Rant and Rave Think Tank 2

[tsetse22]

Seems speculative at best. What other factors were overlooked in this study? People who eat a lot of fastfood also tend to be overweight. Overweight people may be more vulnerable to depression. People who work 45+ hours a week also tend to run a sleep deficit, and a lack of sleep has definite ties to depression. And that's on top of the possibility that they may be overweight, and overly stressed, and stress can lead to depression. Last but not least, overly-stressed, over-weight mid-level managers often ARE single due to job requirements, and being single or just a lack of sex period can also lead to depression. I think blaming the food itself is a red herring personally, but that's just my opinion.

I'm thinking along these same lines on this one. Depression and the correlating circumstances (diet) may have another connections, say income, education, self regard, etc that connect them both as opposed to saying they are the only two variables. What I think is that the tendency to get depressed and what a person eats are possibly BOTH derived from other factors. Connected yes, but not in a cause and effect manner directly.

[tsetse22]

On the privacy infringement topic, it's been decades since most telephone conversations are run through a computer program that filters them by trigger words (like trigger.. ha ha ha) and sorts them to a database for analysis. okay, I'll take off my foil hat now...

[KRSTY]

On the privacy infringement topic, it's been decades since most telephone conversations are run through a computer program that filters them by trigger words (like trigger.. ha ha ha) and sorts them to a database for analysis. okay, I'll take off my foil hat now...

Actually, Tsetse, there is a case in California see Hepting V AT&T., involves NSA that is current and possibly still pending in the Upper Courts.

*Goes to see if I can find a link*

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepting_v._AT%26T


Or google Hepting V AT&T

[KRSTY]

On the American Obesity topic

.alternet.org/food/152967/are_farm_subsidies_really_to_blame_for_obesity/

just add your www to the link to open it.

Or google farm subsidies and obesity.

Just to clarify, I don't think subsidies are the problem, but rather how cheap it is to produce the main ingredients in our processed foods, and the companies that produce and package foods filled with sugar, cornstarch, and bleached wheat known as white bread. It used to be a sign of a families status if they could afford to buy white bread back in the 40's or so. Now it's the cheapest and least nutritional thing available.

[JessicaBunny]

Let's look at obesity (technically, a body mass index higher than 30 kg per square meter) from a national perspective. Fresh stats from the OECD places America at number one, with more than a third of the population aged fifteen and older classifying as obese.

Consider the worst nations:

1. U.S. 34%
2. Mexico 30%
3. New Zealand 27%
4. Chile 25%
5. Australia 25%
6. U.K. 23%
7. Luxembourg 22%
8. Iceland 20%

Those are high numbers compared to France, Italy, Sweden, and Norway--all weighing in at around 10%. But can anyone tell me why that is the case? Why is, for instance, Luxembourg more like Mexico than France, or Iceland more like the U.K. than Norway? Is there a logic behind the stats or is it mostly random?

On the bottom of the list you'll find South Korea and Japan, both scoring slightly below 4%. Anywhere else this would be an indicator of extraordinary health, physical and psychological. However, when it comes to suicide rates--the strongest indicator of clinical depression--South Korea and Japan are far worse off than any of the nations mentioned above, be they obese or slender.

For the sake of clarity, I'm not looking to discredit the results of the study. There may well be a link between obesity and depression, and if there is one it should be made available to the public to increase awareness. Nevertheless, it is equally important to not let a singular finding overshadow the very dynamic and multicausal phenomenon that is depression.

no shocked that we are first where do countries like ireland, canada and germany land in those statistics? my dad always goes he'd rather live in canada then america with the way things are going here, but he has said this for years. . . we are a country of excesses and nothing is never enough, goes for food consumption too. i don't care if you or anyone else disputes the article i posted, i didn't write it, i only pasted it. . . but i believe it, did you ever watch the documentary called super size me? he showed how that diet can make you depressed also. it was an eye opening movie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Size_Me

[Dorn]

no shocked that we are first

Sure, but what would explain Mexico's and Chile's high rates?

where do countries like ireland, canada and germany land in those statistics?

They are very close. Canada weighs in at 17%, slightly above the OECD average, and Ireland and Germany at 15%.

my dad always goes he'd rather live in canada then america with the way things are going here, but he has said this for years. . . we are a country of excesses and nothing is never enough, goes for food consumption too.

That is to be expected, though. Historically, superpowers have always sought excesses in military might, economic growth (for a growing population), science, technology, religion, architecture, and so on. Excess and power go hand in hand.

i don't care if you or anyone else disputes the article i posted, i didn't write it, i only pasted it. . . but i believe it,

I didn't dispute it. If you had cared to read my post thoroughly, you would have seen that I was concerned about the scientist's obfuscation of other factors. Obesity may correlate with depression, but correlation is not causality.

did you ever watch the documentary called super size me?

I have. But as your link points out, Spurlock "intentionally consumed an average of 5,000 calories per day and did not exercise," which undermines most of the claims made by physicians in the documentary.

[BLUE]

I was talking with a friend of mine last night. She is originally from Germany and is heading back home soon. She told me she couldn't wait to get back home to see her mom and get skinny. Apparently food that is good for you is cheaper there. It is the stuff that is loaded with fat and huge calories that is expensive. I found that very interesting. Considering, here it seems to be the opposite for the most part.

[Dorn]

I was talking with a friend of mine last night. She is originally from Germany and is heading back home soon. She told me she couldn't wait to get back home to see her mom and get skinny. Apparently food that is good for you is cheaper there. It is the stuff that is loaded with fat and huge calories that is expensive. I found that very interesting. Considering, here it seems to be the opposite for the most part.

American food culture is much broader, but the aspect appealing to European whites is but a thin slip.

German cuisine is generally very rich in calories. But for those who prefer the in-between meals of bread, cheese, and pastries--be they French, German, or Swiss--then there is no end to the variety (and we Americans with a European heritage, I must admit, simply love this kind of food).

Also keep in mind that Germans, on average, drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes significantly more than Americans, so when they are forced to accommodate to an American lifestyle, they tend to get a little heavier. As such, it is only natural that she hopes to reverse this once she's back.

[tropicalheatwave]

some people eat too much.


some people eat too little.


both extremes seem to lack an appreciation for the life they have been given. as both can ruin your life and even lead to an early death.
but then again some people don't have much of a choice.

[Nostalgic]

NZ is high on the list and I'm not suprised the French are low. NZers love their fast food and fish n chips.

French are so overly watchful of what they eat. They "fait attention" all the time and will say it also.
If they see your eating a dessert 2 days in a row it's "fait attention"

Hubby has said though that there's more obesitity in France than ever before.

Im handing over all eating and food education to hubby for our little man.

While I think the French are overly obsessed about being slim and eating rabbit food, I think they still grow up with a better education regarding eating healthy.

Nz is trying though. It's now strict at school on what you put in your kids lunch box. No more crisps and pies it's sandwhiches and salads. No more cokes it has to be water or a healthy juice.

[Guardian7347]

It's now strict at school on what you put in your kids lunch box. No more crisps and pies it's sandwhiches and salads. No more cokes it has to be water or a healthy juice.

Did I read that right? They can tell the parents what they can put in their children's lunches? That's terrifying!

[St. Dymphna]

At least 12 dead....could have been prevented if just 1 of those people would have had a concealed handgun license.

[cap1015]

At least 12 dead....could have been prevented if just 1 of those people would have had a concealed handgun license.

Unless of course that 1 person was shot first and/or that one person started shooting back and missed and added to the death count.

I get your point St. D. but it's hard to defend against someone crazy, committed to cause harm and willing to die doing it.

I'm willing to bet that once it is reviewed this dude has been exhibiting signs of issues all along but he got ignored, or I could be wrong and he was really good and blending in and avoiding being spotted as a crazy. But I wish you were right St. D and someone had of pulled a concealed and put one between his eyes.




and so you know, I have a concealed carry license..........not sure I would have had it at the movies with though..............

[LifeChanges]

At least 12 dead....could have been prevented if just 1 of those people would have had a concealed handgun license.

I agree with Cap. It would be a hard shot in the middle of a dark theater with a panic stricken crowd. I would be afraid of hitting a bystander. Then everyone thinks you are a gunman too. I can imagine getting shot down by the police.

But I get your point as well. In better conditions, as sick as that may sound, it would be easier to take down an insane person like that.

[tropicalheatwave]

if only batman showed up.

[LifeChanges]

If only

[Nostalgic]

It's now strict at school on what you put in your kids lunch box. No more crisps and pies it's sandwhiches and salads. No more cokes it has to be water or a healthy juice.

Did I read that right? They can tell the parents what they can put in their children's lunches? That's terrifying!

Sadly yes but if the parents can't feed their kids properly I think rules are needed.

[Dorn]

At least 12 dead....could have been prevented if just 1 of those people would have had a concealed handgun license.

The perpetrator wore a riot helmet and carried body armor. And before he started firing aimlessly, he blocked the vision by throwing a smoke bomb. If anyone had tried to fire back, it may actually have increased the number of innocent victims.

Moreover, one victim was sitting in a theater nearby and was hit by a stray bullet that had pierced the wall.

For the record, I support extensive rights under the 2nd Amendment. But claiming that a CCW would have "saved the day" is as fallacious as the reverse argument, viz., "if guns were outlawed, there would be no shooting sprees." It's an absolutist position that misses the complexities of the situation.

[Guardian7347]

At least 12 dead....could have been prevented if just 1 of those people would have had a concealed handgun license.

The perpetrator wore a riot helmet and carried body armor. And before he started firing aimlessly, he blocked the vision by throwing a smoke bomb. If anyone had tried to fire back, it may actually have increased the number of innocent victims.

Moreover, one victim was sitting in a theater nearby and was hit by a stray bullet that had pierced the wall.

For the record, I support extensive rights under the 2nd Amendment. But claiming that a CCW would have "saved the day" is as fallacious as the reverse argument, viz., "if guns were outlawed, there would be no shooting sprees." It's an absolutist position that misses the complexities of the situation.

1. Riot helmets don't stop bullets. A shot to the head would have stopped him just as surely as if he was wearing a ball cap.
2. Body armor keeps the bullets from killing you, but it doesn't stop it from hurting like hell! Two or three rounds to the chest (probably only one), and this guy would hav been incapacitated from the pain. If trained soldiers drop from the pain, Bill Nye the science guy isn't going to be toughing it out.
3. He supposedly threw two smoke canisters , which still didn't produce enough smoke to obscure people's view of him coming up the aisle to shoot people in the rows. If you can see him coming, you can put two in his chest, maybe his head. Better still, due to the way theatre's are designed to allow viewers to see over the heads of rows in front of them, an armed person in the back rows could shoot down to the front of the room(where he started) with little risk of shooting an innocent bystander.
4. Let's suppose there WAS so much smoke that visibility was nil(that would require many times the amount of canisters he used, but let's pretend). This would actually work to the advantage of any armed citizen wishing to take out the suspect, because the shooter is blind too. The difference is, the shooter is firing at a high rate which means lots of muzzle flash, thereby pin-pointing his location, and despite the vest, he isn't expecting anyone to shoot back. Every soldier knows that muzzle flash can get you killed.

[MissWong]

That was a horrible tragedy and I feel bad for the those killed and injured. I\'m not sure what else to say, other than these situations should be preventable by now. I think he walked in with three guns and also booby trapped his home. I\'m new but saw the discussion and wanted to give a comment too.

[LifeChanges]

Three of the twelve victims served their country. One of them was planning on going back into the Navy. He threw himself on top of his girlfriend and saved her life

[Guardian7347]

Three of the twelve victims served their country. One of them was planning on going back into the Navy. He threw himself on top of his girlfriend and saved her life

Good man. Too bad he didn't have the option of defending himself.

[derz]

At least 12 dead....could have been prevented if just 1 of those people would have had a concealed handgun license.

The perpetrator wore a riot helmet and carried body armor. And before he started firing aimlessly, he blocked the vision by throwing a smoke bomb. If anyone had tried to fire back, it may actually have increased the number of innocent victims.

Moreover, one victim was sitting in a theater nearby and was hit by a stray bullet that had pierced the wall.

For the record, I support extensive rights under the 2nd Amendment. But claiming that a CCW would have "saved the day" is as fallacious as the reverse argument, viz., "if guns were outlawed, there would be no shooting sprees." It's an absolutist position that misses the complexities of the situation.

1. Riot helmets don't stop bullets. A shot to the head would have stopped him just as surely as if he was wearing a ball cap.
2. Body armor keeps the bullets from killing you, but it doesn't stop it from hurting like hell! Two or three rounds to the chest (probably only one), and this guy would hav been incapacitated from the pain. If trained soldiers drop from the pain, Bill Nye the science guy isn't going to be toughing it out.
3. He supposedly threw two smoke canisters , which still didn't produce enough smoke to obscure people's view of him coming up the aisle to shoot people in the rows. If you can see him coming, you can put two in his chest, maybe his head. Better still, due to the way theatre's are designed to allow viewers to see over the heads of rows in front of them, an armed person in the back rows could shoot down to the front of the room(where he started) with little risk of shooting an innocent bystander.
4. Let's suppose there WAS so much smoke that visibility was nil(that would require many times the amount of canisters he used, but let's pretend). This would actually work to the advantage of any armed citizen wishing to take out the suspect, because the shooter is blind too. The difference is, the shooter is firing at a high rate which means lots of muzzle flash, thereby pin-pointing his location, and despite the vest, he isn't expecting anyone to shoot back. Every soldier knows that muzzle flash can get you killed.

Even if someone could have fought back and shot him, it was at a movie theatre. No one expects to go to the movie theater and get shot at or have tear gas thrown at them. The tear gas would and probably inhibited the vision of everyone, except the shooter since he had a mask on and a face cover.
You can look over what could happen afterward, but the point would be that during that time, the people who were army personal were not expecting to be shot at while enjoying a movie.

I only hope that the families are able to get through this and justice is served.

[St. Dymphna]

You know who else didn't expect them to fight back, derz?

re: Support your local NRA folks.

[Dorn]

@ Green & Guardian
You're both relying on ifs that form a fictionalized account of the events as they unfolded. There is no "fighting back" in a dark movie theater filled with smoke and, as Derz points out, teargas.

Simplistic solutions are blinders, no matter how comforting.

[cap1015]

Regarding the shooting in Colorado.....Here's what I would have done if I was there, i would have..................................

I don't know what I would have done and neither does anyone else whose never been in a similar situation.

It's easy to say what you think you would do, but until your are actually faced with that real life or death situation you can only speculate.

Even if you have had military type training there is a chance that you will not react as you were trained. So discussing what if's may assist in analyzing and trying to help us deal with it mentally, that's all it is a discussion and speculation.

The real issue that should be sougt out is Why, why does this happen like it does in North America? Go back to the first postal shooting in Edmund Oklahoma in 1986 killing 14 people and then having at least 5 more similar shootings as late as 2006. Then the School shootings, High School and College. What creates this here that doesn't happen in other parts of the country? That's my two cents.

[St. Dymphna]

There is no "fighting back" in a dark movie theater filled with smoke and, as Derz points out, teargas.

Have you ever fired a side arm, or any weapon for that matter; been taught how to focus after having walked through CS gas?
Your if argument is no different than your above statement because it's still a leap to judgement, just like I've done.

Simplistic solutions are blinders, no matter how comforting.

Well you see dorn, that's the beauty of simplistic solutions: they don't require much thought, as the obvious solution[s] tend to be inherent of us all.

[Dorn]

There is no "fighting back" in a dark movie theater filled with smoke and, as Derz points out, teargas.

Have you ever fired a side arm, or any weapon for that matter; been taught how to focus after having walked through CS gas?

Not extensively, and of course I haven't walked through CS gas. But more to the point, that is to be expected among regular moviegoers, especially at midnight.

Your if argument is no different than your above statement because it's still a leap to judgement, just like I've done.

I find yours to be based on hypotheticals that require perfect hindsight (i.e., fallacious).

Simplistic solutions are blinders, no matter how comforting.

Well you see dorn, that's the beauty of simplistic solutions: they don't require much thought, as the obvious solution[s] tend to be inherent of us all.

You're conflating "reaction" and "solution."

[St. Dymphna]

i don't know what I would have done and neither does anyone else whose never been in a similar situation.

You see a guy dressed in all black with red hair get up from the front seats, head to the emergency exit and your first thought isn't to ask mang. if they have an employe fitting that description? This should be commonsense.

The real issue that should be sougt out is Why, why does this happen like it does in North America?

I'd have thought it obvious:

A society built on violence, rape and greed; the product of this envirement released back upon itself in a theatre playing a movie titled The Dark Knight Rises, all the while people left to wonder how or why this has happened.....and you don't find that even slightly amusing?

[St. Dymphna]

Okay, dorn.

[Dorn]

A society built on violence, rape and greed; the product of this envirement released back upon itself in a theatre playing a movie titled The Dark Knight Rises, all the while people left to wonder how or why this has happened.....and you don't find that even slightly amusing?

Oh I see, you are a nut job joker wannabe as well. Obviously you and the shooter would get along very well.

EDIT: No I do not find it even the slightest bit amusing.

[St. Dymphna]

Do you have a cute sister that's anywhere close to being as awesome as you are? Hook me up yo, let's cross dna.

[Dorn]

[St. Dymphna]

I've no time for this silliness, later man.

[BLUE]

I have a patient who is dieing. There is no more that we can do to save this person. We are all waiting for hospice to come in. These are nurses who come into the home and take care of the patient at the end of their life. Making sure they have no pain and tending to their needs. Problem is..the doctor in his own beliefs does not believe in this and will not order it for his patient.


Should doctors be able to inflict their own beliefs on someone else's life?

[Dorn]

Should doctors be able to inflict their own beliefs on someone else's life?

Your example is a bit hazy, but if this particular doctor is preventing the movement of a patient from intensive to palliative care, he is in fact violating standard medical procedure.

Is this similar to the Schiavo case?

[cap1015]

i don't know what I would have done and neither does anyone else whose never been in a similar situation.

You see a guy dressed in all black with red hair get up from the front seats, head to the emergency exit and your first thought isn't to ask mang. if they have an employe fitting that description? This should be commonsense.

Of course unless you figure, a.) it's part of the show, b.) you mind your own business as many people do c.) You freeze out of fear d.) you go to get up and your mates says "you're overreacting d.) the managment tells you "they'll check into it E.) you realize this guy is a psycho and you pull out your tech 9 and pumt three into center mass,,,,,,,,and then get to shower with bubba at the state pen because you just shot an actor...........St. D. I understand where you're coming from but I say this all the time, "things are easy to say, but sometimes hard to do, no matter how simple"

The real issue that should be sought out is Why, why does this happen like it does in North America?

I'd have thought it obvious:

A society built on violence, rape and greed; the product of this envirement released back upon itself in a theatre playing a movie titled The Dark Knight Rises, all the while people left to wonder how or why this has happened.....and you don't find that even slightly amusing?

Well that clears it up....................not!.............I agree there is something wrong, but just a blanket statement about greed/violence, rape makes this no clearer than saying it was because he was a Capricorn. There is no easy answer, no matter how much we want one and think it is easy to have perfect hindsight on things like this. Look up "going postal" on Wikipedia, has some of the worst employee shootings ever, from 1986 to 2006, look up columbine, Vtech, and if that sentence by Rums is the answer then explain it to me because I'm not smart enough to get it.

[tropicalheatwave]

The real issue that should be sougt out is Why, why does this happen like it does in North America?

Because in America you get a celebrity status for killing someone. and i believe Americans are more concerned with fame more so then in any other part of the world. if you can't become a famous actor, or singer then why not be a famous mass murderer. they may even make a movie about you.

its like its built in us. "American Idol" is a good example of that. so are these other reality shows where people are trying to be famous. i even had an Aunt tell me i should be a famous writer a few years ago because i have a wild imagination. looking back i should've said "why be a famous writer? why not just a writer?"

so it doesn't surprise me that a person fed up with life will try doing something stupid.

[BLUE]

Should doctors be able to inflict their own beliefs on someone else's life?

Your example is a bit hazy, but if this particular doctor is preventing the movement of a patient from intensive to palliative care, he is in fact violating standard medical procedure.

Is this similar to the Schiavo case?

Not exactly like that case. It is the doctor infringing his own beliefs on the patient. He does not believe in ever giving up. So he won't order end of life care. Even to the point of getting staff in trouble for mentioning to the patient. Does the doc have the right?

[derz]

It may not be what anyone wants such as they want their patients to never give up and keep fighting, but if the patient is done and has already made up his or her mind, then the doctor has to be an advocate for that patient and understand the reasons and respect the patient's wishes. The doctor or the nurses can talk to the patient and see how the patient feels. Get the patient to talk about their feelings about their condition or illness, and see why they might have given up. If there is nothing else that can be done, then the doctor and the nurses should reinstate to the doctor that there is a need to comfort the patient and make sure that when they do die, that they have lived the rest of their life in comfort and managed the pain.

[BLUE]

I worked at a hospital where the patient was a do not resusitate but the dr did. For his own reasons of not being able to let them go.

So god factor or sadness over losing a life?

[derz]

I worked at a hospital where the patient was a do not resusitate but the dr did. For his own reasons of not being able to let them go.

So god factor or sadness over losing a life?

It may be either. A doctor should always respect the wishes of the patient but can offer advise and consultation to the patient on their side.

[KRSTY]

I have a patient who is dieing. There is no more that we can do to save this person. We are all waiting for hospice to come in. These are nurses who come into the home and take care of the patient at the end of their life. Making sure they have no pain and tending to their needs. Problem is..the doctor in his own beliefs does not believe in this and will not order it for his patient.


Should doctors be able to inflict their own beliefs on someone else's life?

I think that is immoral. As a hospice caregiver, I can say with all honesty that I have NEVER heard a patient say that they prefer to die in a hospital rather than in the comfort and familiarety of their own home. Even hospice centers are more homey than a hospital. The only thing that would keep someone in the hospital against their wishes would be infectious disease or a lack of a responsible and safe home setting. In case of the later, they would go to convalesent care if they were otherwise stable to be transferred. Very sad situation BLUE. *hugs for great nurses that care*

[Dorn]

Should doctors be able to inflict their own beliefs on someone else's life?

Your example is a bit hazy, but if this particular doctor is preventing the movement of a patient from intensive to palliative care, he is in fact violating standard medical procedure.

Is this similar to the Schiavo case?

Not exactly like that case. It is the doctor infringing his own beliefs on the patient. He does not believe in ever giving up. So he won't order end of life care. Even to the point of getting staff in trouble for mentioning to the patient. Does the doc have the right?

Well, there is a chain of command according to which the doctor is the highest authority in a medical team. However, extraordinary circumstances would justify any act of insubordination from staff members. And if the doctor is citing faith as the source of his or her decision, as opposed to medical opinion, the staff should definitely take it up with the hospital board.

[BLUE]

It would be nice in a perfect world guys but doesn't always happen.

Now what would you do if someone's grandma is dieing and the family doesn't want her to know/ it has something to do with their culture and grandma speaks no english. They want her to keep fighting. She thinks she has a really bad cold and can't breathe. We know its the end stages of lung cancer.

[KRSTY]

That would explain a lot if it is the same person you referred to earlier. Some Asian cultures have dramatic superstitions about the dead. I dontt know specifics but I do know a family that refused to buy a home that they loved once they found out someone had died in the home. All of the family members that viewed the home went to a cleansing ceremony to get the spirit of the dead away from them before they would go home and wouldnt take a chance on the spirit following them to their new home. Some traditional American Indians have similar beliefs and will forever vacate a house if the corpse was not handled in a specific way. Idk about what you could or should do. I wouldnt interfere with those kind of belief systems though unless obviously illegal.

[Dorn]

It would be nice in a perfect world guys but doesn't always happen.

I alluded to the order we have, which is most imperfect as it relies on active participation in the face of office intrigue.

Now what would you do if someone's grandma is dieing and the family doesn't want her to know/ it has something to do with their culture and grandma speaks no english. They want her to keep fighting. She thinks she has a really bad cold and can't breathe. We know its the end stages of lung cancer.

I can't tell you what to think or how to act. But let the old adage do no harm guide you in your decision.

[derz]

It really depends. There are situations where you have to take with what the family wants if the patient can not speak or comprehend on his/her own self. For all patients, we are taught (nursing and doctor) to speak to the patient and discuss with the patient what is wrong with them. In that situation, you have to ask the patients if they feel like it would be a bad idea or talk to them about telling her and helping her with peace. You really have to just talk to the family and get them to understand why you want to tell her and understand why they may not want to tell her.

[MissWong]

On the doctor patient issue. Did the patient know their doctor had that point of view in advance, how long has that doctor had that patient under their care? This is why you should interview for doctors and get one that mirrors your own beliefs. The patients wishes would come first, if they are unable to make their wishes known, there would be a family member, spouse or some guardian who would step in and make their choices known.

[tsetse22]

More horrific, imo, is a patient (friend of ours) who has ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease) and the physician has not made it clear to the family her prognosis and disease process.

The family is just going along as she deteriorates like she's gonna recover. Wife's CNA, she was sending over for free had to finesse into the conversation with her husband and sons.... Talk about tough and totally unnecessary had the physician been professional.