Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
When parties are debating each other, there needs to be some understanding or set of foundational principles that they all agree upon. Otherwise, it will devolve into chaos and misunderstanding.
In this heated topic, there’s a lack of that understanding.
What are the facts? What are the rules? Lastly, which sources are okay?
If not, everyone ends up going around in circles.
Personally, I embrace every yid as a part of our holy nation. It’s not my role to categorize any group negatively, especially when they have their own rabbanim and leaders, regardless of my personal views on their approach.
querty = health?
The old timers would know what I’m referring to.
Jackk,
Apparently, he believed that there are other mechanisms in the system that would prevent the elections from being certified and he wanted to utilize them. I cannot speak for his intentions, or if those mechanisms are truly there or not.
qwerty613,
What’s the deal with you checkmating people in every post?
Not a legal expert nor am I following this very closely.
However, I believe that they do not need to prove that the elections were legitimate, this has been confirmed by those that certify the elections.
I believe it will boil down to the intent of the former president. The actions are not debatable, they are what they are, it is what he was attempting to do with his actions.
Assuming the facts are as stated, and this is not just an isolated individual in the hospital asking these questions on their own, this is very troublesome.
In medicine, providers should look at the patient beyond their own biases. While at times that may be difficult to do as we all have our cognitive biases and personal beliefs, there should not be an active effort to insert any biases, whatever they may be, especially religious or ideological, when it comes to treating patients.
I am not really sure why my post on this thread has not cleared moderation, but the source for this is in last weeks parsha.
qwerty,
What I posted earlier is what I heard from Harav Avigdor Miller Zt”l.
querty,
I may be new to this thread, but I’m not new to the CR.
Not exactly my thing to involve myself in these types of discussions.
DaMoshe,
Interesting that it’s said that the Bal Shem Tov actually davened Nusach Ashkanaz, based on the siddur he used.
The topic of Nussach is complex, one cannot just change things around and there are lengthy discussions about this in the leading poskim.
Some say that the current Nusach Sefard dates back to the times when every shevat had their own nusach, which they had in their mesorah that targets another shaar. There was one nussach that was dedicated for those that are unsure as to what shevat they belong to, this is the nussach that is nowadays called nusach sefard.
No human being is perfect, not even Moshe Rabeinu, who made mistakes and erred at times.
Though these actions might be perceived as sins due to Moshe Rabeinu’s elevated spiritual level, beyond our basic comprehension, as we are so removed from the Dor Hamidbar, the Torah still acknowledges them as such.
This is one of the remarkable aspects of the Torah – its honesty. Unlike other religious texts, which often idealize their leaders and avoid mentioning their faults, the Torah, as Toras Emes, presents its leaders as fallible and capable of making mistakes
The actual source for this is last week’s Parsha. (Perek 4, Passuk 32).
שְׁאַל נָא לְיָמִים רִאשֹׁנִים אֲשֶׁר הָיוּ לְפָנֶיךָ, לְמִן הַיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אָדָם עַל הָאָרֶץ
CTL,
Regarding the ban you mentioned, is it that if he were to knock on your front door, he would be sent away? Or is the ban in another sense?
Moreover, it appears that most politicians who operate on a national level tend to be self-serving and engage in bad behaviors. Our current president, in particular, seems to have involved himself in various questionable activities, utilizing his elected position for personal financial gain.
Probably because of why the rest of the population is not thrilled with him.
If he shut the GW bridge just to get back at some politicians, imagine what he would do if he had more powers than that.
Tort reform presents both advantages and disadvantages. On one hand, it compels healthcare providers to practice defensive medicine, which some argue benefits patients. However, on the other hand, it significantly escalates healthcare costs, ultimately burdening regular individuals with the expenses.
What is truly troubling is that the main impediment in this situation is the attorneys, who seem to prioritize their own enrichment.
Reb E,
I heard that vort a number of years ago. Elon Musk gives his reason for working on colonizing Mars, as a backup plan for catastrophes that may occur on planet Earth.
It seems like something along the lines of Rav Yonasan Eibshutz’s explanation for the Dor Haflaga.
Reach out to Gift of Life for a detailed overview.
Someone I am associated with will be donating in the very near future. They have provided the donor with a detailed overview and I was privy to the information.
Never do any procedure without consulting those that you trust, such as your physician and others that you would normally consult with.
Everything in life has risks, including a short car drive. But in the scheme of things this is considered a very low-risk procedure.
ubiq,
There needs to be some mechanism that will filter out unnecessary or excessive medicine.
Ubiq,
“I guess both. I’m saying if a Doctor thinks patient would benefit from a drug/scan etc the doctor should be able to prescribe it and the patietn get it.”
I understand your viewpoint that doctors should have the ability to prescribe medication and diagnostic tests that they deem necessary for their patients. However, it’s important to realize that insurance companies may not be obligated to cover the cost of these treatments. Since their primary objective is to remain profitable and sustainable, they may reject claims and requests that may be seen as not necessary in order to reduce costs.
In an ideal free market scenario, insurers would be forced to compete with each other and provide better value to consumers, such as better coverage and an easier time at approvals. However, the current healthcare system is complex and involves many grey areas. For instance, there are certain medical conditions that have vague symptoms, and the potential risk of serious consequences is minimal. In such cases, patients may request multiple diagnostic tests, which some providers may consider to be excessive. If patients are willing to pay for these tests out of pocket, they may still be able to receive them.
“what I imagine is a world where if a doctor orders a test it is done and paid for.”
In that world, there are often significant wait times for tests, and appointments can be months away.
Ubiq,
“IVe since hinted to patients to exaggerate their symptoms, Its easy to get a CT scan in ED, though I hope you appreciate the absurdity of this suggestion, Lie, commit insurance fraud to get Health care you have paid for already’
– Its the way the system is set up, if the provider believes that this is an urgent matter, they can send the pt for the scan. I doubt that this would be considered insurance fraud.
In fact, PCPs send pts frequently to the ED for quicker and more convenient management. Despite the fact that at times these pts can adequately be managed outpatient.
“I say denying healthcare is a non starter if thats the only way it can function, then we need a different way. Period If that means Insurance will no longer be the lucrative field it is (one that MADE money during a pandemic!!!) and instead we a need a non-for profit system or Government run Ok so be it. But denying healthcare a patient and or doctor* deems neccesary is a non-starter for me”
– The financial incentives in the healthcare industry have spurred innovation and enabled the provision of advanced care. Without these incentives, progress in the industry would have been hindered. Providing healthcare for free is not sustainable as it does not cover the costs of research, development, and high-quality care.
“* who should “win” when the patient and doctor disagree is a good question and one that potentially needs to be worked out. I’m not certain myself. but I am sure it shouldnt be a bureaucrat or nurse who glanced a t the chart”
– In terms of payment or patient autonomy?
If it’s with regard to payment, maybe they should get a premium policy that does not require pre-authorization.Personally, I believe that the healthcare system is too complicated. Insurance should be reserved for expensive unexpected medical or trauma care with high deductibles, and routine care should be paid out of pocket. Just as people purchase fire or loss insurance to protect themselves from unexpected events.
However, people would neglect their care if they had to pay for it themselves, leading to missed check-ups and medication non-compliance. To address this issue, insurance rates should reflect an individual’s health status, based on factors like regular check-ups, BMI, healthy habits, and medication compliance. insurance rates can be affected by an individual’s risk factors or prior claims. By incentivizing people to take care of their health and making insurance rates reflect this, the healthcare industry can better ensure the sustainability of the system and improve overall health outcomes.
I know, its all wishful thinking.
Ubiq,
“That year I had spent months trying to get a CT scan approved for a patient wit ha suspicious lesion. Renal cell carcinoma is essentially curable if caught early enough before it spreads. by the time it was approved it had spread.”
This is very unfortunate as early detection is crucial and delays may increase complications and reduce the effectiveness of treatment. They had the following alternative options.
a. Go to the ED, and have the ED provider convinced that their symptoms require an urgent scan.
b. Explain to them the importance of the study, and why it is time sensitive, and see if they can lay out the costs (roughly 500 when paid out of pocket) and hopefully be reimbursed at a later time.
(I assume that being that they had private insurance, they had some sort of income that made the not eligible for government-funded healthcare insurance).c. Could have used ultrasound as an alternative diagnostic tool to detect a mass, and use that as an objective means for declaring the CT Scan study urgent or emergent.
I for sure will not tell you how to practice and I am sure that you do your best to prioritize the needs of your patients, but one needs to navigate the system to the benefit of their patients.
Ubiq,
“The bottom line is I don;t think free market could or should be in charge of healthcare
We have touched on many reasons here are a few:
1) Healthcare is largely not driven by supply and demand
2) The information asymmetry is close to insurmountable
3) When its an emergency you cant exactly price shop
4) Having a business decide who lives and who dies Is as you said “wrong, I agree”So If not the private sector who should run it?
t o that I say it should be the government.”These are significant issues, but I fail to see how putting the government in charge would fix those issues. In fact, the government may make decisions without consequence to its decisions. Where in a free market, a truly free and open market the service providers or insurers would have to compete with each other for the consumers to sign up with them.
Interesting topic.
During the time of Chazal, cellular biology may not have been understood. It’s also possible that since the processes within cells are interdependent to sustain life, the body as a whole was considered a living entity and not an individual organism.
This same discussion is relevant to antibiotics.
“ is being able to say and do anything the true Torah value of success?”
Why not?
Is placing severe restrictions that are not from Hashem or have anything to do with religion, a true Torah value?
You know where else there is little crime? In prisons. Does that mean society should be placed in prison?
Mentch1
Your cherry picking. Is Russia crime free?
Besides, democracy and freedom of choice has consequences, people will make bad choices. But having a few decide for the many is bad.
Communism resulted in the death of millions.
mentch1
History is a bunch if lies agreed upon… but that also goes for the version of “truth” you put forth.
ujm,
Apparently, the world leaders are not listening to your advice, so the situation is escalating with the threat of Russia going nuclear.
interjection,
What compromise do you think Russia would be willing to accept in order to stop the war?
Reb E,
I share your concerns, and a clear declassification process should be established.
Reb E,
“ If declassified, it should be indicated on the document.”
Is that your assumption and practice or is that the set guidelines?
I have not seen or listened to Trump’s interview and the only information I have about this is from what the media is reporting. However, I don’t think there is a formal process of declassifying documents, nor does it require a declassification stamp. This is something that was never really clarified in the past. The President may at his own discretion declassify documents, but there is no actual process that he is required to follow. Can he simply tell his staff that it’s declassified? Can he simply tell himself that it is declassified? Does he need to make a note or mark it as declassified?
Another thing that is interesting is, I don’t believe that Trump actually packed his own boxes and schlepped all those boxes out of the WH, he is a man of means and probably had other staff do it. There are lawyers and protocol people on staff that participate in everything that happens in the WH. This does not make him innocent, but it may complicate the story. He may not even have had any knowledge about the specifics of what was removed from the WH.
CTL,
ERs tend to become busy later afternoon, when people are more available to check in.
Anonymous Jew,
If the hospital accepts medicare they are required by law to asses and stabilize every patient that presents themselves to the hospital for help.
GH,
“So now there is a story running in WaPo”
I would assume that most people by now know that any stories are just that, stories. At this point, we don’t have many facts one or another.
er,
“Again, the crux of disagreement seems to stem from your starting point that every governmental official is corrupt or biased that they can’t be trusted to do their duties. Thus the rush to assume conspiracies.”
I am not sure how you deduced that.
All I said is that until we learn more, everything is speculation and there is precedence with regards to creating illegitimate investigations against Trump with the sole purpose to contain his political future.
er,
“2cents: just because there were a couple of biased people who hated Trump working on the case, it doesn’t mean the investigation was politically motivated.”
Correct, but that was not the basis of the claim. We now have objective evidence that the origin of the investigation was politically motivated and not based on actual interference concerns.
This is why I stated, that the fact that warrants were obtained does not yet convince me that this was a legitimate investigation.
It seems that more information will be revealed, which will make us smarter.
er
“2cents: if your opinion of the search is colored by Mueller report, it is not true that the report was illegitimate. Please read the report yourself instead of Trump/Fox’s characterizations. Trump barely cooperated and also worked to derail the investigation, so Mueller was limited.”
I am not sure you understood what I wrote. We now know for certain, based on written communications that were at the time, (meaning at the onset of this investigation) that the Mueller investigation was a political hit job by people in the FBI.
If you are ok with that, you probably do not like our country.
Smerel kind of made my point already.
In short, that was done by the highest levels of authority in the FBI/DOJ, at the time I was also thinking if they are doing this, there has to be some legitimacy to this, but no, it was iligimate in terms of being instigated by political hacks and people in the DOJ that targeted Trump for reasons that had nothing to do with Russia or criminality.
So no, just because the FBI and a judge signed a warrant, does not mean we should just accept it as OK. We now know that this may very well be politically motivated.
I guess we will learn more with time.
While we are free to speculate, we should realize that we dont have any of the facts. This may likely be something minor that Trump is using to augment and promote himself by getting people upset about the system.
On the other hand, for those that are saying that this must be a very legitimate and serious concern if the FBI went through the hoops and was able to get a warrant. In the past, I would have thought the same.
However, the Mueller investigation, has completely changed my mind. No longer are serious investigations necessarily legitimate, even if they are conducted by the highest levels of authority.
We now know that the there was no legitimate basis for this investigation, the people that authorized it knew it as well. Yet, it held us all captive and at the time made us all think that Trump might be guilty of treason. The fact that other unrelated carious white collar crimes were uncovered, does not justify any of this.
Therefore, no longer is a warrant or the fact that there is an investigation any indication that there is a legitimate issue here.
Chaylev Halyah,
“big difference, though, a war cant be staged – an invisible spiritual fictional virus – who can know if it’s real????”
Are you claiming that all those people that allegedly died from the SARS Covid19 virus are really alive, they were just abducted and are living on some remote island?
mdd1,
“ Using your brains.”
If one chooses to he skeptical, brains can be fooled.
Musk is a fictional character created by twitter to get attention.
mdd1,
“ I agree that many corpses were found in Bucha, but how do you know those people were not just caught in crossfire?”
Why is it that you believe that corpses were actually found? Maybe this is a hoax. Why do you choose to believe this?
Y.W. Editor,
“In fact, there were no Chassidim living in Lakewood 15 years ago.”
This is a highly inaccurate statement. For starters, Satmar had a shull in Lakewood much more than 15 years ago, and I am sure there were many other Chassidishe shulls at time.
mdd1,
“My recommendation: think and don’t just swallow what you are being told.’
What not to do is simple, the question is what to yes believe. Is there a war now between Russia and Ukraine? Why believe that?
Or, will you just bring examples of statements that are inaccurate as a distraction to this discussion?
Mdd1
“ Modern and 2cents, Liz Cheney today said that the attack on the Kramatorsk train station shows that Russia is committing genocide in Ukraine. Your take on her statement, please.”
Distraction.
You selectively choose what to believe and what to ignore. The consensus of all information, from multiple different flows, including rescue organizations, media, raw data from people on the grounds all point to Russia being a very bad actor. If you are selective in what you believe, why believe that there is a war to begin with? Have you seen it with your own eyes, or your simply believing what your being told?
Besides, I’ve not been able to follow the logic behind the entire invasion/special operation, as well as Russia telling the world prior to this that they are not planing to invade Ukraine.
It seems like a chain of lies and deceit by the Russians that not a single country, other than other communist allies, have not condemned and taken action to sanction Russia.
Mdd1, by1212,
Are you even sure there is a war between Russia and Ukraine? Maybe the media simply manufactured the entire war thing.
Maybe its not even Russia Thats fighting Ukraine, its the media that us feeding us this made up news.
mdd1,
It so seems that you have sided with the Russians on this matter and are have strong opinions about Ukraine.
While I don’t think that any of what was written here will change your mind, it seems odd that all the information coming out clearly point to Russian atrocities, they have no regard for civilian human life.
If this were not the fact, Russian PR would be at full speed providing acceptable information to refute this. In fact, all they have is some made-up stories that hold no water.
How is it that day after day, there is another atrocious story about a hospital, school, or civilians being killed by the Russians, and they are all consistent with photos and videos? If even just some of this were made up, there would have been many inconsistencies.
It’s clear that Russia is willing to reach its objectives by all means, with no regard for its consequences. That is not Ok.
Politics is about twisting logic and facts to fit a pre-set narrative.
The simple reality is, that people are being hurt and killed. These are civilians that just want to live, take care of their families and their selves, and contribute to society. These people have not instigated this war nor are they playing an active role in this war.
To justify an invasion, kill civilians, and flatten residential buildings, schools, and hospitals is an extreme level of evil and has no justification in a civilized society.
Russia started this, they need to eat the consequences that come along with their actions.
Putin may believe that killing so many people, including young Russian soldiers is justified as long as his objectives are met. The world does not have to subscribe to that belief.
While there are some overlapping similarities between a cult and a religion, they are not the same.
In simplistic terms, a cult is where people have extreme dedication and worship a leader, or are controlled by a leader.
Religion is a set of shared beliefs about a supernatural power and is consistent with basic mainstream standards for human dignity.
There are some overlapping characteristics which is why religions are sometimes brushed off as cults, but they are fundamentally different.