Undoubtedly one of the biggest causes of distress for housebound people over 70 has been the news that coronavirus patients would not be admitted to the ICU. over 80 years old. In many hospitals it has been applied as such. In others, the priority criterion was quality of life expectancy. It was certainly not only a question of chronological age, but also of biological age, with the aim of saving those who had a minimum survival expectancy of at least two years without serious disability, and that the social value of the persons (dependants etc.) would be taken into account. But there was even greater unease when it was reported that overcrowded hospitals were recommending that people should not be transferred. over 70 years oldThis is confirmed by the testimonies of patients' relatives.
Faced with such an outrage, the Ministry of Health has eliminated the simple criterion of age to prevent the care of those over 70 or 80, depending on the case. Old age is not a disease!
If Francisco de Ayala had lived in our days and had been caught by the coronavirus at the age of 85 in certain Spanish hospitals, he would not have been admitted to the ICU and sedated according to the instructions given, as his life expectancy was supposed to be very short. The writer had only 18 years of life from that date to continue writing!
Something similar would have happened to the Nobel Prizes of Spanish literature over 80 if they had lived in March 2020: José de Echegaray (+84 years old), Jacinto Benavente (+88 years old), Vicente Aleixandre (+86th), Camilo José de Cela (+85 years old), Octavio Paz (+84 years old) and Gabriel María Márquez (+87 years old). Mario Vargas Llosa is the only one alive today at the age of 84, an age for some, scandalous and today of special risk (by the way, it is mine and for some I must apologise for it). It would have been bingo if the Nobel laureates had simply been allowed access to the emergency department at the age of 84. Thank goodness that someone could have recognised them despite their poor appearance and that their "social value" would have been taken into account by allowing them to enter the sancta sanctorum of the ICUs.
Certainly some would not have won the Nobel Prize if they had been infected by the coronavirus at the age of 75 in our time and not received adequate care due to their old age would have passed away. For example, Octavio Paz who got it at 76 and Aleixandre at 79. What impudence, to receive the Prize so old...
Curiously, two Nobel Prize winners in Spanish, the Chileans Gabriela Mistral (aged 68+) and Pablo Neruda (aged 69+), could have passed the tests to be treated if they were seriously affected by the virus because they had not reached the age of 70. But curiously, their supposed life expectancy of more than two years in quality would have been reduced in this case to one and two years of life. What a horror, the protocol would have been breached!
While we are on the subject of health, we could mention famous doctors, who would probably not be given any priority, because the protocol is very strict and the lack of protection for health professionals, as we have seen in the thousands of infections, some of them fatal, has been flagrant. Santiago Ramón y Cajal, Severo Ochoa, Segovia de Arana and so many others who come to mind would have succumbed to this pandemic because they would have made the grave mistake of being over 80 years old and some even had beards, which would have made them older. With luck, someone might think that they would have more than two years of quality life expectancy and, being well known in the sector, save them as well, but in breach of protocol.
People like Picasso (+ 92 years) would have fared worse, but it is not worth going on because the list of illustrious Spanish people who died in old age with a life expectancy of more than two years in quality would be endless. Incidentally, today, the number of people over 85 is the fastest growing age cohort, most of them in very reasonable health.
Some actions in the context of this pandemic, such as those outlined above, have been causing particular distress to the elderly (and their families and friends). We should reassure them that they can continue to enjoy life without worry, and those who are lonely that they will be effectively protected by informal social networks and formal government networks.
Those age limitations - 70 and 80 years - to which we have alluded, for us, the current survivors, were just a bad nightmare of a bad night. It was not for those who could not be cared for and lost their lives.
Eduardo Rodríguez Rovira
Honorary President of CEOMA (Spanish Confederation of Organisations for the Elderly)