Discussion in 'Health and Lifestyle' started by RodISHI, Dec 6, 2018.
No, it's hypocritical in the extreme.
I think Republicans attacking doctors and modern medicine is the perfect big issue to run on. I think they should really go with that. It’s definitely a winning message for the Republican Party.
So I take it you think killing babies in the womb is fine and dandy. If that is the case you should have no problem if you are treated with that same treatment, no?
It is when doctors are forcing their and big pharmas nasty crap off on people and telling them they have to take it or else. Unlike you most Republicans I know believe people are individuals free to make their own decisions.
Oh, so you are pro-choice and pro gay marriage and for legalized pot and......?
Sure you can choose to spread your legs or poke the leg spreader and take whatever consequences come of that.
Pro gay marriage; no; as I do not think the government should be sticking their nose into peoples personal affairs; people can contract with one another without a law proclaiming that they can do it.
Pro legalization of pot? Why was it made illegal in the first place? It should be regulated just like any other narcotic or substance where you go out among the populace and put them at risk with your personal behavior and choices.
Apparently a report came in from a parent in Washington state about their dentist requiring a the parents sign a form that agrees that if they do not follow the dentist advice for the child the dentist office will call CPS.
I agree with Jeffrey Jaxen and Mary Holland.
"Speaking on informed consent, the fundamental tenet of modern medicine, research scholar and director of the research program at NYU’s School of Law Mary Holland, JD had this to say:
“I believe there is no such thing as consent without a choice. And the notion that we have no real choice in sending our children to school or taking certain jobs means this is coercion. This is not informed consent.”
The continual push to use misleading, one-sided information about the safety of vaccine products is a shortsighted, poorly thought out agenda. Using censorship, assumptions of safety and bullying to keep a public health intervention from well-deserved and essential scrutiny serves to both delay fixing inherently flawed issues and magnifies public distrust. The longer mainstream medicine waits to face and work to correct its logical, ethical and scientific flaws in vaccine safety and science, the further the public must shoulder the multifaceted burden of the unavoidable unsafe vaccine products it pushes."
It is probably true that a few very unethical drs would to unnecessary treatments or surgeries on people.
It is also true that some women would refuse C sections, even up to the death of their babies. If I were an OB-GYN, I guess all I could do then is make the parents sign every single form there is, sign and sign and sign, and watch the woman labor for days and days until both she and the baby dies.
This happened to my great-aunt, by the way, in the country in the 1930s, before C sections were routine. She was in labor for three days, after which she and the baby died. She was 25 years old.
Separate names with a comma.