Boris - The Prime Minister

First thoughts on PMBoris, will he make a difference?


  • Total voters
    574
I can't let this pass.

My dad died on the 26th April in a care home, he had vascular dementia. he was 88 and gave up on life because he wanted to see my mum who died 3 years ago. He basically gave up on life.

Cause of death?

COVID-19.

Did he have it? Nope, was tested 2 days before he died and the results came back 2 days after he died as negative.

Is it a convenient reason to put on the death certificate, hell yes since doctors can't put 'old age' and have to have a medical cause.

3 other families can give you very similar stories.

Want to tell me that the stats are accurate?
My mother died in a care home on 29th February. The Dr. Put 'Old Age and Alzheimer's' on the death certificate. I'm sure if she'd have died a week or so later, she'd have put COVID 19.
 
My mother died in a care home on 29th February. The Dr. Put 'Old Age and Alzheimer's' on the death certificate. I'm sure if she'd have died a week or so later, she'd have put COVID 19.
l can't see whose interests would be served if a doctor were to include or omit Covid-19 as a cause of death in the case of a death by natural causes if it were not so.
 
l can't see whose interests would be served if a doctor were to include or omit Covid-19 as a cause of death in the case of a death by natural causes if it were not so.
Death by any infectious disease is natural causes [ so my mums doctor told me] The fact that patients have underlying causes may aid an infectious disease is another matter. Were an otherwise healthy person brought down by the disease, that would be the cause.
 
Death by any infectious disease is natural causes [ so my mums doctor told me] The fact that patients have underlying causes may aid an infectious disease is another matter. Were an otherwise healthy person brought down by the disease, that would be the cause.
Most elderly people will have comorbidities. Where these are known and have played a part in the death, they will appear on the DC.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
It is only an idiot (and a very gullible one) who could believe that a complex system that relies on the active co-operation of the public on an essentially discretionary basis is going to be anything more than a PR stunt.
*Cough* policing by consent *cough*
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Nasty cough. If you develop a temperature you know what you have to do.

Fingers crossed.

BTW, since when has policing by consent meant do something, or don't do something : Your choice?
Oh dear, let's not go down the rocky road of wishing bad things on each other. As far as I'm concerned you being a former monkey is already punishment enough for any number of nasty posts you might make.
 

rifleair

War Hero
l can't see whose interests would be served if a doctor were to include or omit Covid-19 as a cause of death in the case of a death by natural causes if it were not so.
Because the chief coroner changed the rules and stated that if there were any deaths where a test was not carried out but the patient might have had any of the symptoms then cv19 was to be recorded as a possible or additional cause.
 
When it’s a guideline rather a rule?
There is some risk of this going round in circles. It's very much the point I was making.

Is it appropriate that a complex tracing system dealing with a deadly public health problem, resulting in potentially negative consequences for some (quarantining), should rely solely on the goodwill and voluntary co-operation of the public for its successful implementation?

Either it is a vital and necessary tactic in the control of the virus, the protection of the public and the return to normal life or else it is not.

If it is not, then the whole idea should be abandoned and people left alone.

If it is vital and necessary, then it should not be left to the whim of the individual. If it needs proper legislation, then so be it.

Even wearing a seatbelt in a car is not advisory. It's all policing by consent.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
It was a topical joke, you touchy sod. I don't even know who you are. Don't let that prat moderator tune you up.
Not at all touchy, nor tuned up. Just responding in kind old thing.
 
Because the chief coroner changed the rules and stated that if there were any deaths where a test was not carried out but the patient might have had any of the symptoms then cv19 was to be recorded as a possible or additional cause.
Yes, I can accept that you may be right in this. Covid-19 is a notifiable disease.

But why would that be a bad thing or, for that matter, a good thing? A death certificate is just a statement of the perceived professional opinion of the doctor attending at time of death. This already takes place. The only alternative is a full PM in every circumstance. Even that could frequently be inconclusive.

I still don't see why this situation would be a problem for anybody.
 
Is it appropriate that a complex tracing system dealing with a deadly public health problem, resulting in potentially negative consequences for some (quarantining), should rely solely on the goodwill and voluntary co-operation of the public for its successful implementation?
A virus does not give a flying about a tracing system.

2 things that should have grabbed your attention in the past 24 hours.

1. South Korea ended it's lockdown on the 4th May - 24 days later on the 28th May ( yesterday ) it had to go back into lockdown.

2. In the UK. of the Covid tests that have came back positive, it is claimed that 6 out of every 10 have been asymptomatic.

It would appear that the only options for this damn virus is to let it run its course or a vaccine is found.
 

Latest Threads

Top