UK : The lockdown may cause 200,000 extra deaths

[Rat Boy 43,860]

11 minutes ago, Florin said:

Maybe tell us what advice do you have for cancer patients who cant get a diagnosis and treatment? Or you dont care about these people?

But with lockdown, medical appointments/concerns are grounds to leave home and get treatment?? 

[Bt1 5,213]

2 minutes ago, Mer Boy said:

But with lockdown, medical appointments/concerns are grounds to leave home and get treatment?? 

No, because there were a lot of restrictions. 

Only emergencies were accepted. So if u have cancer, yes, you will get the treatment, but not necessarily your surgery.

But

If you want to get tested for cancer or any other disease, it isnt considered an emergency and your appointment may be postponed for 1 - 6 months.

[RAMROD 117,330]

12 minutes ago, Florin said:

 

Maybe tell us what advice do you have for cancer patients who cant get a diagnosis and treatment? Or you dont care about these people?

 

Weak argument, as I have stated

37 minutes ago, RAMROD said:

Stay home when there are no urgent need to be outdoor.

Since cancer patients have urgent need, obviously they can go and get their treatment.

 

[Rat Boy 43,860]

5 minutes ago, Florin said:

No, because there were a lot of restrictions. 

Only emergencies were accepted. So if u have cancer, yes, you will get the treatment, but not necessarily your surgery.

But

If you want to get tested for cancer or any other disease, it isnt considered an emergency and your appointment may be postponed for 1 - 6 months.

If the treatment/test is deemed essential/urgent, it will not be denied. Also, imagine if there was no lockdown - the hospitals would be overwhelmed with COVID-19 cases and would not be able to treat patients with other conditions properly! 

[Bt1 5,213]

2 minutes ago, RAMROD said:

 

Weak argument, as I have stated

Since cancer patients have urgent need, obviously they can go and get their treatment.

 

That's what I called uninformed.

Yes, if u have a cancer diagnosis u will get the treatment.

But if you have an appointment for a cancer test, most of them have been cancelled during lockdowns. 

And it's the same with most non-covid things.

[Bt1 5,213]

1 minute ago, Mer Boy said:

If the treatment is deemed essential/urgent, it will not be denied. Also, imagine if there was no lockdown - the hospitals would be overwhelmed with COVID-19 cases and would not be able to treat patients with other conditions properly! 

As I've said cancer tests werent considered essential/ urgent during lockdowns. 

[Rat Boy 43,860]

6 minutes ago, Florin said:

As I've said cancer tests werent considered essential/ urgent during lockdowns. 

Then maybe that means that lockdowns in the UK need to be slightly amended to allow such tests to be considered essential. I don't think we should discount lockdowns as a whole because of this rectifiable limitation. Once again, I believe no lockdown = limited non-COVID treatments/tests due to an overwhelmed health system. Lockdowns are not ideal but they are better than other alternatives. 

[RAMROD 117,330]

2 minutes ago, Florin said:

That's what I called uninformed.

Yes, if u have a cancer diagnosis u will get the treatment.

But if you have an appointment for a cancer test, most of them have been cancelled during lockdowns. 

And it's the same with most non-covid things.

 

With all medic team need to focus on covid patients which is more urgent since it is highly contagious, it is predictable lots of other appointments got cancelled. Do you think medic team would like to ignore cancer patients if they can help it? Everyone life been shxtty from covid. But to keep it contained, we need to stay home until all infected person treated so there will be no new infections, then the medic can start to take care of other patients. The sooner people understand this the sooner non covid patients can get treatment. Know your priorities better.

[My Name Isnt Alice 3,737]

1 hour ago, Florin said:

 

The cover looks like graphic design is my passion

[Bt1 5,213]

14 minutes ago, RAMROD said:

 

With all medic team need to focus on covid patients which is more urgent since it is highly contagious, it is predictable lots of other appointments got cancelled. Do you think medic team would like to ignore cancer patients if they can help it? Everyone life been shxtty from covid. But to keep it contained, we need to stay home until all infected person treated so there will be no new infections, then the medic can start to take care of other patients. The sooner people understand this the sooner non covid patients can get treatment. Know your priorities better.

Again uninformed.

The restrictions didnt help covid patients. It's a reason why we have specialists and not just doctors. The oncologists simply had online appointments or had less patients. 

There is data online if you are interested. Just google it.

[Adakam 2]

20 minutes ago, Florin said:

As I've said cancer tests werent considered essential/ urgent during lockdowns. 

And do you think they would be considered essential without the lockdowns? Hospitals being overwhelmed would mean that patients off ALL kinds of diseases and emergencies wouldnt get treatment either way. Having non-emergency cases wait is better than having no place to treat anyone.

 Neither situation is ideal but if your concern is people being able to get treatments, lockdown is the better way to go

[Bt1 5,213]

20 minutes ago, Mer Boy said:

Then maybe that means that lockdowns in the UK need to be slightly amended to allow such tests to be considered essential. I don't think we should discount lockdowns as a whole because of this rectifiable limitation. Once again, I believe no lockdown = limited non-COVID treatments/tests due to an overwhelmed health system. Lockdowns are not ideal but they are better than other alternatives. 

The idea that this only happened in UK is false again. They simply have some available data in English.

What people forgot is that most of these restrictions started as 2 weeks restrictions. That's why they were so tough. And yet, most of them remained in place for months.

When u have available data that shows u that more people will die because of x instead of y and yet u insist that y is more important than x, then something is wrong.

[Bt1 5,213]

10 minutes ago, Adakam said:

And do you think they would be considered essential without the lockdowns? Hospitals being overwhelmed would mean that patients off ALL kinds of diseases and emergencies wouldnt get treatment either way. Having non-emergency cases wait is better than having no place to treat anyone.

 Neither situation is ideal but if your concern is people being able to get treatments, lockdown is the better way to go

Well, you miss the point.

It's not important that medical appoiments arent considered emergencies during normal times, because there arent restrictions against non-emergencies.

[PartySick 173,132]

42 minutes ago, Mer Boy said:

I don't think we should discount lockdowns as a whole because of this rectifiable limitation.

Besides, "what if I have cancer" is a HUGE "what if" and not even remotely grounds to suspend lockdowns and allow covid to freely infect everyone.

Most hospitals in the hardest hit areas in the US had staff (nurses and doctors) get infected and need treatment themselves. And that's with lockdowns. Not even cancer treatments happen when every doctor and nurse has to care for dozens of covid patients or becomes one themselves.

We're seeing what happens without a lockdown here in Florida. County by county, every ICU is filling up. Trucks are being brought in to hold the dead bodies of covid patients. Medical workers are being pulled from other states. People here are going without non-covid care and it's BECAUSE we don't have a lockdown or any kind of law attempting to mitigate the pandemic.

My grandpa can't safely be in a rehab center where he needs to be, he can't get reliable appointments at the wound center because they're now short staffed, and his nurses come only once every other week now. He has diabetic lesions on his legs, a mono infection, a bed sore so deep it hits bone on his backside, and minor pneumonia (as of three days ago) but the doctors decided it's safer for him to be at home than in the hospital with covid patients literally filling the hallways.

My best friend's mom had to travel several counties over for dialysis last week because all the people at the center in town are working at the hospital. She can't get an appointment at the cancer center in Jacksonville to see if she's still in remission nor can she get the kidney transplant she needs and was supposed to get earlier this year. That's put off indefinitely.

And it's all because we're NOT under ANY restrictions here. Not even a freaking mask mandate.

Lockdowns ensure people like my grandpa and the woman who calls me her adopted son can get care eventually rather than never. The nerve of anyone to argue otherwise

They have their drawbacks but at the end of the day, they give us control of the situation. Lifting them prematurely or not having them at all leads to mass chaos with horrifying consequences.

[Defmix100 7,108]

1 hour ago, TimisaMonster said:

So self isolation will cause more death....make this make sense Britain 

My first thoughts were it was less about self isolation and more about unemployement.

Like that statistic in America saying for every 1% unemployment goes up, 40,000 people die (unless that's not true, I'm finding things for and agaisnt that)