Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
that may not happen in something like a flu pandemic or a plague.
Sure it would.
There would be a central entry point, a lot of people would get sick & voila: I perish early on.
I want to be in one of the original clusters.
Sure it would.
There would be a central entry point, a lot of people would get sick & voila: I perish early on.
I want to be in one of the original clusters.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,763,471 times
Reputation: 3587
The elderly because they cannot reproduce, the stupid because we don't want them to reproduce and the Republicans because we don't want them to reproduce either!
I would also add the useless- prisoners and felons- to that list. They should be last in line for anything.
You raise an interesting point. These are the individuals that should be on the absolute bottom of the priority list since their survival in such mass chaos would likely be very problematic after the fact. Now I am very disappointed I didn't see this category on that list.
It would only be logical to let those with the least chance of survival die first.
It matters not if that person is an old politician or a young physically disabled patient.
That is the principal of "triage", developed, I believe in WWII or maybe the Korean War. Tri= three groups: those that will die no matter what (palliative care only, e.g. pain relief), those that will live no matter what (take care of later), those that may survive with care (take care of now).
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC
Seems like a good plan,happens all the time now I would imagine.
Those who think the gov. will rescue them will be sorely disappointed.
and then will die.
It may happen by default in some practices. Most health care providers have a hard time letting go of life. It would be hard.
pretty harsh to see it written out in black and white like that, and bound to make people try to justify keeping someone in those groups alive for whatever reason, but reasonable if you give it serious thought.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It would only be logical to let those with the least chance of survival die first.
the truth isn't always pretty...
