clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 6:10 pm Isn't there a fundamental difference comparing things like smoking, obesity and drug use vs covid? You can't 'infect' someone else with it with the former. Self abuse vs a pandemic. Chalk and cheese.

The post I replied to originally wasn't about spreading the virus to others. It was about not providing health care to those that choose not to get the vaccine.

I would agree there is more likelihood of external negative consequences to others with Covid. I'd also point out that there are negative external consequences for the children of people that don't exercise, the family members of drug users, etc etc.

I believe everyone that can get a vaccine should. It is unfortunate that we've had terrible leadership from both our political leaders and our public health leaders. After all, fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me. Remember "Don't wear a mask!"? Makes it much easier for people to tell themselves they'll continue to be careful and not get the vaccine.

Separately, are we going to mandate booster shots? My parents are fully vaccinate - they are both quite elderly. Their doctor has recommended that my father get a booster shot. He's recommended my mother wait as she had moderate side effects from the initial vaccine - and modify her behavior while waiting. Additionally, he's told her not to get a flu shot this year if she gets the vaccine booster later this year. Should she be mandated to get the booster? And how about the next booster?

IMO, the horse has left the barn. Any vaccine mandate needed to be implemented up front with clear messaging.

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 6:10 pm Isn't there a fundamental difference comparing things like smoking, obesity and drug use vs covid? You can't 'infect' someone else with it with the former. Self abuse vs a pandemic. Chalk and cheese.

You may not be able to infect others with obesity or drug use, but you certainly can impact others by taking up limited medical / hospital resources.
Should a person who is sick through no fault of their own get priority over someone who’s health is compromised as a direct result of their lifestyle choices? In my book, yes they should.
In the case of Covid patients, should someone who has taken all possible measures against Covid get priority over some cavalier, no mask anti-vaxxer? In my book, again, yes they should.
If people don’t take care of themselves and get sick as a result of that, and resources are limited, they should be at the back of the line (don’t get me started on those cunts sat in wheelchairs outside hospital entrances, smoking cigarettes while hooked up to oxygen bottles. I’d put those fuckers in a taxi and send them straight home)

The tittle of the thread I suppose is for world wide, any country. But most of us are not in other countries (I also understand some members to be in other countries or your own). But the majority are here in Cambodia.
The discussion and its vote are on agreement of mandatory vaccinations.
It has been up to this point before the booster vaccinations will be in force there has been a choice given to you by age, if you are at an acceptable age you would then be qualified for the approved and tested vaccine of AstraZeneca. If you haven't qualified on age then you will be vaccinated with one of the two Chinese Sinovac or Sinopharm, vaccines. World Health Organization (WHO) has approved a Covid-19 vaccine made by Sinovac Biotech for emergency use listing.
Therefor I think the vote is not straight forward, unless you believe in the Chinese vaccine, also what are the numbers who have been vaccinated by AZ, compared with the numbers and vote of the people vaccinated by the Chinese ones. What becomes of your thinking, judgment, if the person is voting there for mandatory vaccination, example, would it still be your same vote if you were to be vaccinated by any of the two Chinese vaccines? Also there are voters here who have been vaccinated with western vaccines out of the country.

Chad Sexington wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:51 pm

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 6:10 pm Isn't there a fundamental difference comparing things like smoking, obesity and drug use vs covid? You can't 'infect' someone else with it with the former. Self abuse vs a pandemic. Chalk and cheese.

You may not be able to infect others with obesity or drug use, but you certainly can impact others by taking up limited medical / hospital resources.
Should a person who is sick through no fault of their own get priority over someone who’s health is compromised as a direct result of their lifestyle choices? In my book, yes they should.
In the case of Covid patients, should someone who has taken all possible measures against Covid get priority over some cavalier, no mask anti-vaxxer? In my book, again, yes they should.
If people don’t take care of themselves and get sick as a result of that, and resources are limited, they should be at the back of the line (don’t get me started on those cunts sat in wheelchairs outside hospital entrances, smoking cigarettes while hooked up to oxygen bottles. I’d put those fuckers in a taxi and send them straight home)

a very slippery slope ur headed for with these ideas
playing god and saying this life is worth more than the other>>>

Ever been in an emergency room? Gun shot robbers, wounded gangbangers, kids wounded in a drive by, thieves, overdoses, hit & run victims etc etc are all given the same quality service/care as a 70 year old heart attack person.

Chad Sexington wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:51 pm

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 6:10 pm Isn't there a fundamental difference comparing things like smoking, obesity and drug use vs covid? You can't 'infect' someone else with it with the former. Self abuse vs a pandemic. Chalk and cheese.

You may not be able to infect others with obesity or drug use, but you certainly can impact others by taking up limited medical / hospital resources.
Should a person who is sick through no fault of their own get priority over someone who’s health is compromised as a direct result of their lifestyle choices? In my book, yes they should.
In the case of Covid patients, should someone who has taken all possible measures against Covid get priority over some cavalier, no mask anti-vaxxer? In my book, again, yes they should.
If people don’t take care of themselves and get sick as a result of that, and resources are limited, they should be at the back of the line (don’t get me started on those cunts sat in wheelchairs outside hospital entrances, smoking cigarettes while hooked up to oxygen bottles. I’d put those fuckers in a taxi and send them straight home)

Agree with the gist of your point about personal responsibility and the burden on medical/hospital resources. However, hard to put into practice I suspect as some (many) would be up in arms saying that's profiling patients. That's the world we live in these days unless you're in the PRC where they want to control everything in their society. Yet, I understand some hospitals by necessity are starting to make those life decisions about who has priority where they are overloaded with insufficient beds etc due to covid. And many other people are unable to get non covid treatment or putting off preventative checks that alert them to health problems.

Whilst covid is a pandemic that was not expected and can spread exponentially if not managed, it occurred to me that for example Australia and NZ's approach to managing it was 'every single life is worth saving from covid' at any cost for at least 18 mths.

14 years ago I had a serious illness that required me to go to hospital on a regular basis for nearly a year. The thing that hit me was the number of obese people there on any given day. Obesity, diabetes, cancer, heart disease mostly all related. It just astounded me that those people were clogging up the health/hospital system. And now the Aus government is priding itself on how well they've minimised covid deaths, yet seemingly doing and having done very little to deal with this obesity issue for a long, long time. It's a national catastrophe IMHO that seems to get very little coverage, attention or emergency. Oh, it's an invasion of people's choice and freedom they will say. Maybe so, but there are severe consequences and a burden on society by ignoring and doing nothing about it.

In Australia/NZ's case, hypercritical in my view the attention to minimising covid deaths. I know those other diseases are not pandemics and not potentially exponential but seems to me the attention to covid deaths is way, way out of context/proportion to the other deaths and any perspective has been lost there. Rant over.

phuketrichard wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:32 pm

Chad Sexington wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 7:51 pm

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 6:10 pm Isn't there a fundamental difference comparing things like smoking, obesity and drug use vs covid? You can't 'infect' someone else with it with the former. Self abuse vs a pandemic. Chalk and cheese.

You may not be able to infect others with obesity or drug use, but you certainly can impact others by taking up limited medical / hospital resources.
Should a person who is sick through no fault of their own get priority over someone who’s health is compromised as a direct result of their lifestyle choices? In my book, yes they should.
In the case of Covid patients, should someone who has taken all possible measures against Covid get priority over some cavalier, no mask anti-vaxxer? In my book, again, yes they should.
If people don’t take care of themselves and get sick as a result of that, and resources are limited, they should be at the back of the line (don’t get me started on those cunts sat in wheelchairs outside hospital entrances, smoking cigarettes while hooked up to oxygen bottles. I’d put those fuckers in a taxi and send them straight home)

a very slippery slope ur headed for with these ideas
playing god and saying this life is worth more than the other>>>

Ever been in an emergency room? Gun shot robbers, wounded gangbangers, kids wounded in a drive by, thieves, overdoses, hit & run victims etc etc are all given the same quality service/care as a 70 year old heart attack person.

Playing God? Is that not what doctors do anyway? If there is a God I’d like to think he’d put the kid wounded in a drive by ahead of the wounded gangbanger.
My point was about limited resources and reckless people who willingly gamble with their health, not deserving treatment at the expense of someone sick through no fault of their own.
You’d be okay for your sick (through no fault of their own) loved one to wait in line behind the shot gangbanger or the morbidly obese person in cardiac arrest or the OD,d junkie? Your happy for it to be first come first served, because they’re all equally deserving? Fuck that,

phuketrichard wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:32 pm

a very slippery slope ur headed for with these ideas
playing god and saying this life is worth more than the other>>>

Ever been in an emergency room? Gun shot robbers, wounded gangbangers, kids wounded in a drive by, thieves, overdoses, hit & run victims etc etc are all given the same quality service/care as a 70 year old heart attack person.

This is not about what life is worth more, but what to do if all beds are filled up with covid patients and new patients show up? It's called triage.
OK, we move patients to other hospitals, but what if those are filled up too?
You seem to think resources in healthcare are unlimited, but they aren't, and in some places of the world demand has been higher than what's on offer and triage already had to be applied. Mostly pre-vaccin.

Now there are vaccines. And they might have to triage again.
Then what?

'selfishness' as a strategy within groups prevails but it's between groups that 'altruism' wins. In this example clearly the vast majority of us are going to be 'okay' simply because the most crude death rate is somewhere between 0.1% and 1%. And if you're not in the 'most' vulnerable probably less than 0.01%. So a selfish strategy within the group is clearly to be unvaccinated or ambivalent as 'MY' chances of dying are pretty low. Mutations etc aside. However, it's a false choice for a selfish person. The only way you'll make a selfish person understand the real choice is for altruists to conjure consequences to the individual! That's when selfishness falls apart as unlike altruists its everyman for himself!

Reading through this thread I'll just say I'm happy that the stupid are not a protected class under the US Constitution .

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk