What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

FreshFish said:
from what I read, the nurse who contracted Ebola brushed her cheek with the outside of her hazmat suit when she was removing it.

I had to wear a hazmat suit and respirator a few times, and they are not that easy to remove without touching the outside anywhere while you are taking them off.
Click to expand...
Fish-I saw that too but dismissed it. If this virus was that easy to catch, we would already be seeing it spreading like the flu. The second nurse was sick when she flew-and she knew it-and if this was very contagious, she could have exposed more people than we can count as the various planes she was on went lots of other places. And just think how many people were exposed to the 190+ people on her first plane ride? Thankfully, it appears this is not readily transmissable(yet). Back in the old days, viruses like rubeola (measles), varicella(Chicken Pox), rubella(German Measles), and the paramyxoma virus that cause mumps had incredibly high contagion rates. But their virulence was limited in most cases. Ebola is an incredibly virulent organism but so far, thankfully, has not approached any sort of level of contagion comparable to these others. If it ever does, and personally i do not think that is very likely, we will be dealing with a catastrophic event of Biblical proportions-and wil be regretting all the missteps of not containing it when it first appeared. This is one bad sucker and maybe Animal Planet should it include it on the series they are now running called Monsters Within Me.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Kepler said:
accusing the CDC of being the "Coalition for Deception and Coercion"
Click to expand...

You are not seriously going to defend the CDC's response so far, I hope. Setting all politics aside entirely, any unbiased observer has to conclude that their response so far as been less than competent.

The second infected nurse had a fever, called them before flying, and they said fine.

They are using tortured twisted obfuscations to defend the lack of a travel ban rather than using plain simple direct declarative statements.

on and on. it's one thing to debate politics over taxes and such but when the most important mission of a government agency is not being addressed, then concern and criticism is entirely valid.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

DrDemento said:
Fish-I saw that too but dismissed it. If this virus was that easy to catch, we would already be seeing it spreading like the flu. The second nurse was sick when she flew-and she knew it-and if this was very contagious, she could have exposed more people than we can count as the various planes she was on went lots of other places. And just think how many people were exposed to the 190+ people on her first plane ride? Thankfully, it appears this is not readily transmissable(yet). Back in the old days, viruses like rubeola (measles), varicella(Chicken Pox), rubella(German Measles), and the paramyxoma virus that cause mumps had incredibly high contagion rates. But their virulence was limited in most cases. Ebola is an incredibly virulent organism but so far, thankfully, has not approached any sort of level of contagion comparable to these others. If it ever does, and personally i do not think that is very likely, we will be dealing with a catastrophic event of Biblical proportions-and wil be regretting all the missteps of not containing it when it first appeared. This is one bad sucker and maybe Animal Planet should it include it on the series they are now running called Monsters Within Me.
Click to expand...

Good information here. Also nice of Fishy to post baseless rumors about a health crisis. Never seen that before...:rolleyes:
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

DrDemento said:
Fish-I saw that too but dismissed it.
Click to expand...

It's really a shame that "news" reporting has become so unreliable. In many cases, unless you are an expert, you have no way to evaluate information to assess its reliability.

I remember, not too long ago even, when news organizations took great pride in getting the story "right" and even had fact checkers on staff to verify information independently from the reporter to make sure the reported information could be supported if it were ever questioned.

Somewhere along the way, the race to be "first" took precedence, and then we have despicable events like the NYPost splashing pictures of innocent teenagers all over the front page before the authorities finally tracked down Fratricide and Speedbump as the Boston Marathon bombers.

or people even fabricating documents in order to create a story to sway opinion among the gullible and unwary (far too many examples to count).
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

FreshFish said:
It's really a shame that "news" reporting has become so unreliable. In many cases, unless you are an expert, you have no way to evaluate information to assess its reliability.

I remember, not too long ago even, when news organizations took great pride in getting the story "right" and even had fact checkers on staff to verify information independently from the reporter to make sure the reported information could be supported if it were ever questioned.

Somewhere along the way, the race to be "first" took precedence, and then we have despicable events like the NYPost splashing pictures of innocent teenagers all over the front page before the authorities finally tracked down Fratricide and Speedbump as the Boston Marathon bombers.

or people even fabricating documents in order to create a story to sway opinion among the gullible and unwary (far too many examples to count).
Click to expand...

FF: I am certainly not an expert in this case but I do have a particular interest and education in epidemiology. In fact i think when it comes down to it, I might really only know about four things really well. There are several medical people who post on here and hopefully they can add input. Remember however, that not all medical people are the same. Not everyone has the same training and experience. Some specialize early in their careers. You can have an MD after your name and never have delivered a baby. Besides some people who graduate medical school are really physicians in all senses of the word. Others are doctors and even more are just providers. Some graduate number one in their class and some are near the bottom. You really have to try to discern who really know what they are talking about these days. Some are ivory tower guys who sit and play on a computer all day while others are actually out diagnosing and treating patients.
As far as the media-well, let's just say I try to watch movies and the food channel instead of the so called newscasts. i consider most of them just entertainment instead of factual reporting. I am not saying that certain stations do not try to push an agenda but I am saying they are more interested in ratings, sensationalism, and keeping the audience tuned into entertainment than they are in being factual. Currently Ebola is the flavor of the month, last week it was Enterovirus D. Perhaps when they run out of steam with this, they will remember that the middle east still exists and that North Korea has not gone anywhere or there is some other health hazard to scare the viewers about.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

DrDemento said:
As far as the media-well, let's just say I try to watch movies and the food channel instead of the so called newscasts. i consider most of them just entertainment instead of factual reporting. I am not saying that certain stations do not try to push an agenda but I am saying they are more interested in ratings, sensationalism, and keeping the audience tuned into entertainment than they are in being factual. Currently Ebola is the flavor of the month, last week it was Enterovirus D. Perhaps when they run out of steam with this, they will remember that the middle east still exists and that North Korea has not gone anywhere or there is some other health hazard to scare the viewers about.
Click to expand...


Today's "terror of the week" is brought to you by BioSafetyWear, makers of protective gear.

Next week's show on the coming financial collapse will be sponsored by GoldenSilverSellers. Be sure not to miss it!


It has always seemed weird to me that "news" is "sponsored" by advertisers. What if your top advertiser does something awful? Do you not report on it out of fear that they will stop paying you for ad space or air time?
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Let's be very clear here. The reason these people got ebola was because they were the primary caregivers in the end stages of his battle with EVD. It's an ugly stage. Truly horrific. You're effectively geysering bloody **** and vomit from both ends all over the place.

Nurses in western Africa follow extremely rigid protocols and actually have people basically walking them through every step of an extremely detailed and thorough process to disrobe.

The nurses were either not given proper PPE or didn't follow protocol. They need to have people reading off a list while another person watches to ensure the person disrobing follows protocol precisely. This isn't something to **** around with.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Every time I interact with a health care professional, the more I'm sure Obamacare is a mess of epic proportions. The latest is my eye doctor who said my eye coverage no longer covers my eye exam, as under Obamacare guidelines they have to consider my eye exam as being medical in nature, rather than eye coverage. I have a risk factor for glaucoma, though never any sign of it, so because of that risk factor,and the way Obamacare requires an eye doctor to categorize your risk factors, it flips to medical, though nothing has changed at all with my eye situation for years. But my wife, who doesn't have the risk factor, can't have her eye exam under medical coverage, but rather under the eye coverage. So, either I don't buy eye coverage, or I buy it for both of us, with it being wasted for me. What silliness.

The eye doctor also said that their amount of paperwork under Obamacare has skyrocketed and they have to gather all sorts of information no patients that has nothing to do with eye care. Like they ask a number of questions about the makeup of your family and other things. I've heard similar stories from our dental folks and primary care physician. Nothing like the feds not knowing what they're doing and creating yet more monstrous bureaucratic messes.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Bob Gray said:
Every time I interact with a health care professional, the more I'm sure Obamacare is a mess of epic proportions. The latest is my eye doctor who said my eye coverage no longer covers my eye exam, as under Obamacare guidelines they have to consider my eye exam as being medical in nature, rather than eye coverage. I have a risk factor for glaucoma, though never any sign of it, so because of that risk factor,and the way Obamacare requires an eye doctor to categorize your risk factors, it flips to medical, though nothing has changed at all with my eye situation for years. But my wife, who doesn't have the risk factor, can't have her eye exam under medical coverage, but rather under the eye coverage. So, either I don't buy eye coverage, or I buy it for both of us, with it being wasted for me. What silliness.

The eye doctor also said that their amount of paperwork under Obamacare has skyrocketed and they have to gather all sorts of information no patients that has nothing to do with eye care. Like they ask a number of questions about the makeup of your family and other things. I've heard similar stories from our dental folks and primary care physician. Nothing like the feds not knowing what they're doing and creating yet more monstrous bureaucratic messes.
Click to expand...

Bob, you b !tch like a 5 year old girl. Its not your most interesting quality. Boo hoo hoo if you have to change a plan. Most likely you had to change plans long before Obamacare happened at some time in your life. The bottom line is the ACA is the law, its working for millions of people, and all of your horror stories have been correctly ridiculed. Get over it already. Your side lost. Why don't we re-litigate Social Security while we're at it? I mean, its only been law for like 75 years but hey, if its something to whine about lets have at it!

I can't wait for your next post "I never got constipated before Obamacare but I am now so that's the law's fault dammit!!!"
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Bob Gray said:
Every time I interact with a health care professional, the more I'm sure Obamacare is a mess of epic proportions.
Click to expand...
Since we're playing Anecdote, every time I have interacted with doctors the last few years I've asked them what they thought of Obamacare, figuring they must have a unique perspective. Their reaction has ranged from total support to tepid "we'll see." None of them have been opposed to it, and several of them had choice words for the politicians using it as their hobbyhorse. The universal reaction has been that there is no alternate plan they've seen that's any better.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Kepler said:
Since we're playing Anecdote, every time I have interacted with doctors the last few years I've asked them what they thought of Obamacare, figuring they must have a unique perspective. Their reaction has ranged from total support to tepid "we'll see." None of them have been opposed to it, and several of them had choice words for the politicians using it as their hobbyhorse. The universal reaction has been that there is no alternate plan they've seen that's any better.
Click to expand...
That's been similar to my experience. When I briefly talked to my family practice doctor about it, his response was basically "it can't be worse than what we have."
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Whoo Hoo! Here we go again!

Supreme Court to Hear Case on Health Law Subsidies

Challengers Argue Affordable Care Act Only Permits Tax Credits on State-Run Exchanges
Click to expand...


Does a law mean what the plain simple English language text says in black and white? or will SCOTUS somehow contort it into something else?

"It depends upon what you mean by 'is'."
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

FreshFish said:
Whoo Hoo! Here we go again!




Does a law mean what the plain simple English language text says in black and white? or will SCOTUS somehow contort it into something else?

"It depends upon what you mean by 'is'."
Click to expand...

This will be an interesting one, for sure. I don't think the "plain simple English" is as restrictive by definition as you'd like to think. In the phrase "an exchange established by the state", does "established" mean "built and run", or could it more generally mean "designated".
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Originalists are supposed to be slaves to intent. The intent was clearly to allow them. So we'll see whether "Originalism" is just a smoke screen. Spoiler: it is.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Does a law mean what the plain simple English language text says in black and white? or will SCOTUS somehow contort it into something else?
Click to expand...

GrinCDXX said:
This will be an interesting one, for sure. I don't think the "plain simple English" is as restrictive by definition as you'd like to think. In the phrase "an exchange established by the state", does "established" mean "built and run", or could it more generally mean "designated".
Click to expand...

Woo hoo! See, it's started already!

or does "the state" refer to "the state" or does it mean "government" in general?

or does plain simple English become buried in a sea of technicalities? Lawyers, gotta love 'em, eh?


Never mind that the drafters of the law initially said flat out that they meant "the states" because they figured no governor would expose his/her citizens to being forced to buy insurance without a subsidy: they intended it to be a cudgel to force states to set up exchanges. Boy, did they then backtrack from that in a hurry! If this were the world of 1984 they'd have scrubbed the servers a long time ago.
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

Speaking of 1984, we now hear from someone who thinks it's an instruction manual!

Candide said:
The intent was clearly to allow them [only for the states, not for the feds, see # 856, because they SAID SO FLAT OUT!].
Click to expand...
 
Re: The PPACA Implementation Phase II - Love it or Lose it!

It's amazing how often people think the world is black & white, especially when it comes to the law.

When all else fails, scream "1984!!!!!!!!!!!!" Will FF be working "Orwellian" into his next post, like a good little, unironic neo-conservative? Tell us, Fishy, where is Big Brother Oblahblah's stern face on the telescreen? Are you living in a slum apartment block, drinking bathtub "Victory Gin", and sneaking out for illegal romps with your neighborhood YASL leader?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top