GSUeagles14

absolutely. Triage exists. But like i said, im done arguing. Its just so silly that it was even being argued. Again, if you feel strongly this what we should do, call your state and local officials. Tell your neighbors, tell anyone who will listen to help raise support for this idea. Im gonna sound like a broken record, but i suspect that the it wont be well received among people you encounter out in the real world. BUt that doesnt matter, because you guys believe it. Enact local change, it can happen if you push hard enough and find enough people that agree with you.

I absolutely agree with the choice thing, its a slippery slope. I wasnt the one that made it though, @ET80 did. I just took it further and as you already said, analyzed those other aspects of society. But you know what, i just dont care to argue it anymore, now that ive actually thought about whats being argued. I encourage @ET80and whoever else who think its a good idea to refuse hospital care to the unvaccinated to call their local and state officials, and really press them to get the ball rolling. try to get other people on board and have them call as well. Tell your neighbors, tell the couple waiting at the bar thats out for dinner. Shout it to the world, and maybe, just maybe enough people will suggest it that we see some action. I dont see that happening, in fact i suspect the reaction would be pretty poor, but if anyone believes in it that much they should absolutely do what they can.

But @ET80s thing was resource allocation. Theres limited doctors/nurses and medicine, by that obese person choosing to eat foolishly, they knew there an added risk it could lead to things that needed medical attention. They took away a doctor/nurse based on a choice they made. And we can use cigarette smokers too. And youre right, theyre directly harming others with 2nd hand smoke. But again, lets get real, this is all extremely foolish. As I already mentioned, this never gets implemented in real life, and id be shocked if anyone taken seriously would dare to suggest it.

Absolutely not, and theres more than one way to get HIV obviously. What im saying is thank goodness we had people treating HIV patients back in the day even though they could have contracted it themselves (however low the odds) in the process and its something that could have been avoided (somewhat). It would be absolutely awful if that happened, and i mean that sincerely.

Hiv can infect others right? Im being serious, what am i missing. Regardless of how small the chance, theres still a chance. Unless im missing something?

Good one bruh, hurt me deep. We all realize though that if someone suggested what you are in the real world, it would be laughed at. Right? So maybe lets cool it with those jokes... if you want to throw some digs at me though, im not the tallest guy in the world. And as we saw today, the reading aint great.. maybe angle towards those.

No, but theres an easy avoidance for HIV/AIDs. Avoid a couple things and your chances go drastically down of catching it. Not 100%, but a significant amount. The odds are that a person infected with HIV made a choice(again, not always). A unvaccinated person made a choice. Both could infect those who are treating them.

Of course thats not the only cause, ive never said it is. It is one of the leading causes though. Please, tell me where you got that i said obesity was the ONLY cause of heart disease.

thats not what was argued though. it was a resource allocation issue. As to your argument, if you really want to argue it, thoughts on Hiv/Aids? Largely avoidable, and theres a chance they can infect others. If youre actually arguing this, thank goodness you werent making medical decisions back in the 80's.

Ill try and make this clearer.... whether i agree or disagree, i let all unvaccinated dont get the good medicine/equipment stuff go. So in this make believe world, that stuff is in good inventory and on site. I stood firm on the doctors and nurses treating unvacccinated until the day that vaccinated people need care. Even typing this is silly as it would be laughed at in the real world... But i digress. So plan is in place, equipment is there. you dont need suppliers or vendors (although theyre kind of the same thing) at the immediate moment because you already have built up inventory on site, but i do appreciate you trying to complicating it. The fact that you think if your boss calls a meeting, and tells their staff this plan we've worked on is now going into effect, and expecting it to be executed is unrealistic tells me youve worked with some really crappy bosses and co workers. yes, the obese is creating a harmful environment because they made a choice to east that pizza/pasta. That led them to needing a hospital/doctor care that is in such short supply in your own scenario, that it could have gone to someone who had completely no control over their situation. The person who had no control is suffering because someone else made a choice that led to needing care. Same with the person who smoked, hes taking attention away from someone else. I mean, lets even look at this down the road post pandemic. Who wants to live in the world where a heart attack patient goes to the hospital, and they say ""sorry we're really busy today. we want to make sure our patients can have the upmost attentiveness from our staff and were just about at our limit. Youre obese and contributed to your own condition, so were gonna have to turn you away. Sorry though." Yuck.

Im sorry but youre completely making up #s and then saying "oh, this wouldnt help". a 40% drop in hospitalizations might still leave us in an awful spot, but would a 80% drop help! Neither is based on anything. Although, admittedly im having a tough time reading today as @JonStarkcan attest to,can you point me to wehre youre seeing that 40% if im just missing it. Additionally, who cares if we get covid and sympotons arent any worse than the flu? Sure, not fun, but manageable. So when you say deaths/hospitalizations would be down, thats very important. I never asserted that the spread would be lowered if we had a 100% healthy population, at least i dont think? Not even gonna address the 3rd world stuff, or those living under dictators/tyrants. I did get a chuckle out of it though.

I just came back from my run (health!) and i was thinking this is what youd say, im pretty sure you said you dropped or conceded this point (i forgot the word you used). Obese people dont have to be obese, thats a choice. Cancer patients who smoked, thats a choice. They made those choices and took the risk that cancer, heart disease, etc wouldnt come for them. But it was a choice they made. Its actually funny that you include heart attack/stroke in your list as you can drastically decrease your risks for those if you live a healthy lifestyle. So why is it the obese people who made a choice to eat pizza and pasta then had a heart attack gets medical attention, but the covid patient who made a choice to not get a vaccine doesnt. And i think you underestimate how quickly a meeting can be called. send out mass email, text, phone call or whatever that a meeting will be had at x time. "were implementing plan ______, effective immediately. You guys are great at what you do, we've been over said plan extensively, lets go execute it".

To be clear, im talking about currently in regards to doctors and nurses. Theyre not an issue because essentially the only people being hospitalized are the unvaccinated. specifically to doctors/nurses, if you want to have a plan in place for if/when vaccinated folks start to get hospitalized in large #'s, well thats a great idea. Call a meeting, tell your we're implementing the plan we talked about, and were moving care away from the unvaccinated and focusing on the vaccinated. But to say we cant we cant spare doctors and nurses because something may happen and its not easy to redirect human resources... i simply disagree with. And i think thats where ill stop on this one, its better to just say "agree to disagree" and we can both hope that people will continue to get vaccinated at the accelerated rate we've seen recently.

thats a pretty bold statement, do you have any data to back this up? Or is it just solely your opinion? Or, to be fair, whats leading you to believe a healthy population would only lead to an inconsequential improvement?

A lot of this is well said. And im well aware people die, and while sad its a fact of life and inevitable. Theres an issue here though. One, and we'll probably continue to agree to disagree on this, theres no real threat with the delta variant to the vaccinated. Its a microscopic % that are getting hospitalized if youre vaccinated. So you want to hold back the good medicine to the unvaccinated, i dont like it but whatever. Doctors, nurses etc are not an issue. If we start to see a big influx of vaccinated folks needing to get hospitalized, at that point you can pivot. But this is a much more nuanced take than your previous statements of "dont treat the unvaccinated".