-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
Will Trump win again???
Started by Planktonmd
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
- Status
I'm more confused by what's going on in this thread than the impeachment stuff
Is there anything on them that differentiates US citizen from non-US citizen? If not, then they should change them to have 2 different colors of stars, one for US citizens and the other for non-US citizens.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I feel sorry for anyone who actually slogged through it.
What I got:
Left: we have no evidence, but Trump must be impeached.
Right: are you serious?
No, there's no difference when you look at the ID.
D
deleted126335
Not quite what I got.
Left, " Trump used his position to pressure a foreign government for personal gain". He should be impeached for this.
Right, "well (maybe) he tried to do this, but didn't succeed. Even if he did so, This does not rise to the level of impeachable offenses."
You probably have been consistent with use of the term 'elective'. I probably just missed this.
However, that is not my question.
In your view, is the abortion of ectopics killing a human being?
HH
D
deleted480308
Again, I thought that was apparent by my answer but I'll be more specific. I think the standard medical treatment of ectopics is both self defense on behalf of the mother and admitting that there is no reasonable expectation for a live birth. The main difference is that without abortive medical intervention, both mother and the would-be-child die. In an elective abortion, without abortive medical intervention both are expected to live.
Has this ever worked?????? Unbelievable
Last edited:
Pitlyk was confirmed as judge to the federal bench today 🙁
Although she said that fertility treatments and surrogacy have grave effects on society and diminish motherhood. The amicus brief is painful to read. One can be against fertility treatments for themselves but to speak so ill of people who go through such a journey is disgusting.
In addition, the American Bar Association rated her as not qualified.
Nothing but the best.
www.huffpost.com
Although she said that fertility treatments and surrogacy have grave effects on society and diminish motherhood. The amicus brief is painful to read. One can be against fertility treatments for themselves but to speak so ill of people who go through such a journey is disgusting.
In addition, the American Bar Association rated her as not qualified.
Nothing but the best.
Republicans Confirm Lifetime Federal Judge Opposed To Fertility Treatments
Sarah Pitlyk has claimed that IVF and surrogacy have “grave effects on society” and lead to “diminished respect for motherhood.”
Nope. That is not a thing. Well first of all implant isn't the correct term. Embryo's are inserted into the uterus during IVF. And second, no, such a thing is not possible with an ectopic pregnancy.
Yes while a woman is bleeding out from a ruptured ectopic pregnancy, lets find the embryo which is essentially microscopic and put it in her uterus :/ If not you're a murderer and going to jail! End of story.
Once again nothing but the best.
This response wasn't apparent to me at all. It's novel (to me) and intriguing. There seems to be two parts: (1) self-defense and (2) unlikely live birth.
Regarding self-defense: Are you then OK with abortions that protect the woman from say likely uterine perforation or eclampsia (neither of which are certain outcomes, but will harm the mother)?
Regarding unlikely live births: Are you then OK with the destruction of extracorporeal embroyos (which are unlikely to result in a live birth, especially when old)?
Please note, I am not being argumentative here. My curiosity is genuine. IRL I don't think I know of anyone with both your knowledge of science/medicine and metaphysical views. It's highly unlikely I'll be able to ask these questions offline.
HH
D
deleted480308
as long as we're discussing in good faith, I'm cool with the questions. Thanks for clarifying
I think the question of "likely" uterine perforation is interesting as "likely" means a lot of things to a lot of people. I'm sure my idea of an acceptable risk is potentially different than someone else. defining That line might fall in the territory of the old judicial story about the definition of pornography, it's really hard to define but we know it when we see it. I do think once someone is in eclampsia, it's a fair request in the realm of self-defense to go ahead and deliver.
Regarding extracoproreal embryos, my argument would be against the creation of any without a firm commitment to implant them. And yes, I get the expense/pay off ratio of that request is a big deal
D
deleted87051
You know how some women like to have cats as pets and drink tea? Others really don’t like cats or tea. And some people prefer dogs or like both dogs and cats.
People tend to be liberal or conservative and hold opposing views, yet we all think we are right. This thread got me thinking why people who care about 2A tend to also be pro-life or pro-Israel. Or why people who care about climate change also tend to be pro-marriage equality. I’m sure it’s a combination of both innate traits, our experiences, and our environment but it still doesn’t make complete sense to me how these issues fit together. Anyway I apologize for being an a**hole in parts of this thread. Just because we disagree doesn’t mean the other party is stupid or evil. Undoubtedly the vast majority of people here are intelligent and decent people. Probably most of us are not posting from jail.
Anyway the thread made me curious about why some of us are conservative and others of us are liberal and I found these.
www.bu.edu
People tend to be liberal or conservative and hold opposing views, yet we all think we are right. This thread got me thinking why people who care about 2A tend to also be pro-life or pro-Israel. Or why people who care about climate change also tend to be pro-marriage equality. I’m sure it’s a combination of both innate traits, our experiences, and our environment but it still doesn’t make complete sense to me how these issues fit together. Anyway I apologize for being an a**hole in parts of this thread. Just because we disagree doesn’t mean the other party is stupid or evil. Undoubtedly the vast majority of people here are intelligent and decent people. Probably most of us are not posting from jail.
Anyway the thread made me curious about why some of us are conservative and others of us are liberal and I found these.
How a liberal learned to respect conservative thinking | Bostonia
(and accept the fact that, yes, the right is happier than the left)
These key psychological differences can determine whether you're liberal or conservative
Scientists have studied the brains of conservatives and liberals and found startling differences in how they process information and see the world.
www.google.com
You know how some women like to have cats as pets and drink tea? Others really don’t like cats or tea. And some people prefer dogs or like both dogs and cats.
People tend to be liberal or conservative and hold opposing views, yet we all think we are right. This thread got me thinking why people who care about 2A tend to also be pro-life or pro-Israel. Or why people who care about climate change also tend to be pro-marriage equality. I’m sure it’s a combination of both innate traits, our experiences, and our environment but it still doesn’t make complete sense to me how these issues fit together. Anyway I apologize for being an a**hole in parts of this thread. Just because we disagree doesn’t mean the other party is stupid or evil. Undoubtedly the vast majority of people here are intelligent and decent people. Probably most of us are not posting from jail.
Anyway the thread made me curious about why some of us are conservative and others of us are liberal and I found these.
How a liberal learned to respect conservative thinking | Bostonia
(and accept the fact that, yes, the right is happier than the left)
These key psychological differences can determine whether you're liberal or conservative
Scientists have studied the brains of conservatives and liberals and found startling differences in how they process information and see the world.www.google.com
Lol nimbus, did you read that Business Insider article? It may not be the olive branch you were hoping for given the tone of your post considering it essentially says conservatives are mentally inflexible, dull, squeamish, cowards...
You do raise an interesting question though about how certain seemingly unrelated issues become leftist or rightist positions. For instance, how many people here would I guess I own a Bushmaster M4 and a Romanian SAR-1?
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
D
deleted87051
Yeah the first article is more thoughtful.
I attached the second one because it included some functional neuro imaging studies. I do think people have differing responses to different stimuli. For example I live in an area with a significant homeless population and it really never bothered me to to occasionally see human feces behind a planter. Except the time my dog decided to rub and roll his face and neck in it.
I don’t own any guns but enjoyed shooting clay pigeons with a friend when I was younger. And I drive a big Chevy pickup.
I'm not saying that I agree with the bill (which I haven't even read in full). I'm not saying that transplanting ectopics are now possible. But, I'd like to just point out that not all ectopics are discovered ruptured. Some live ectopics are being treated with ultrasound guided injections of concentrated KCl or MTX to induce fetal demise by asystole. So, while not possible now to save a live ectopic, in the future...? I'd say that the vast majority of pregnant women who discover that they have an ectopic pregnancy WANTED a baby. So, why wouldn't it be a great thing IF it was possible to save the pregnancy?
Non-surgical management of live ectopic pregnancy with ultrasound-guided local injection: a case series. - PubMed - NCBI
You know how some women like to have cats as pets and drink tea? Others really don’t like cats or tea. And some people prefer dogs or like both dogs and cats.
People tend to be liberal or conservative and hold opposing views, yet we all think we are right. This thread got me thinking why people who care about 2A tend to also be pro-life or pro-Israel. Or why people who care about climate change also tend to be pro-marriage equality. I’m sure it’s a combination of both innate traits, our experiences, and our environment but it still doesn’t make complete sense to me how these issues fit together. Anyway I apologize for being an a**hole in parts of this thread. Just because we disagree doesn’t mean the other party is stupid or evil. Undoubtedly the vast majority of people here are intelligent and decent people. Probably most of us are not posting from jail.
Anyway the thread made me curious about why some of us are conservative and others of us are liberal and I found these.
How a liberal learned to respect conservative thinking | Bostonia
(and accept the fact that, yes, the right is happier than the left)
These key psychological differences can determine whether you're liberal or conservative
Scientists have studied the brains of conservatives and liberals and found startling differences in how they process information and see the world.www.google.com
This is something I have often thought about and it does seem like if I hear someone’s viewpoint on one topic, it’s a 9/10 proposition that I could tell you their viewpoints on most other controversial issues. I’m sure some of it has to do with one’s source of news, but I don’t think that’s the biggest factor. I have a sister who used to listen to Rush everyday (10 years ago or so) and now she’s definitely left of center and listens to NPR and CNN. Don’t really understand how she switched sides so to speak but that’s always fascinated me, and she doesn’t really have a good answer for the change in perspective.
And since you broached the topic, I too apologize for my part in being a dick on here to some. I just get super defensive when people accuse me of motives that aren’t real and sling personal insults and accusations of racism and sexism.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Yes I know how to treat ectopic pregnancy, I treat patients who are stable with ectopic pregnancies in my office.
Why are you saying the vast majority of pregnant women who have ectopic pregnancies want a child?
50% of pregnancies are unintended...now of course that doesn't mean they are unwanted children, but they are still unintended pregnancies. I do not think there are statistics on how many ectopic pregnancies were intended vs unintended pregnancies, so I'd be curious to know where you got your statistic that "the vast majority of pregnant women who discover they have an ectopic wanted a baby." Do you have a link?
Yes of course it would be wonderful if in the near future we were able to figure out why some women have unexplained infertility and unexplained multiple miscarriages for example in order to save more pregnancies that are wanted.
However, this bill has nothing to do with that and the entire bill is a hot mess and that just adds to the ridiculousness of it. Ectopic pregnancies do rupture. This bill says that no matter what a doctor must try to "reimplant" it or be charged with murder. Exactly why politicians shouldn't be in charge of dictating what procedures we do in our exam rooms.
Well, it's a little more nuanced than that. I'm not being argumentative. It's just that there have been abdominal ectopics that have been delivered alive at term. I mean, I just don't go to the extreme of "clearly", like being cut into hundreds of pieces, or exposed to space for several minutes - those are a few things that are "clearly incompatible with life". It is "highly likely to have a detrimental effect", but not guaranteed.
The fact that politicians actually submitted this ectopic section is proof of why I am against any form of universal government-run health care. These people are stupid, and in healthcare, stupidity is dangerous. Not only that, but can you imagine the malpractice nightmare that this would create? The current $120,000 premium per year would look like a bargain, not to mention the retainers for the trial attorneys.
If the government takes over healthcare and then dictates it's protocols be followed (or else you don't get paid), who's on the hook for the medical liability? Will physicians still be able to practice with autonomy? When there's only "one employer in town," will you be forced to do whatever that one boss dictates? People say, "Don't perform abortions if you don't want to. Nobody's forcing you to do them." But in the realm of universal government-run healthcare will that still be the case? I have my doubts.
If the government takes over healthcare and then dictates it's protocols be followed (or else you don't get paid), who's on the hook for the medical liability? Will physicians still be able to practice with autonomy? When there's only "one employer in town," will you be forced to do whatever that one boss dictates? People say, "Don't perform abortions if you don't want to. Nobody's forcing you to do them." But in the realm of universal government-run healthcare will that still be the case? I have my doubts.
I thought I saw a post by @AMEHigh about REAL-ID. It was something about illegal aliens having IDs that are now REAL-IDs (I know that the term of "illegal aliens" is out of vogue, but, if they have official IDs, then, by definition, they are not "undocumented").
When I vote, they compare my signature (this is in New York). I don't recall what I had to do to register to vote, all those years ago. However, it is not some strident, aggressive, "I provide no proof of identity, but you must let me vote!!" thing. However, I do not have to produce any type of ID.
When I vote, they compare my signature (this is in New York). I don't recall what I had to do to register to vote, all those years ago. However, it is not some strident, aggressive, "I provide no proof of identity, but you must let me vote!!" thing. However, I do not have to produce any type of ID.
What I said was that you do not have to be a US citizen to get a REAL ID. So people with green cards and visas can get REAL IDs. These people are not eligible to vote, but still have a valid state ID.
The term "undocumented" has become the term to use for people who do not have legal papers to live in the US. However, that does not mean they don’t have any "documents." Depending on where they live they can certainly have a social security number/card, tax number, ID, etc.
But what is the term that is currently accepted for people not in the country legally? It's not "undocumented citizens", for two reasons: they're not "undocumented", as you say, and they are NOT US citizens. So, what is the term?
Medicare and the VA are federally run government healthcare and Medicaid is state government run healthcare, so I guess you are against those? The VA actually has low malpractice payouts compared to private insurers from what I’m aware. The VA, Medicare and Medicaid already force us to practice in certain ways. I certainly don’t have 100% autonomy. What is your speciality?
Yes let’s just let the poor, disabled, elderly and veterans get by with no healthcare. Great plan for overall society.
The well-known term is undocumented person. Some people also use the phrase illegal immigration. I’m not sure I understand where you’re going. I’m all for a different name to classify such persons if they would like to be referred to as something else, but to answer your question the current term that ensures that most people know whom you’re talking about is undocumented person or illegal immigration.
My question is, what is the current way to address them? "Illegal alien" is, as I say, out of vogue. And, as you say, some are not undocumented. So, it's okay to refer to these persons as "illegal immigrants"? I am not being fatuous.
Yes undocumented immigrant or illegal immigrant. I mean if you want to really get in to the nitty gritty they might be an asylum seeker, DREAMER or might technically be a migrant. However for communication purposes in general undocumented immigrant or illegal immigrant will suffice. Obviously you shouldn’t use those general phrases if you’re writing an academic paper or a legal argument, you should be more specific, but in general everyday conversation those 2 phrases will get your point across.
Some people don’t agree with borders and people themselves being considered illegal. But yes undocumented or illegal immigrant are generally acceptable in regular conversation.
Maybe I was just distracted/confused by those loony people in San Francisco.
D
deleted87051
Here’s another article explaining how the ability to feel and experience disgust correlates with conservatism. Some of the language in this thread illustrates this.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
D
deleted87051
Last edited by a moderator:
Vandal : undocumented artist
Thief : undocumented shopper
Rapist: undocumented lover
Burglar : undocumented resident
Somewhat off topic, but that number always bugs me.
I had a co-resident who was married and stopped taking her birth control. But, she claims that they weren't trying to get pregnant and that her pregnancy was an accident so that would go to that 50% number when it very clearly shouldn't - a doctor of all people should know that having regular sex without using any form of birth control is, in fact, trying to get pregnant.
If you're having sex without birth control, you are trying to get pregnant. An exception could be made for people not in relationships (since that could be explained away as just being irresponsible). But if you are in a relationship, having heterosexual sex, without any birth control, you are trying to get pregnant and those pregnancies shouldn't count as unintended.
I definitely get your point. Those "catchy stats" often based on fluff.
However, this one irritates me too for a different reason.
Why does it matter if it's intended or unintended? Wanted or unwanted? -- yes, that changes treatment options..but intended or not -- this only helps us judge the patient or create silly stats like the one being discussed; which I think is just there and repeated for thinly veiled political reasons.
HH
D
deleted480308
I also agree it is irrelevant, but have a different response to how to react
The statistic in the US and worldwide uses the use of contraception to determine unintended vs intended pregnancies. Therefore your friends pregnancy would be considered an intended pregnancy.
Obviously statistics aren’t perfect. However, I do think it’s important to have several different measures of reproductive healthcare statistics. There’s pretty good data that when people have access to birth control, particularly women, they go to school longer, make more money and overall benefit society.
Statistics matter for a variety of reasons.
I gave an example to VAHopeful in regards to how access to birth control generally increases the economy in places when women don’t have children early or too many children.
Access to birth control and abortion is important to measure as it has a great impact on society. I can give more examples. Therefore it’s important to understand if people are having their birth control and pregnancy needs met, which can be accomplished by research and statistics. But yes you’re correct that those stats can then be used by politicians, advocacy groups etc.
I’m really not trying to turn this in to an abortion debate again but I don’t think that people who are conservative understand the societal implications if people don’t have access to BC and abortions and have 5+ kids in today’s society. It just wouldn’t work too well. I really think all men should just have vasectomies 😉
Wow, how very insulting.
Yes, but sometimes no. It depends on how the information is gathered.
D
deleted480308
I think it’s odd to assume that more school/money is automatically more beneficial than being a mom.
D
deleted480308
I think you are rudely prejudiced about conservatives.
But I agree with you about the utility of vasectomies and have suggested them to A LOT of couples
I was referring to the most recent accepted research that was published in regards to how the information was collected. In which your friends pregnancy would be considered unintended. Sorry if I was mistaken and not understanding which data you were referring to!
electropartyogram
Full Member
Illegal immigrant.
Illegal: "contrary to or forbidden by law, especially criminal law". True.
Immigrant: "a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country". True.
They are not only just "non-citizens" as that implies some form of legal (provided by U.S. law) residence. A person who intentionally comes to live in another country with a disregard for immigration law and the proper immigration is an illegal immigrant.
Guess which group of people, presumably because of a moral rather practical objection, has a much higher % of people who oppose private employers or the ACA getting an exemption for covering birth control for female employees?
You can be insulted all you want, but the facts and the polling are what they are.
D
deleted87051
Finally we can agree on something! Vasectomies are good! It would be so nice if we could get them covered by insurance.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
D
deleted480308
Huzzah!
Interesting read. Thanks for posting.
I do think large part of has to do with sympathy and compassion and how people feel they are applying those principles. I heard two people debating on tv over the change in food stamps that Trump just made. I haven’t delved super deep into it, but it sounds like the basic change is that food stamps for able bodied single individuals between 18-49 (I think) with no dependents will now be limited to three months.
My immediate reaction is, ok that seems reasonable. Yeah, it’s good to have some safety net for people when they are desperate, but there’s no need for a healthy individual to not be able to find some kind of job. So give em a few months of assistance if they need to get back on their feet. The liberal was against this change in policy that seemed reasonable to me, but to them it was cruel, especially with the change coming around the holidays (which is a little silly cause 3 months out is in March).
To me, it’s not compassionate to have someone develop dependence on fold stamps. To the liberal, it was not compassionate to remove the assistance ever.
Interesting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I didn't meant to intentionally insult someone. (As opposed to some of the things people have said about me in this thread). My apologies for doing so.
I'm going to stand by my stance that most people are not research scholars and haven't read the latest data on reproductive health care, society, economics, etc. I'm a physician and only recently started learning and being more involved in that research. People can THINK unintended pregnancy and access to birth control does not matter to society at large, but the data says otherwise. I would hope that with most of us being physicians we would use data, research and evidence based medicine to inform our opinions and especially how we counsel and take care of patients.
Except not.
i can guarantee you that @sb247 knows the data about easy access to cheap/free birth control as well as any of us here. That's not going to make him change his mind about it being one of the mandatory coverage parts of the ACA.
I'm reasonably conservative (sometimes) and I'm fully aware of the statistics regarding birth control and economics.
Again, understanding the data doesn't mean you have to agree that insurance should be required to pay for birth control.
- Status
