Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Acceptable Covid death rates

  • 27-10-2021 9:38pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭


    Mark Paul wrote an article in last Friday's Irish Times that should not have been published. Mark wrote an article titled "Let’s talk about acceptable Covid death rates before restrictions kick in". As a person with a compromised immune system, I find this disgusting. There should be no acceptable Covid deaths.

    I have been in lockdown since March 2020 and I have no idea when I will be able to go out again. I took the vaccine but it did not work on me, so until a solutions found for people like me, I am going nowhere. Why should people in my situation become a statistic on a government chart? Would you like it if one of your family or friends was an acceptable death?

    Post edited by Beasty on


«13456720

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,669 ✭✭✭buried


    When did you get your vaccine S? And how do you mean it didn't work on you? Genuinely interested

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    I got my vaccine last June. I have an underlying health condition and the treatment I underwent shot my B cells. Without any B cells the vaccine won't work on me. I also had a Covid antibody test which checked if I had spike proteins from my Pfizer vaccine and if spike proteins were present, the vaccine was working. Sadly I had no spike proteins.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,669 ✭✭✭buried


    I'm sorry to hear that S.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭skimpydoo




  • Registered Users Posts: 7,227 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    Sorry to hear that.


    So do you propose restrictions forever so no covid deaths happen?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,281 ✭✭✭✭Beechwoodspark


    I have vulnerable family and friends and I know exactly what your situation is like. There is no “acceptable death rate”.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    No I propose mandatory masks and not opening up fully when we have a high rate of daily covid cases and a high rate of hospitalisations.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,227 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    But vulnerable people have been dying of the flu for years.


    Did you call for restrictions when this was happening all those years?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm sorry, but yes there is.

    Society is willing to accept a certain level of flu-related deaths each year in transaction for freedoms - freedoms that transmit the virus to the most vulnerable in society.

    5,000+ people have died from COVID; this isn't the Black Death of the 14th century where up to 40% of the European population perished.

    At some point, we must ask ourselves the question - as we have done with flu each year - what level of risk is society willing to accept in transaction for our daily freedoms.

    5,000 deaths is so miniscule compared to the 5,000,000 people who live here. In other words, restrictions are disproportionate at a time when the vast majority of adults are fully vaccinated. Those who refuse vaccination have volunteered to take that risk on. If there are those still vulnerable in society, they should continue to protect themselves if they so wish. We were promised our freedoms back when the population was fully vaccinated. We have now reached that stage.

    But the 99.5% of the population who want their freedoms back should not otherwise be held in psychological hostage.

    Whilst I am sympathetic to your situation, COVID-19 is going to be here forever - literally forever.

    We cannot close society down forever.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,223 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    Perhaps consider consulting with a medical specialist in immunization, if you have not already? Your GP may refer you. An additional source may be at universities that have medical faculties with immunization research departments both in Ireland, the UK, on the continent, and across the pond?

    Lots of medical research is done at the case study level of analysis. Someone with unusual immunization conditions may be of interest to medical scientists and doctors doing research. If contacted at university they may reply.

    As to the OP question, personally I reject an acceptable Covid death rate.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,227 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    But that won't stop covid deaths altogether???


    So you're basically saying there is an acceptable covid death rate???



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,544 ✭✭✭dubrov


    There are already widespread acceptable death rates in operation although most don't like to think about it.

    Cars cause deaths but the benefit outweighs the death rate for almost all.

    Economic values are placed on lives when deciding what drugs to purchase or quality of roads to build.

    Even the flu causes a lot of deaths that could be prevented with lifestyle changes.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    No, I did not call for restrictions then because if you restricted your movements and contacts you are less likely to catch the flu. It is also worth noting that the flu (not counting the Spanish flu) has never been as rampant as Covid is.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    But the argument is the same.

    Fewer restrictions = greater spread of a virus that kills.

    Let's not forget that influenza is fatal for young people, too - especially those with compromised immune systems.

    On an individual level, I can sympathise. But we have to zoom out and see the bigger picture and, unless we seek to literally save every single life from every virus imaginable, society could never function. And when society stops, it leads to ancillary deaths from other social, economic or health-related issues.

    There is no situation that leads to zero deaths.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,669 ✭✭✭buried


    I think the likes of yourself S and a lot of people in a similar situation, your families and friends are going to have to band together in a widescale political movement in order for you all to get the proper supports from government agencies to get you through this terrible pox. You will have to because this thing is not going away, and you are right to be careful, this thing is now everywhere, and for the vast majority of people they view this unleashed pox as nothing but a mere hindrance, because it won't affect them to the same extent as it would definitely affect you. So they are not in the same zone as you or people like you. You need to create a movement similar to the mica house families to demand extra support from government. Demand it until a proper treatment for this pox is developed. And one will, but it will probably take years. Get everybody you can in your situation to band together until this is done. That's all the little advice I can offer but it's worth doing it.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,227 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    But people still caught and died of the flu even by restricting their movements.


    But that was accepted, hence you never calling for restrictions.


    The only way to stop people dying of the flu or covid is for everyone to remain in their house forever and ever.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,496 ✭✭✭crossman47


    While I sympathise with the OP, I very much hope our government is having that very discussion. Its like the usual "you cannot put a price on a life". You can and you must if you want a functioning policy as regards drugs. People say this if a government is unwilling to sanction a new drug costing say a million per annum per patient. Arguable but what if the cost is ten million or multiples of that?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    People need to take some personal responsibility and what fuucking idiot queues for 2 hours to get into Coppers. If you go to a venue, be it a restaurant, pub, nightclub etc and you are not asked for your Covid passport don't give them your custom.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Or every other bacterial, fungal, and viral infection - all of which can be fatal to the immunocompromised / elderly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    It is also worth noting that people who survive Covid might end up with long covid and that ain't pretty.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭skimpydoo


    Another point worth making is why has the government stopped contact tracing? Surely we should know where cases are coming from? and why are schools treated appallingly?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    What are acceptable flu death rates?

    I mean the deaths that have been accepted every winter for many years.

    Are they no longer acceptable?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Because it's not possible to contact trace to that degree given the widespread level of community transmission; the resources aren't there.

    Once you accept that widespread community transmission has taken place, it becomes only relevant to test symptomatic cases.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,654 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack



    The article doesn’t refer to acceptable deaths though, it refers to an acceptable death rate - what level of risk is a society prepared to take in order to regain some sense of normality. I didn’t read the rest of it because it’s behind a paywall, but that’s the general gist of any of the articles which are posing the question. There’s nobody referring to specific individuals, which I grant you would be disgusting, and I probably wouldn’t have any interest in reading said articles, but articles questioning what level of risk are societies willing to accept in order to live and go about their business?

    Those kinds of questions are asked every day, and everyone finds themselves in situations where they are at risk from something or other on an almost daily basis and ask themselves whether or not the risk is worth it, and whether the level of risk is too great that it outweighs the benefits or not. The articles don’t mean that any death is acceptable, they’re questioning the costs vs the benefits - stay locked down with all the negatives that entails for a society, or risk opening society with all the negatives that entails, and whether one outcome outweighs the other.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭skimpydoo




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    ...precisely because it's unsustainable.

    Contact tracing is only effective at low levels of transmission; to contain the spread of the virus. You find everyone close to contacts, and quarantine them all down.

    Once you permit community transmission, you simply cannot effectively contact trace. It's not about limiting the spread of the virus; it's about finding symptomatic cases and dealing with them appropriately. Up to a third of cases are asymptomatic, too. At this level, contact tracing is ridiculous.

    NPHET understand this and have clearly stated the same.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,400 ✭✭✭TheChizler




  • Registered Users Posts: 6,034 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    FFS OP, people die. Get over it or move over into the conspiracy forum. If you underlying conditions then focus on those and manage them, because that’s all you can do.

    It doesn’t mean the rest of the country has to pander to your perceived extra needs.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    They've altered the criteria for contact tracing, to be exact.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 81,110 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    Where does it end though, should healthy people under 40 park up their cars as road deaths have killed multiple times more of them in the last year than Covid has?



Advertisement