Jump to content

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, MediMike said:

If you read/heard his physician's answers to reporters asking about oxygen it is a little unclear exactly what's going on in regards to O2 requirements.

I wonder if anyone here feels that a patient is entitled to any privacy whatsoever in regards to their medical information? Or is that right 100% ceded when you take high public office.

In the interest of science, I would have been interested to know what witches' brew they were pumping into a former associate justice of the Supreme Court to keep her plugging along. It seems like she had some privacy respected. No one knew she was at death's door until she walked through.   

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 230
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Speaking as a professor of global health: not dismantled the pandemic response team would have been a good idea. Not defunded the CDC and removed us from the WHO... Not made statements like

Acknowledged the seriousness of the disease. His downplaying of it directly led to more cases. The incessant arguing with his scientific advisors led to a lack of faith in the experts and subsequent i

That would put him on equal footing with the candidate from the other party.  🤣

Posted Images

1 hour ago, CJAdmission said:

I wonder if anyone here feels that a patient is entitled to any privacy whatsoever in regards to their medical information? Or is that right 100% ceded when you take high public office.

In the interest of science, I would have been interested to know what witches' brew they were pumping into a former associate justice of the Supreme Court to keep her plugging along. It seems like she had some privacy respected. No one knew she was at death's door until she walked through.   

Sure if that's the line they want to take, that the information is privileged for the patient. Rather they deliberately lied and obfuscated (new word of the day for me) to "not steer the illness in another direction". 

Were there ever questions regarding what treatments RBG was receiving that weren't answered? I don't recall that ever being an issue but by no means take a hard stand on it.

And I think you have to admit that there is a significant difference between a her and the sitting POTUS.

It is a great ethics question, does the idea of patoenr-physician privilege change when you are the supposed "leader of the free world"? How much right do the american people have to information regarding the well being of the president?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CJAdmission said:

The congresswoman from San Francisco was happily traipsing around Chinatown in the early days of the pandemic insisting it was safe and crying racist when anyone mentioned the pandemic's Asian origin.

------

I have some swampland in Florida I'll sell you. 

As noted in a different post, the Pelosi-Chinatown incident appears to be fairly hyperbolized. She is quoted as saying it was safe to shop in February, at the same time the president said that everything was well under control. There were no restrictions on the Bay Area at that time, shelter in place wasn't to start until 3 weeks later. 

Isn't there plenty of swampland in Florida? I get ocean front in AZ...Is it like a Costco thing? I get to buy it in bulk?

Link to post
Share on other sites

After the first line treatment, and frankly - even for first line treatment, chemo for pancreatic cancer is essentially witches brew. It is palliative and adverse effects often flat out kill. A post-chemo patient with stage IV pancreatic cancer at any time whatsoever can be septic and dead in 24 hours. I am absolutely not surprised that RBG passed quickly, that is status quo for what she had.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MediMike said:

As noted in a different post, the Pelosi-Chinatown incident appears to be fairly hyperbolized.

Every "both sides" argument presented by a supporter of the republican party is gaslighting at this point. There is so much trash in their politics, even supporters have largely abandoned trying to argue in favor for it. They are stuck trying to bring democrats down to their level with "both sides" arguments. Case in point, only the republicans would have to make up a term to slander the concept of "virtue", seriously...

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MediMike said:

How much right do the american people have to information regarding the well being of the president?

Personally, I'd say essentially none. I don't care if the president has angina, or gout or cancer or hemorrhoids. My solitary concern is if he has the mental faculties to do the job. 

And before someone jumps on that statement, I'm not sure either candidate clears this bar.  330 million people and this is who we come up with. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, mcclane said:

Every "both sides" argument presented by a supporter of the republican party is gaslighting at this point. 

I have been unaffiliated since originally registering to vote. As a disinterested outsider, I can assure you: both parties are trash.

If you can't see this, I encourage you to really step out of the news sources you typically consume, speak to people with different viewpoints, and try to critically appraise both parties. It's a failed system, and both sides are equally to blame. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The ability of a president to function in office IS completely the right of the American people to know.

If the president is hypoxic, drugged, intubated, delirious or otherwise incapacitated - he/she should NOT be making any decisions.

A president should NOT be able to boss medical folks around - stay in his/her lane.

No joyrides, no demanding of medications - do what your highly trained medical team is trained to do. The president should NOT be able to pick his/her own doctor - period. 

AND have full evaluation for mental faculties by real medical providers that were not appointed by said president.

We can't afford any mentally incapacitated president suddenly ordering things on a delirious whim that could endanger the whole country.

EVERY single prior President since the 25th Amendment has signed over powers during anesthesia or medical event. 

This president doesn't follow ANY RULES and endangers the whole country.

To stop a pandemic - lead by example, FOLLOW RULES, do reasonable things and follow real medicine.

His idiot doctor trying to "play it up as positive" insults every single medical professional in the country by being bullied and lying to keep the deluded old man happy. 

Call it like it is - a deadly virus with serious complications.

Dr Conley should lose his license.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Reality Check 2 said:

The ability of a president to function in office IS completely the right of the American people to know.

If the president is hypoxic, drugged, intubated, delirious or otherwise incapacitated - he/she should NOT be making any decisions.

Agree completely. Happily, there is no indication that is the case here (at least not below the previously demonstrated baseline).

 

24 minutes ago, Reality Check 2 said:

A president should NOT be able to boss medical folks around - stay in his/her lane.

No joyrides, no demanding of medications - do what your highly trained medical team is trained to do.

I have taken care of a ton of patients who do this, none of whom were presidents. More a problem of Press-Gainey surveys than anything else. 

 

24 minutes ago, Reality Check 2 said:

The president should NOT be able to pick his/her own doctor - period. 

This can't be a serious statement. First, because you have to pick someone that you are comfortable taking care of you, and second, because being elected to office does not automatically cede all of your rights. This belief has serious ethical problems. 

 

24 minutes ago, Reality Check 2 said:

This president doesn't follow ANY RULES and endangers the whole country.

His idiot doctor trying to "play it up as positive" insults every single medical professional in the country by being bullied and lying to keep the deluded old man happy. 

Call it like it is - a deadly virus with serious complications.

Dr Conley should lose his license.

At points, this seems to me hyperbolic. But certainly you are entitled to your opinion. I know many worse physicians that are still practicing happily. 

Clinton was elected, Bush was elected, Obama was elected, Trump was elected. How much in your day to day life really changed with any of these people?

People are too emotionally charged to have rational discussions about this stuff. That is why discussion boards have to shut things down and censor people. Both parties have positive and negative planks in their platform. To think otherwise is cultish foolishness. 

Edited by CJAdmission
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator

It sounds like at some point he should have signed over presidential authority to Pence, if only for 24 hrs or so. We know at this point that he was hypoxic and "not clearly out of danger".  For a brief period of time he was not at 100%. America deserves a president who is at 100%. If China invaded Taiwan and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff calls the president, he should be able to elucidate a valid response. Both Reagan and Bush(Sr), signed over authority briefly when they had procedures lasting less than 1 hr for just this reason. At a minute's notice, the president needs to be able to make an informed choice that potentially effects everyone on earth. can't do that while hypoxic. I would say this regardless of who was in office.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I say that a President should not be able to pick his/her own providers because this president did - he picked a GI doctor and then proceeded to write his OWN medical letter and the doctor signed it - stating he was the most fit president in history - far from the truth, very very far from the truth.

So, a coerced doctor or provider is not a legitimate provider.

That bogus statement should not have held as reasonable to attest to the candidate's health and capacity for the job.

I believe an Amendment will come along stating that candidates for high office will need to sit for a tribunal or committee of medical evaluators who look at all health aspects including psychological - and those cannot be chosen by the candidate. Members of such a group would have to be field experts in their specialty and likely include Internal Medicine, Psychiatry/Psychology and another from Cardiology, Neurology or other associated field applicable to someone over age 45. 

Military enlistees don't get to choose who does their intake physical. 

The current "expert" in COVID is a freaking radiologist...... 

So, take that statement with the above information and reconsider.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Reality Check 2 said:

I believe an Amendment will come along stating that candidates for high office will need to sit for a tribunal or committee of medical evaluators who look at all health aspects including psychological - and those cannot be chosen by the candidate. Members of such a group would have to be field experts in their specialty and likely include Internal Medicine, Psychiatry/Psychology and another from Cardiology, Neurology or other associated field applicable to someone over age 45. 

Interesting. And who will decide what conditions are "allowed" and "not allowed?" Left anterior descending 40% occluded? 60%? Psoriasis? Depression? Furthermore, how hard is it to find two "experts" in a field that disagree with each other?

You realize that setting such criteria would run completely contrary to the Americans with Disabilities Act? 

Finally, realize that all law enforcement officers go through some type of screening psychological evaluation? Based on the current climate in the country, do you think these are really effective?

People want simplistic, knee jerk answers for everything. They don't exist. In spite of what people think, the country is not going to legislate or spend its way into prosperity and harmony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CJAdmission said:

I have been unaffiliated since originally registering to vote. As a disinterested outsider, I can assure you: both parties are trash.

No one claiming to be unaffiliated, independent, or disinterested is ever remotely close to any of it.

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mcclane said:

No one claiming to be unaffiliated, independent, or disinterested is ever remotely close to any of it.

A somewhat bold statement for not knowing me, but you should think whatever will help you sleep at night. 

Realize that you are basically claiming that the lines are drawn and one MUST either be hard left or hard right with no one in the middle. I don't really believe that. Perhaps I am wrong. But I suspect that one reason that pre-election polls are always so screwed up is that nuts on the left and the right don't account for people like me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else find the brigade of healthcare "professionals" trotted out to stand around stupidly in white coats during these media updates as off-putting as I do? As someone who cares for COVID patients, and just patients in general, I cannot imagine in my wildest dreams a hospital culture that encourages that kind of useless attention-whoring. Distasteful.

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CJAdmission said:

A somewhat bold statement for not knowing me, but you should think whatever will help you sleep at night.

Not the slightest bit bold at all. The vast majority of "independents" have voting records, viewing habits, and personal views that wildly contradict their claim, simple as that. I deleted the rest of your straw man.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, greenmood said:

 I cannot imagine in my wildest dreams a hospital culture that encourages that kind of useless attention-whoring. Distasteful.

I used to see a ton of hospitals on the nightly news with hordes of white coated people clapping as they discharged their first/tenth/hundredth/thousandth/whatever Covid patient. It has quieted down a good bit, I suspect because the patient volume is so low right now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2020 at 6:28 AM, ANESMCR said:

I have a few unsubstantiated predictions. After the last 4 years, particularly 6 months, I feel entitled to make equally unrealistic false claims so here it goes:

1) He uses this opportunity to downplay the virus even further by remaining asx, using a “strongman” approach to further attack opponents and boast his “excellent health”.

2) Perfect excuse to postpone further damaging debates.

3) Doesn’t actually have it, strategy for the reasons listed above. 

4) Actually has it, remains asx, uses reasons listed above, particularly #1.

Either way, I wish him and the First Lady well. 

As predicted, he has already begun tweeting and clearly going with #1.

Edited by ANESMCR
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ANESMCR said:

As predicted, he has already begun tweeting and clearly going with #1.

With no apologies, no self responsibility, no acknowledgement of how many people he put in harm's way and no gratitude for the Secret Service who have put up with more than enough from this doddering old fool.

Dr Conley continues to be shamefully untrue in his discussion and release of needed information for contact tracing and applicable limitations. 

The sham continues..................

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Physician Assistant Forum! This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn More