TheTeapot Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, woolley said: Brain activity can be monitored. Ultimately, you have to accept when you are beaten, medical science has done its best and for mercy's sake it's time to let go. Somebody in this state is not self-sustaining. It's an artificial situation brought about by intervention. If there is no quality of life then it's merely prolonging the agony. You're right on this Woolley, I've mentioned it before on here. More than 5 years of just nothing sat in a home where you could you go see her, leave the room, go back in and she didnt know you'd just been there and didn't know who you were anyway. What's the point? Oh £4k a month. It's just a massive industry, keeping people alive for profit. And I can't complain about the care, physically she was in better nick in there than she had been at home before her soul left. It's really sad. Edited July 29, 2020 by TheTeapot 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 Nail on head Teapot. I don't get on with the "soul" concept at all, but everything else, spot on. The land is for the living. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 Just now, woolley said: Nail on head Teapot. I don't get on with the "soul" concept at all, but everything else, spot on. The land is for the living. Well what I mean about the soul is thats who you are. All your memories etc. They just stopped at the point of the stroke, effectively the bit that makes you you. That left, so the person died, just left a body with nothing of the previous 80 odd years going on in the brain. Didnt recognise their children. Didn't remember their life. It's like having two deaths. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 I'm with you. Correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Mirror Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 (edited) 22 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: Did you actually even look at what either of those papers said or did you you just copy the links off something else believing they said what you hope they said? Because they don't. The first is a review article (ie not original research, but summarising what other papers have been published on a particular topic). It points out there hasn't been a awful lot published on the subject[1]. It concludes "Based on observational evidence from the previous SARS epidemic included in the previous version of our Cochrane review we recommend the use of masks combined with other measures". The second is a specific study done in Vietnam in 2011 and tests whether cloth masks are as effective as medical masks in high-risk clinical situations. Unsurprisingly they weren't. That doesn't prove that cloth masks aren't more effective than nothing or that they are useless in other situations than the very particular one looked at or that any masks are ineffective outside a clinical setting (in fact it suggests the opposite). What is more the study looked at whether such masks are protective for the wearer (as would be required in the test situations), while those recommending cloth masks are doing so because it stops the wearer spreading infections to others. We see this all the time from what you might call the more Trumpian end of public discourse. People put down links claiming they prove something when even the slightest examination of them will show that they don't. I don't know whether this is because such people are so gullible that because someone else has given the links to them and they are supposed to support their existing prejudices, then they accept them. Or if they are so arrogant that they think everyone will take what they say on trust and think they are very clever referencing scientific papers. Either way it's not a good look - but they don't seem to mind. [1] The review dates from April and only looked at publication up to the start of the month so there may well have been more studies that have come out since on such a 'hot' topic. You seem to be blissful unaware of how politics has infected the scientific debate. Even a study that purports Covid-19 to be not much more deadly than the common flu would still conclude that social distancing is advised. Or it would be just labelled as “dangerous misinformation” and censored; its authors ostracised and banned from the scientific community. Maybe I did not pick up the most meaningful paper. Then, look at these (which have references to various scientific studies): Covid-19 - face mask rules more political than scientific, says UK expert https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/may/21/face-mask-rules-more-political-than-scientific-says-expert Coronavirus: wearing a cloth face mask is less about science and more about solidarity https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-wearing-a-cloth-face-mask-is-less-about-science-and-more-about-solidarity-138461 This time I carefully choose left-wing papers so that you can’t just label me as “trumpian” and dismiss the lot on that ground. I am no Trump acolyte and not even a slight sympathiser. Up to the beginning of the pandemic the consensus has always been that masks outside of the medical environment could do more harm than good. They are thought to increase the risk to the wearer. I won’t do masks in any circumstance, you can rest assured. The main issue for me is not whether or not they work (though we know they do very little). I see them as a muzzle and humiliation. Edited July 29, 2020 by Black Mirror Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 4 minutes ago, Black Mirror said: I won’t do masks in any circumstance, you can rest assured. Would you wear one if you were chasing out a channel in a wall for some wiring? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gettafa Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 20 minutes ago, Black Mirror said: Up to the beginning of the pandemic the consensus has always been that masks outside of the medical environment could do more harm than good. They are thought to increase the risk to the wearer. I won’t do masks in any circumstance, you can rest assured. The main issue for me is not whether or not they work (though we know they do very little). I see them as a muzzle and humiliation. Appropriate masks (ie with a layer of HEPA filter) and used properly (it's not rocket science) would stop this virus and as good as eradicate it. As simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 Covid will be back here by late Aug/Sep...wave 2 worse than wave 1 IMO. Shit government isolation rules the cause... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 8 hours ago, woolley said: Brain activity can be monitored. Ultimately, you have to accept when you are beaten, medical science has done its best and for mercy's sake it's time to let go. Somebody in this state is not self-sustaining. It's an artificial situation brought about by intervention. If there is no quality of life then it's merely prolonging the agony. Brain activity can not show dementia. But some clues are there and can be used in conjunction with other assessments that dementia is a likely cause for current behaviour. But we can't be sure. It seems there has been an increase in dementia. It's just previously the body wore out before the brain. Thanks to healthier lifestyles and advances in medical science more and more the brain is giving out before the body. The thing is there are no indicators of when you may start to suffer from dementia. So as folks get old medically you have to treat them all the same. You could give two folks the same treatment and one starts to fade with dementia before they are 70 and the other keeps going living a full and happy life until at least 85. This, of course, means it is impossible to put age based parameters around dealing with folks who get dementia in later life. The obvious solution to this issue is to find a treatment for these debilitating conditions. Until that happens the only course of action that can be taken is that if they are still living, breathing, human beings then they deserve every chance of a long life like any other patient. Because as far as I can tell it's impossible to legislate any other option with any confidence in being able to safeguard their human rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 @ PK . Totally disagree. You are clearly in the preserve life at all costs, all life is sacred whatever the state of it camp, condemning a proportion of the population to a living death by state intervention. It's crazy, it's pointless and it's unsustainable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 1 minute ago, woolley said: @ PK . Totally disagree. You are clearly in the preserve life at all costs, all life is sacred whatever the state of it camp, condemning a proportion of the population to a living death by state intervention. It's crazy, it's pointless and it's unsustainable. Your intepretation of my stance is way off, no change there, but it's still fine by me. So let's hear your proposals for legislating up to euthanasia whilst still being able to safeguard the human rights of these poor unfortunates? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 Funny how every travel agent is now an expert on Covid-19 and how to handle it. Would Jan W and Brian K be so quick to have the answers if they didn’t stand to gain financially from easing the border restrictions.? No, thought not. Not sure why they are given so much airtime on the radio tbh. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 1 hour ago, P.K. said: Your intepretation of my stance is way off, no change there, but it's still fine by me. So let's hear your proposals for legislating up to euthanasia whilst still being able to safeguard the human rights of these poor unfortunates? Nah. Letting people die naturally is not euthanasia anyway and, of course, voluntary euthanasia should be a basic human right. I just hope that this has changed be the time I get there. I reckon it will have to because otherwise there are going to be too many empty shells just waiting to die for the system to cope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said: Covid will be back here by late Aug/Sep...wave 2 worse than wave 1 IMO. Shit government isolation rules the cause... What a cheerful thought. Still it could be worse and we could be in Malta which is now setting itself up to be rave capital of Europe now Ibiza is struggling. You do have to question the logic v the benefits. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-53395609 Edited July 29, 2020 by thesultanofsheight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 5 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said: What a cheerful thought. Still it could be worse and we could be in Malta which is now setting itself up to be rave capital of Europe now Ibiza is struggling. You do have to question the logic v the benefits. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-53395609 https://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/103859/festival_mad_malta_is_parallel_universe_as_covid19_panic_rises_again_#.XyHT7Vko-DY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.