Hawker
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
 |
December 18, 2013, 10:24:56 PM |
|
....
You have entered tinfoil hat mode. Doctors keep records and as such every country in the world has access to the medical records of its population. Find something serious to worry about. Surely obamacare can't be such a success that this is all you can find to criticise?
Every country has access? Really? Feel free to point me to a country where the security services can't get a warrant for medical records. |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 19, 2013, 12:21:19 AM |
|
....
You have entered tinfoil hat mode. Doctors keep records and as such every country in the world has access to the medical records of its population. Find something serious to worry about. Surely obamacare can't be such a success that this is all you can find to criticise?
Every country has access? Really? Feel free to point me to a country where the security services can't get a warrant for medical records. No goal post shifting please. We are talking here about total data collection on all citizens. With no warrants whatsoever. |
|
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 19, 2013, 07:28:44 AM |
|
....
You have entered tinfoil hat mode. Doctors keep records and as such every country in the world has access to the medical records of its population. Find something serious to worry about. Surely obamacare can't be such a success that this is all you can find to criticise?
Every country has access? Really? Feel free to point me to a country where the security services can't get a warrant for medical records. No goal post shifting please. We are talking here about total data collection on all citizens. With no warrants whatsoever. lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant? Seriously, is that all that is wrong with Obamacare? You must be so happy! |
|
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1010
|
|
December 19, 2013, 07:29:42 AM |
|
....
You have entered tinfoil hat mode. Doctors keep records and as such every country in the world has access to the medical records of its population. Find something serious to worry about. Surely obamacare can't be such a success that this is all you can find to criticise?
Every country has access? Really? Feel free to point me to a country where the security services can't get a warrant for medical records. No goal post shifting please. We are talking here about total data collection on all citizens. With no warrants whatsoever. lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant? Seriously, is that all that is wrong with Obamacare? You must be so happy! They don't need a warrant anymore. I've seen this first hand. |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 19, 2013, 09:03:27 AM |
|
...snip...
lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?
Seriously, is that all that is wrong with Obamacare? You must be so happy!
They don't need a warrant anymore. I've seen this first hand. At the risk of going wildly off topic, are you sure what you saw was legal and ethical? Doctor/patient confidentiality is a big deal. Doctors here in the UK are ethically obliged to report someone that falls into certain categories (don't ask me for list) but the police have to get a warrant to see a random person's records. |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 19, 2013, 03:14:32 PM |
|
....
You have entered tinfoil hat mode. Doctors keep records and as such every country in the world has access to the medical records of its population. Find something serious to worry about. Surely obamacare can't be such a success that this is all you can find to criticise?
Every country has access? Really? Feel free to point me to a country where the security services can't get a warrant for medical records. No goal post shifting please. We are talking here about total data collection on all citizens. With no warrants whatsoever. lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant? I wish that were so, but it's not. All health data is sent to a massive new database with thousands of employees going over it. All health data, from the point of collection from health practitioners. In other words if you want to avoid having your latest doctor visit/blood test/whatever in the hands of the District of Criminals (Washington DC) you go to a private doctor and pay in cash. I think that'd work but haven't tried it. This is all out in the open, it's written up in the law and well understood here. You still think it isn't a problem? |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 19, 2013, 03:16:22 PM |
|
At the risk of going wildly off topic, are you sure what you saw was legal and ethical? Doctor/patient confidentiality is a big deal. Doctors here in the UK are ethically obliged to report someone that falls into certain categories (don't ask me for list) but the police have to get a warrant to see a random person's records.
You are not off topic. Moon Shadow and I have described the issue correctly. If you don't believe us ask some of the US socialist inclined on this forum. These are the facts. All they can say is something like "the benign Government would never abuse our data".... |
|
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 19, 2013, 03:35:25 PM |
|
...snip...
lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?
I wish that were so, but it's not. All health data is sent to a massive new database with thousands of employees going over it. All health data, from the point of collection from health practitioners. In other words if you want to avoid having your latest doctor visit/blood test/whatever in the hands of the District of Criminals (Washington DC) you go to a private doctor and pay in cash. I think that'd work but haven't tried it. This is all out in the open, it's written up in the law and well understood here. You still think it isn't a problem? Way too much tinfoil in your hat. Widen the peepholes - you will see that if you go see a doctor and pay cash, he is still obliged to keep records and would be struck off for malpractice if he failed to do so. If you took the tinfoil hat off, you'd find yourself wondering why you are the only person in the world that thinks its a bad idea to have written medical records. And my big question remains; is that all you can find to complain about? And how valid are your other complaints if what you aspire to is a medical system where doctors don't document their work? |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 19, 2013, 06:22:40 PM |
|
...snip...
lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?
I wish that were so, but it's not. All health data is sent to a massive new database with thousands of employees going over it. All health data, from the point of collection from health practitioners. In other words if you want to avoid having your latest doctor visit/blood test/whatever in the hands of the District of Criminals (Washington DC) you go to a private doctor and pay in cash. I think that'd work but haven't tried it. This is all out in the open, it's written up in the law and well understood here. You still think it isn't a problem? Way too much tinfoil in your hat. Widen the peepholes - you will see that if you go see a doctor and pay cash, he is still obliged to keep records and would be struck off for malpractice if he failed to do so. If you took the tinfoil hat off, you'd find yourself wondering why you are the only person in the world that thinks its a bad idea to have written medical records. And my big question remains; is that all you can find to complain about? And how valid are your other complaints if what you aspire to is a medical system where doctors don't document their work? No moving the goalposts please. Two of us have asserted you were completely wrong on the bolded section above. Please respond directly to this issue instead of reframing, misinforming, and using other debating tactics. |
|
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1010
|
|
December 19, 2013, 07:04:44 PM |
|
...snip...
lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?
Seriously, is that all that is wrong with Obamacare? You must be so happy!
They don't need a warrant anymore. I've seen this first hand. At the risk of going wildly off topic, are you sure what you saw was legal and ethical? Doctor/patient confidentiality is a big deal. Doctors here in the UK are ethically obliged to report someone that falls into certain categories (don't ask me for list) but the police have to get a warrant to see a random person's records. Ethical, no. Quite legal, though. Doctor patient confidentialtiy is now a meaningless term in these United States; partly due to Obamacare, and partly due to other percurser laws. |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
Wilikon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
December 19, 2013, 08:22:29 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
cryptasm
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 997
Merit: 1002
Gamdom.com
|
|
December 19, 2013, 08:40:52 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wilikon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
December 19, 2013, 10:08:50 PM |
|
Of course it does. Obamacare in reality is really loved by everyone, including those Native Americans, the Bigfoots. |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 20, 2013, 12:59:58 AM |
|
Fox News Makes You Less Informed Than Watching No News:....
Basic premise is false, that "knowledge of news" comes from "watching TV". Secondly, selection of questions is likely screwed up. Who picked what the "news" was that people should know? |
|
|
|
|
Wilikon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
December 20, 2013, 01:40:14 AM |
|
Fox News Makes You Less Informed Than Watching No News:....
Basic premise is false, that "knowledge of news" comes from "watching TV". Secondly, selection of questions is likely screwed up. Who picked what the "news" was that people should know? The Daily Show (on the channel Comedy Central) is a clear winner for clean, untainted amazing news according to that graph? OK |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 20, 2013, 02:37:54 AM |
|
Fox News Makes You Less Informed Than Watching No News:....
Basic premise is false, that "knowledge of news" comes from "watching TV". Secondly, selection of questions is likely screwed up. Who picked what the "news" was that people should know? The Daily Show (on the channel Comedy Central) is a clear winner for clean, untainted amazing news according to that graph? OK Some actually interesting results in the raw data. Misreported and misunderstood by the reporter. http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2012/confirmed/Basic premise is pretty much verified wrong. Watchers of the Daily Show are far more likely to have 'gotten their news' from the Internet.... |
|
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 20, 2013, 07:59:01 AM |
|
...snip...
lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?
...snip... ...snip... No moving the goalposts please. Two of us have asserted you were completely wrong on the bolded section above. Please respond directly to this issue instead of reframing, misinforming, and using other debating tactics. 1. All doctors have records of their patients. 2. All doctor records can be accessed if there is a warrant. You say I am completely wrong on these facts. What is wrong with you? Seriously, you have left sanity miles behind here. |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 20, 2013, 12:40:18 PM |
|
...snip...
lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?
...snip... ...snip... No moving the goalposts please. Two of us have asserted you were completely wrong on the bolded section above. Please respond directly to this issue instead of reframing, misinforming, and using other debating tactics. 1. All doctors have records of their patients. 2. All doctor records can be accessed if there is a warrant. You say I am completely wrong on these facts. What is wrong with you? Seriously, you have left sanity miles behind here. You've been told several times why and how you were wrong. This has nothing to do with doctors having records. You've been told it has nothing to do with a need for warrants, that they are not required. .... gathering and maintaining a universal medical database on a population? So stop the snide and condescending remarks, the problems are all yours as is evident from the forum pages... |
|
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
December 20, 2013, 01:23:02 PM |
|
...snip...
lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?
...snip... ...snip... No moving the goalposts please. Two of us have asserted you were completely wrong on the bolded section above. Please respond directly to this issue instead of reframing, misinforming, and using other debating tactics. 1. All doctors have records of their patients. 2. All doctor records can be accessed if there is a warrant. You say I am completely wrong on these facts. What is wrong with you? Seriously, you have left sanity miles behind here. You've been told several times why and how you were wrong. This has nothing to do with doctors having records. You've been told it has nothing to do with a need for warrants, that they are not required. .... gathering and maintaining a universal medical database on a population? So stop the snide and condescending remarks, the problems are all yours as is evident from the forum pages... So - your problem is not that the data exists since the data has existed all along. Your problem is not that the data is in a database as its been in databases all along. Your problem is not that its accessible by the security services with a warrant since its been accessible to them all along. Your problem is ... well what is your problem? I'm not being snide. You clearly have some kind of weird issue with either your doctor keeping records or it being available to the security services. Say what the issue is. |
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 20, 2013, 02:01:14 PM |
|
...snip...
lol really? your doctor would be sued for malpractice if he did not keep records. And you regard it as "total data collection on all citizens" that doctors have records and that the security services have access to the records with a warrant?
...snip... ...snip... No moving the goalposts please. Two of us have asserted you were completely wrong on the bolded section above. Please respond directly to this issue instead of reframing, misinforming, and using other debating tactics. 1. All doctors have records of their patients. 2. All doctor records can be accessed if there is a warrant. You say I am completely wrong on these facts. What is wrong with you? Seriously, you have left sanity miles behind here. You've been told several times why and how you were wrong. This has nothing to do with doctors having records. You've been told it has nothing to do with a need for warrants, that they are not required. .... gathering and maintaining a universal medical database on a population? So stop the snide and condescending remarks, the problems are all yours as is evident from the forum pages... So - your problem is not that the data exists since the data has existed all along. Your problem is not that the data is in a database as its been in databases all along. Your problem is not that its accessible by the security services with a warrant since its been accessible to them all along. Your problem is ... well what is your problem? I'm not being snide. You clearly have some kind of weird issue with either your doctor keeping records or it being available to the security services. Say what the issue is. I have now, four times. What is your problem with not understanding the meaning of a 'national health information database'? It has nothing to do with warrants or informations in doctors hands or insurance companies hands. It is a creation of the federal government intended to collect and maintain all health records. What is my problem? I don't have a problem. What is your problem? You can't or won't understand things clearly written and right in front of you? |
|
|
|
|
|
