humorlesscretin: Re: rimshot

Fri, 18 May 2007 00:45:50 EST

The issue is the idea of mandatory testing. That's all. In the realm of things, as long as medical privacy is maintained and the results are used for treatment and prevention, rather than exclusion, then no...no big thing here.

Of cou

pO157: Re: rimshot

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:19:01 EST

The issue is the idea of mandatory testing. That's all. In the realm of things, as long as medical privacy is maintained and the results are used for treatment and prevention, rather than exclusion, then no...no big thing here.

Lou: Re: rimshot

Thu, 17 May 2007 12:29:09 EST
"I don't really see the issue here. "
The issue is the idea of mandatory testing. That's all. In the realm of things, as long as medical privacy is maintained and the results are used for treatment and prevention, rather than ex

humorlesscretin: Re: rimshot

Thu, 17 May 2007 09:57:43 EST
The good rich ladies of Somerset County won't even notice one more tube among the bunch they're already getting drawn for standard insurance-mandated prenatal testing. Their doctors won't call attention to the fact that 1 is for HIV testing, and the

thefadd: couldn't have said it better myself

Wed, 16 May 2007 18:56:47 EST
I think this is the first time I've seen anyone suggest that one of the benefits of being rich is to not have all medical needs met.
Such is the state of profit-driven american medicine today.

Lou: My bad

Wed, 16 May 2007 16:21:41 EST
Somerset County is not an especially wealthy area
Ok, it's not wealthy...but, from the link I so thoughtfully provided...
The median income for a household in the county was $76,933 and the median income for a family was $90,605. Males had

Lou: Wrong Question

Wed, 16 May 2007 16:12:00 EST
Why are you guys so paranoid?
The question is, are we paranoid enough?

pO157: Re: rimshot

Wed, 16 May 2007 13:36:11 EST

That's the craziest thing anyone's written in this discussion. Where do you suppose that wealthy women go to give birth? To a spa? In a high-rollers' area in an Atlantic City casino? In the dressing room at Saks?
Neither you nor Lou is maki

pO157: Re: rimshot

Wed, 16 May 2007 10:55:56 EST

Can you think of any reason whatsoever why "the good rich ladies of Somerset County" (I assume you meant only the pregnant ones - and, by the way, Somerset County is not an especially wealthy area) would not consult with an ObGyn during their

gerrymander: Re: rimshot

Wed, 16 May 2007 10:46:43 EST
do you think the good rich ladies of Somerset County New Jersey are going to line up for mandatory HIV testing?
I think this is the first time I've seen anyone suggest that one of the benefits of being rich is to not have all medical needs

zyxwvutsr: Re: rimshot

Wed, 16 May 2007 09:16:03 EST

I wondered when I heard this plan: Do you really think the hospital administrators are going to allow [some busybody interlopers] to visit/bother the educated, rich mothers who land in hospital to give birth?
The proposed law

zyxwvutsr: Re: rimshot

Wed, 16 May 2007 09:12:14 EST

My question is how exactly they plan to enforce this
That's an excellent question because this is the first law ever that tells doctors that they must do certain things when treating patients. Until now public health m

zyxwvutsr: Re: rimshot

Wed, 16 May 2007 09:01:50 EST

...but seriously... do you think the good rich ladies of Somerset County New Jersey are going to line up for mandatory HIV testing?
Actually, I don't think anyone will "line up" for HIV testing. It will be done at thei

pO157: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Wed, 16 May 2007 08:50:57 EST

Lets say that (in the future) based on this precedent you and your kid are automatically subjected to a genetic screening for diseases when you go to a hospital. Isn't it still a big leap to imply that medical actions such as abortion/genetic

pO157: Re: rimshot

Wed, 16 May 2007 08:37:22 EST

Oh it will be written for all people...rich/poor, white/whatever...but seriously... do you think the good rich ladies of Somerset County New Jersey are going to line up for mandatory HIV testing?
This is a decent point, someth

pO157: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Wed, 16 May 2007 08:29:06 EST

I would assume that an entire battery of tests are performed as de-rigeur for expectant mothers -- gestational diabetes, TB, HIV...it all seems fairly logical to me. You go to a hospital by choice, they have standard scientific medical pra

wetkarma: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Wed, 16 May 2007 06:20:56 EST

You know, I am all for at-risk people learning their HIV status as much as the next guy, but forcing the mother to go ahead and undergo medical procedures? This sets a horrible precedent.
Phrased that way it does sound pretty appalling. Exc

Lou: PS

Tue, 15 May 2007 22:38:42 EST
Rombuu? Kiss my ass.

thefadd: Re: rimshot

Tue, 15 May 2007 22:36:45 EST
My question is how exactly they plan to enforce this. I tried reading in the links but didn't find too many details. Would this be enforced at the ob/gyn level? Lou brings up an excellent point -- most people who have the money and are smart about it will

thefadd: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 22:33:03 EST
Vaccinations
Who said anything about vaccinations?

Lou: Re: rimshot

Tue, 15 May 2007 22:27:41 EST
Oh it will be written for all people...rich/poor, white/whatever...but seriously... do you think the good rich ladies of Somerset County New Jersey are going to line up for man

zyxwvutsr: Re: rimshot

Tue, 15 May 2007 21:33:53 EST
Out of what context? It seemed as if you were implying that, somehow, this proposed law would not apply to rich, white people.
I mean, how absurd is that? Such a law would be unconstitutional on its face.

Lou: rimshot

Tue, 15 May 2007 20:32:17 EST
sooo funny...man, you take me out of context almost as good as a conservative.

zyxwvutsr: Re: Quick question

Tue, 15 May 2007 20:01:46 EST

is this going to be for all woman[?]
No, only the pregnant ones.

...will the rich white folks have to line up for the test?
Only the pregnant ones.

zyxwvutsr: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 19:59:07 EST

And all the gun rights groups on the internet moaning and groaning about licensing laws for their pistol permits are complaining about federal power?
I think they're mostly complaining that their constitutional rights are bei

Lou: Quick question

Tue, 15 May 2007 17:32:36 EST
I read through the links and probably missed the obvious answer...but is this going to be for all woman...or just those in "risk groups". Or, to put it bluntly...will the rich white folks have to line up for the test? I'd like to see that.

gerrymander: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 17:03:55 EST
When those licensing laws are upheld through the expectation of a "collective-rights" reading of the 2nd Amendment, yes.

gerrymander: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 17:02:12 EST
props up medical industry profits
Except that it doesn't. Vaccinations don't have a lot of profit potential, in no small part because government agencies buy so much of the supply. Remember the flu vaccine shortage from a few years back? That was

pO157: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 16:06:51 EST

Most small government proponents I've heard are concerned about the scope of federal power, not state power.
And all the gun rights groups on the internet moaning and groaning about licensing laws for their pistol permits are

zyxwvutsr: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 15:35:29 EST

Check out the small government proponents...
Most small government proponents I've heard are concerned about the scope of federal power, not state power.

thefadd: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 14:58:46 EST
Check out the small government proponents chiming in to support government intervention when it props up medical industry profits.

gerrymander: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 12:44:58 EST
but forcing the mother to go ahead and undergo medical procedures? This sets a horrible precedent.
Well, no. It continues the precedent set in the middle of the last century, when forcing medical procedures upon infants all but eliminated polio a

zyxwvutsr: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 11:15:43 EST
The NJ HIV testing is not "for the greater good" but for the welfare of individual infants. Which really is a road we want to go down, I think.

pO157: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Tue, 15 May 2007 09:38:21 EST
You know, I am all for at-risk people learning their HIV status as much as the next guy, but forcing the mother to go ahead and undergo medical procedures? This sets a horrible precedent.
Why, in a few short years

Mandatory HIV Testing Coming to the Garden State? (Trees And Things)

humorlesscretin: Re: rimshot

humorlesscretin: Re: rimshot

pO157: Re: rimshot

Lou: Re: rimshot

humorlesscretin: Re: rimshot

thefadd: couldn't have said it better myself

Lou: My bad

Lou: Wrong Question

pO157: Re: rimshot

pO157: Re: rimshot

gerrymander: Re: rimshot

zyxwvutsr: Re: rimshot

zyxwvutsr: Re: rimshot

zyxwvutsr: Re: rimshot

pO157: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

pO157: Re: rimshot

pO157: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

wetkarma: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Lou: PS

thefadd: Re: rimshot

thefadd: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Lou: Re: rimshot

zyxwvutsr: Re: rimshot

Lou: rimshot

zyxwvutsr: Re: Quick question

zyxwvutsr: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

Lou: Quick question

gerrymander: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

gerrymander: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

pO157: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

zyxwvutsr: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

thefadd: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

gerrymander: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

zyxwvutsr: Re: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S

pO157: R to the I to the D I C U L O U S