kbordson

You are way off the mark here. It is not that i don´t understand, it is that you fail to convince me otherwise. There is a big diference. It is not a cultural problem either, first of all, there is many american that think like me. Besides, i know your culture pretty well, i have lived in the U.S, been engaged for many years to an american woman, i have even shooted a gun while living there. Somehow i think that you have much less experience about my culture than i have about yours. In first place, we neither hate nor fear guns. We regard them as a tool, and a tool that suceds at doing what is designed to do which is to kill people. No more and no less. In the other hand it seems many of you consider guns more a toy than a tool. We can see prove of this on most of John Richs´s posts. By the way, do you usually teach young kids how to use chainsaws, welders and power drillers, because those are also tools. Maybe they are not as "fun" to use as guns. You claim to "know our culture pretty well" - which one? Big city in California? Rural Texas? Midwest - Wisconsin? New England? So you lived here and even shot a gun... So... by your logic, having been an exchange student in Germany and having visited a Concentration camp, I understand about their views on WWII?! No. I would NEVER be so vain to state that. . That doesn't give my a proper "understanding" - I got a "window" into the life. But I did not begin to assume that that I "knew their culture pretty well." I was still an outsider. Just as you were. OK, so you were engaged to an American woman... does having a relationship with ONE individual of nation give you special insight to all the opinions in that that country? Maybe you're not afraid of the guns, but you ARE afraid of the people that chose to own them. And maybe that might sit poorly with you... hit a soft spot... cuz a big strong "any Nationality" man can't be scared of anything.... but I believe you are. You don't "get it." There is nothing wrong with that. I don't get homosexuality, but I don't in anyway try to inhibit the freedoms of those that do. There's nothing wrong with saying "that isn't for me" - but there IS something wrong with then trying to attack others freedoms and liberties because of your fears. And... since you asked... I don't actually HAVE any children. But my husband did try to teach his son how to use a lathe and a mill and other tools when he was younger. And my cousins that lived on the farms did know how to use the tractors, the chainsaws, and the other machinery. So... the answer to your final question would be "yes."

My EMR - (Digichart) - has several faults and while they are making adjustments and improvements. It is a challenge. It is not very intuitive. When patients enter their personal information, they tend to mis-enter it. I don't know if that is a fault of the the EMR or the patients, but it is quite frustrating to then have to edit. Sometimes they don't understand or don't see where to enter, other times they CHOSE not enter it at all. And I am speaking from personal experience here. They don't like to enter number of sexual partners or number of pregnancies (especially if there might have been terminations) Which from a Gyn perspective - IS typically pertinent. I honestly don't know about other EMR's... but if it would work smoother, would be willing to try. But... even then... would it be "better" than traditional. (and any one that uses bad handwriting as a reason to do EMR is just providing the doctors/providers excuses for irresponsible charting) Also... Jen, would your opinion change on a gynecologist just clicking on a laptop while asking you about your cycles or sexlife? Is there a level of .... disconnectedness... with using the EMR in the exam room? Not trying to do a "change is bad"... cuz some change is good. But the EMR systems that I have be subjected to have not been good change for the physicians or the patients.

Now would also be the time to get an AI. Hard to say how laws about imported firearms might change.

From a genetics standpoint - I'm thinking "cool." But how do they know which chromosomes code for kicking or pitching and which genes are for motivation and drive? From a parental standpoint - no way in hell would I have any child of mine tested.

Health Information Technology sells nicely... but a national database of health histories? Great for data collection and research... but not great for privacy or personal rights. I also heard grumblings about implanting a chip with medical info while I was in the military. Not keen on that idea either.

Basically it's a PERSONAL choice. You can choose to REGISTER and subject your past to review to be granted what should be a RIGHT to personal safety. But... ultimately I have to admit that you will never "get it" and arguing with you about this is pointless. You do not understand and trying to explain it over the internet to someone in a completely different culture. It's a hard sell. If you grew up in this environment, if you lived here, if you could see with my eyes.... you might be able to understand better. Likewise if I lived in a country that feared and hated firearms, I might have a different opinion of them as well.

Both firearms have a high likelihood of becoming "politically" unavailable. But as far as accuracy goes - the DPMS is pretty good (if lucky it might hold 1MOA, but it might need a new barrel) There are a lot of people with your thoughts and DPMS has been doing record sales. Expect probably a 6mos to 1yr wait on DPMS

it depends if you have greedy fuckwits running the show or not though doesn't it? Nope. Learn the system. OR Move to OZ, it seems to largely work here

it depends if you have greedy fuckwits running the show or not though doesn't it? Nope. Learn the system.

Some on this site that ain't got a real clue are advocating a change to the medical system that is already underway but is a scary invasion of privacy. Electronic Medical Records. If the information is entered correctly it can be helpful - I've been on call at night and it was nice to just look up her name and critical information. But at a cost. Privacy. I can look at any of the other physicians patients and know about her past history, including drug history. Is that info relevant to a call at 2am about her water being broke? Maybe not then, but how about if she were calling for a refill on that "hydrocodone" thing that she gets and just had a rx written 3d ago. (but the standard is to NOT call in narcotics on patients after hours... so it's not relevant to tell her "No.") Insurance companies (or if it becomes "socialized" even the government) can access said info as well. Are you willing to be honest with your doctor knowing that it doesn't stop there? So unintended consequences is that patients are less complete with giving a detailed history. Time. I spend 5-10min extra per patient entering the information correctly (and with 30+ patients/day that's 2.5 to 5hrs of data entry a day) And that's just from one office visit - if she has labs or ultrasounds, that takes even more time to review. Computers do NOT always make life better or easier. EMR is a perfect example.

Either that or she's actually had to use an EMR, and understands that it's more likely to cost us 70 billion dollar than save us that amount. I've been using an EMR for the past two years and I can assure you that it will either need to be made more time efficient or docs just will NOT properly document. Period. (that also brings up a whole new topic for discussion) sidenotes rhys, you as well are making comments on which you have no actual information. I think the proper term for that is blatherscythe. jackee, you can dwell there and think whatever you want.

Being a midwestern girl and having been raised around firearms, here is my perspective. I have a concealed carry. Many of my friends do as well - but my sub community consists of several current / prior law enforcement and those in the firearms industry. My population is skewed. Although you weren't asking about the "why", I will try to explain some of the mentality. I don't believe that the cops are here to protect ME. I don't have a body guard. Law enforcement is there to enforce the laws (which need to be broke before they are even "needed") I, and many of my friends, take personal safety as a personal responsibility. As do most CCW (concealed carry weapon) owners - although they might not be so paranoid that they "pack heat" at Disney (which in fact... if you do a google search of CCW and disney, you will pull up many posts/threads on other forums that discuss that) but some do feel more secure knowing that they have something "up their sleeve" if coming up against someone that wants to do them harm. The whole point of the CCW though is that you DON'T really know. Whether that deters crime or not is often debated.... but it does make the one carrying FEEL safer and that is sometimes all he/she wants.

The monument itself is kind of boring. But the area around it.... I would HIGHLY recommend. The Black Hills are beautiful. The badlands are amazing. Deadwood is fun. Sturgis... especially during the Rally is worth it!! Devils Tower (in WY but really, really close) is cool.

YUMMMM! That sounds lovely! And Lisa, rum is always nice to me (even if nice means reminding me to drink a bit of extra water

Nice selection!!

Half a bottle of rot gut Canadian Black Diamond..... YUMMMMM Rum and Coke is good.....

Short answer? Money No, they are not all the same. But, they should all provide basic medical care. But those focus on current cardiac standards are better than those that primarily treat "knife and gun club" patients... and those that have a known trauma center should trump those that might be local (trust me... I'm speaking on experience on this one) It's hard to say... cuz as an OB/Gyn, I would hope that all patients get treated correctly... but there might be a difference.

I've been gone for a month, but in reading the thread title and the posts? Didn't this thread end at post #85?

I didn't come back to bite... HONESTLY. I just logged back in yesterday for the first time since that discussion cuz LisaH finally convinced me to check out a pic of her barfing in bonfire... SWEAR! But while I was on, to my surprise I saw my name on the top of SC?! I pm'ed Skyrad and was just going to let it go at that.... then I read Andys poor representation of history and felt attacked. Of course I had to bite. But... I didn't come back TO bite. And... now that I've found all this free time again.... pick an interesting topic. Hint: Anything that the ATF is interested in is interesting. edit to spell "reply" with the needed "l" to make the formatting actually work

QFT

Thank you, This was a VERY challenging mark to hit. For those that are unaware, let me give a brief summary of getting to this step. Medical School. 4years (typically... there are some schools that are 6yrs that combine undergrad and medical school; but I did the traditional 4yr undergrad and then 4yr Med School) Through medical school, you take three standardized tests (Step 1,2 and 3) Residency. OB/Gyn - 4years. Throughout residency, we took annual exams (CREOGS) At the completion of residency, we took the written exam to become "Board Eligible" Then you take a year to build a practice. The next year, you have to collect all your cases. Every delivery, every surgery, every ER walk-in with pelvic pain, every inpatient consult. These are divided by OB and Gyn. And you need to compile a list of 40 office patients. This complete list has to be approved by the hospital to ensure that patients weren't left off... either by accident or intent. Then the list is submitted for review. Once the list is approved, then you are set to take the Oral portion of the Boards. There are three separate panels. Obstetrics, Gynecology and Office Practice. Each panel of experts has an hour to ask about your cases and standardized cases. The pass rate is 83-87% so most do pass. But for several reasons, people are asked to repeat the process. But... what does this mean? Most patients are unaware of Board Certification and don't even know to ask. Does it mean the doctor that is Board Certified is better? No. It means that the one that took and passed the Boards is willing to put their practice in front of review. It means that that particular physician spent the time (LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS of time) and money to "prove" themselves. But there is more to a "good" doctor than just papers on the wall. House MD is (aside from being fictitious) likely to be Board Certified... but his bedside manner is horrid. I would not consider him a "good" doctor. I believe that you should have a relationship based on trust and confidence with your physician. So when talking to your doctor... you SHOULD feel comfortable talking about his/her credentials. It should not offend (but it does depend on how you ask too!!) Thanks again!

Whatever. But I figured she hadn't really "left", but was lurking, and this would smoke her out. Not too predictable. Anyhow, having watched the histrionics unfold, I stand by my post. Honestly dude, you're making incorrect assumptions on my actions with no knowledge of my schedule or my personality. by the way.... what other screen names do you lurk under? Just curious if I should have the IP of some of my pm's looked at. -and for the other questions. Yes, I passed my Oral Boards. I personally believe that if lawyers had to collect their cases and present and defend the suits the way that doctors do, that there would be A LOT less lawyers.

It wasn't the one particular thread, but rather the culmination of the general fucktardedness that is speakers corner (specifically) and dizzy in general

Thank you. You helped me make a difficult decision

OK... maybe I'm not understanding your anger. Why should my questions display and "irrational hatred"? I QUESTION him. I don't HATE him. There is a VERY BIG difference. Why should questions not be allowed? And I think I did answer your question. You want me to say "well, since he didn't hold the knife in her hand" he's clear and free of blame. He's not, nor is McCain. Both have made efforts to incite emotion. That's what politics are all about. And even you seem to be playing into that. I specifically responded back to you and Nerdgirl because of respect that I had had for your opinions, I linked to sites that have made me question the campaign tactics. I see that as truly trying to answer the and with respect to: Yes.... as I've been saying. It's BOTH parties that are playing this game. In fact.... like Mike, I am quite disappointed in the response of many of the regular posters on this forum. If someone has a varying opinion, it becomes a full onslaught and an attack of character. I have gotten threatening pm's, I have been insulted and called a liar, I have been attacked by because I don't openly praise Obama. In all honesty, I have a lot more important issues in my life than trying to discuss politics with people that don't seem to have any level of respect for divergent thoughts.