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.

 

Elderly should be low priority for antivirals, says scientist

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 





What ever happened to survival of the fittest? With world population growth at an exponential rate, is it no wonder that world resources are a hotly fought after commodity? Demand exceeding supply is natures way of curbing population growth...AND I for one say protect the world's "assets" first...And the sick, elderly, mentally challenged, etc. are NOT the world's greatest assets. I am a compassionate person, believe it or not. BUT when talking about rationing medication...the medication HAS to go to those that will be the most benefit to the betterment of the global society.


Let's see...survival of the fittest became an outdated concept with the introduction of civilised society. World resources are not a hotly fought after commodity, they are just fought after and protected by greedy and selfish thugs. There is no demand exceeding supply...that is just brainwashing to make you fearful and comply.
So, I take it as a compassionate and unselfish person, should you get sick you will accept that dying is for the good of all and you will end your life?
Those with your views are so brainwashed that I despair. The ONLY point of life and living to you is to have your parents and grandparents pay for your existence and growth when they were productive and useful members (although obviously not enough attention was given to teach critical thinking), for you to then marry, to have kids and to work, work work until you drop. And you cannot think of any other way can you?




posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
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


Really?

People are not only living longer, but they are living healthily longer and many people over the age of 65 are still working and contributing to society in ways that are not measured by GDP.

Older people are our link to the past. They give cultural relevance to history for our children, not to mention the asset that grandparents and great-grandparents represent to families in terms of child care, financial assistance, and a host of other support roles.

Actually, the scientist is correct. Those who have been affected most by the current strain of swine flu are young people and pregnant women.

www.businessmirror.com.ph...

www.businessdailyafrica.com...

We have actually had a pretty near universal cultural norm of societies ensuring their longevity by giving preference to those who represent the future, who just happen to be the women and the children.

Feminism has put a huge whole in that norm and now we send our young females into harms way for national security while we have perfectly healthy young males walking the streets here at home who can't figure out how to wear their pants or where the front of a cap is.

One might wonder who contributes more to society. The elderly person who still works and helps out with his extended family or the knuckle-headed numbskull driving around with his pants below his butt, his hat turned sidways, and his stereo blasting loud enough to vibrate concrete and steel structures.



[edit on 2009/7/29 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by oneclickaway
 


I'm not talking dollars and cents here. What I am talking about is the state of our planet in regards to the population. Where I live, we are warned against eating fish out of our rivers, when the wind blows in my direction, you get to smell the local landfill because it is overfilled with our garbage, when I take a hike in our national forest, I get to see the trash and graffiti everywhere. We have outgrown our planet and drastic measures are going to have to be taken. Compassionate or not, when this planet dies, we all die!



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Although it is easy to jump to conclusions, the simple fact of the matter is that the H1N1 Influenza Virus has not been either pathogenic nor deadly to the over 65 demographic as most Influenza Viruses are. The older a person is, the more resilient they are naturally to this particular strain. The median age of contagion for H1N1 is 30, and the median age for fatality for H1N1 is 5.

The government agencies, such as the CDC, do not see H1N1 being a threat to the elderly population simply because it isn't, unlike the more common Type A, B, and A+B strains of Influenza which are far more pathogenic and deadly to that demographic than any other. There is no need to Vaccinate a demographic if they are not threatened by it.

This is no different than say certain Viruses that are pathogenic to only particular genotypes. It's not a conspiracy to withhold Vaccination for a Virus from African-Americans that only affects Caucasians, like SARS for example.

When faced with limited resources, the CDC has to make tough choices, and it comes down to simply a matter of reserving those limited resources to those demographics who are at highest risk of being either pathogenic or a fatal statistic.

We see this happen all the time when there is a shortage of the Influenza Vaccination for Type A, B, A+B...the Elderly and Care-Givers get first priority, and since the younger you are, the less at risk you are of Influenza, so younger demographics are not given priority, and are even out-right denied the Vaccination when supplies are low.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Mudman21
 





I'm not talking dollars and cents here. What I am talking about is the state of our planet in regards to the population. Where I live, we are warned against eating fish out of our rivers, when the wind blows in my direction, you get to smell the local landfill because it is overfilled with our garbage, when I take a hike in our national forest, I get to see the trash and graffiti everywhere. We have outgrown our planet and drastic measures are going to have to be taken. Compassionate or not, when this planet dies, we all die!


Well then don't drop trash in the national forest or pick it up if you see it. Landfill is a whole other issue. Polluted rivers is a whole other issue.
We have not outgrown our planet.
If you are moaning because there is graffitti in your national park then who the hell put it there? I doubt elderly ladies came on zimmer frames to write abuse.
No...dear me...it was the young, the very ones that need saving at the expense of the elders (not that there is any need for rationing anyway).
And on a financial note....if anyone is entitled to anything at all it will be the elderly who have paid taxes all their lives!



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Well..I am one of the ancient ones....and guess what? None of any flu vaccine has ever been WASTED on me. I have never taken a Flu shot!! I am very healthy and on no type of medications...I have worked with the Elderly for 11 years, some younger than me!!! These people have plenty to contribute to society...their experiences in life give many lessons to many people who are around them. They are funny and delightful to be with. And the sadness in their lives can give you plenty to think about. Their plights are just heartbreaking, yet many of them think they are the lucky ones. I have learned much from these Elderly people. Because they are old, don't think they have nothing to contribute to society. These people have made my life so much more rewarding from having known them.....



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere


It's not because they're too old to revolt. If voting mattered they're plenty of elderly to thwart or pass just about anything.

What matters to the gov is that they arent pulling their share-cropper weight anymore. They arent producing any income for the system.



Yeah, you're probably right about that.

It's sickening to see how willing people are to throw our elderly to the wolves. In past societies, the elders were revered for their wisdom and knowledge. Today, we call them senile and put them in homes to get them off our hands while we wait for them to die. Disgusting really.

My father is 70 years old, a cancer survivor and he still works his ass off every day (weekends too) running his restaurant to support his family, and pay for my younger brother's school expenses. If these people had their way, my dad would have lost his battle to cancer at 65 and our family would have fallen apart.

What people need to remember is, these days especially, senior citizens still contribute a lot to society, especially with the increasing amount of seniors who are still working. They also contribute knowledge and wisdom that younger generations would likely be lost without.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
reply to post by oneclickaway
 


What ever happened to survival of the fittest? With world population growth at an exponential rate, is it no wonder that world resources are a hotly fought after commodity? Demand exceeding supply is natures way of curbing population growth...AND I for one say protect the world's "assets" first...And the sick, elderly, mentally challenged, etc. are NOT the world's greatest assets. I am a compassionate person, believe it or not. BUT when talking about rationing medication...the medication HAS to go to those that will be the most benefit to the betterment of the global society.


Here in the UK it is the pensioners who worked for, and helped to establish a national health service. They also went to war.

I am neither for war, nor am I a huge fan of Big Pharma. And throughout the history of Epidemiology we see viruses come along and try to wipe us out in an effort to maintain balance.

The thing that stands out for me is that we in the western world are leaving ourselves wide open to an attack of this kind by the way we live our daily lives. Poor diet, a willingnes to take anti biotics at the sign of a sneeze, toxins in all the products we buy, poor diet, stressed lifestyle and a fundamental lack of knowledge of how to maintain our own health.

Throw global travel and the reluctance of the Govt to impliment proper containment proceedures over the fear of the finacial losses into the mix and you have the perfect storm.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Let's look at just a tiny few elderly useless non productive members of society that the young would put on the scrap heap and allow to die so happily because the young give so much more.

Nelson Mandela 91
Desmond Tutu 78
Dalai Lama 74
Maya Angelou 81
Queen Elizabeth 82
Ron Paul 74
Stephen Hawking 67
Liz Taylor 77

These three have not long to go...
Bill Clinton 63
Oprah Winfrey 55
Bill Gates 54

George Bush 63
Dick Cheney 68
Yeah ok, you have a point with those two....

Ghandi was 79 when he died
Albert Einstein was 76
I could probably come up with list upon list of artists, writers, scientists, philosophers, actors, musicians etc who have contributed more right up to their deaths than most of us ever will.


[edit on 29-7-2009 by oneclickaway]



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
This is the lifeboat scenario.

You're trapped in a lifeboat with limited resources and too many people.
Who do you save.

If you're realistic, you need people to row the lifeboat. If the young and healthy sacrifice themselves to save the elderly then everyone dies.

If there are ample supplies of antivirals then you don't have to worry about it. If you have to ration, then you need a plan.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
reply to post by oneclickaway
 




What ever happened to survival of the fittest? With world population growth at an exponential rate, is it no wonder that world resources are a hotly fought after commodity? Demand exceeding supply is natures way of curbing population growth...AND I for one say protect the world's "assets" first...And the sick, elderly, mentally challenged, etc. are NOT the world's greatest assets. I am a compassionate person, believe it or not. BUT when talking about rationing medication...the medication HAS to go to those that will be the most benefit to the betterment of the global society.

So lets see, are you talking about "survival of the fittest"?? or after reading your post:


And the sick, elderly, mentally challenged, etc. are NOT the world's greatest assets.

Are you really talking about "Survival of the worlds greatest assets"??
My elderly Aunt is in great health, very fit, my niece who is mentally challenged, is in perfect health, and competes in Special Olympics..so I guess by your standards they are amoung the fittest..or not???


[edit on 29-7-2009 by MissysWorld]



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by MissysWorld
Are you really talking about "Survival of the worlds greatest assets"??
My elderly Aunt is in great health, very fit, my niece who is mentally challenged, is in perfect health...


So, if they are in great health, then the have no need to see the doctor then...so your point is mute.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Then you are saying that all the Elderly in the life boat are unhealthy, weak, and are unable to help row the boat, while all the Young are healthy and strong. So with the limited resources, just throw the Old in to drown or be eaten.
Just to let you know my Uncle is 75 and He was upset with his riding lawn mower not working a few days ago...maybe it was an adrenaline rush, but that ELDERLY man picked the mower up and threw it on the back of his truck!!! Which stunned all of us watching him, plus he used a few choice words to go along with the feat. That truck bounced like a ball!!!This was not a small mower either!!! My Uncle is 6 feet 4in. tall. weighs about 235 lbs.. Wouldn't you want to keep that old man to help row the boat? Or maybe he would take up too much room.
All old people are not sick and helpless, and unfortunately...not all the young are strong and healthy.
.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by moonwize
Then you are saying that all the Elderly in the life boat are unhealthy, weak, and are unable to help row the boat, while all the Young are healthy and strong. So with the limited resources, just throw the Old in to drown or be eaten.
Just to let you know my Uncle is 75 and He was upset with his riding lawn mower not working a few days ago...maybe it was an adrenaline rush, but that ELDERLY man picked the mower up and threw it on the back of his truck!!! Which stunned all of us watching him, plus he used a few choice words to go along with the feat. That truck bounced like a ball!!!This was not a small mower either!!! My Uncle is 6 feet 4in. tall. weighs about 235 lbs.. Wouldn't you want to keep that old man to help row the boat? Or maybe he would take up too much room.
All old people are not sick and helpless, and unfortunately...not all the young are strong and healthy.
.


Sounds like your Uncle wouldn't fall into the category of unhealthy, unproductive either...but G**D***IT most elderly are weak and feeble...and more heatlth care costs are spent on these "walking dead" than Almost any other segment of society....Sure it sucks to lose a loved one...but, the world is a better place...and so is the economy, without these sorts dragging the rest of us down and dragging our health care costs up.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   
This is a sad day for me.

Some of the comments in this thread cut me to the bone.

How long will it be before any baby born deformed or with any birth defect be killed as soon as it's born?

When a young man or woman has an accident and is paralyzed and unable to work will they soon be killed?

I predict that it won't be long until the age is lowered from 64 to 50 and eventually anyone over 30 will be denied life.

This thread has made me physically sick. I Have allowed it to take my joy away.

Life is precious at any age.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by dizziedame
This is a sad day for me.

Some of the comments in this thread cut me to the bone.

How long will it be before any baby born deformed or with any birth defect be killed as soon as it's born?

When a young man or woman has an accident and is paralyzed and unable to work will they soon be killed?

I predict that it won't be long until the age is lowered from 64 to 50 and eventually anyone over 30 will be denied life.

This thread has made me physically sick. I Have allowed it to take my joy away.

Life is precious at any age.


so when 1 dose of "the cure" is left and we have a precious 5 year old and a precious 70 year old left in the waiting room....you say give it to the 70 year old because he/she was there first? GET REAL FOLKS

EDIT: Deformed babies USE TO DIE...through our (human) selfishness and compassion, we have discovered medical advances to prolong their life. KILL them NEVER...that's insane...Letting them be born and let nature take it's course...THAT IS NOT MURDER!

[edit on 29-7-2009 by Aggie Man]



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 





This is the lifeboat scenario. You're trapped in a lifeboat with limited resources and too many people. Who do you save. If you're realistic, you need people to row the lifeboat. If the young and healthy sacrifice themselves to save the elderly then everyone dies. If there are ample supplies of antivirals then you don't have to worry about it. If you have to ration, then you need a plan.


We are not in a lifeboat and even if we were you might need the wisdom to steer the damn thing. Physical strength and vitality is not the only attribute needed in the world.
Take for example Stephen Hawking, aged 67, theoretical physicist and mathematician, He has been completely paralysed with a motor neuron disease for the last 30 years. In your theory he is a complete waste of space. He can't move, has to be looked after day and night. But the world would be a much poorer place without him as he is one of the greatest minds that ever lived. The man has struggled daily to write some of the most impressive papers ever seen, by moving his cheek, the only part of him that has some minute movement. So against all the odds he has struggled and managed to write works of genius.
But in your scenario, you would put him up against some 20 year old who may never have a decent thought come into his head, possibly ever, but has muscles and brute strength, and he is more important and has precedence over someone who has and still does contribute so much knowledge to the world?



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 





Sounds like your Uncle wouldn't fall into the category of unhealthy, unproductive either...but G**D***IT most elderly are weak and feeble...and more heatlth care costs are spent on these "walking dead" than Almost any other segment of society....Sure it sucks to lose a loved one...but, the world is a better place...and so is the economy, without these sorts dragging the rest of us down and dragging our health care costs up.


Well, there are the living dead too. Those that have not a good thought in them, those that have not contributed to the world in any good way except to toss disrespect and hatred into the world. Those that have the imagination of gnats. Those that can't see anything becuase of their intellectual limitations. Those that are just brainwashed. Those that are just totally souless. I would not want them killed as every life is precious. However, Aggie Man, think on as you will be old one day. Who is more entitled to health care...you...or someone who has paid into the system all their lives. Well the answer is...not you. I use the financial argument purely as that seems to be the only one you could understand in your feebleness. The only reason you are getting health care is because the walking dead as you put it have worked and paid taxes all their life...so on that basis who should come first?



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 



I would throw you and Angie Man, and anyone else who agrees with you two off the boat without blinking and leave an elderly couple in the boat with me. They probably have many more interesting things to tell me anyways.


[edit on 29-7-2009 by ElectricUniverse]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join