Coronavirus math

Quote: ChumpChange

Since it's behind a paywall, I can't read the rest of the article. But I'm gonna go with underserved communities of color.
link to original post

The issued guidelines are here
http://www.mssnyenews.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/122821_Notification_107774.pdf

Quote:

"Oral antiviral treatment is authorized for patients who meet all the following criteria:
...
• Able to start treatment within 5 days of symptom onset
• Have a medical condition or other factors that increase their risk for severe illness.
o Non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity should be considered a risk factor, as
longstanding systemic health and social inequities have contributed to an
increased risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19

So, the guidance takes as fact, that Non-whites are socially and medically disadvantaged, thus at greater risk and thus in need of positive discrimination in treatment.
It's not listed AS a qualifying criteria, but it IS listed as a decision influencer.
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal advice in the UK or most of Europe. Expect it to be challenged in your courts.

Hmmmmm. Pragmatic way to allocate resources, but begging for a racial discrimination accusation.

Quote: OnceDear

Quote: ChumpChange

Since it's behind a paywall, I can't read the rest of the article. But I'm gonna go with underserved communities of color.
link to original post

The issued guidelines are here
http://www.mssnyenews.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/122821_Notification_107774.pdf

Quote:

"Oral antiviral treatment is authorized for patients who meet all the following criteria:
...
• Able to start treatment within 5 days of symptom onset
• Have a medical condition or other factors that increase their risk for severe illness.
o Non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity should be considered a risk factor, as
longstanding systemic health and social inequities have contributed to an
increased risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19

So, the guidance takes as fact, that Non-whites are socially and medically disadvantaged, thus at greater risk and thus in need of positive discrimination in treatment.
It's not listed AS a qualifying criteria, but it IS listed as a decision influencer.
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal advice in the UK or most of Europe. Expect it to be challenged in your courts.

Hmmmmm. Pragmatic way to allocate resources, but begging for a racial discrimination accusation.
link to original post

Pragmatic?

I cannot say more without getting suspended.

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: OnceDear

The issued guidelines are here
http://www.mssnyenews.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/122821_Notification_107774.pdf

Quote:

"Oral antiviral treatment is authorized for patients who meet all the following criteria:
...
• Able to start treatment within 5 days of symptom onset
• Have a medical condition or other factors that increase their risk for severe illness.
o Non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity should be considered a risk factor, as
longstanding systemic health and social inequities have contributed to an
increased risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19

So, the guidance takes as fact, that Non-whites are socially and medically disadvantaged, thus at greater risk and thus in need of positive discrimination in treatment.
It's not listed AS a qualifying criteria, but it IS listed as a decision influencer.
I'm pretty sure that would be illegal advice in the UK or most of Europe. Expect it to be challenged in your courts.

Hmmmmm. Pragmatic way to allocate resources, but begging for a racial discrimination accusation.
link to original post

Pragmatic?

I cannot say more without getting suspended.
link to original post

Hi AZD,

Pragmatic is a euphemism $:o) Even I dared not say all the words I might apply.
I think we are OK in agreeing that it is a controversial, probably racist and even socialist/leftist approach being taken. No need for us to discuss the political correctness or otherwise of such a practice.
I try not to suspend here, just as I try not to get suspended. Though we generally disagree on many things, let's avoid it on this forum.
The policy is a controversial talking point best taken to DT.

Can't we all just agree that all men are not created equal? We are all racists.

I wouldn’t expect it to have any legitimate influence. Medical professionals judging a specific case are more qualified and to judge the risk at play on a case by case basis. It’s simply blatantly prejudiced political theater.

Early on in the pandemic, it was said that many of the sickest people were deficient in a specific vitamin. I don't recall which one it was, but at the time it was said that ethnicity and poverty were the leading reasons why people might be lacking that important vitamin. If lacking that vitamin is still a major factor in how sick covid makes you, then it should certainly be a mitigating circumstance.

Before applying treatment, how is race determined? Genetically? Or by someone that judges your race based on your skin color?

In NY what if you're only 1/16 black? Is that black enough to receive treatment? But what if you're skin isn't dark enough and you're more than 1/4?

Quote: Keyser

Before applying treatment, how is race determined? Genetically? Or by someone that judges your race based on your skin color?

In NY what if you're only 1/16 black? Is that black enough to receive treatment? But what if you're skin isn't dark enough and you're more than 1/4?
link to original post

I am very fortunate that during my career I never had to decide on if someone would get treatment based on race. Or gender. Or income. Or even if they were incarcerated. If there is a limited supply of a treatment for COVID, I know some who firmly believe that the vaccinated should get first dibs, as if all were vaccinated there would be no shortage.

To me it is simple. Pick one of these two options.
1. First come, first served.
2. Most in need. There are easy ways to determine who is sicker, using quantifiable metrics.

You sound like a good doctor.

Quote: Keyser

Before applying treatment, how is race determined? Genetically? Or by someone that judges your race based on your skin color?

In NY what if you're only 1/16 black? Is that black enough to receive treatment? But what if you're skin isn't dark enough and you're more than 1/4?
link to original post

I don't know how they apply it, but if you're saying it's undeterminable, then it's more or less meaningless. It's as if you've been given a directive that if a Martian or a Venusian shows up you should prioritize the Martian. Well, if you don't know how to prioritize the two, because you have no idea what constitutes a Martian from a Venusian you can't apply it, can you?

So, no problem. Just ask for a clarification or don't apply it.

Anyway, urgent healthcare is usually structured by saving life or limb moving to the head of the line. All else is first serve. (one exception can be where little can be done to save someone, so they move resources to someone not as dire who can be saved)