On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 11:14:46 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 2/2/2014 8:50 AM, Shadow wrote:
On 02 Feb 2014 10:20:45 GMT, Zaky Waky wrote:

Is anyone participating in or visiting this group under 60 years
old and healthy (not cronicly taking prescripton meds, not
"disabled", not cripped, not whining about how much pain they are
in, not morbidly obese)?

Seems not, except for me.
I presume you are not taking mental health into consideration ? If
you were, you would have to tick yourself off the list. IMHO []'s


Hey pal, you noticed that too eh? ^_^

What's up Shadow? Do you find the whack jobs posting here to be more
amusing than those in the other groups I see you in? I even have a
fanboy, Killer Loon, who's using part of my nym, sort of a junior
Hatter. I do have fun here. ^_^

Yep. The Off Topic here is nice. Has an earthy smell to it.
Not metallic as in the NSA_most_watched groups.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On 2/3/2014 11:08 AM, Peter wrote:
It depends who is defining "healthy". Your definition and the insurance
company's definition might vary. And, is someone who is "disabled" or
even "crippled" necessarily unhealthy?

Speaking as a MD, I believe that if someone is taking prescription
medication for a chronic condition, and that condition is being well
controlled (no medication side effects and no detectable damage to any
organ system from the chronic condition), that person should be
considered healthy. (Examples might include well controlled high blood
pressure and well controlled high blood cholesterol if they were
diagnosed and managed soon after onset - among some other chronic
conditions.) I regard those situations as no different than a person who
requires prescription corrective lenses to see clearly with no evidence
of other ocular abnormality.

And, on the other hand, someone may be taking no prescription
medications because they have a serious medical problem that just has
not become clinically evident (such as early adult onset diabetes or
early stage hepatitis C). Also, some people with chronic mental illness
either may be undiagnosed (and therefore untreated), or may refuse to
take their medications. Those individuals are most certainly not healthy.

I think there are a lot of conditions where the
body doesn't work properly, but medications can
make up for that. Allergies, diabetes, chronic
pain, migraines, etc. I like your view point,
that in many cases that medicated people can
be "healthy".

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 09:55:07 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Zaky Waky wrote:
Is anyone participating in or visiting this group under 60 years old and
healthy (not cronicly taking prescripton meds, not "disabled", not cripped,
not whining about how much pain they are in, not morbidly obese)?

Seems not, except for me.

Hi,
How about over 70? Except for me? No known family history?
I am talking abbout your gene, how did your dad die?
Was he healthy like you? Are you knocking on the wood?

My father drank like a fish. He died really young, at 79. All
my other relatives have not yet reached 100, or died trying to get
there, except my 2 grandmothers. Is that good ? Hum , probably not.
I'm already bored.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On 2/3/2014 9:12 AM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
On 2/3/2014 7:55 AM, CRNG wrote:
On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 22:37:52 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote in


I bought an inexpensive Hi-Point CF-380 HC which is a lot of gun
for the money. It came with an 8 round magazine but I'll have to
get the 10 round magazine so it will fit my hand better. The last
pistol I owned was a Belgian made NATO issue 9mm Browning
Hi-Power. There are a lot of pro/con videos on YouTube about
Hi-Point but it's a basic simple firearm with a lifetime
warranty. The CF-380 is kind of heavy for its caliber so when you
run out of ammo, you can bash in a dobad's head with it. ^_^

http://www.hi-pointfirearms.com/hand...ns_380acp.html

That's a nice piece.

It's a gun, it's not nice - certainly not nice lookingg

Take a look at the SCCY (pronounced Sky) compact 9mm. I bought one
simply because of the "feel" of it in my grip. I didn't need another
pistol or revolver but this one is...

www.sccy.com

US made in Daytona Beach, lifetime warranty, DAO, 10+1 and comes in
under 22oz fully loaded. Great CCW gun or travel gun (I won't be
happy but I won't flip out if some baggage handler rips me off. Just
let the airline buy me a replacement for ~ $250)

Those are nice looking pistols but the price I saw was $299.00. Of
course there may be used ones out there that can be bought for less
money. Did you purchase yours new from a dealer? I really can't afford a
$300.00 pistol. ^_^

TDD

On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:08:32 -0500, Peter wrote:

well controlled high blood cholesterol if they were
diagnosed and managed soon after onset

You must be from the new brood. I suppose if someone has
"uncontrolled" high cholesterol, that would make them "disabled".

Gotta larf, what those drug companies stuff down young MD's
throats. They offer me trips to Europe if I prescribe their trash. Ha.
Not me, I'd rather die honest.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On 03 Feb 2014 19:23:22 GMT, Zaky Waky wrote:

Peter wrote in :


It depends who is defining "healthy". Your definition and the insurance
company's definition might vary. And, is someone who is "disabled" or
even "crippled" necessarily unhealthy?

Speaking as a MD, I believe that if someone is taking prescription
medication for a chronic condition, and that condition is being well
controlled (no medication side effects and no detectable damage to any
organ system from the chronic condition), that person should be
considered healthy.


Well, speaking as a layman, I don't think I've ever seen a person taking
prescription medication for a chronic condition in which the initial
prescribed medication did not have deleterious side effects that required
additional meds for those side effects. For example: take this for your
blood pressure and if it keeps you from sleeping, then that this, and take
that to help you wake up in the morning. Of course I'm not in a position
to prove this, but would ask those reading this to draw on their own
personal experiences.

Utter nonsense. The counterexamples abound.

Frankly, I consider most G.P. MDs pill-pushing quacks; although I don't
blame them. I blame the "system" that has most of their later years (10
yrs in practice) education being provided "free" by the pharmaceutical
companies.

More bull****.

On 2/3/2014 1:44 PM, Peter wrote:
On 2/3/2014 2:23 PM, Zaky Waky wrote:
Peter wrote in
:


It depends who is defining "healthy". Your definition and the
insurance company's definition might vary. And, is someone who
is "disabled" or even "crippled" necessarily unhealthy?

Speaking as a MD, I believe that if someone is taking
prescription medication for a chronic condition, and that
condition is being well controlled (no medication side effects
and no detectable damage to any organ system from the chronic
condition), that person should be considered healthy.


Well, speaking as a layman, I don't think I've ever seen a person
taking prescription medication for a chronic condition in which
the initial prescribed medication did not have deleterious side
effects that required additional meds for those side effects. For
example: take this for your blood pressure and if it keeps you from
sleeping, then that this, and take that to help you wake up in the
morning. Of course I'm not in a position to prove this, but would
ask those reading this to draw on their own personal experiences.

Frankly, I consider most G.P. MDs pill-pushing quacks; although I
don't blame them. I blame the "system" that has most of their
later years (10 yrs in practice) education being provided "free"
by the pharmaceutical companies.


Unfortunate that everyone you know on chronic meds uses incompetent
quack physicians.

Speaking as both an individual who takes prescription medication
chronically, and someone who has treated many patients who do the
same, I can say that my population sample size is likely to be
considerably larger than yours and my experience contradicts your
observation. With close observation and careful control of dosage,
the overwhelming majority of patients who require chronic medication
do not sustain complications that require additional meds to treat
the complications. That being said, it is a consistent, widely
reported observation that the more medications a patient takes, the
great the likelihood of undesirable drug-drug interactions.

Your generalization about abuse of pharmaceutical company "education"
as the prime source of continuing medical education is off the mark.
Most states require a certain number of hours/year of continuing
medical education for physicians to retain their license. Most
states require that the majority of those hours be from AMA PRA
category I sources. Pharmaceutical company sponsored activities
rarely if ever meet that criterion. Also, in reality, G.P.s are not
common any more. Most M.D.s today who treat all or most members of a
family for all or most of their medical needs are board certified in
family practice or internal medicine.

Well Dr. Pete, I'm glad to see you posting and sharing your knowledge.
I picked up 9 different medications from my pharmacist last Saturday.
At the end of May last year, I was sent home to die and had home hospice
care and was walking around with a $32,000.00 automatic external
defibrillator hanging off my belt. After 6 months, the hospice service
determined I wasn't declining and ended the service. I wasn't dying fast
enough and the service was worried about fraud that had happened with
other hospice service organizations. They came and picked up the bed,
the oxygen machine, tanks and all the other stuff. I shipped the $32k
Zoll defibrillator back to them. I take a handful of pills at 6:00am and
again at 6:00pm and I'm too damn ornery to die. ^_^

TDD

On 2/3/2014 1:45 PM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:
In article ,
The Daring Dufas wrote:

On 2/2/2014 1:47 PM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:
In article , The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 2/2/2014 11:08 AM, R. Quincy, M. E. wrote:
How ridiculous.

Out of the average paycheck of anyone older than 30 in Canada,
you can probably trace anywhere from $500 to $750 of the monthly
income tax deducted at source going to one of the provincial
health insurance programs.

I watched a video made by a young Canadian woman about her family
and her husband who is disabled due to injury. She said that in the
Canadian health care system, her family is referred to as "Useless
eaters."

isn't that in essence what Romney called the 47%?

I kind of doubt it but I don't care.

wow, way to take a position


Malcom, Mitt Romney is not The President of my country. Nothing he may
say has any effect on me at all. The ultimate consequence of Affirmative
Action IS The President of my country and THAT does concern me because
of all the destruction he has done and will do to my country. o_O


Malcom, Mitt Romney is a much
better human being than you'll ever be but I'd like you to get up real
close to the screen, move your lips if you must while reading what I've
written and perhaps you can comprehend it. I'm not a Republican,
Republicans disgust me but Democrats are special, they horrify me. I'll
support members of either party when they're right but will excoriate
them when they're wrong. Malcom,

did you excoriate Mitt for his 47% "statement"?


Mitt Romney was not a candidate for Prime Minister of Canada you idiot. O_o

I realize that it's something you fail
to grok but It's a characteristic of those of your ilk and perhaps one
day, you'll grow out of it. ^_^

TDD

I don't care what your political stance is, it doesn't change the facts

The facts of what Malcom? Be specific and try to be sane. o_O

TDD

On 2/3/2014 8:01 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:


Well Dr. Pete, I'm glad to see you posting and sharing your
knowledge. I picked up 9 different medications from my pharmacist
last Saturday. At the end of May last year, I was sent home to die
and had home hospice care and was walking around with a $32,000.00
automatic external defibrillator hanging off my belt. After 6 months,
the hospice service determined I wasn't declining and ended the
service. I wasn't dying fast enough and the service was worried about
fraud that had happened with other hospice service organizations.
They came and picked up the bed, the oxygen machine, tanks and all
the other stuff. I shipped the $32k Zoll defibrillator back to them.
I take a handful of pills at 6:00am and again at 6:00pm and I'm too
damn ornery to die. ^_^

TDD

Yes, medicine is still very much an art as well as a science. Accurately
predicting any individual patient's clinical course, especially in the
case of chronic illness, is usually impossible. Glad to hear that
you're outliving medical predictions and are still ornery. That
personality type seems to experience (I won't say "enjoy") greater
longevity.

As an aside, and I won't pry (your medical circumstances are not
appropriate for discussion in a public group), but I have trouble
reconciling being enrolled in hospice with wearing an AED. Please don't
address this as it would really violate your medical privacy. Just my
own observation.

On 2/3/2014 7:26 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:08:32 -0500, Peter wrote:

well controlled high blood cholesterol if they were diagnosed and
managed soon after onset

You must be from the new brood. I suppose if someone has
"uncontrolled" high cholesterol, that would make them "disabled".
Gotta larf, what those drug companies stuff down young MD's throats.
They offer me trips to Europe if I prescribe their trash. Ha. Not me,
I'd rather die honest. []'s

I don't think you've read my reply in the context of the original
posting. And, I'm not part of any "new brood"; I'm a senior citizen.

I never said or implied that no physicians accept pharmaceutical
freebies. I said that such freebies rarely meet State standards for
continuing medical education. Personally, I never accepted those
invitations, found private practice too mercenary, and spent 30 years on
active duty as a medical officer in the military. I happen to agree
with your criticism of the pharmaceutical companies and although
physicians cannot be compelled to sign a promise to prescribe in return
for the freebies, the companies' intent is clearly apparent and those
M.D.s' bias to prescribe accordingly has been well documented, even
when it is a subconscious bias. You jumped to entirely unwarranted
conclusions.

On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 20:28:34 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

The ultimate consequence of Affirmative
Action IS The President of my country and THAT does concern me because
of all the destruction he has done and will do to my country. o_O


The voters of the U.S. put the President in office.
And you'll live with it.
All your squealing like a stuck pig won't change a thing.

Zaky Waky wrote:
Is anyone participating in or visiting this group under 60 years old and
healthy (not cronicly taking prescripton meds, not "disabled", not cripped,
not whining about how much pain they are in, not morbidly obese)?

Seems not, except for me.

Hi,
Define being healthy? My age is mid-70 I eat well, eliminate well
and sleep very well every night. I do all my routine chores every day
without any difficulty.

The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 2/2/2014 6:02 PM, Daring Dufas: Hypocrite Sock of Killer Loon wrote:

will never understand. I keep an eye on my roommates home, office,
handle a lot of paperwork for him and keep the computers up and in good
Hi,
Roommates home? Are you resident in an institution?

Adam Kubias wrote:
On 2014-02-02 4:20 AM, Zaky Waky wrote:
Is anyone participating in or visiting this group under 60 years old and
healthy (not cronicly taking prescripton meds, not "disabled", not
cripped,
not whining about how much pain they are in, not morbidly obese)?

Seems not, except for me.

I'm not even 30 and I can kick ass.


Hi,
What is your time for 100 yard dash? What? one minute? No? Couldn't
finish?, LOL!

On 2/3/14 9:00 PM, Peter wrote:

I never said or implied that no physicians accept pharmaceutical
freebies. I said that such freebies rarely meet State standards for
continuing medical education. Personally, I never accepted those
invitations, found private practice too mercenary, and spent 30 years on
active duty as a medical officer in the military. I happen to agree
with your criticism of the pharmaceutical companies and although
physicians cannot be compelled to sign a promise to prescribe in return
for the freebies, the companies' intent is clearly apparent and those
M.D.s' bias to prescribe accordingly has been well documented, even
when it is a subconscious bias. You jumped to entirely unwarranted
conclusions.

There is a not yet approved method to stop bleeding from gunshots:
http://tinyurl.com/ljdq8c9 (Popular Science)

On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 22:00:19 -0500, Peter wrote:

On 2/3/2014 7:26 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:08:32 -0500, Peter wrote:

well controlled high blood cholesterol if they were diagnosed and
managed soon after onset

You must be from the new brood. I suppose if someone has
"uncontrolled" high cholesterol, that would make them "disabled".
Gotta larf, what those drug companies stuff down young MD's throats.
They offer me trips to Europe if I prescribe their trash. Ha. Not me,
I'd rather die honest. []'s

I don't think you've read my reply in the context of the original
posting. And, I'm not part of any "new brood"; I'm a senior citizen.

I never said or implied that no physicians accept pharmaceutical
freebies. I said that such freebies rarely meet State standards for
continuing medical education. Personally, I never accepted those
invitations, found private practice too mercenary, and spent 30 years on
active duty as a medical officer in the military. I happen to agree
with your criticism of the pharmaceutical companies and although
physicians cannot be compelled to sign a promise to prescribe in return
for the freebies, the companies' intent is clearly apparent and those
M.D.s' bias to prescribe accordingly has been well documented, even
when it is a subconscious bias. You jumped to entirely unwarranted
conclusions.

I retired as a family doctor, years ago. ( 35 years practice,
when I was almost perfect, I had to retire ....). In my country,
family medicine is state-run, a very corrupt state, so we have to
ignore the leaflets they hand out and study in those tediously thick
text-books. And even double check them for biased text.
I don't jump to conclusions.
I just thought your choice of "high cholesterol" when we were
discussing disability was not wisely made. A stroke, heart attack,
severe liver or kidney failure, something like that would be more
convincing.
FWIW
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 2/2/2014 11:08 AM, R. Quincy, M. E. wrote:
How ridiculous.

Out of the average paycheck of anyone older than 30 in Canada, you can
probably trace anywhere from $500 to $750 of the monthly income tax
deducted at source going to one of the provincial health insurance
programs.

I watched a video made by a young Canadian woman about her family and
her husband who is disabled due to injury. She said that in the Canadian
health care system, her family is referred to as "Useless eaters." If
Abomination Care is allowed to continue in The United States, the same
sort of attitude will develop among the Affirmative Action morons who
are being put in charge of the system. ^_^

TDD
Hi,
Useless eaters? In the orient they say "rice worm"

On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 21:10:12 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 20:28:34 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

The ultimate consequence of Affirmative
Action IS The President of my country and THAT does concern me because
of all the destruction he has done and will do to my country. o_O


The voters of the U.S. put the President in office.
And you'll live with it.
All your squealing like a stuck pig won't change a thing.

They never had a choice.
Not having a choice was not their fault, it was their parent's
fault ..... spilt milk etc ...
OK, it won't change a thing.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 20:28:34 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

The ultimate consequence of Affirmative
Action IS The President of my country and THAT does concern me
because of all the destruction he has done and will do to my
country. o_O


The voters of the U.S. put the President in office.

Too bad a lot of those voters were dead , and that many of them voted more
than once . There is no question in my mind that the last 2 elections were
stolen due to voter fraud . And that Barry Soetoro is the biggest fraud ever
perpetrated upon the American public . I'm just waiting to see how he tries
to stay in power . He's already got a good start on corrupting our military
leaders into agreeing to fire on US citizens . Let's just hope the people
that actually have to pull those triggers realize that it's their friends
and neighbors out there on the business end of those arms . It's gonna get
ugly , and the question is not if but when ...
--
Snag

On 02/03/2014 02:44 PM, Peter wrote:
Unfortunate that everyone you know on chronic meds uses incompetent quack physicians.

Most people go straight to BlubberKing after visiting their doctor and order a slab of fat and sugar on a bun, a pound
of fries and wash it down with a 64 oz Croke-a-cola. Then they go to their pharmacy.

Most are unwilling to change their diet or read this book:

http://smile.amazon.com/The-China-St.../dp/1932100660

In article ,
The Daring Dufas wrote:


Well Dr. Pete, I'm glad to see you posting and sharing your knowledge.
I picked up 9 different medications from my pharmacist last Saturday.
At the end of May last year, I was sent home to die and had home hospice
care and was walking around with a $32,000.00 automatic external
defibrillator hanging off my belt. After 6 months, the hospice service
determined I wasn't declining and ended the service. I wasn't dying fast
enough and the service was worried about fraud that had happened with
other hospice service organizations. They came and picked up the bed,
the oxygen machine, tanks and all the other stuff. I shipped the $32k
Zoll defibrillator back to them. I take a handful of pills at 6:00am and
again at 6:00pm and I'm too damn ornery to die. ^_^

TDD

Don;t know the particulars, but had a bud who "timed out" of hospice,
but was picked by home healthcare. Same company, same staff, just a
different pot of money. Is this available?
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein

On Mon, 3 Feb 2014 22:39:44 -0600, "Terry Coombs"
wrote:

He's already got a good start on corrupting our military
leaders into agreeing to fire on US citizens

That is what the military do. Shoot first, and maybe 2% are
capable of asking "why" later. They call them "deserters".
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On 2/3/2014 10:10 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
The ultimate consequence of Affirmative
Action IS The President of my country and THAT does concern me because
of all the destruction he has done and will do to my country. o_O


The voters of the U.S. put the President in office.
And you'll live with it.
All your squealing like a stuck pig won't change a thing.

Something called "voter fraud" and another thing
called "voter intimidation" and a third called
"Diebold electronic voting" makes me wonder about
that.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

In article ,
Stormin Mormon wrote:

On 2/3/2014 10:10 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
The ultimate consequence of Affirmative
Action IS The President of my country and THAT does concern me because
of all the destruction he has done and will do to my country. o_O


The voters of the U.S. put the President in office.
And you'll live with it.
All your squealing like a stuck pig won't change a thing.

Something called "voter fraud" and another thing
called "voter intimidation" and a third called
"Diebold electronic voting" makes me wonder about
that.

Nah, Diebold's head said years ago that he was a Republican, so the Dems
decided his machines were all corrupted. Please try to keep your
conspiracy theories straight. It is hard enough to follow as it is...
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein

On 2/3/2014 10:19 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Hi,
Define being healthy? My age is mid-70 I eat well, eliminate well
and sleep very well every night. I do all my routine chores every day
without any difficulty.

When the lab tests come back, I'll review them
and certify you healthy.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 2/4/2014 4:59 AM, Bubba wrote:
Most people go straight to BlubberKing after visiting their doctor and
order a slab of fat and sugar on a bun, a pound of fries and wash it
down with a 64 oz Croke-a-cola. Then they go to their pharmacy.

Most are unwilling to change their diet or read this book:

http://smile.amazon.com/The-China-St.../dp/1932100660

I saw a guy one time, leaving the dental clinic.
After a tooth extraction. They told him to keep
pressure on for so long, and no smoking for some
ammount of time. He got out the front door, spit
out the gauze, and lit up. I don't know the
follow up, but he probably had a lot of post
op complications which he blamed on the dentist.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 2/3/2014 10:00 PM, Peter wrote:
I don't think you've read my reply in the context of the original
posting. And, I'm not part of any "new brood"; I'm a senior citizen.

I never said or implied that no physicians accept pharmaceutical
freebies. I said that such freebies rarely meet State standards for
continuing medical education. Personally, I never accepted those
invitations, found private practice too mercenary, and spent 30 years on
active duty as a medical officer in the military. I happen to agree
with your criticism of the pharmaceutical companies and although
physicians cannot be compelled to sign a promise to prescribe in return
for the freebies, the companies' intent is clearly apparent and those
M.D.s' bias to prescribe accordingly has been well documented, even
when it is a subconscious bias. You jumped to entirely unwarranted
conclusions.

I prefer capitalism over socialism. But both are
known to bias the thinking of physicians. I'd
rather have doctors carrying pocket full of
Metamucil tongue depressors, opposed to having to
phone a bureaucrat in Washington every time the
MD wants to prescribe acetaminophen.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 2/4/2014 7:55 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Something called "voter fraud" and another thing
called "voter intimidation" and a third called
"Diebold electronic voting" makes me wonder about
that.

Nah, Diebold's head said years ago that he was a Republican, so the Dems
decided his machines were all corrupted. Please try to keep your
conspiracy theories straight. It is hard enough to follow as it is...

Conspiracy theory? Baah! I heard that straight from
my Aunt Myrtle, who heard it from her cousin's hair
dresser Madge (who's still soaking in palmolive).

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 21:39:43 -0500, Peter wrote in


Yes, medicine is still very much an art as well as a science. Accurately
predicting any individual patient's clinical course, especially in the
case of chronic illness, is usually impossible.

IMO one cause for misunderstanding is the medical profession's
(perhaps unconscious) cultivation of a public aura of infallibly; I.e.
the "..doctor knows best.." aura. I'm guessing that medical pros are
taught early to project a mystique of confidence and certainty so as
to reassure the patient and family that all is under control. And
that is certainly worthwhile. But I do believe it leads to
disappointment when reality sets in.
--
Web based forums are like subscribing to 10 different newspapers
and having to visit 10 different news stands to pickup each one.
Email list-server groups and USENET are like having all of those
newspapers delivered to your door every morning.

On 2/4/2014 8:39 AM, CRNG wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 21:39:43 -0500, Peter wrote
in

Yes, medicine is still very much an art as well as a science.
Accurately predicting any individual patient's clinical course,
especially in the case of chronic illness, is usually impossible.

IMO one cause for misunderstanding is the medical profession's
(perhaps unconscious) cultivation of a public aura of infallibly;
I.e. the "..doctor knows best.." aura. I'm guessing that medical
pros are taught early to project a mystique of confidence and
certainty so as to reassure the patient and family that all is under
control. And that is certainly worthwhile. But I do believe it leads
to disappointment when reality sets in.


Much less a factor these days than in the past. More a factor recently
is the pressure placed on physicians by their patients to conform to
their "requests" which are often couched more in terms of threats. They
see an ad on TV or in a magazine, or in a blog, and they want that same
Rx. The threat, sometimes overt, sometimes implied is that without
getting what they want, they'll (a) leave your practice and bad mouth
you to all their friends and family, (b) find a lawyer who agrees to
file a trumped up lawsuit against you, (c) file a complaint with your
State's board of discipline and/or licensing office, or (d) a
combination of some or all of the above. It's usually faster and easier
to placate the patient and just given them the Rx. So the motivation is
usually not greed, it's intimidation!

In sum, it's a very complicated situation. One of the great joys of
military medicine (yes, it IS "socialized medicine"), is that physicians
don't have a profit motive associated with any patient management
decision, and the Feres doctrine (look it up if you don't know what it
is) insulates from the pressure to practice defensive medicine. You can
concentrate on providing the best possible care for each patient.

On 2/4/2014 8:39 AM, CRNG wrote:
IMO one cause for misunderstanding is the medical profession's
(perhaps unconscious) cultivation of a public aura of infallibly; I.e.
the "..doctor knows best.." aura. I'm guessing that medical pros are
taught early to project a mystique of confidence and certainty so as
to reassure the patient and family that all is under control. And
that is certainly worthwhile. But I do believe it leads to
disappointment when reality sets in.

One friend of mine describes the WCG syndrome,
White Coated God. That's when the MD think's
s/he is infallible.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 2/4/2014 5:52 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , The Daring Dufas
wrote:


Well Dr. Pete, I'm glad to see you posting and sharing your
knowledge. I picked up 9 different medications from my pharmacist
last Saturday. At the end of May last year, I was sent home to die
and had home hospice care and was walking around with a $32,000.00
automatic external defibrillator hanging off my belt. After 6
months, the hospice service determined I wasn't declining and ended
the service. I wasn't dying fast enough and the service was worried
about fraud that had happened with other hospice service
organizations. They came and picked up the bed, the oxygen machine,
tanks and all the other stuff. I shipped the $32k Zoll
defibrillator back to them. I take a handful of pills at 6:00am
and again at 6:00pm and I'm too damn ornery to die. ^_^

TDD

Don;t know the particulars, but had a bud who "timed out" of
hospice, but was picked by home healthcare. Same company, same staff,
just a different pot of money. Is this available?


No idea. Best source of information is probably a competent local
patient care ombudsman or social worker who is familiar with the
specific laws of the jurisdiction involved and the license provisions
and restrictions of the specific company.

On 2/4/2014 4:59 AM, Bubba wrote:
On 02/03/2014 02:44 PM, Peter wrote:
Unfortunate that everyone you know on chronic meds uses incompetent
quack physicians.

Most people go straight to BlubberKing after visiting their doctor
and order a slab of fat and sugar on a bun, a pound of fries and wash
it down with a 64 oz Croke-a-cola. Then they go to their pharmacy.

Most are unwilling to change their diet or read this book:

http://smile.amazon.com/The-China-St.../dp/1932100660



You put it a little cynically, but it's true that too many patients
think that taking meds for a chronic condition insulates them from the
harmful effects of any of their bad habits that have contributed to
their disease.

On 2/3/2014 10:28 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 22:00:19 -0500, Peter wrote:

On 2/3/2014 7:26 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:08:32 -0500, Peter
wrote:

well controlled high blood cholesterol if they were diagnosed
and managed soon after onset

You must be from the new brood. I suppose if someone has
"uncontrolled" high cholesterol, that would make them "disabled".
Gotta larf, what those drug companies stuff down young MD's
throats. They offer me trips to Europe if I prescribe their
trash. Ha. Not me, I'd rather die honest. []'s

I don't think you've read my reply in the context of the original
posting. And, I'm not part of any "new brood"; I'm a senior
citizen.

I never said or implied that no physicians accept pharmaceutical
freebies. I said that such freebies rarely meet State standards
for continuing medical education. Personally, I never accepted
those invitations, found private practice too mercenary, and spent
30 years on active duty as a medical officer in the military. I
happen to agree with your criticism of the pharmaceutical companies
and although physicians cannot be compelled to sign a promise to
prescribe in return for the freebies, the companies' intent is
clearly apparent and those M.D.s' bias to prescribe accordingly
has been well documented, even when it is a subconscious bias. You
jumped to entirely unwarranted conclusions.

I retired as a family doctor, years ago. ( 35 years practice, when I
was almost perfect, I had to retire ....). In my country, family
medicine is state-run, a very corrupt state, so we have to ignore the
leaflets they hand out and study in those tediously thick text-books.
And even double check them for biased text. I don't jump to
conclusions. I just thought your choice of "high cholesterol" when we
were discussing disability was not wisely made. A stroke, heart
attack, severe liver or kidney failure, something like that would be
more convincing. FWIW []'s


Shadow, perhaps we have an English language comprehension problem? As a
trained doctor, surely you know that most patients who have had a stroke
or have severe liver or kidney failure are at least partially disabled.
My original reply questioned the OP's apparent belief that anyone
merely taking prescription meds for a chronic condition met the
definition of disabled.

On 2/4/2014 8:29 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 2/3/2014 10:00 PM, Peter wrote:
I don't think you've read my reply in the context of the original
posting. And, I'm not part of any "new brood"; I'm a senior
citizen.

I never said or implied that no physicians accept pharmaceutical
freebies. I said that such freebies rarely meet State standards
for continuing medical education. Personally, I never accepted
those invitations, found private practice too mercenary, and spent
30 years on active duty as a medical officer in the military. I
happen to agree with your criticism of the pharmaceutical companies
and although physicians cannot be compelled to sign a promise to
prescribe in return for the freebies, the companies' intent is
clearly apparent and those M.D.s' bias to prescribe accordingly
has been well documented, even when it is a subconscious bias. You
jumped to entirely unwarranted conclusions.

I prefer capitalism over socialism. But both are known to bias the
thinking of physicians. I'd rather have doctors carrying pocket full
of Metamucil tongue depressors, opposed to having to phone a
bureaucrat in Washington every time the MD wants to prescribe
acetaminophen.


Bogus assertion. Never happened. Regardless of the system of practice,
physician choices may be constrained by logistical and financial issues
(either the patient's or the medical care system). How about the common
problem of a private physician believing that a certain med is most
appropriate for a specific private patient, but that patient's insurance
won't cover the cost of that med and it costs far more than the patient
can afford out of pocket?

On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 09:05:49 -0500, Peter wrote in


On 2/4/2014 8:39 AM, CRNG wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 21:39:43 -0500, Peter wrote
in

Yes, medicine is still very much an art as well as a science.
Accurately predicting any individual patient's clinical course,
especially in the case of chronic illness, is usually impossible.

IMO one cause for misunderstanding is the medical profession's
(perhaps unconscious) cultivation of a public aura of infallibly;
I.e. the "..doctor knows best.." aura. I'm guessing that medical
pros are taught early to project a mystique of confidence and
certainty so as to reassure the patient and family that all is under
control. And that is certainly worthwhile. But I do believe it leads
to disappointment when reality sets in.


Much less a factor these days than in the past.

Yes, I should have mentioned that I do see less of it than fifty years
ago.

More a factor recently
is the pressure placed on physicians by their patients to conform to
their "requests" which are often couched more in terms of threats. They
see an ad on TV or in a magazine, or in a blog, and they want that same
Rx.

Glad you mentioned that. IMO the "big pharma" move into public
advertising was one of the worst things to happen to medical care
vis-a-vis development of unrealistic patient expectations. I seem to
recall reading somewhere that big pharma mounted a successful lobbying
effort with the Feds to make that happen, but I don't know if that is
accurate.

The threat, sometimes overt, sometimes implied is that without
getting what they want, they'll (a) leave your practice and bad mouth
you to all their friends and family, (b) find a lawyer who agrees to
file a trumped up lawsuit against you, (c) file a complaint with your
State's board of discipline and/or licensing office, or (d) a
combination of some or all of the above. It's usually faster and easier
to placate the patient and just given them the Rx. So the motivation is
usually not greed, it's intimidation!

I'll bet that does a lot to take the satisfaction out of medical
practice.
--
Web based forums are like subscribing to 10 different newspapers
and having to visit 10 different news stands to pickup each one.
Email list-server groups and USENET are like having all of those
newspapers delivered to your door every morning.

On 2/4/2014 9:22 AM, Peter wrote:
On 2/4/2014 8:29 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
I prefer capitalism over socialism. But both are known to bias the
thinking of physicians. I'd rather have doctors carrying pocket full
of Metamucil tongue depressors, opposed to having to phone a
bureaucrat in Washington every time the MD wants to prescribe
acetaminophen.


Bogus assertion. Never happened. Regardless of the system of practice,
physician choices may be constrained by logistical and financial issues
(either the patient's or the medical care system). How about the common
problem of a private physician believing that a certain med is most
appropriate for a specific private patient, but that patient's insurance
won't cover the cost of that med and it costs far more than the patient
can afford out of pocket?

Just cause something "never happened", I can
still prefer one over the other. I'd prefer a
solar flare that wipes out all life on Earth,
over a meteor strike that knocks a bunch of
dust into the atmosphere and kills us all in
a few months.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 2/4/2014 9:22 AM, Peter wrote:
I prefer capitalism over socialism. But both are known to bias the
thinking of physicians. I'd rather have doctors carrying pocket full
of Metamucil tongue depressors, opposed to having to phone a
bureaucrat in Washington every time the MD wants to prescribe
acetaminophen.


Bogus assertion. Never happened. Regardless of the system of practice,
physician choices may be constrained by logistical and financial issues
(either the patient's or the medical care system). How about the common
problem of a private physician believing that a certain med is most
appropriate for a specific private patient, but that patient's insurance
won't cover the cost of that med and it costs far more than the patient
can afford out of pocket?

I'd rather have an insurance company be unable
to pay for the med (or the patient) rather than
a bureaucrat in Washington denying permission
for the med.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 2/3/2014 9:28 PM, Dean Hoffman wrote:
On 2/3/14 9:00 PM, Peter wrote:

I never said or implied that no physicians accept pharmaceutical
freebies. I said that such freebies rarely meet State standards
for continuing medical education. Personally, I never accepted
those invitations, found private practice too mercenary, and spent
30 years on active duty as a medical officer in the military. I
happen to agree with your criticism of the pharmaceutical companies
and although physicians cannot be compelled to sign a promise to
prescribe in return for the freebies, the companies' intent is
clearly apparent and those M.D.s' bias to prescribe accordingly
has been well documented, even when it is a subconscious bias. You
jumped to entirely unwarranted conclusions.

There is a not yet approved method to stop bleeding from gunshots:
http://tinyurl.com/ljdq8c9 (Popular Science)

For some time, soldiers have been using over the counter tampons
produced for monthly female hygiene to plug gunshot wounds. I can
imagine the scene when a medic pulls a pink package out of his pack
while treating a soldier who's been shot. Soldiers are very good at
improvising during times of war. ^_^

TDD

Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 2/3/2014 10:19 PM, Tony Hwang wrote:
Hi,
Define being healthy? My age is mid-70 I eat well, eliminate well
and sleep very well every night. I do all my routine chores every day
without any difficulty.

When the lab tests come back, I'll review them
and certify you healthy.

Hi,
I was at doctor's 2 weeks ago routine 3 month check up.
I got A+, LOL!