So what you’re saying is that you are choosing a very specific section of the definition. Instead of the entire definition to suit your argument. He does not have the same amount of care as anyone else. He was potus, and will be again, unfortunately.
So what you’re saying is that you are choosing a very specific section of the definition.
Every definition is a “very specific one”. I’m clarifying what I said and you’re coming at me with some sort of weird “gotcha” energy. I don’t expect you have noble intentions.
Instead of the entire definition to suit your argument.
I only pasted part because I wasn’t going to put the entire thing in a post. But what part of the rest of the section do you feel I should have included?
He does not have the same amount of care as anyone else.
No, there are sections your cherry picked, you didn’t use the entirety of the definition. Nothing about “gatcha”, just showing that your point doesn’t stand. The definition is also a legal matter, the potus has access to better health care, more direct health care. And you’re right i don’t have a citation for that because that was a typo. But here.
No, there are sections your cherry picked, you didn’t use the entirety of the definition.
This is fucking stupid. I bloody well did. The POINT I am making is that “standard of care” is a medial term that applies to how disease is evaluated, treated, etc. It’s not different based on income, social standing, etc.
In short - if you have X disease the standard of care says to treat it with Y treatment.
What YOU are talking about is… Which healthcare he has? The thing you posted just talks about how he has access to military benefits (which anybody in the military has access to).
But what wouldn’t change is HOW he is treated. Walter Reed will treat X disease the same as any other hospital.
He’s not receiving some extra-super-special treatment.
I would be surprised if he wasn’t, hence using the special treatment for covid on him. Also he is treated different because he can access medical aid faster and easier than anyone else. That’s littlerally a different standard of care.
It’s literally not standard of care as I am using it and as the medical industry uses it. You seem to want to redefine my term to match your needs.
Others could access the same experimental treatment using the same exception he used as I pointed out already, and I even linked to the ruling that allows for it.
It’s also not BETTER treatment it’s EXPERIMENTAL treatment. Many experimental treatments do NOT work out. Look at all the assholes using the SAME exception to get treated with hydroxychloroquine.
It’s literally is, you seem to want to redefine what i am saying to match what you want me to be saying. If you don’t realize the leader of the country has more readily access to Healthcare with the fanciest bells and whistles, then I can’t help you. Feel free to stop replying.
I am the one who introduced the phrase “standard of care” to this conversation. I even provided the definition of it to clarify. It means what I say it means in this context because it’s what I am talking about. If it doesn’t mean what you want it to mean then that’s your problem.
It’s like I said “murder is wrong” and you jump in and accuse me of “cherry picking” a definition for murder and start defending groups of crows!
“standard of care” is a medical and legal term of art. It has a specific definition about how to treat patients. It has nothing - zero - zilch to do with access to healthcare which is all you want to rant about and which I’ve already said would be easier for anybody with money. Even when you accused me of “cherry picking” a definition (which is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard) you couldn’t point to one that says anything about insurance.
Of course the president has easy access to healthcare. I even said that in my first reply. But the care he is given would be the same as to anyone else. There is no “magic medicine” that he gets that you don’t. If he has a cut they give him a bandage with antibiotics. If he has cancer they will provide the same treatment as they would you. YES he may be able to afford medicines easier than you - THAT IS NOT MY POINT. The same options would be made available.
But there are no more “fancy bells and whistles” available - what does that even mean??? Do you think there are medicines that you wouldn’t be allowed to get? Like if the president were diabetic do you think there is some “super insulin” that they’ll give him that works better?
Medical standard of care is a medical industry standard that “Treatment standards applied within public hospitals ensure that all patients receive appropriate care regardless of financial means.”
Well since you continue to reply, and this isn’t going anywhere, you won’t change my mind and I won’t change yours. I’ll stop replying after this, you’re welcome to continue to do so if you see fit, but I won’t waste time anymore.
So what you’re saying is that you are choosing a very specific section of the definition. Instead of the entire definition to suit your argument. He does not have the same amount of care as anyone else. He was potus, and will be again, unfortunately.
Every definition is a “very specific one”. I’m clarifying what I said and you’re coming at me with some sort of weird “gotcha” energy. I don’t expect you have noble intentions.
I only pasted part because I wasn’t going to put the entire thing in a post. But what part of the rest of the section do you feel I should have included?
Citation needed.
No, there are sections your cherry picked, you didn’t use the entirety of the definition. Nothing about “gatcha”, just showing that your point doesn’t stand. The definition is also a legal matter, the potus has access to better health care, more direct health care. And you’re right i don’t have a citation for that because that was a typo. But here.
This is fucking stupid. I bloody well did. The POINT I am making is that “standard of care” is a medial term that applies to how disease is evaluated, treated, etc. It’s not different based on income, social standing, etc.
In short - if you have X disease the standard of care says to treat it with Y treatment.
What YOU are talking about is… Which healthcare he has? The thing you posted just talks about how he has access to military benefits (which anybody in the military has access to).
But what wouldn’t change is HOW he is treated. Walter Reed will treat X disease the same as any other hospital.
He’s not receiving some extra-super-special treatment.
I would be surprised if he wasn’t, hence using the special treatment for covid on him. Also he is treated different because he can access medical aid faster and easier than anyone else. That’s littlerally a different standard of care.
It’s literally not standard of care as I am using it and as the medical industry uses it. You seem to want to redefine my term to match your needs.
Others could access the same experimental treatment using the same exception he used as I pointed out already, and I even linked to the ruling that allows for it.
It’s also not BETTER treatment it’s EXPERIMENTAL treatment. Many experimental treatments do NOT work out. Look at all the assholes using the SAME exception to get treated with hydroxychloroquine.
It’s literally is, you seem to want to redefine what i am saying to match what you want me to be saying. If you don’t realize the leader of the country has more readily access to Healthcare with the fanciest bells and whistles, then I can’t help you. Feel free to stop replying.
I am the one who introduced the phrase “standard of care” to this conversation. I even provided the definition of it to clarify. It means what I say it means in this context because it’s what I am talking about. If it doesn’t mean what you want it to mean then that’s your problem.
It’s like I said “murder is wrong” and you jump in and accuse me of “cherry picking” a definition for murder and start defending groups of crows!
“standard of care” is a medical and legal term of art. It has a specific definition about how to treat patients. It has nothing - zero - zilch to do with access to healthcare which is all you want to rant about and which I’ve already said would be easier for anybody with money. Even when you accused me of “cherry picking” a definition (which is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard) you couldn’t point to one that says anything about insurance.
Of course the president has easy access to healthcare. I even said that in my first reply. But the care he is given would be the same as to anyone else. There is no “magic medicine” that he gets that you don’t. If he has a cut they give him a bandage with antibiotics. If he has cancer they will provide the same treatment as they would you. YES he may be able to afford medicines easier than you - THAT IS NOT MY POINT. The same options would be made available.
But there are no more “fancy bells and whistles” available - what does that even mean??? Do you think there are medicines that you wouldn’t be allowed to get? Like if the president were diabetic do you think there is some “super insulin” that they’ll give him that works better?
Medical standard of care is a medical industry standard that “Treatment standards applied within public hospitals ensure that all patients receive appropriate care regardless of financial means.”
Well since you continue to reply, and this isn’t going anywhere, you won’t change my mind and I won’t change yours. I’ll stop replying after this, you’re welcome to continue to do so if you see fit, but I won’t waste time anymore.