It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Elderly people with swine flu should be treated as the lowest priority for antiviral drugs in a bid to preserve stocks for the younger population, according to new research. The controversial view was published yesterday by an Italian scientist who claimed that distributing drugs such as Tamiflu to those over 65 has little effect on the spread of the infection or on mortality rates.
Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Aggie Man
Funny you should say that and express support for a national health care system in that other thread.
Nazi much?
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by Aggie Man
They are still alive for crying out loud... just because they are older it is no excuse to put them earlier in their graves. Hitler also had similar treatments for the ill/old, the mentally unstable, as well as other "undesirables", to put them in the grave as soon as possible....
Your parents will soon enough be 65, and you will as well, i wonder if by then you will be so uninterested as to what happens to elderly people...
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Even thou it might be good news since noone over 65 will be forced to vaccinate I see this as a sign of things to come.
President Obama himself has stated something similar, that it might be better for the government not to allow elder people to have treatments or operations if under the Obama healthcare the government takes control, and if the government thinks it is too expensive, or the treatment or operation "might' not work.
Now we are seeing other influential people on the other side of the world spousing a similar idea, that elder people are not worth the time and effort in the brave new world.
Is this the kind of future we have in store for our elderly?
(visit the link for the full news article)
[edit on 29-7-2009 by ElectricUniverse]
Originally posted by Aggie Man
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
What age classes are unproductive to society? The youth and the elderly. The youth have future potential to contribute, whereas the elderly, for all intents and purposes, have nothing tangible left to contribute. So, with that being said, they SHOULD be lowest priority.
Just my 2-cents
Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Originally posted by Aggie Man
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
What age classes are unproductive to society? The youth and the elderly. The youth have future potential to contribute, whereas the elderly, for all intents and purposes, have nothing tangible left to contribute. So, with that being said, they SHOULD be lowest priority.
Just my 2-cents
WOW,
Originally posted by Aggie Man
reply to post by MissysWorld
WOW, I'm surprised that people find what I said above appalling. The article the OP was referring to states
"Elderly people with swine flu should be treated as the lowest priority for antiviral drugs in a bid to preserve stocks for the younger population".
Is what I said really that appalling, or is it just a tough bit of reality to swallow?
What should we do? Give medication out on a first come, first serve basis? If we did that, know who would get all the medication? The elderly/retired, as they actually have the time on their hands to be the first in line...That ain't right.
What should we do? Give medication out on a first come, first serve basis? If we did that, know who would get all the medication? The elderly/retired, as they actually have the time on their hands to be the first in line...That ain't right.