Discussion in 'The Red Room' started by The Night Funky, Jan 9, 2020.
The practice of medicine is not an "opinion."
The fact that you decided to dodge the questions, rather than answer them speaks volumes. One wonders if you'd have the same reaction to a soldier disobeying orders with the result that a lot of people die who might otherwise have lived.
Physicians aren't usually epidemiologists. If an Oncologist diagnosed me with colon cancer, I wouldn't go to a dermatologist (or even 600 dermatologists) for a second opinion.
Fair enough! So medicine can only be practiced one way? And you (Doctor Garamet) decide how it should be practiced? Well that's the secret to progress no doubt about it!
Why should Conservative physicians practice medicine any different than Moderate or Liberal physicians do? What should politics have anything to do with medicine?
conservative physicians generally wouldn't practice medicine any differently (or not much differently) than liberal physicians. But if the media/popular opinion/leadership has their mind set on any predetermined conclusion you better believe politics are going to matter as to what gets emphasized. This applies across the political spectrum of course.
There is a right and wrong to science. when you are a conservative physician who is wrong because they pretend their opinion is a fact to get money from trump it is called malpractice. Practice is what correct doctors do. Malpractice is what conservative doctors do.
so there are no good conservative doctors? Weird because I've met a lot of good conservative doctors. Should they have a scarlet C tattooed on their forehead so you can steer clear of them?
Good is a relative term. Correct is not.
well that's your right as a patient I guess! Screen all your future doctors is all I can tell you!
Apparently you ask your doctors for their political affiliation before you allow them to treat you. What you should be looking at is their credentials to practice in their particular field. Or, as Shoes put it, if you had cancer would you see an oncologist or a dermatologist? See if you can apply that thinking to which specialists you'd want to treat a pandemic.
Pennsylvania is temporarily relaxing its liquor laws and allowing restaurants to serve cocktails for takeaway.
In YOUR opinion, maybe.
I ask if they voted for trump. If they say yes I am out. That vote alone shows a severe lack of good judgment and low level of research. Last thing I want in a doctor is for them to be a fuck up who can't use a computer search.
Cool! Will you do that for an EMT if you get in a wreck or something? Let us know how that turns out! Maybe you should find a health insurance plan that shares your viewpoint and won't cover you if you are treated by Trump voting doctors.
You do realize that's exactly the "argument" you've been making. "I don't trust Fauci, so even though I have no medical expertise, I'll go with someone else who sees this pandemic the way I do!"
yes, I have already seen EMTs try to deny help to gays because they have the AIDS. Let me just say if an EMT refuses to help because I happen to be in a dress, he better hope I am crippled and I die because I am taking him with me if I am not. No way I am letting a conservative EMT who refuses to help others based on his political beliefs live.
It sure seems like they practice medicine differently according to your article. Kinda like how Conservatives have to believe Climate Change is fake and Liberals have to believe it's real. I find it a little mind boggling. Shit used to be bipartisan.
Cock-to-Go is, uh, an interesting concept. If the owner goes with the cock, it raises an eyebrow. If the owner does not, it's a horror show.
Dr. Anthony Fauci says staying closed for too long could cause ‘irreparable damage’
Stay-at-home orders intended to curb the spread of the coronavirus could end up causing “irreparable damage” if imposed for too long, White House health advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci told CNBC on Friday.
“I don’t want people to think that any of us feel that staying locked down for a prolonged period of time is the way to go,” Fauci said during an interview with CNBC’s Meg Tirrell on “Halftime Report.”
He said the U.S. had to institute severe measures because Covid-19 cases were exploding then. “But now is the time, depending upon where you are and what your situation is, to begin to seriously look at reopening the economy, reopening the country to try to get back to some degree of normal.”
However, Fauci also cautioned states against reducing social distancing measures too quickly, adding they must take “very significant precautions.”
“In general, I think most of the country is doing it in a prudent way,” he said. “There are obviously some situations where people might be jumping over that. I just say please proceed with caution if you’re going to do that.”
Yeah, no shit.
"Some" is too high of a number from medical professionals.
Unless you're okay with the idea that "some" nurses at the VA fake vaccine records to get employed there after their last hospital sacked them, then stupidly tell all this to the patients they help.
From the beginning I thought Fauci understood the problem very well, and also understood we do need to open back up and also keep certain practices like masks and social distancing as our routine as we did. I saw him on an interview with one of the youtube doctors I watch and I think I linked it here. This is where he was way back then and still is today. He has not actually changed his position, it is just the media did not ask the proper questions, and they did not listen to his whole story. Plus the interview with the internet doctor was without an audience or trump and it was not conducted by news idiots.
If trump just let fauci go and listened to him he could have sat back and raked in the good press and appeared like a smart leader who employs good people and knows how to use them. Instead he was trump and could not stand just being the top dog and had to tell everyone how he was a great doctor and everyone was impressed by his knowledge when he kept talking and proved himself a complete dolt. Are we sure @Asyncritus isn't trump?
I know this is not what you meant, but some medical professionals think some people at risk of catching COVID is too high a number. It is a balancing act and we were never able to make everyone safe from the disease so we do have to balance when everyone has to do something in public, and when certain people who are in danger have to make arrangements to keep themselves safe. That balancing act goes on everywhere between what everyone has to do in public spaces, and what some have to do to keep themselves safe from public spaces.
That does mean there will be a time when we return to what used to be normal where people are not wearing masks, social distancing, and the people with severe health problems stay away from highly infectious public places.
Very sad, but no level of government with jurisdiction there has demonstrated the capacity (political, expertise, or fiscal/manpower, take your pick) to implement a test/trace/isolate regime that's necessary to reopening. Especially with the fucktardedness of a large portion of population who won't even wear a damn mask properly. It's not like we can invite in the South Korean army to enforce quarantines.
I grew up within a mile or two from the hospital where this doctor and nurse work. Heard the helicopter coming every couple days (it's a major regional trauma center). It's mostly low-density suburbs, bumping up on open space and rural areas, and has the highest per capita population of medical professionals in the Bay Area if not the state; the population overall is smarter and significantly better educated than average -- and consequently, more prone to depression. They were never going to see a ton of COVID patients to begin with, since the downtowns in the area all closed before the virus made its way out there - and downtown Walnut Creek is a major shopping destination for the Bay Area. As of a couple weeks ago, all but a few cases out there have been in nursing homes.
This doesn't mean the SIP was unnecessary. It means it worked. You can't open up a city or county (and other parts of the county are very different from Walnut Creek), and not expect to get people from the whole rest of the region and beyond.
Your inability to differentiate "If A then B" from "B" is not something to blame on the person who said "If A then B", especially when "B" is bad enough that a whole bunch of people put a whole lot of effort into making sure "A" didn't happen.
If I have said A and B then you can put all of that in context with what I said rather than A and B. Because I am really not precisely sure what you are referring to by A and B considering the very large number of possibilities of what A and B are.
Holy shit now you have me doing it.
Don't need to quit, I can remote work. And get Amazon deliveries at a safe social distance.
Besides, the argument has shifted to your usual "if you think X, you must also think ridiculous thing Y" bullshit.
My country is a capitalist economy, but with a strong history of social safety nets and workers' rights. Admittedly, the party currently in power is trying to model itself after the US, but we don't have the excesses of the US system yet. No-one here is saying don't get back to work, but they ARE saying do it safely and not just because the economy might suffer.
oh so you are capitalist but only for the right reasons - got it. And again a person who has the ability to work from home telling everyone that staying at home is no problem. Got it.
And yes we have been getting back to work and doing it smartly despite a few idiots that are of course on the news so the terrified can wail "see! It's not working! I told ya! Now we need to lockdown even tighter!"
Separate names with a comma.