When will this shit end?

[Mr.Tease]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Do you think that all patients who are admitted to hospital with covid and ultimately survive would die if they had not been admitted? 

Why do you think they get admitted if they'd be fine at home? 

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Best hope for cancer patients was to suppress the virus with stricter lockdowns until we got a vaccine, but we haven't done that so now cancer treatments will have to be cancelled, as was said weeks/months ago on this thread. 

They don’t “have” to be cancelled. The NHS is making a completely conscious decision to prioritise pensioners were coronavirus over young people with cancer. 

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

They don’t “have” to be cancelled. The NHS is making a completely conscious decision to prioritise pensioners were coronavirus over young people with cancer. 

Ageism.

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

Why do you think they get admitted if they'd be fine at home? 

Why not have the paramedics drop off the dexamethasone pills to them at home? 

[fred quimby]

12 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Exactly, much better than leaving cancer patients at home 

What if they are cancer patients in their 80's  

In fact would it not be best to treat no one in that age group and spend money on treatment for the young 

[Mr.Tease]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

Which is completely morally wrong, IMO. 

What's the alternative? If covid is prevalent, hospitals aren't safe for cancer patients, not sure what the alternative is- try separate hospital, but how do you staff them? Plus there's still the risk of staff transmission. It's horrific once you get to this point. 

[steviewevie]

I guess for covid patients the need for treatment is immediate, whereas in some cancer patients some treatments can be delayed?

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

Why not have the paramedics drop off the dexamethasone pills to them at home? 

Do you have some kind of challenge amongst friends about how many times you can go from a negative rep to a positive one ... it seems like some kind of game you are playing on here ... with good cop bad cop posting ? 

[Quark]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

They don’t “have” to be cancelled. The NHS is making a completely conscious decision to prioritise pensioners were coronavirus over young people with cancer. 

No they aren't.

What they're doing is not making the conscious decision to turn people away who are in need of immediate emergency care in order to maintain the planned schedule of very important but non-emergency treatments.

[Mr.Tease]

Just now, steviewevie said:

I guess for covid patients the need for treatment is immediate, whereas in some cancer patients some treatments can be delayed?

Correct

[mcshed]

3 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

They don’t “have” to be cancelled. The NHS is making a completely conscious decision to prioritise pensioners were coronavirus over young people with cancer. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-54485272

Because this is what happens if you have high COVID prevalence and cancer treatment.

We should do everything to allow cancer patients to get treatment but that means controlling the virus. Lockdowns allow for more treatment as they suppress the virus.

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, crazyfool1 said:

Do you have some kind of challenge amongst friends about how many times you can go from a negative rep to a positive one ... it seems like some kind of game you are playing on here ... with good cop bad cop posting ? 

No but cancer is a cause VERY close to my heart. I’ve lost family members to it and worry about getting it myself. 

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I guess for covid patients the need for treatment is immediate, whereas in some cancer patients some treatments can be delayed?

Except that it can’t, as many people have paid the ultimate price for. The easiest way to beat cancer is to catch it early and do something about it. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, Quark said:

No they aren't.

What they're doing is not making the conscious decision to turn people away who are in need of immediate emergency care in order to maintain the planned schedule of very important but non-emergency treatments.

You are seriously suggesting that cancer treatments are non-emergency? Have a word with yourself. 

[ace56blaa]

6 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

They don’t “have” to be cancelled. The NHS is making a completely conscious decision to prioritise pensioners were coronavirus over young people with cancer. 

I thought the reason cancer treatments get cancelled is not to prioritizese covid patients, it's because when there is more and more cases of covid in the hospitals, it would be much easier for a cancer patient to catch covid and face complications? - IE if you have cancer going to the hospital can become more dangerous with covid prevalent in the wards

[Quark]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

You are seriously suggesting that cancer treatments are non-emergency? Have a word with yourself. 

I've been to enough fucking cancer funerals to know exactly what it is you twat. Now fuck off.

[steviewevie]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

No but cancer is a cause VERY close to my heart. I’ve lost family members to it and worry about getting it myself. 

Me too so I understand. It's a nightmare situation. They are trying their best to treat both covid and non covid patients...and in the end we may need a lockdown to allow this....but also a lockdown has many negative affects too. It is a nightmare.

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, Quark said:

I've been to enough fucking cancer funerals to know exactly what it is you twat. Now fuck off.

If you’ve been to that many, why would you be downplaying it’s seriousness? 

[Ozanne]

2 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

I thought the reason cancer treatments get cancelled is not to prioritizese covid patients, it's because when there is more and more cases of covid in the hospitals, it would be much easier for a cancer patient to catch covid and face complications? - IE if you have cancer going to the hospital can become more dangerous with covid prevalent in the wards

I think you are right especially under going treatment for cancer. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by Ozanne

[Havors]

7 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I guess for covid patients the need for treatment is immediate, whereas in some cancer patients some treatments can be delayed?

Tell that to my friends wife that died. 

[DeanoL]

13 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

My point is that some anti lockdown people blame lockdown as the reason why cancer treatment was stopped. This is not the case. You could lock down and still have cancer treatment ongoing. 

Oh definitely. Not just "could", "did". Once numbers went down some treatments were resumed while we were still in lockdown.

But it's not just that lockdown isn't the reason cancer treatments stopped. It's that not locking down IS the reason they're stopping again now.

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, ace56blaa said:

I thought the reason cancer treatments get cancelled is not to prioritizese covid patients, it's because when there is more and more cases of covid in the hospitals, it would be much easier for a cancer patient to catch covid and face complications? - IE if you have cancer going to the hospital can become more dangerous with covid prevalent in the wards

Chemotherapy is an immunosuppressant I believe so it would make you very vulnerable for covid but also sitting at home without treatment WILL kill you. Keeping the treatment going and hopefully not catching covid is still the better option. 

[steviewevie]

5 minutes ago, Havors said:

Tell that to my friends wife that died. 

yeah, well sorry...I did say some patients and some treatments...not all.

Edited October 28, 2020 by steviewevie

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, Havors said:

Tell that to my friends wife that died. 

Exactly. I don’t want to hear anyone else suggesting that cancer treatment is anything other than an emergency scenario. 

[efcfanwirral]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

Me too so I understand. It's a nightmare situation. They are trying their best to treat both covid and non covid patients...and in the end we may need a lockdown to allow this....but also a lockdown has many negative affects too. It is a nightmare.

I think the firebreak/circuit break type lockdowns sound like the most sensible idea - if schools aren't the problem then locking down everything but them for a short period every now and then (financially supported of course) makes more sense than letting it run and having to lock down for longer. Surely financially too?

But because Labour suggested it, it won't happen. Politics getting in the way of what's needed 

[steviewevie]

Just now, efcfanwirral said:

But because Labour suggested it, it won't happen. Politics getting in the way of what's needed 

Yeah, could well be...could be Sunak pushing back against it too, as well as backbenchers as Ozanne said the other day.