News Jack Darling resumes with WCE

[mattyc75]

Directly, yes. The taxes paid by someone needing say heart surgery would pay for the procedure.

But that clogs up the system, so while that person is getting the care they need (that they paid for through taxes) potentially someone else is waiting or may even die.

It's a bit of a rabbit hole though as the next in line may be obese (again, potentially preventable health issues being treated in hospital).

On SM-G986B using BigFooty.com mobile app

Was going to write this too. Its outrageous that a smoker should get the same rights to a hospital bed as a non smoker

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[Balls In]

Was going to write this too. Its outrageous that a smoker should get the same rights to a hospital bed as a non smoker

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Car drivers. Dangerous bastards

 

[Godfather32]

Car drivers. Dangerous bastards

True, especially in Perth

 

[MIKE85]

Should an obese person get the same rights to a hospital bed as a thin person? Should we charge them $50 for a whopper??

 

[Godfather32]

Should an obese person get the same rights to a hospital bed as a thin person? Should we charge them $50 for a whopper??

I'm glad you said whopper and not DQP

 

[HoneyBadger35]

I'm glad you said whopper and not DQP

You can’t deny basic medical treatment like that.

 

[Forward Press]

Was going to write this too. Its outrageous that a smoker should get the same rights to a hospital bed as a non smoker

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Was debating whether to type up a serious reply as I think your sarcasm was off the mark, but meh I got nothing else better to do.

In normal times when we have beds for whoever needs it, and the resources to help those who require it, smokers will get the same rights to medical treatment as a non smoker.

However, there are situations where the medical profession makes choices.

• A motorcycle accident leads to a healthy set of lungs available to those on the waiting list - preference is given to the non smoker over the smoker (all other things being equal, obviously)
• Overcrowded beds will lead to choices for treatment - those deemed less important are sent to the back of the line so those requiring more urgent treatment get seen to first - hence why we have triage
• We have plenty of stories overseas (and hopefully never in Australia) where overcrowded ICUs have led doctors to giving ventilators and ECMOs and oxygen to those they thought were more likely to survive and essentially letting the others die (Italy, India etc)
• It is not impossible therefore to envision a scenario where an overcrowded ICU would lead to doctors choosing not to give treatment to unvaccinated-by-choice patients, like the organ donation scenario I outlined above

Let me make this clear - I (and hopefully most others) do not want unvaccinated patients to be banned from medical treatment should they develop COVID symptoms. However, if there came a time when doctors have to make choices on who to treat because the system is overloaded - I have zero qualms in them choosing the vaccinated. None. I make no apologies for that line of thought.

 

[WestCoast05]

That’s where it originally comes from. You think individuals in Australia formulated that as a value? Not really.

If you would like, I could delve a bit more into why I put it that way. Do you want me to explain myself a bit better?

No thankyou. I'm middle eastern so so I dont even have to pretend to be mildly interested in any of that crap.
(No offence if you're also brown - I know sometimes there can be the odd token one of us that gets into that stuff too).

 

[Matera92]

Gee willickers. Who ever could've for-seen that happening

 

[boondy]

Yeah sounds like chiro’s are the western version of a Chinese medicine bloke. Tho I think eastern medicine is way more legitimate that chiros are.

Someone light with clean feet walking on my back did wonders for me

 

[ziad]

Has JD been given an IQ test yet?

 

[matthew_s]

Has JD been given an IQ test yet?

no, but he's had a brain scan, unfortunately it didnt reveal anything.

 

[Fatty rules]

I'm vaccinated. It's better than not being for one who wants to protect against Covid depending on personal situation. My argument is the lack of choice. You know, that thing Democracy is supposed to be about.

Also, you'd have to break that data up by cohort. For example, what is the chance of a healthy 20 to 30 year old being hospitalised by Covid and suffering serious damage versus the same cohorts risk of a serious side effect like Myocarditis. Alot of European countries for example have banned Moderna for these age groups.

Choice is key. I prefer not to go down the authoritarian route out of some misguided fear.

It's not only about risk of mortality or hospitalisation. Longer-lasting effects are particularly a worry for younger people even if they were not hospitalised. Potential risks from vaccination are still clearly outweighed by the risks of not being vaccinated.

 

[ziad]

It's not only about risk of mortality or hospitalisation. Longer-lasting effects are particularly a worry for younger people even if they were not hospitalised. Potential risks from vaccination still clearly outweigh the risks of not being vaccinated.

With a list of 42 how many WC players have we lost to head injury with long term impacts. Whats that as a %
How many players retire with degenerative conditions to knees etc.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

So to put this bluntly

Mark McGowan > West Coast Eagles

Would suggest to a lot of people here it’s Probably best off to buy season tickets to the McGowan press conferences so Eagles fans can attend the games...

 

[kane249]

So to put this bluntly

Mark McGowan > West Coast Eagles

Would suggest to a lot of people here it’s Probably best off to buy season tickets to the McGowan press conferences so Eagles fans can attend the games...

Huh?

 

[AFC AFeederClub]

People are uneducated brain dead mongs, stirred up by wackjob politicians and the internet

Trade the bloke to freo.

typical Hinkley lover, im not surprised

 

[shooshka]

Was debating whether to type up a serious reply as I think your sarcasm was off the mark, but meh I got nothing else better to do.

In normal times when we have beds for whoever needs it, and the resources to help those who require it, smokers will get the same rights to medical treatment as a non smoker.

However, there are situations where the medical profession makes choices.

• A motorcycle accident leads to a healthy set of lungs available to those on the waiting list - preference is given to the non smoker over the smoker (all other things being equal, obviously)
• Overcrowded beds will lead to choices for treatment - those deemed less important are sent to the back of the line so those requiring more urgent treatment get seen to first - hence why we have triage
• We have plenty of stories overseas (and hopefully never in Australia) where overcrowded ICUs have led doctors to giving ventilators and ECMOs and oxygen to those they thought were more likely to survive and essentially letting the others die (Italy, India etc)
• It is not impossible therefore to envision a scenario where an overcrowded ICU would lead to doctors choosing not to give treatment to unvaccinated-by-choice patients, like the organ donation scenario I outlined above

Let me make this clear - I (and hopefully most others) do not want unvaccinated patients to be banned from medical treatment should they develop COVID symptoms. However, if there came a time when doctors have to make choices on who to treat because the system is overloaded - I have zero qualms in them choosing the vaccinated. None. I make no apologies for that line of thought.

I get what you are saying and agree... but...

The issue is if society thinks that way then governments will just use it as a way to invest even less in things they need to (in this case the healthcare system) and fudge the stats to meet the presiding public sentiment. i.e. 'no fully vaccinated people were denied their right to healthcare and prompt healthcare in the last month' or 'ambulances had a 90% rate of attendance within the expected timeframes for cases of vaccinated patients' (for anyone unsure - both of those quotes are completely made up).

Measuring a part of the data (even if it is 90% of the data) still leaves the opportunity for the remainder to be completely ignored. I think/hope we are better than that here in Australia in that we want all people to receive adequate health care and general care - regardless of vaccine status (and smoking, weight, health choices,etc etc etc etc).

 

[Forward Press]

I get what you are saying and agree... but...

The issue is if society thinks that way then governments will just use it as a way to invest even less in things they need to (in this case the healthcare system) and fudge the stats to meet the presiding public sentiment. i.e. 'no fully vaccinated people were denied their right to healthcare and prompt healthcare in the last month' or 'ambulances had a 90% rate of attendance within the expected timeframes for cases of vaccinated patients' (for anyone unsure - both of those quotes are completely made up).

Measuring a part of the data (even if it is 90% of the data) still leaves the opportunity for the remainder to be completely ignored. I think/hope we are better than that here in Australia in that we want all people to receive adequate health care and general care - regardless of vaccine status (and smoking, weight, health choices,etc etc etc etc).

At the moment all that need urgent care receive it, and I'd like to think COVID deaths are of course inevitable but that over the course of pandemic they have had the best treatment available - vaccinated or unvaccinated - because our health system is able to do so. The Hippocratic oath and all that.

However, if our system gets to a point where they have to start making choices because there are too many COVID patients and too few beds or ventilators or monoclonal antibody treatments etc (like the two countries above and no doubt countless more) - then I have no guilt or shame over doctors making the necessary decisions on treatment based on whether you are voluntarily anti-vax or not.

 

[Bleedblueandgold]

Seems like pure speculation to theorise (or hope) that Darling is waiting for the Novavax vaccine.
Without even knowing his exact reasons, it's possible that he's opposed to all vaccines or vaccine mandates in general.

 

[larrikin]

typical Hinkley lover, im not surprised

Maybe take the Port sniping to, I dunno, the Port board??

 

[shooshka]

Seems like pure speculation to theorise (or hope) that Darling is waiting for the Novavax vaccine.
Without even knowing his exact reasons, it's possible that he's opposed to all vaccines or vaccine mandates in general.

It's all possible.

I guess reading between the lines some/most of us are holding out hope due to 2 factors:

• Darling's statement (whilst vague, it suggested he wouldn't be missing training for too long)
• The club's statement and use (or non-use) of the rules in place. If he was absolutely anti-vax then we would/should immediately put him on the inactive list and cut his pay to 25%. It would help with salary cap and also free up another list spot for a SSP player or mid-season draft. But, once done, that player is there for a specified period of time. Not doing that implies that they still expect him back.

 

[Ochre]

So to put this bluntly

Mark McGowan > West Coast Eagles

Would suggest to a lot of people here it’s Probably best off to buy season tickets to the McGowan press conferences so Eagles fans can attend the games...

McGowan already our best player

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

McGowan already our best player

Plonk him at CHB and nothing will get through.

 

[Matera92]

McGowan already our best player

He's been to a GF more recently.