|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 12 2016 07:28 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:15 xDaunt wrote:
I don't get this "pneumonia isn't serious" line. It is a very bad infection and a major killer of old people. And it is also very commonly a secondary illness to other serious health problems. come on dude, I understand that you think it's wise of Trump to harp on her health or whatever, but you're really sounding more and more conspiratorical when talking about her health issues. Pneumonia isn't something that disqualifies one from office, it's something you rest until you've recovered while taking antibiotics. Then when you get it during campaign trails and 911 memorial which she obviously couldn't stay home from because that would maybe look even worse than her fainting like this, that is a case of shitty timing, but it doesn't mean anything. I get when you're arguing that Trump should engage her with full robert stone conspiracy mode, I can accept that being strategically wise, but I don't get why you are suddenly trying to argue with a straight face in this thread that getting pneumonia (and I think that's a very legit-sounding reason for fainting myself) disqualifies someone from being president. I had pneumonia last year myself. I was really sick and coughing like crazy and I stayed home from work for a week, but once it was over it was over. Of course I'm a 32 year old man so my recovery is swifter and easier, but it's just.. This isn't a relevant line of attack, especially not for a person whose VP you and pretty much everyone else would prefer.
a 68 year old with her health history and recent events of pneumonia can easily cause the average person to question her resiliency for another 4 years. There could be an underlying cause that should be thoroughly investigated. Why take that chance?
|
On September 12 2016 07:37 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:28 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 12 2016 07:15 xDaunt wrote:
I don't get this "pneumonia isn't serious" line. It is a very bad infection and a major killer of old people. And it is also very commonly a secondary illness to other serious health problems. come on dude, I understand that you think it's wise of Trump to harp on her health or whatever, but you're really sounding more and more conspiratorical when talking about her health issues. Pneumonia isn't something that disqualifies one from office, it's something you rest until you've recovered while taking antibiotics. Then when you get it during campaign trails and 911 memorial which she obviously couldn't stay home from because that would maybe look even worse than her fainting like this, that is a case of shitty timing, but it doesn't mean anything. I get when you're arguing that Trump should engage her with full robert stone conspiracy mode, I can accept that being strategically wise, but I don't get why you are suddenly trying to argue with a straight face in this thread that getting pneumonia (and I think that's a very legit-sounding reason for fainting myself) disqualifies someone from being president. I had pneumonia last year myself. I was really sick and coughing like crazy and I stayed home from work for a week, but once it was over it was over. Of course I'm a 32 year old man so my recovery is swifter and easier, but it's just.. This isn't a relevant line of attack, especially not for a person whose VP you and pretty much everyone else would prefer. a 68 year old with her health history and recent events of pneumonia can easily cause the average person to question her resiliency for another 4 years. There could be an underlying cause that should be thoroughly investigated. Why take that chance?
because her policies actually make sense. I'd rather be operated on by a sickly heart surgeon than by a healthy janitor
|
On September 12 2016 07:42 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:37 biology]major wrote:On September 12 2016 07:28 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 12 2016 07:15 xDaunt wrote:
I don't get this "pneumonia isn't serious" line. It is a very bad infection and a major killer of old people. And it is also very commonly a secondary illness to other serious health problems. come on dude, I understand that you think it's wise of Trump to harp on her health or whatever, but you're really sounding more and more conspiratorical when talking about her health issues. Pneumonia isn't something that disqualifies one from office, it's something you rest until you've recovered while taking antibiotics. Then when you get it during campaign trails and 911 memorial which she obviously couldn't stay home from because that would maybe look even worse than her fainting like this, that is a case of shitty timing, but it doesn't mean anything. I get when you're arguing that Trump should engage her with full robert stone conspiracy mode, I can accept that being strategically wise, but I don't get why you are suddenly trying to argue with a straight face in this thread that getting pneumonia (and I think that's a very legit-sounding reason for fainting myself) disqualifies someone from being president. I had pneumonia last year myself. I was really sick and coughing like crazy and I stayed home from work for a week, but once it was over it was over. Of course I'm a 32 year old man so my recovery is swifter and easier, but it's just.. This isn't a relevant line of attack, especially not for a person whose VP you and pretty much everyone else would prefer. a 68 year old with her health history and recent events of pneumonia can easily cause the average person to question her resiliency for another 4 years. There could be an underlying cause that should be thoroughly investigated. Why take that chance? because her policies actually make sense. I'd rather be operated on by a sickly heart surgeon than by a healthy janitor
fair enough, as long as you can admit that her health 4 years from now is questionable at best.
|
I mean pneumonia is a serious disease but if you're treated well you're going to recover, passing out in public just looks awkward. I don't think there's any evidence to believe that she suffers from anything more serious.
|
Haha, the world has just lost the battle against climate change.
This has got to be the biggest fail in this election yet.
First, Democrats have a super strong candidate. But because he's not beholden to corporate interests enough, they reckon they can do better and nominate the poster child of neoliberalism.
So they manipulate the primaries, ignore and marginalise the healthy, popular, conscientious candidate for months, then suck up to him to get his fan club on their side.
It gets better: even the ones who didn't really care about policy and really just wanted to see a woman president actually had an excellent choice. While Hillary gets tens of thousands of dollars to hang out with super rich celebrities, Jill Stein gets her hands dirty helping flood victims and protesting pipelines, all while standing up without help. But because Red and Blue didn't want to give Green and whatever colour libertarians are a voice, most voters don't even know who she is.
So now team blue have handed the election and the nuclear codes to some psychopath who is one small penis joke away from nuking a NATO ally and who thinks climate change is a hoax.
Well done America, from the rest of the world.
I waited until after midnight to send your neoliberal corporate hoax of a political system a hearty 'fuck you'.
|
On September 12 2016 07:37 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:28 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 12 2016 07:15 xDaunt wrote:
I don't get this "pneumonia isn't serious" line. It is a very bad infection and a major killer of old people. And it is also very commonly a secondary illness to other serious health problems. come on dude, I understand that you think it's wise of Trump to harp on her health or whatever, but you're really sounding more and more conspiratorical when talking about her health issues. Pneumonia isn't something that disqualifies one from office, it's something you rest until you've recovered while taking antibiotics. Then when you get it during campaign trails and 911 memorial which she obviously couldn't stay home from because that would maybe look even worse than her fainting like this, that is a case of shitty timing, but it doesn't mean anything. I get when you're arguing that Trump should engage her with full robert stone conspiracy mode, I can accept that being strategically wise, but I don't get why you are suddenly trying to argue with a straight face in this thread that getting pneumonia (and I think that's a very legit-sounding reason for fainting myself) disqualifies someone from being president. I had pneumonia last year myself. I was really sick and coughing like crazy and I stayed home from work for a week, but once it was over it was over. Of course I'm a 32 year old man so my recovery is swifter and easier, but it's just.. This isn't a relevant line of attack, especially not for a person whose VP you and pretty much everyone else would prefer. a 68 year old with her health history and recent events of pneumonia can easily cause the average person to question her resiliency for another 4 years. There could be an underlying cause that should be thoroughly investigated. Why take that chance?
Because we vote for a ticket? Trump is not a good alternative to Tim Kaine for people who are voting for Clinton.
Edit: jesus kids, I had pneumonia in college from working to hard. It really not that hard to get walking pneumonia, where you have a mild case just from over working yourself.
|
On September 12 2016 07:45 Nyxisto wrote:
I mean pneumonia is a serious disease but if you're treated well you're going to recover, passing out in public just looks awkward. I don't think there's any evidence to believe that she suffers from anything more serious.
Oh come on, it's just pneumonia, as if that could ever be an issue for a POTUS.
+ Show Spoiler +Yes, that's a William Henry Harrison joke.
|
On September 12 2016 07:58 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:37 biology]major wrote:On September 12 2016 07:28 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 12 2016 07:15 xDaunt wrote:
I don't get this "pneumonia isn't serious" line. It is a very bad infection and a major killer of old people. And it is also very commonly a secondary illness to other serious health problems. come on dude, I understand that you think it's wise of Trump to harp on her health or whatever, but you're really sounding more and more conspiratorical when talking about her health issues. Pneumonia isn't something that disqualifies one from office, it's something you rest until you've recovered while taking antibiotics. Then when you get it during campaign trails and 911 memorial which she obviously couldn't stay home from because that would maybe look even worse than her fainting like this, that is a case of shitty timing, but it doesn't mean anything. I get when you're arguing that Trump should engage her with full robert stone conspiracy mode, I can accept that being strategically wise, but I don't get why you are suddenly trying to argue with a straight face in this thread that getting pneumonia (and I think that's a very legit-sounding reason for fainting myself) disqualifies someone from being president. I had pneumonia last year myself. I was really sick and coughing like crazy and I stayed home from work for a week, but once it was over it was over. Of course I'm a 32 year old man so my recovery is swifter and easier, but it's just.. This isn't a relevant line of attack, especially not for a person whose VP you and pretty much everyone else would prefer. a 68 year old with her health history and recent events of pneumonia can easily cause the average person to question her resiliency for another 4 years. There could be an underlying cause that should be thoroughly investigated. Why take that chance? Because we vote for a ticket? Trump is not a good alternative to Tim Kaine for people who are voting for Clinton. Edit: jesus kids, I had pneumonia in college from working to hard. It really not that hard to get walking pneumonia, where you have a mild case just from over working yourself.
except you aren't 68 years old. All of the health concerns seen are magnified due to her age which essentially puts her at increased risk for everything. This is taking into account the fainting, and her previous concussion.
|
On September 12 2016 07:36 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:32 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2016 07:29 Stratos_speAr wrote:
Pneumonia is serious as an infection secondary to another medical condition. It's not anything that's incredibly alarming on its own. Another medical condition here includes old age. Heck, even for young people it can be lethal depending on the pathogen. Pneumonia is by it's incidence relatively trivial, but it is NOT a trivial disease. No, it doesn't. Old age is an easy but not always accurate correlation with things like heart disease, COPD, diabetes, etc. The reason pneumonia is worse for old people is because old people are almost always already ill. As a medical professional that works in an emergency room, I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia isn't incredibly concerning. Treatment, bed rest, keeping an eye out and it should resolve in a week.
I was talking in laymans terms, but if you want me to be more specific:
Yes, old age is a proxy measure for comorbidity-burden, but even after adjusting for comorbidity, mortality following pneumonia increases with age.
As a MD PhD I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia depending on pathogen can be lethal - even in young people. You fail to differ between the treatment being trivial and the disease being trivial. If we did not have antibiotics zero cases of pneumonia (except some of the viral ones) would be trivial. The reason why you perceive it to be trivial is because the pathogen in the majority of the community-acquired cases are due to S. pneumoniae which can be treated with penicillin. However, as soon as the pathogen begins to exhibit resistance it quickly becomes are very non-trivial treatment.
|
On September 12 2016 08:03 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:58 Plansix wrote:On September 12 2016 07:37 biology]major wrote:On September 12 2016 07:28 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 12 2016 07:15 xDaunt wrote:
I don't get this "pneumonia isn't serious" line. It is a very bad infection and a major killer of old people. And it is also very commonly a secondary illness to other serious health problems. come on dude, I understand that you think it's wise of Trump to harp on her health or whatever, but you're really sounding more and more conspiratorical when talking about her health issues. Pneumonia isn't something that disqualifies one from office, it's something you rest until you've recovered while taking antibiotics. Then when you get it during campaign trails and 911 memorial which she obviously couldn't stay home from because that would maybe look even worse than her fainting like this, that is a case of shitty timing, but it doesn't mean anything. I get when you're arguing that Trump should engage her with full robert stone conspiracy mode, I can accept that being strategically wise, but I don't get why you are suddenly trying to argue with a straight face in this thread that getting pneumonia (and I think that's a very legit-sounding reason for fainting myself) disqualifies someone from being president. I had pneumonia last year myself. I was really sick and coughing like crazy and I stayed home from work for a week, but once it was over it was over. Of course I'm a 32 year old man so my recovery is swifter and easier, but it's just.. This isn't a relevant line of attack, especially not for a person whose VP you and pretty much everyone else would prefer. a 68 year old with her health history and recent events of pneumonia can easily cause the average person to question her resiliency for another 4 years. There could be an underlying cause that should be thoroughly investigated. Why take that chance? Because we vote for a ticket? Trump is not a good alternative to Tim Kaine for people who are voting for Clinton. Edit: jesus kids, I had pneumonia in college from working to hard. It really not that hard to get walking pneumonia, where you have a mild case just from over working yourself. except you aren't 68 years old. All of the health concerns seen are magnified due to her age which essentially puts her at increased risk for everything. This is taking into account the fainting, and her previous concussion.
My mother is 68 years old, she is fine. But I wouldn't want her doing yard work with pneumonia.
People get pneumonia. It happens. Trump will get sick too, but he will likely lie about it because that seems to be his default when he shows a slight sign of weakness.
|
I find it hilarious(ly sad) that Bernie, who at his age had no issues giving two hour long rallies, standing in the sweltering sun without support for 90 minutes at a time, sometimes four or even five days in a row, was attacked by Democrats because his age might be an issue.
|
On September 12 2016 08:04 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:36 Stratos_speAr wrote:On September 12 2016 07:32 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2016 07:29 Stratos_speAr wrote:
Pneumonia is serious as an infection secondary to another medical condition. It's not anything that's incredibly alarming on its own. Another medical condition here includes old age. Heck, even for young people it can be lethal depending on the pathogen. Pneumonia is by it's incidence relatively trivial, but it is NOT a trivial disease. No, it doesn't. Old age is an easy but not always accurate correlation with things like heart disease, COPD, diabetes, etc. The reason pneumonia is worse for old people is because old people are almost always already ill. As a medical professional that works in an emergency room, I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia isn't incredibly concerning. Treatment, bed rest, keeping an eye out and it should resolve in a week. I was talking in laymans terms, but if you want me to be more specific: Yes, old age is a proxy measure for comorbidity-burden, but even after adjusting for comorbidity, mortality following pneumonia increases with age. As a MD PhD I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia depending on pathogen can be lethal - even in young people. You fail to differ between the treatment being trivial and the disease being trivial. If we did not have antibiotics zero cases of pneumonia (except some of the viral ones) would be trivial. The reason why you perceive it to be trivial is because the pathogen in the majority of the community-acquired cases are due to S. pneumoniae which can be treated with penicillin. However, as soon as the pathogen begins to exhibit resistance it quickly becomes are very non-trivial treatment.
So what you're saying is that in the potential future where we have not come up with a new antibiotic before penicillin stops working due to antibiotic resistance, what she has now, will be (in this hypothetical future) be very non-trivial. Gotcha.
PS. statistically pneumonia is barely more lethal than the flu.
|
United States42009 Posts
On September 12 2016 06:43 CorsairHero wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 06:33 hunts wrote:
I honestly don't get the thing with Hilary's health. I fail to see the issue. She is an older person, she was out in the sun and started feeling feint. It's just another one of the long list of non existant things that republicans will turn into an "issue" until the general public can't give any more fucks about it. Would be nice if the same people crying about her health would cry about trump's fake letter on his health, or tax returns, or his psychological health. I'm sure if the media went after those half as hard as the republicans went after Hilary on non issues everyone would assume trump was a corrupt trust fund baby who broke out of a mental hospital.
edit: I wrote this before I saw the pneumonia part. Let's see how that gets blown out of proportion though. I'm waiting for the "pneumonia is a cover up for serious cognitive disabilities and all of the cancers in the world." And the "A candidate who is so weak they can catch pneumonia is not fit to be president. Did you feel the same way about Mccain in 2008?
McCain had a uniquely unqualified VP candidate. It was a different situation.
|
On September 12 2016 07:55 DickMcFanny wrote:
Haha, the world has just lost the battle against climate change.
This has got to be the biggest fail in this election yet.
First, Democrats have a super strong candidate. But because he's not beholden to corporate interests enough, they reckon they can do better and nominate the poster child of neoliberalism.
So they manipulate the primaries, ignore and marginalise the healthy, popular, conscientious candidate for months, then suck up to him to get his fan club on their side.
It gets better: even the ones who didn't really care about policy and really just wanted to see a woman president actually had an excellent choice. While Hillary gets tens of thousands of dollars to hang out with super rich celebrities, Jill Stein gets her hands dirty helping flood victims and protesting pipelines, all while standing up without help. But because Red and Blue didn't want to give Green and whatever colour libertarians are a voice, most voters don't even know who she is.
So now team blue have handed the election and the nuclear codes to some psychopath who is one small penis joke away from nuking a NATO ally and who thinks climate change is a hoax.
Well done America, from the rest of the world.
I waited until after midnight to send your neoliberal corporate hoax of a political system a hearty 'fuck you'.
While Hilary may not be the greatest candidate, neither Sanders nor Stein are strong candidates. You're delusional if you think they are.
|
On September 12 2016 08:11 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 08:04 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2016 07:36 Stratos_speAr wrote:On September 12 2016 07:32 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2016 07:29 Stratos_speAr wrote:
Pneumonia is serious as an infection secondary to another medical condition. It's not anything that's incredibly alarming on its own. Another medical condition here includes old age. Heck, even for young people it can be lethal depending on the pathogen. Pneumonia is by it's incidence relatively trivial, but it is NOT a trivial disease. No, it doesn't. Old age is an easy but not always accurate correlation with things like heart disease, COPD, diabetes, etc. The reason pneumonia is worse for old people is because old people are almost always already ill. As a medical professional that works in an emergency room, I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia isn't incredibly concerning. Treatment, bed rest, keeping an eye out and it should resolve in a week. I was talking in laymans terms, but if you want me to be more specific: Yes, old age is a proxy measure for comorbidity-burden, but even after adjusting for comorbidity, mortality following pneumonia increases with age. As a MD PhD I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia depending on pathogen can be lethal - even in young people. You fail to differ between the treatment being trivial and the disease being trivial. If we did not have antibiotics zero cases of pneumonia (except some of the viral ones) would be trivial. The reason why you perceive it to be trivial is because the pathogen in the majority of the community-acquired cases are due to S. pneumoniae which can be treated with penicillin. However, as soon as the pathogen begins to exhibit resistance it quickly becomes are very non-trivial treatment. So what you're saying is that in the potential future where we have not come up with a new antibiotic before penicillin stops working due to antibiotic resistance, what she has now, will be (in this hypothetical future) be very non-trivial. Gotcha. PS. statistically pneumonia is barely more lethal than the flu.
No, that is not what I'm saying and responses like yours are exactly why I try to avoid this thread.
EDIT: PS what do you think is the primary complication to the flu; causing people to die?
|
On September 12 2016 08:04 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:36 Stratos_speAr wrote:On September 12 2016 07:32 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2016 07:29 Stratos_speAr wrote:
Pneumonia is serious as an infection secondary to another medical condition. It's not anything that's incredibly alarming on its own. Another medical condition here includes old age. Heck, even for young people it can be lethal depending on the pathogen. Pneumonia is by it's incidence relatively trivial, but it is NOT a trivial disease. No, it doesn't. Old age is an easy but not always accurate correlation with things like heart disease, COPD, diabetes, etc. The reason pneumonia is worse for old people is because old people are almost always already ill. As a medical professional that works in an emergency room, I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia isn't incredibly concerning. Treatment, bed rest, keeping an eye out and it should resolve in a week. I was talking in laymans terms, but if you want me to be more specific: Yes, old age is a proxy measure for comorbidity-burden, but even after adjusting for comorbidity, mortality following pneumonia increases with age. As a MD PhD I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia depending on pathogen can be lethal - even in young people. You fail to differ between the treatment being trivial and the disease being trivial. If we did not have antibiotics zero cases of pneumonia (except some of the viral ones) would be trivial. The reason why you perceive it to be trivial is because the pathogen in the majority of the community-acquired cases are due to S. pneumoniae which can be treated with penicillin. However, as soon as the pathogen begins to exhibit resistance it quickly becomes are very non-trivial treatment.
Your distinction is completely irrelevant.
Almost any disease on Its own is significant. Our medical knowledge is precisely what makes everything from the flu to pneumonia to the majority of STD's not worth freaking out about in the average patient. Even the most tame of pathological conditions can be terrifying in the right patient, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about your average case of pneumonia in a patient with no current evidence of exacerbating medical factors aside from her age.
|
On September 12 2016 08:17 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 07:55 DickMcFanny wrote:
Haha, the world has just lost the battle against climate change.
This has got to be the biggest fail in this election yet.
First, Democrats have a super strong candidate. But because he's not beholden to corporate interests enough, they reckon they can do better and nominate the poster child of neoliberalism.
So they manipulate the primaries, ignore and marginalise the healthy, popular, conscientious candidate for months, then suck up to him to get his fan club on their side.
It gets better: even the ones who didn't really care about policy and really just wanted to see a woman president actually had an excellent choice. While Hillary gets tens of thousands of dollars to hang out with super rich celebrities, Jill Stein gets her hands dirty helping flood victims and protesting pipelines, all while standing up without help. But because Red and Blue didn't want to give Green and whatever colour libertarians are a voice, most voters don't even know who she is.
So now team blue have handed the election and the nuclear codes to some psychopath who is one small penis joke away from nuking a NATO ally and who thinks climate change is a hoax.
Well done America, from the rest of the world.
I waited until after midnight to send your neoliberal corporate hoax of a political system a hearty 'fuck you'. While Hilary may not be the greatest candidate, neither Sanders nor Stein are strong candidates. You're delusional if you think they are.
What? Bernie mopped the floor with Trump in every single poll ever.
He'd be extremely strong to win the election. What happens afterwards would depend, in both cases, on how big he could grow his movement.
If a candidate as badass as Jill Stein, who is essentially a woman version of Indiana Jones, had gotten equal media coverage, we would be talking about the end of the two party system now.
Only she and Bernie were ever vocal enough about the biggest issue that faces the world today (and that most Americans apparently care very little about), so forgive me that I'm biased towards them.
As a non-American I don't much care about your domestic problems, it's foreign policy and energy policy that concern me.
|
You guys are fucking ridiculous. Ghostcom gave precisely the correct description of the issue, yet one of you deliberately misconstrues his post and the other clearly doesn't get it.
|
On September 12 2016 08:22 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 08:04 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2016 07:36 Stratos_speAr wrote:On September 12 2016 07:32 Ghostcom wrote:On September 12 2016 07:29 Stratos_speAr wrote:
Pneumonia is serious as an infection secondary to another medical condition. It's not anything that's incredibly alarming on its own. Another medical condition here includes old age. Heck, even for young people it can be lethal depending on the pathogen. Pneumonia is by it's incidence relatively trivial, but it is NOT a trivial disease. No, it doesn't. Old age is an easy but not always accurate correlation with things like heart disease, COPD, diabetes, etc. The reason pneumonia is worse for old people is because old people are almost always already ill. As a medical professional that works in an emergency room, I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia isn't incredibly concerning. Treatment, bed rest, keeping an eye out and it should resolve in a week. I was talking in laymans terms, but if you want me to be more specific: Yes, old age is a proxy measure for comorbidity-burden, but even after adjusting for comorbidity, mortality following pneumonia increases with age. As a MD PhD I can tell you that a diagnosis of primary pneumonia depending on pathogen can be lethal - even in young people. You fail to differ between the treatment being trivial and the disease being trivial. If we did not have antibiotics zero cases of pneumonia (except some of the viral ones) would be trivial. The reason why you perceive it to be trivial is because the pathogen in the majority of the community-acquired cases are due to S. pneumoniae which can be treated with penicillin. However, as soon as the pathogen begins to exhibit resistance it quickly becomes are very non-trivial treatment. All you are doing is trying to manipulate semantics to make an irrelevant point. Almost any disease on Its own is significant. Our medical knowledge is precisely what makes everything from the flu to pneumonia to the majority of STD's not worth freaking out about in the average patient.
I can agree that the point is straying from the topic of this thread and as such I'll drop it, but suffice to say that I disagree with you.
|
On September 12 2016 08:23 DickMcFanny wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2016 08:17 Stratos_speAr wrote:On September 12 2016 07:55 DickMcFanny wrote:
Haha, the world has just lost the battle against climate change.
This has got to be the biggest fail in this election yet.
First, Democrats have a super strong candidate. But because he's not beholden to corporate interests enough, they reckon they can do better and nominate the poster child of neoliberalism.
So they manipulate the primaries, ignore and marginalise the healthy, popular, conscientious candidate for months, then suck up to him to get his fan club on their side.
It gets better: even the ones who didn't really care about policy and really just wanted to see a woman president actually had an excellent choice. While Hillary gets tens of thousands of dollars to hang out with super rich celebrities, Jill Stein gets her hands dirty helping flood victims and protesting pipelines, all while standing up without help. But because Red and Blue didn't want to give Green and whatever colour libertarians are a voice, most voters don't even know who she is.
So now team blue have handed the election and the nuclear codes to some psychopath who is one small penis joke away from nuking a NATO ally and who thinks climate change is a hoax.
Well done America, from the rest of the world.
I waited until after midnight to send your neoliberal corporate hoax of a political system a hearty 'fuck you'. While Hilary may not be the greatest candidate, neither Sanders nor Stein are strong candidates. You're delusional if you think they are. What? Bernie mopped the floor with Trump in every single poll ever. He'd be extremely strong to win the election. What happens afterwards would depend, in both cases, on how big he could grow his movement. If a candidate as badass as Jill Stein, who is essentially a woman version of Indiana Jones, had gotten equal media coverage, we would be talking about the end of the two party system now. Only she and Bernie were ever vocal enough about the biggest issue that faces the world today (and that most Americans apparently care very little about), so forgive me that I'm biased towards them. As a non-American I don't much care about your domestic problems, it's foreign policy and energy policy that concern me.
Are you kidding me? If Jill stein got equal media coverage the entire population would laugh her out of the election for being anti GMO and believing that wifi gives you cancer and who knows what other crap. And the reason bernie appeared to do well was because no one knew or cared about him so there was no negative media coverage of him, whereas Hillary has had decades of smear campaigns and fake scandals against her. If Bernie got the ticket he would get destroyed by the media.
Trust me, at first I liked bernie too, I felt like he was "for the people." But after learning some more about him, his campaign, his follower base, and how his campaign was run, I quickly changed my mind. At this point in time, if the election was somehow either trump vs bernie, or trump vs jill stein, I would likely vote trump, and I absolutely despise trump and about 99% of his supports.
And now, we perfectly got ghostcoms post, xdaunt. It's just that it is irrelevant and a red herring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
