoring medical advice such as those that continue to smoke even though the doctors advise them to stop yet they still get treated. Or diabetics told to watch what they eat and theh continue as they are. . 

(Im not saying all just the ones that choose to this before i get jumped on!)

Or how about disgusting humans like paedos, and murderers who still get treatment.

My point is i think of your gonna treat thosegroups i dont see how you cant treat unvaccinated 

[StefanAVFC]

4 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Yoir point is correct. But what happens in the below example

 if the choice is between two liver patients ones a alcoholic that continues to drink but has been vaccinated or someone who has cirrhosis caused by NAFLD but isnt vaccinated who gets the new liver?

 

Probably the 2nd one. Doctors have to look at all risks and see who's the lowest risk. 

It's not really relevant in this case because he isn't competing with a named person who's vaccinated is he?

[A'Villan]

14 hours ago, sidcow said:

I miss the heady days of circular arguments about if measures were OTT or a waste of time. Intrusive or protectionist. People at constant loggerheads with nothing shifting the view of either side. The never ending, ever spiraling downwards bickering ultimately ending in immature and unnecessary insults between fellow posters. 

Heady days. 

Fortunately I can just throw myself right back into it by going into the transfer or any player thread. 

 

You're on some new level self amusement recently. Roger that. Can confirm attempts to evoke smiles and freshen the air with light-hearted humour. Outrageous behaviour! How terribly unbecoming!

[mjmooney]

51 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

the choice is between two liver patients ones a alcoholic that continues to drink but has been vaccinated or someone who has cirrhosis caused by NAFLD but isnt vaccinated who gets the new liver? 

Ah, but what about the patient's 'rights'? What if the patient sincerely believes that drinking is entirely harmless, and giving up drinking is dangerous, because he saw it in a video on YouTube? Doesn't that have equal value with anti-alcohol propaganda, which is spread by Bill Gates and Joe Biden as part of a plan for a teetotal new world order?