FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Going ro take a collapsed nhs b4 real reason covid has to be taken seriously
Going ro take a collapsed nhs b4 real reason covid has to be taken seriously
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"STOP talking about will I die
When you break a leg and there is no NHS space let alone ANY of the reasons the NHS is there for you THEN those who think conid isnt a problem MIGHT just WAKE UP "
Someone got out of bed grumpy this morning..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Approximately 42,000 people mostly very old and with co-morbidities may have died with (not from Covid 19)
Meanwhile according to SAGE's own figures 75,000 (all age demographics) will die because of the lack of NHS tests and treatments as a result of the stopping of routine NHS work.
Apparently the latter deaths are perfectly acceptable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Approximately 42,000 people mostly very old and with co-morbidities may have died with (not from Covid 19)
Meanwhile according to SAGE's own figures 75,000 (all age demographics) will die because of the lack of NHS tests and treatments as a result of the stopping of routine NHS work.
Apparently the latter deaths are perfectly acceptable."
It's bizarre that so many people now seem so obsessed with Covid deaths that they couldn't careless or even want to acknowledge this massive problem. Seems it's safer to be ill with Covid than anything else at the moment, at least people seem interested. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Approximately 42,000 people mostly very old and with co-morbidities may have died with (not from Covid 19)
Meanwhile according to SAGE's own figures 75,000 (all age demographics) will die because of the lack of NHS tests and treatments as a result of the stopping of routine NHS work.
Apparently the latter deaths are perfectly acceptable."
Seems the only treatment you can get is for Covid ,God help us if we get any other illness |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I must be lucky living where I do. My local hospital seems to be coping really well.
I know cancer patients who have not had their treatments curtailed.
I know people who have had biopsies and the usual investigatory procedures to diagnose their problems.
I know people who have had hospital treatment for ongoing heart problems.
What has been affected is the elective procedures which people generally have to wait some time for anyway.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"STOP talking about will I die
When you break a leg and there is no NHS space let alone ANY of the reasons the NHS is there for you THEN those who think conid isnt a problem MIGHT just WAKE UP "
Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the children ?! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Without treatment some people Will die due to simple procedures being put off or cancelled.
These are needless deaths, people with a far wider spectrum of ages being affected. In years to come the toll of this will be far greater than covid deaths, but as mentioned this seems acceptable by our government.
Why can't they use the nightingale hospitals to treat covid and keep normal hospitals running freely. People are still getting ill or need treatment due to none covid problems. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Neither should be downplayed in importance. Covid-19 would have had a far higher impact, killing more, as well as leaving more with serious health complications, if lockdown and treatments earlier this year hasn't happened.
Has government done things well? No.
Why has the NHS struggled to cope in treating people with other conditions? Look at what people voted for, as 10 years of austerity and neglect damaged the NHS ability to cope under pressure from general spikes in health demand. It's easy to remember the ambulances queueing with patients, or them waiting in corridors for treatment. People voted for them again a few months ago. They ignored the results from epidemic readiness testing - that's grossly negligent.
We can criticise all day but we do face worse prospects this winter. Other treatments barely restarted but covid-19 infections up. Services have to be led by someone with competence and the right moral outlook |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I must be lucky living where I do. My local hospital seems to be coping really well.
I know cancer patients who have not had their treatments curtailed.
I know people who have had biopsies and the usual investigatory procedures to diagnose their problems.
I know people who have had hospital treatment for ongoing heart problems.
What has been affected is the elective procedures which people generally have to wait some time for anyway.
"
Same here. Both local hospitals closed thier dedicated covid wards.
Of the 7 icu beds in one only 5 were ever in use and only 2 of these covid.19.
The local private hospital cancled all operations for 6 months and set up as covid unit. They didnt have one patient and have now gone back to buisness as usual.
There seem no concern from the hospitals here that a second wave will be a problem as no covid only units have been reopened |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Without treatment some people Will die due to simple procedures being put off or cancelled.
These are needless deaths, people with a far wider spectrum of ages being affected. In years to come the toll of this will be far greater than covid deaths, but as mentioned this seems acceptable by our government.
Why can't they use the nightingale hospitals to treat covid and keep normal hospitals running freely. People are still getting ill or need treatment due to none covid problems. "
Because they don’t have the staff numbers. I am not sure what you want the NHS to do? Ignore and not treat the COVID patients? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovelybumCouple
over a year ago
Tunbridge Wells |
How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
"
So you disagree with the initial lockdown?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovelybumCouple
over a year ago
Tunbridge Wells |
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown?? "
Absolutely |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown??
Absolutely "
Bonkers, I guess your one of the lucky ones who did lose a relative or friend through COVID. 42,000 have died, without the lockdown the figure would have been much higher, can you explain how all these extra deaths and hospital admittance would have helped the NHS treat other people? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown??
Absolutely
Bonkers, I guess your one of the lucky ones who did lose a relative or friend through COVID. 42,000 have died, without the lockdown the figure would have been much higher, can you explain how all these extra deaths and hospital admittance would have helped the NHS treat other people? "
Didn’t lose |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The tide is beginning to turn do not worry.
More and more voices will call the government out on their insanity and blinkered view over the coming months.
"
The second wave of lockdowns have been badly handled and a confusing mess but I think the first lockdown (although it was 2 weeks late) had to be done |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Approximately 42,000 people mostly very old and with co-morbidities may have died with (not from Covid 19)
Meanwhile according to SAGE's own figures 75,000 (all age demographics) will die because of the lack of NHS tests and treatments as a result of the stopping of routine NHS work.
Apparently the latter deaths are perfectly acceptable. Seems the only treatment you can get is for Covid ,God help us if we get any other illness "
Seeing as people are catching it in hospital again, you are quite right |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovelybumCouple
over a year ago
Tunbridge Wells |
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown??
Absolutely
Bonkers, I guess your one of the lucky ones who did lose a relative or friend through COVID. 42,000 have died, without the lockdown the figure would have been much higher, can you explain how all these extra deaths and hospital admittance would have helped the NHS treat other people? "
Unfortunately we've lost a very good friend to the virus(who was the fittest and healthiest person known), but that doesn't make us believe the cure we were presented with is better than the desiese. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown??
Absolutely
Bonkers, I guess your one of the lucky ones who did lose a relative or friend through COVID. 42,000 have died, without the lockdown the figure would have been much higher, can you explain how all these extra deaths and hospital admittance would have helped the NHS treat other people?
Unfortunately we've lost a very good friend to the virus(who was the fittest and healthiest person known), but that doesn't make us believe the cure we were presented with is better than the desiese. "
mind blown. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown??
Absolutely
Bonkers, I guess your one of the lucky ones who did lose a relative or friend through COVID. 42,000 have died, without the lockdown the figure would have been much higher, can you explain how all these extra deaths and hospital admittance would have helped the NHS treat other people?
Unfortunately we've lost a very good friend to the virus(who was the fittest and healthiest person known), but that doesn't make us believe the cure we were presented with is better than the desiese. "
And how would stopping the first lockdown have helped the NHS treat non COVID patients? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oggoneMan
over a year ago
Derry |
"Neither should be downplayed in importance. Covid-19 would have had a far higher impact, killing more, as well as leaving more with serious health complications, if lockdown and treatments earlier this year hasn't happened.
Has government done things well? No.
Why has the NHS struggled to cope in treating people with other conditions? Look at what people voted for, as 10 years of austerity and neglect damaged the NHS ability to cope under pressure from general spikes in health demand. It's easy to remember the ambulances queueing with patients, or them waiting in corridors for treatment. People voted for them again a few months ago. They ignored the results from epidemic readiness testing - that's grossly negligent.
We can criticise all day but we do face worse prospects this winter. Other treatments barely restarted but covid-19 infections up. Services have to be led by someone with competence and the right moral outlook "
I agree with what you wrote a 1000% 10 years of conservative government has not been good for the NHS. Sure you can blame the conservatives but it was the electorate that enabled them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Approximately 42,000 people mostly very old and with co-morbidities may have died with (not from Covid 19)
Meanwhile according to SAGE's own figures 75,000 (all age demographics) will die because of the lack of NHS tests and treatments as a result of the stopping of routine NHS work.
Apparently the latter deaths are perfectly acceptable. Seems the only treatment you can get is for Covid ,God help us if we get any other illness "
Absolute bullshit and I think you know it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Neither should be downplayed in importance. Covid-19 would have had a far higher impact, killing more, as well as leaving more with serious health complications, if lockdown and treatments earlier this year hasn't happened.
Has government done things well? No.
Why has the NHS struggled to cope in treating people with other conditions? Look at what people voted for, as 10 years of austerity and neglect damaged the NHS ability to cope under pressure from general spikes in health demand. It's easy to remember the ambulances queueing with patients, or them waiting in corridors for treatment. People voted for them again a few months ago. They ignored the results from epidemic readiness testing - that's grossly negligent.
We can criticise all day but we do face worse prospects this winter. Other treatments barely restarted but covid-19 infections up. Services have to be led by someone with competence and the right moral outlook "
I think that to a large extent, the NHS over reacted to the Virus. They planned and IMPLEMENTED based on a worst case scenario, but that worst-case didn't occur. A lot of capacity was freed up by cancelling treatments and operations and thankfully that capacity wasn't required. Unfortunately the knock-on effect on other treatments was the side effect of this. With hindsight, a more tapered approach would have been more efficient... but hindsight is a great thing.
Cal |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
So we have a super duper deadly air-borne virus, its the virus to end all viruses, So deadly that if you test positive, the treatment is, stay at home for two weeks. You can even get paid for having a test (that shows how desperate they are to get the numbers up ) At least with the flu, the doc recommends paracetamol.In the mean time flu is killing ten times more people than the super duper deadly virus, (not a mention of this on MSM) On average by this time of year 123000 will have died of cancer, 270000 would have been diagnosed with cancer, There's a backlog of 1 million cancer screenings. Maybe just maybe comrade Doris and Co are up to something far more sinister. Remember "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown??
Absolutely
Bonkers, I guess your one of the lucky ones who did lose a relative or friend through COVID. 42,000 have died, without the lockdown the figure would have been much higher, can you explain how all these extra deaths and hospital admittance would have helped the NHS treat other people? "
Lost someone of Cancer appointments where cancelled one amongst thousands |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
My daughter had her second baby in mid August, the care was practically non existent. All due to covid, health professionals here are not treating or performing care interventions in the same way. She has support from a nurse (me) and, midwife (sister) what about women who don't. Covid has taken over other health concerns in my opinion.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
No cervical cancer screaning, surely if posting cov kits they could post these out. Also cov is being lumped in on flu figures on https:ons gov uk not sure if I can post link without getting forum ban  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovelybumCouple
over a year ago
Tunbridge Wells |
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown??
Absolutely
Bonkers, I guess your one of the lucky ones who did lose a relative or friend through COVID. 42,000 have died, without the lockdown the figure would have been much higher, can you explain how all these extra deaths and hospital admittance would have helped the NHS treat other people?
Unfortunately we've lost a very good friend to the virus(who was the fittest and healthiest person known), but that doesn't make us believe the cure we were presented with is better than the desiese.
And how would stopping the first lockdown have helped the NHS treat non COVID patients? "
And how it helped? Not a scientist, nor a doctor or a health professional. Simply expressing opinion that the lock down,and the way it was implement hasn't helped the health sistem one bit. You need too look in a countries with a health sistems in a far worse state than NHS where nothing apocalyptic has happened even without lockdown. In the other hand, the enormous resources that have been used in keeping people locked could have been used far more effectively.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So we have a super duper deadly air-borne virus, its the virus to end all viruses, So deadly that if you test positive, the treatment is, stay at home for two weeks. You can even get paid for having a test (that shows how desperate they are to get the numbers up ) At least with the flu, the doc recommends paracetamol.In the mean time flu is killing ten times more people than the super duper deadly virus, (not a mention of this on MSM) On average by this time of year 123000 will have died of cancer, 270000 would have been diagnosed with cancer, There's a backlog of 1 million cancer screenings. Maybe just maybe comrade Doris and Co are up to something far more sinister. Remember "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY" "
Maybe go away, do some actual fact checking, then go study about virus transmission and pandemics and you might start to understand why the action we took was taken. Unless of course, you are going to start pretending that all the governments in the world are "in on it" seeing as most governments have adopted similar approaches. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Neither should be downplayed in importance. Covid-19 would have had a far higher impact, killing more, as well as leaving more with serious health complications, if lockdown and treatments earlier this year hasn't happened.
Has government done things well? No.
Why has the NHS struggled to cope in treating people with other conditions? Look at what people voted for, as 10 years of austerity and neglect damaged the NHS ability to cope under pressure from general spikes in health demand. It's easy to remember the ambulances queueing with patients, or them waiting in corridors for treatment. People voted for them again a few months ago. They ignored the results from epidemic readiness testing - that's grossly negligent.
We can criticise all day but we do face worse prospects this winter. Other treatments barely restarted but covid-19 infections up. Services have to be led by someone with competence and the right moral outlook "
This..
The perfect storm hit at a time when the services needed have been slashed..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown??
Absolutely
Bonkers, I guess your one of the lucky ones who did lose a relative or friend through COVID. 42,000 have died, without the lockdown the figure would have been much higher, can you explain how all these extra deaths and hospital admittance would have helped the NHS treat other people?
Unfortunately we've lost a very good friend to the virus(who was the fittest and healthiest person known), but that doesn't make us believe the cure we were presented with is better than the desiese.
And how would stopping the first lockdown have helped the NHS treat non COVID patients? And how it helped? Not a scientist, nor a doctor or a health professional. Simply expressing opinion that the lock down,and the way it was implement hasn't helped the health sistem one bit. You need too look in a countries with a health sistems in a far worse state than NHS where nothing apocalyptic has happened even without lockdown. In the other hand, the enormous resources that have been used in keeping people locked could have been used far more effectively.
"
I disagree, the first lockdown was vital to stop further deaths and to protect the NHS who were not prepared at the time for the pandemic . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovelybumCouple
over a year ago
Tunbridge Wells |
"How about instead of paying millions of perfectly healthy people to stay at home and do nothing for months, pumped all this recourse into the health sistem so that can cope.
It has become more than obvious that the path most of the world has taken with this bulshit is only leading to mass destruction of lifes.
So you disagree with the initial lockdown??
Absolutely
Bonkers, I guess your one of the lucky ones who did lose a relative or friend through COVID. 42,000 have died, without the lockdown the figure would have been much higher, can you explain how all these extra deaths and hospital admittance would have helped the NHS treat other people?
Unfortunately we've lost a very good friend to the virus(who was the fittest and healthiest person known), but that doesn't make us believe the cure we were presented with is better than the desiese.
And how would stopping the first lockdown have helped the NHS treat non COVID patients? And how it helped? Not a scientist, nor a doctor or a health professional. Simply expressing opinion that the lock down,and the way it was implement hasn't helped the health sistem one bit. You need too look in a countries with a health sistems in a far worse state than NHS where nothing apocalyptic has happened even without lockdown. In the other hand, the enormous resources that have been used in keeping people locked could have been used far more effectively.
I disagree, the first lockdown was vital to stop further deaths and to protect the NHS who were not prepared at the time for the pandemic . "
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and fully respect that!
We have to agree to disagree.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"STOP talking about will I die
When you break a leg and there is no NHS space let alone ANY of the reasons the NHS is there for you THEN those who think conid isnt a problem MIGHT just WAKE UP "
It is grey,raining and new restrictions and you come on to cheer us up.Thanks a lot |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
