News
Featured Image
A do-not-resuscitate orderShutterstock

December 1, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Almost 90% of patients who died with COVID-19 had do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders in place at the time of admission, thus illustrating the severity of their pre-existing conditions.

Clinics in Dermatology published the study at the end of last month, based on all patients in two hospitals in New Jersey who “had or developed COVID-19.” The dates covered in the survey are from March 15 to May 15 of this year.

The report records that 1,270 patients had or developed the illness, with 640 patients dying and 630 surviving. However, of those who died, “570 (89.1 percent)” had a DNR, leaving “70 (10.9 percent) without a DNR order at the time of admission.” In the interest of clarity, the study did not include patients who were given a DNR during the time they were in the hospital.

Of the 630 patients who survived, “180” or 28.6% had a DNR on admission, and “450” or 71.4% did not have one. Furthermore, the study found, “Among the 120 patients without COVID-19 who died during this interval, 110 (91.7 percent) had a DNR order when admitted.”

A DNR, as the study mentions, “is often linked to patients with severe illness, advanced age, poor disease prognosis, and deteriorating health status with impending death.”

The high death rates of patients surveyed who already had a DNR, points to the fact that the study “indicates that many patients who died in these hospitals were quite ill to begin with.”

Additionally, the study proved that patients who had a DNR, “had significantly higher numbers of comorbidities ([more than] 3 comorbidities) compared to patients with non-DNR status.” In fact, figures collated by the study show that the majority of patients with 2 comorbidities or more had DNR’s in place.

Not unexpectedly, the study found, “Patients with DNR had a poorer survival rate than non-DNR patients.”

Patients with DNR status thus were found to have “higher hazard ratios for risk of death.”

The study also mentioned the important aspect of “failure to rescue phenomenon,” whereby the very existence of a DNR, means that the patient receives less treatment. “A DNR order has been documented to negatively impact the implementation of other treatment modalities,” the report stated. “One explanation for these results is that more patients with a DNR order died because they were not resuscitated.”

“The increased mortality in DNR patients may have resulted from unmeasured severity of illness, transition to comfort care in accordance with a patient’s wishes, or failure to offer more aggressive care, such as a respirator, to patients with a DNR order.”

The report concluded by noting that DNR’s should be taken into account “in COVID-19 epidemiological studies to further understand mortality in this pandemic.”

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: No to government and corporate penalties for refusing COVID-19 vaccine
  Show Petition Text
102918 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 125000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

                                                                                                                      **Photo credit: Shutterstock.com

Mainstream media sources are promoting offensive suggestions by some doctors that people who refuse a vaccine for COVID-19 should be "punished" by the government and by business - effectively coercing them into taking the vaccine.

  • One group of doctors writing in 'USA Today' suggested that the government impose special taxes (i.e., fines) on people who refuse the vaccination and that business simply refuse to serve them. [see story below]
  • Another doctor writing in an online publication called 'The Conversation' shamelessly suggested that people who refuse a vaccine should be given a psychoactive drug to induce compliance. [see story below]

But, these suggestions are plain political posturing, and have nothing to do with science or with the recent trends of the disease.

And, in case they haven't noticed, we live in a democracy not a medical dictatorship!

Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks policy-makers and business people, at all levels, to pledge to respect the rights of those who, in good conscience, decide not to vaccinate themselves or their children.

People should not have to live in fear of governmental or corporate retribution for refusing a vaccine which is being rushed to market by Big Pharma and their fellow-travelers in NGOs, like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

It would be intolerable and immoral for the government or business to coerce someone, and their family, to take a COVID vaccine against their will to avoid a fine, or just so they can do their weekly grocery shopping.

Medical freedom must be respected in principle and also in practice.

So, it is now time that our policy-makers listen to all voices involved in this vital conversation, and start to represent those who will not tolerate being punished for refusing a vaccine.

Simply put, legislatures must begin to act as legislatures again.

Questions must be asked. Hearings and investigations must be held. And, the legislatures of each state and country must return to the business of representing the people who voted for them, assuming their rightful place as the originator of legislation.

We can no longer accept the dictates of executive branches without question, especially now that, statistically speaking, the initial brunt of the COVID crisis has passed.

Neither can we accept the dictates of doctors who seem detached from reality and from science, and who only seem to be attached to the idea of promoting ideas which contribute to the agrandizement of power and control of political interests, and wealth of those who stand to make a lot of money from the sale of a COVID vaccine.

Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks government and business leaders to pledge to respect the rights of those who refuse a COVID vaccine, and not seek to punish them for doing so.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

'Doctors lay out plan to ‘punish’ people who refuse coronavirus vaccine: ‘There is no alternative’' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/doctors-lay-out-plan-to-punish-people-who-refuse-coronavirus-vaccine-there-is-no-alternative

'US professor: ‘Psychoactive pill’ should be covertly administered to ensure lockdown compliance' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/us-professor-ensure-lockdown-compliance-by-drugging-dissenters-with-psychoactive-pill

  Hide Petition Text

Reporting on the study, PJ Media wrote, “It also indicates that COVID-19 is acting as bacterial and viral pneumonia often do in this population. It is a contributing factor in a patient’s death, but one of many.”

“A DNR,” the website wrote, “is more enlightening than a simple analysis of comorbidities because it is indicative of disease severity.”

In recent days, a senior academic at Johns Hopkins University gave an in-depth analysis of U.S. COVID deaths, concluding that there is “no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers. We found no evidence to the contrary.”

Blanket imposition of DNR’s in health settings

As alluded to in the close of the study, DNR’s can also be misused so as to lead to poor treatment. Indeed, during the recent national lockdown, DNR’s were widely placed upon patients in the U.K. in a “blanket” fashion.

So great was the concern about this that the Care Quality Commission (CQC) is conducting a review of the use of DNR’s during the coronavirus crisis after “concerns were widely reported that elderly and vulnerable people may be being subjected to DNACPR decisions without their consent or with little information to allow them to make an informed decision.”

Commenting on this, the BBC wrote, “It became clear that blanket use was in place in some care homes in the early weeks of the pandemic.” Care homes had “blanket orders in place covering groups of residents,” imposing DNR’s on them.

In practice, DNR’s are often put in place in response to the question posed as, “Is it worth it to put myself or my loved one through the traumatic process of resuscitation for a 1 to 2% chance of survival?”

A study conducted by the Queen’s Nursing Institute found that out of those surveyed, “one in ten of the institutions was ordered by [National Health Service] bosses to introduce DNRs without permission from the residents, family members or fellow staff, in order to free up hospital beds.”

One care worker reported that sometimes “changed without inclusion of family or the resident (where appropriate). Not always made including quality of life rather than disease and age.”

In an article in The Guardian, a doctor attempted to do away with rumors regarding blanket imposition of DNR’s, yet added that “no one can insist upon receiving CPR. Like all other medical treatments, CPR will only be administered if a doctor believes it is in the best interests of the patient.”

Clinics in Dermatology’s own survey noted, “Patients with severe COVID-19 whose physicians feel they need such measures short term to treat the disease may be discouraged from offering them if the patient has a DNR order. This may unnecessarily negatively impact patient care and increase mortality in COVID-19 patients.”

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.