LogFAQs > #961232391

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, Database 9 ( 09.28.2021-02-17-2022 ), DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	The point of LOCKDOWNS is to NOT Overwhelm HOSPITALS. Does it make sense to you?
adjl 12/26/21 5:01:52 PM #29:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Hardly. That hospital has a 5 star safety rating and they maintain it by never treating anyone with anything more severe than high blood pressure. They also brag about having the best doctors in the area. It has less to do with capacity or resources and everything to do with holding onto status. That's just a garbage hospital, then. Hospitals turning away patients purely for the sake of being able to say they still have empty beds isn't a solution to the problem here. The problem is that there won't be enough resources to treat everyone that needs treatment unless infection rates are kept under control. "We're not overwhelmed, we just don't want any more patients" does nothing to fix the people dying on stretchers as the paramedics search for a place that can take them. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... I don't believe anyone is endangered. We're in the midst of the greatest public health crisis in a century. Everyone is endangered, and those refusing to take preventative measures to mitigate that danger absolutely do make it worse. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Further the fear mongering and regulations only make it harder to seek help. So in that regard you are wrong. Being able to move around freely, without facing scrutiny over masks or vaccination papers, would help. Therapists have phones. Problem solved. Scrutiny over masks and vaccinations is very easy to render meaningless by wearing a mask and getting vaccinated, and if you've got a problem with that requirement, I recommend paying attention to all of the people that are trying to teach you how public health works. Those requirements are in fact necessary to avoid massive casualties. I'm sorry if that stresses you out, but that's the reality we live in, so you need to figure out how to come to terms with that. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... This prioritization means that lockdowns are the result of those who are seeking medical treatment. They are the ones to blame, not those who are refusing it. News outlets have placed the blame on the latter. Nobody's placing blame on the tiny handful of people that have actually refused all medical care and chosen to die in their homes for hospitals being congested. Those people do indeed not congest hospitals, for obvious reasons (though most with such an attitude also do very little to avoid infecting others, so they're not as innocent as you might like to believe). The blame is being placed on the unvaccinated because it's overwhelmingly unvaccinated people that are taking up ICU beds when the consequences of their (in)actions come calling. That is an empirical fact. Further blame is being placed on those rejecting preventative measures for fueling the spread that is resulting in so many hospitalizations. That is also empirically supported. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... All that matters is that they treat some people. Thus hospitals are made more important than the health of people. Literally nobody is thinking like that, with the sole exception of board members of garbage hospitals like the one your dad tried to go to. When people say they're worried about hospitals being overwhelmed, that means they're worrying that people who need care won't be able to get it. The hospitals themselves don't enter the equation at all the way you're trying to insert them. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:961232391] in The point ... [t:79825906]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>Hardly. That hospital has a 5 star safety rating and they maintain it by never treating anyone with anything more severe than high blood pressure. They also brag about having the best doctors in the area. It has less to do with capacity or resources and everything to do with holding onto status.</quote> That's just a garbage hospital, then. Hospitals turning away patients purely for the sake of being able to say they still have empty beds isn't a solution to the problem here. The problem is that there won't be enough resources to treat everyone that needs treatment unless infection rates are kept under control. "We're not overwhelmed, we just don't want any more patients" does nothing to fix the people dying on stretchers as the paramedics search for a place that can take them. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>I don't believe anyone is endangered.</quote> We're in the midst of the greatest public health crisis in a century. Everyone is endangered, and those refusing to take preventative measures to mitigate that danger absolutely do make it worse. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>Further the fear mongering and regulations only make it harder to seek help. So in that regard you are wrong. Being able to move around freely, without facing scrutiny over masks or vaccination papers, would help.</quote> Therapists have phones. Problem solved. Scrutiny over masks and vaccinations is very easy to render meaningless by wearing a mask and getting vaccinated, and if you've got a problem with that requirement, I recommend paying attention to all of the people that are trying to teach you how public health works. Those requirements are in fact necessary to avoid massive casualties. I'm sorry if that stresses you out, but that's the reality we live in, so you need to figure out how to come to terms with that. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>This prioritization means that lockdowns are the result of those who are seeking medical treatment. They are the ones to blame, not those who are refusing it. News outlets have placed the blame on the latter.</quote> Nobody's placing blame on the tiny handful of people that have actually refused all medical care and chosen to die in their homes for hospitals being congested. Those people do indeed not congest hospitals, for obvious reasons (though most with such an attitude also do very little to avoid infecting others, so they're not as innocent as you might like to believe). The blame is being placed on the unvaccinated because it's overwhelmingly unvaccinated people that are taking up ICU beds when the consequences of their (in)actions come calling. That is an empirical fact. Further blame is being placed on those rejecting preventative measures for fueling the spread that is resulting in so many hospitalizations. That is also empirically supported. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>All that matters is that they treat some people. Thus hospitals are made more important than the health of people.</quote> Literally nobody is thinking like that, with the sole exception of board members of garbage hospitals like the one your dad tried to go to. When people say they're worried about hospitals being overwhelmed, that means they're worrying that people who need care won't be able to get it. The hospitals themselves don't enter the equation at all the way you're trying to insert them. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1