I'm seeing a lot of the machinery that is modern medical care these days, as I accompany my wife from specialist appointment to specialist appointment, from test to test. It's a nightmare, with an almost total absence of caring people. I hope I'm never in the position of having to put my life into their hands.
We came, briefly, the other day across a nurse who was a human being. Such a relief. Then, of course, she was gone. She'd performed her task and ushered us out.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 20, 2024, at 11:05, Darrell King via groups.io <DarrellGKing@...> wrote:
Rarely do we admit that the system is overloaded and simply broke down. This might cost consumer confidence and interfere with geroiatric Medicare farming.
|
?
Well said!
?
Sorry. Was pn my phone--I should know better.?
?
"Resuscitating a dear parent who was expected to pass quietly away was an emotional burden."
?
In many cases, the family was exhausted from caregiving?prior to placement in the nursing home. This is followed by the gradual decline of the patient?over an extended, further taxing coping skills. Then comes hospice or end-of-life regimes which turn every day into a possible tragedy. The decisions?to avoid heroic measures (CPR, intubation, etc.) when a likely fatal complication arises are even more difficult. After all that, the moment comes and then a mistake or delayed communication leads to those measures being enacted anyway and now the family must make the decision to end the life-sustaining treatment and allow the loved one to pass away. Somewhere, the system is pointing at a healthcare provider and noting that the person should not have done what he did.
?
Rarely do we admit that?the system is overloaded and simply broke down. This might?cost consumer?confidence and interfere with geroiatric Medicare farming.
?
D
?
?
Specter?? It's probably obvious, but I don't see it.
?
On Apr 19, 2024, at 15:13, Darrell King via <DarrellGKing=[email protected]> wrote:
?
?
MOLST was a go-to in the nursing home environment. Huge deal is we started CPR on a patient that had MOLST orders for not doing so. Of course, the main drive for the criticism came from the ultimate customer: the elderly patient's family. Resuscitating a dear parent who was not specter to pass quietly away was an emotional burden.
?
As for other words, I guess that all covers most eventualities. I would modify "never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders..." to "never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders that conflict with your values..."
?
Of course, it can be hard to know in advance!
?
I am not sure following orders is always the safest thing to do, either. In both the Marines and as a nurse, I was repeatedly told I was to follow legal orders. Not following an order placed the burden on me to establish my reasoning. Following an illegal order placed the burden on me to establish my reasoning.
?
Those cops who followed Chauvin's orders did not fare so well...
?
?
?
?
// ?If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.??//
?
In other words, it all depends on the judge and the jury and luck.? In other words, following orders is always the legally safest thing to do, except when it's not.? In other words, never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders from a hierarchical superior.? In other words, be independently wealthy and never leave the house.
?
-
?
Thanks for "MOLST":
?
Perplexity:
?
A "MOLST" or Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment is a medical order form used in the United States to document a patient's preferences regarding life-sustaining treatments. This form is particularly relevant for patients with serious health conditions or those who are at the end of their life. The MOLST form helps ensure that the medical care provided aligns with the patient's wishes, especially in emergency situations where the patient might not be able to communicate their preferences.
?
The MOLST form is recognized and used in several states, including New York, Massachusetts, and Maryland, among others. Each state may have its specific guidelines and procedures related to the completion and implementation of the MOLST form, but the core purpose remains the same¡ªto provide clear instructions about a patient's preferences for treatments such as resuscitation, intubation, mechanical ventilation, and other life-sustaining interventions.
?
In New York, for example, the MOLST form is a bright pink document that must be signed by a licensed physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant. It is the only authorized form in New York State for documenting non-hospital Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and Do Not Intubate (DNI) orders. The form is intended to travel with the patient across different care settings to ensure continuity of care and adherence to the patient's wishes[1][4][6].
?
In Massachusetts, the MOLST form is used similarly, allowing patients with serious advancing illnesses to document their treatment preferences. The form must be filled out based on discussions between the patient, their healthcare provider, and possibly family members or other trusted advisors. This ensures that the medical orders reflect the patient's values, goals, and preferred intensity of care at the end of life[3][5].
?
Maryland's MOLST form serves a similar purpose and replaces the earlier EMS/DNR form. It is a portable and enduring medical order that must be honored across healthcare settings, ensuring that the patient's treatment preferences are followed by all healthcare providers, including emergency medical services[8].
?
Overall, the MOLST form is a critical tool in patient-centered healthcare, enabling individuals to make informed decisions about their medical treatment and ensuring that these decisions are respected across healthcare settings[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8].
?
Citations:
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
?
-
?
The states in the United States that use MOLST (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) forms are New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Ohio, and Maryland[2].
?
Citations:
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
?
?
?
The almost irresistible illusion that numbers represent facts ensures that people become increasingly convinced that their own fiction is reality. ?- ?Mattias Desmet
?
?
?
?
On Apr 19, 2024, at 13:32, Darrell King via <DarrellGKing=[email protected]> wrote:
?
?
Much maligned after being attributed to the German citizenry in WWII, the "following orders" rationale still has some validity. The key point is whether?it is being used to abdicate responsibility?for unethical?behavior or whether it is being more validly applied as shorthand for "I was never expected to know the full reasoning for my superior's orders but I did my best as I understood the situation."
?
Were the orders legal? Were they ethical? Were they moral? National guard troops controlling protests come to mind. A nurse declining to provide treatment when her facility's management clearly does not allow it. or a nurse declining to provide life-saving measures when a doctor orders them stopped and a MOLST is known to be present. There could be a case for civil liberties violations in any of these scenarios.
?
Then come personal values. Do mine lean toward fitting in as a reliable component of my establishment, as with?a soldier who believes in the overarching?mission of his army? Or am I more of an individualist who finds myself in a tough position, or even in the wrong profession altogether? Do my values insist I should be placing my family first? After all, I love them and they are trusting me to fill my family role...
?
I would call the response "good faith" if it was executed faithfully and consistently by an actor who makes his course transparent. If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.
?
D
?
?
?
// ? ?In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no.? ? //
?
"I was just following orders." ?Would you call that "good faith"?? How about: ?"I was following orders that my contract obliged me to follow on pain of losing my job.? I have a family to support."
?
?
1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual[s] are?
If we are speaking of the public official's private behaviour and if the offense is a crime or a civil violation, why not? Politicians and public?employees are not exempt from the law.
?
On the other hand, if this is a matter of an official act made in the execution of official's duties, this is more difficult. Some professions have internal regulatory processes for ethical or mechanical transgressions. Some are entangled in complex interactions between different forces, such as the challenges of teachers brought by the exploration of gender identity in public schools. In such a case, suing a teacher for supporting the stance of his school district?or applicable?governing body would be punishing the teacher for doing his job.
?
In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no. Those who violate civil rights while?transgressing the trust of their position are fair game.
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
?
Another new term for me.
?
Yes. I had to check with the wife, who handles the shopping, and my suspicions were right: she mentioned chips and cereal as examples.
?
Two members of my family have been growing vegetables and one even dries her own stores because the grocery?situation is getting worse for the consumer?such unobvious ways.
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
?
Duh.
4.? Were you surprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
?
It was about what I expected, but my tax situation has simplified immensely since I retired.
?
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
?
I would say yes if the public expense or other impact is negligible. No fanfare is necessary--a simple decision?based upon precedent, law and which considers the seriousness of the offense should suffice.?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
|
1.? Should
public officials be chargeable for violations of civil
rights of individuals to the same degree that private
individual are?
They already are. People who work for the government hold
substantial authority due to their position, but this authority is
not unlimited. Government officials and employees generally cannot
violate the civil rights of people who interact with them. Someone
who has suffered a violation of their civil rights at the hands of a
state or local government official can bring a Section 1983 claim.
There's a similar provision under federal law.
2.? Have
you experienced shrinkflation on?
Not on anything that I buy
3.? Do
you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign
should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
I don't think there are any in that pool.
4.? Were
you suprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year -
whether you got a refund or not?
No
5.?
Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school
graduation?
No. He should be treated just like anyone else would be.
Aloha,
Celeste Rogers
|
Sorry. Was pn my phone--I should know better.?
"Resuscitating a dear parent who was expected to pass quietly away was an emotional burden."
In many cases, the family was exhausted from caregiving?prior to placement in the nursing home. This is followed by the gradual decline of the patient?over an extended, further taxing coping skills. Then comes hospice or end-of-life regimes which turn every day into a possible tragedy. The decisions?to avoid heroic measures (CPR, intubation, etc.) when a likely fatal complication arises are even more difficult. After all that, the moment comes and then a mistake or delayed communication leads to those measures being enacted anyway and now the family must make the decision to end the life-sustaining treatment and allow the loved one to pass away. Somewhere, the system is pointing at a healthcare provider and noting that the person should not have done what he did.
Rarely do we admit that?the system is overloaded and simply broke down. This might?cost consumer?confidence and interfere with geroiatric Medicare farming.
D
Specter?? It's probably obvious, but I don't see it. ?
MOLST was a go-to in the nursing home environment. Huge deal is we started CPR on a patient that had MOLST orders for not doing so. Of course, the main drive for the criticism came from the ultimate customer: the elderly patient's family. Resuscitating a dear parent who was not specter to pass quietly away was an emotional burden.
As for other words, I guess that all covers most eventualities. I would modify "never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders..." to "never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders that conflict with your values..."
Of course, it can be hard to know in advance!
I am not sure following orders is always the safest thing to do, either. In both the Marines and as a nurse, I was repeatedly told I was to follow legal orders. Not following an order placed the burden on me to establish my reasoning. Following an illegal order placed the burden on me to establish my reasoning.
Those cops who followed Chauvin's orders did not fare so well...
// ?If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.??//
In other words, it all depends on the judge and the jury and luck.? In other words, following orders is always the legally safest thing to do, except when it's not.? In other words, never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders from a hierarchical superior.? In other words, be independently wealthy and never leave the house.
-
Thanks for "MOLST":
Perplexity:
A "MOLST" or Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment is a medical order form used in the United States to document a patient's preferences regarding life-sustaining treatments. This form is particularly relevant for patients with serious health conditions or those who are at the end of their life. The MOLST form helps ensure that the medical care provided aligns with the patient's wishes, especially in emergency situations where the patient might not be able to communicate their preferences.
The MOLST form is recognized and used in several states, including New York, Massachusetts, and Maryland, among others. Each state may have its specific guidelines and procedures related to the completion and implementation of the MOLST form, but the core purpose remains the same¡ªto provide clear instructions about a patient's preferences for treatments such as resuscitation, intubation, mechanical ventilation, and other life-sustaining interventions.
In New York, for example, the MOLST form is a bright pink document that must be signed by a licensed physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant. It is the only authorized form in New York State for documenting non-hospital Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and Do Not Intubate (DNI) orders. The form is intended to travel with the patient across different care settings to ensure continuity of care and adherence to the patient's wishes[1][4][6].
In Massachusetts, the MOLST form is used similarly, allowing patients with serious advancing illnesses to document their treatment preferences. The form must be filled out based on discussions between the patient, their healthcare provider, and possibly family members or other trusted advisors. This ensures that the medical orders reflect the patient's values, goals, and preferred intensity of care at the end of life[3][5].
Maryland's MOLST form serves a similar purpose and replaces the earlier EMS/DNR form. It is a portable and enduring medical order that must be honored across healthcare settings, ensuring that the patient's treatment preferences are followed by all healthcare providers, including emergency medical services[8].
Overall, the MOLST form is a critical tool in patient-centered healthcare, enabling individuals to make informed decisions about their medical treatment and ensuring that these decisions are respected across healthcare settings[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8].
Citations: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
-
The states in the United States that use MOLST (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) forms are New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Ohio, and Maryland[2].
Citations: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
?
The almost irresistible illusion that numbers represent facts ensures that people become increasingly convinced that their own fiction is reality. ?- ?Mattias Desmet
? Much maligned after being attributed to the German citizenry in WWII, the "following orders" rationale still has some validity. The key point is whether?it is being used to abdicate responsibility?for unethical?behavior or whether it is being more validly applied as shorthand for "I was never expected to know the full reasoning for my superior's orders but I did my best as I understood the situation."
Were the orders legal? Were they ethical? Were they moral? National guard troops controlling protests come to mind. A nurse declining to provide treatment when her facility's management clearly does not allow it. or a nurse declining to provide life-saving measures when a doctor orders them stopped and a MOLST is known to be present. There could be a case for civil liberties violations in any of these scenarios.
Then come personal values. Do mine lean toward fitting in as a reliable component of my establishment, as with?a soldier who believes in the overarching?mission of his army? Or am I more of an individualist who finds myself in a tough position, or even in the wrong profession altogether? Do my values insist I should be placing my family first? After all, I love them and they are trusting me to fill my family role...
I would call the response "good faith" if it was executed faithfully and consistently by an actor who makes his course transparent. If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.
D
// ? ?In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no.? ? //
"I was just following orders." ?Would you call that "good faith"?? How about: ?"I was following orders that my contract obliged me to follow on pain of losing my job.? I have a family to support."
? 1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual[s] are?
If we are speaking of the public official's private behaviour and if the offense is a crime or a civil violation, why not? Politicians and public?employees are not exempt from the law.
On the other hand, if this is a matter of an official act made in the execution of official's duties, this is more difficult. Some professions have internal regulatory processes for ethical or mechanical transgressions. Some are entangled in complex interactions between different forces, such as the challenges of teachers brought by the exploration of gender identity in public schools. In such a case, suing a teacher for supporting the stance of his school district?or applicable?governing body would be punishing the teacher for doing his job.
In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no. Those who violate civil rights while?transgressing the trust of their position are fair game.
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
Another new term for me.
Yes. I had to check with the wife, who handles the shopping, and my suspicions were right: she mentioned chips and cereal as examples.
Two members of my family have been growing vegetables and one even dries her own stores because the grocery?situation is getting worse for the consumer?such unobvious ways.
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
Duh.
4.? Were you surprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
It was about what I expected, but my tax situation has simplified immensely since I retired.
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
I would say yes if the public expense or other impact is negligible. No fanfare is necessary--a simple decision?based upon precedent, law and which considers the seriousness of the offense should suffice.?
|
Specter? ?It's probably obvious, but I don't see it.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 19, 2024, at 15:13, Darrell King via groups.io <DarrellGKing@...> wrote:
?
MOLST was a go-to in the nursing home environment. Huge deal is we started CPR on a patient that had MOLST orders for not doing so. Of course, the main drive for the criticism came from the ultimate customer: the elderly patient's family. Resuscitating a dear parent who was not specter to pass quietly away was an emotional burden.
As for other words, I guess that all covers most eventualities. I would modify "never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders..." to "never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders that conflict with your values..."
Of course, it can be hard to know in advance!
I am not sure following orders is always the safest thing to do, either. In both the Marines and as a nurse, I was repeatedly told I was to follow legal orders. Not following an order placed the burden on me to establish my reasoning. Following an illegal order placed the burden on me to establish my reasoning.
Those cops who followed Chauvin's orders did not fare so well...
// ?If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.??//
In other words, it all depends on the judge and the jury and luck.? In other words, following orders is always the legally safest thing to do, except when it's not.? In other words, never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders from a hierarchical superior.? In other words, be independently wealthy and never leave the house.
-
Thanks for "MOLST":
Perplexity:
A "MOLST" or Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment is a medical order form used in the United States to document a patient's preferences regarding life-sustaining treatments. This form is particularly relevant for patients with serious health conditions or those who are at the end of their life. The MOLST form helps ensure that the medical care provided aligns with the patient's wishes, especially in emergency situations where the patient might not be able to communicate their preferences.
The MOLST form is recognized and used in several states, including New York, Massachusetts, and Maryland, among others. Each state may have its specific guidelines and procedures related to the completion and implementation of the MOLST form, but the core purpose remains the same¡ªto provide clear instructions about a patient's preferences for treatments such as resuscitation, intubation, mechanical ventilation, and other life-sustaining interventions.
In New York, for example, the MOLST form is a bright pink document that must be signed by a licensed physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant. It is the only authorized form in New York State for documenting non-hospital Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and Do Not Intubate (DNI) orders. The form is intended to travel with the patient across different care settings to ensure continuity of care and adherence to the patient's wishes[1][4][6].
In Massachusetts, the MOLST form is used similarly, allowing patients with serious advancing illnesses to document their treatment preferences. The form must be filled out based on discussions between the patient, their healthcare provider, and possibly family members or other trusted advisors. This ensures that the medical orders reflect the patient's values, goals, and preferred intensity of care at the end of life[3][5].
Maryland's MOLST form serves a similar purpose and replaces the earlier EMS/DNR form. It is a portable and enduring medical order that must be honored across healthcare settings, ensuring that the patient's treatment preferences are followed by all healthcare providers, including emergency medical services[8].
Overall, the MOLST form is a critical tool in patient-centered healthcare, enabling individuals to make informed decisions about their medical treatment and ensuring that these decisions are respected across healthcare settings[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8].
Citations: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
-
The states in the United States that use MOLST (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) forms are New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Ohio, and Maryland[2].
Citations: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
?
The almost irresistible illusion that numbers represent facts ensures that people become increasingly convinced that their own fiction is reality. ?- ?Mattias Desmet
? Much maligned after being attributed to the German citizenry in WWII, the "following orders" rationale still has some validity. The key point is whether?it is being used to abdicate responsibility?for unethical?behavior or whether it is being more validly applied as shorthand for "I was never expected to know the full reasoning for my superior's orders but I did my best as I understood the situation."
Were the orders legal? Were they ethical? Were they moral? National guard troops controlling protests come to mind. A nurse declining to provide treatment when her facility's management clearly does not allow it. or a nurse declining to provide life-saving measures when a doctor orders them stopped and a MOLST is known to be present. There could be a case for civil liberties violations in any of these scenarios.
Then come personal values. Do mine lean toward fitting in as a reliable component of my establishment, as with?a soldier who believes in the overarching?mission of his army? Or am I more of an individualist who finds myself in a tough position, or even in the wrong profession altogether? Do my values insist I should be placing my family first? After all, I love them and they are trusting me to fill my family role...
I would call the response "good faith" if it was executed faithfully and consistently by an actor who makes his course transparent. If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.
D
// ? ?In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no.? ? //
"I was just following orders." ?Would you call that "good faith"?? How about: ?"I was following orders that my contract obliged me to follow on pain of losing my job.? I have a family to support."
? 1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual[s] are?
If we are speaking of the public official's private behaviour and if the offense is a crime or a civil violation, why not? Politicians and public?employees are not exempt from the law.
On the other hand, if this is a matter of an official act made in the execution of official's duties, this is more difficult. Some professions have internal regulatory processes for ethical or mechanical transgressions. Some are entangled in complex interactions between different forces, such as the challenges of teachers brought by the exploration of gender identity in public schools. In such a case, suing a teacher for supporting the stance of his school district?or applicable?governing body would be punishing the teacher for doing his job.
In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no. Those who violate civil rights while?transgressing the trust of their position are fair game.
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
Another new term for me.
Yes. I had to check with the wife, who handles the shopping, and my suspicions were right: she mentioned chips and cereal as examples.
Two members of my family have been growing vegetables and one even dries her own stores because the grocery?situation is getting worse for the consumer?such unobvious ways.
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
Duh.
4.? Were you surprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
It was about what I expected, but my tax situation has simplified immensely since I retired.
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
I would say yes if the public expense or other impact is negligible. No fanfare is necessary--a simple decision?based upon precedent, law and which considers the seriousness of the offense should suffice.?
|
National Conservatism Conference
. Very interesting speech from the National Conservatism Conference in Brussels on April 17, 2024 ?Melanie Phillips' plenary address at NatCon You will have heard that the police in Brussels tried to shut this conference down. With conservatism under attack it is even more crucial to support and defend it. Pat
?
|
MOLST was a go-to in the nursing home environment. Huge deal is we started CPR on a patient that had MOLST orders for not doing so. Of course, the main drive for the criticism came from the ultimate customer: the elderly patient's family. Resuscitating a dear parent who was not specter to pass quietly away was an emotional burden.
As for other words, I guess that all covers most eventualities. I would modify "never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders..." to "never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders that conflict with your values..."
Of course, it can be hard to know in advance!
I am not sure following orders is always the safest thing to do, either. In both the Marines and as a nurse, I was repeatedly told I was to follow legal orders. Not following an order placed the burden on me to establish my reasoning. Following an illegal order placed the burden on me to establish my reasoning.
Those cops who followed Chauvin's orders did not fare so well...
// ?If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.??//
In other words, it all depends on the judge and the jury and luck.? In other words, following orders is always the legally safest thing to do, except when it's not.? In other words, never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders from a hierarchical superior.? In other words, be independently wealthy and never leave the house.
-
Thanks for "MOLST":
Perplexity:
A "MOLST" or Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment is a medical order form used in the United States to document a patient's preferences regarding life-sustaining treatments. This form is particularly relevant for patients with serious health conditions or those who are at the end of their life. The MOLST form helps ensure that the medical care provided aligns with the patient's wishes, especially in emergency situations where the patient might not be able to communicate their preferences.
The MOLST form is recognized and used in several states, including New York, Massachusetts, and Maryland, among others. Each state may have its specific guidelines and procedures related to the completion and implementation of the MOLST form, but the core purpose remains the same¡ªto provide clear instructions about a patient's preferences for treatments such as resuscitation, intubation, mechanical ventilation, and other life-sustaining interventions.
In New York, for example, the MOLST form is a bright pink document that must be signed by a licensed physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant. It is the only authorized form in New York State for documenting non-hospital Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and Do Not Intubate (DNI) orders. The form is intended to travel with the patient across different care settings to ensure continuity of care and adherence to the patient's wishes[1][4][6].
In Massachusetts, the MOLST form is used similarly, allowing patients with serious advancing illnesses to document their treatment preferences. The form must be filled out based on discussions between the patient, their healthcare provider, and possibly family members or other trusted advisors. This ensures that the medical orders reflect the patient's values, goals, and preferred intensity of care at the end of life[3][5].
Maryland's MOLST form serves a similar purpose and replaces the earlier EMS/DNR form. It is a portable and enduring medical order that must be honored across healthcare settings, ensuring that the patient's treatment preferences are followed by all healthcare providers, including emergency medical services[8].
Overall, the MOLST form is a critical tool in patient-centered healthcare, enabling individuals to make informed decisions about their medical treatment and ensuring that these decisions are respected across healthcare settings[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8].
Citations: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
-
The states in the United States that use MOLST (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) forms are New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Ohio, and Maryland[2].
Citations: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
?
The almost irresistible illusion that numbers represent facts ensures that people become increasingly convinced that their own fiction is reality. ?- ?Mattias Desmet
? Much maligned after being attributed to the German citizenry in WWII, the "following orders" rationale still has some validity. The key point is whether?it is being used to abdicate responsibility?for unethical?behavior or whether it is being more validly applied as shorthand for "I was never expected to know the full reasoning for my superior's orders but I did my best as I understood the situation."
Were the orders legal? Were they ethical? Were they moral? National guard troops controlling protests come to mind. A nurse declining to provide treatment when her facility's management clearly does not allow it. or a nurse declining to provide life-saving measures when a doctor orders them stopped and a MOLST is known to be present. There could be a case for civil liberties violations in any of these scenarios.
Then come personal values. Do mine lean toward fitting in as a reliable component of my establishment, as with?a soldier who believes in the overarching?mission of his army? Or am I more of an individualist who finds myself in a tough position, or even in the wrong profession altogether? Do my values insist I should be placing my family first? After all, I love them and they are trusting me to fill my family role...
I would call the response "good faith" if it was executed faithfully and consistently by an actor who makes his course transparent. If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.
D
// ? ?In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no.? ? //
"I was just following orders." ?Would you call that "good faith"?? How about: ?"I was following orders that my contract obliged me to follow on pain of losing my job.? I have a family to support."
? 1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual[s] are?
If we are speaking of the public official's private behaviour and if the offense is a crime or a civil violation, why not? Politicians and public?employees are not exempt from the law.
On the other hand, if this is a matter of an official act made in the execution of official's duties, this is more difficult. Some professions have internal regulatory processes for ethical or mechanical transgressions. Some are entangled in complex interactions between different forces, such as the challenges of teachers brought by the exploration of gender identity in public schools. In such a case, suing a teacher for supporting the stance of his school district?or applicable?governing body would be punishing the teacher for doing his job.
In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no. Those who violate civil rights while?transgressing the trust of their position are fair game.
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
Another new term for me.
Yes. I had to check with the wife, who handles the shopping, and my suspicions were right: she mentioned chips and cereal as examples.
Two members of my family have been growing vegetables and one even dries her own stores because the grocery?situation is getting worse for the consumer?such unobvious ways.
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
Duh.
4.? Were you surprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
It was about what I expected, but my tax situation has simplified immensely since I retired.
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
I would say yes if the public expense or other impact is negligible. No fanfare is necessary--a simple decision?based upon precedent, law and which considers the seriousness of the offense should suffice.?
|
// ?If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.??//
In other words, it all depends on the judge and the jury and luck. ?In other words, following orders is always the legally safest thing to do, except when it's not. ?In other words, never take a job in which you're liable to receive orders from a hierarchical superior. ?In other words, be independently wealthy and never leave the house.
-
Thanks for "MOLST":
Perplexity:
A "MOLST" or Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment is a medical order form used in the United States to document a patient's preferences regarding life-sustaining treatments. This form is particularly relevant for patients with serious health conditions or those who are at the end of their life. The MOLST form helps ensure that the medical care provided aligns with the patient's wishes, especially in emergency situations where the patient might not be able to communicate their preferences.
The MOLST form is recognized and used in several states, including New York, Massachusetts, and Maryland, among others. Each state may have its specific guidelines and procedures related to the completion and implementation of the MOLST form, but the core purpose remains the same¡ªto provide clear instructions about a patient's preferences for treatments such as resuscitation, intubation, mechanical ventilation, and other life-sustaining interventions.
In New York, for example, the MOLST form is a bright pink document that must be signed by a licensed physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant. It is the only authorized form in New York State for documenting non-hospital Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and Do Not Intubate (DNI) orders. The form is intended to travel with the patient across different care settings to ensure continuity of care and adherence to the patient's wishes[1][4][6].
In Massachusetts, the MOLST form is used similarly, allowing patients with serious advancing illnesses to document their treatment preferences. The form must be filled out based on discussions between the patient, their healthcare provider, and possibly family members or other trusted advisors. This ensures that the medical orders reflect the patient's values, goals, and preferred intensity of care at the end of life[3][5].
Maryland's MOLST form serves a similar purpose and replaces the earlier EMS/DNR form. It is a portable and enduring medical order that must be honored across healthcare settings, ensuring that the patient's treatment preferences are followed by all healthcare providers, including emergency medical services[8].
Overall, the MOLST form is a critical tool in patient-centered healthcare, enabling individuals to make informed decisions about their medical treatment and ensuring that these decisions are respected across healthcare settings[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8].
Citations: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_Orders_for_Life-Sustaining_Treatment [2] https://molst.org/how-to-complete-a-molst/ [3] https://www.brighamandwomensfaulkner.org/patients-and-families/advance-care-directives/molst [4] https://www.health.ny.gov/professionals/patients/patient_rights/molst/frequently_asked_questions.htm [5] https://www.molst-ma.org [6] https://www.health.ny.gov/professionals/patients/patient_rights/molst/ [7] https://molst.org/how-to-complete-a-molst/molst-form/ [8] https://www.miemss.org/home/molst
-
The states in the United States that use MOLST (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) forms are New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Ohio, and Maryland[2].
Citations: [1] https://www.health.ny.gov/professionals/patients/patient_rights/molst/ [2] https://smartasset.com/estate-planning/molst-form [3] https://www.molst-ma.org [4] https://leadingageohio.org/aws/LAO/pt/sp/advocacy_molst [5] https://molst.org/how-to-complete-a-molst/molst-form/ [6] https://www.ons.org/cjon/20/1/implementation-medical-orders-life-sustaining-treatment [7] https://www.everplans.com/articles/state-by-state-polst-forms [8] https://polst.org/programs-in-your-state/
?
The almost irresistible illusion that numbers represent facts ensures that people become increasingly convinced that their own fiction is reality. ?- ?Mattias Desmet
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 19, 2024, at 13:32, Darrell King via groups.io <DarrellGKing@...> wrote:
? Much maligned after being attributed to the German citizenry in WWII, the "following orders" rationale still has some validity. The key point is whether?it is being used to abdicate responsibility?for unethical?behavior or whether it is being more validly applied as shorthand for "I was never expected to know the full reasoning for my superior's orders but I did my best as I understood the situation."
Were the orders legal? Were they ethical? Were they moral? National guard troops controlling protests come to mind. A nurse declining to provide treatment when her facility's management clearly does not allow it. or a nurse declining to provide life-saving measures when a doctor orders them stopped and a MOLST is known to be present. There could be a case for civil liberties violations in any of these scenarios.
Then come personal values. Do mine lean toward fitting in as a reliable component of my establishment, as with?a soldier who believes in the overarching?mission of his army? Or am I more of an individualist who finds myself in a tough position, or even in the wrong profession altogether? Do my values insist I should be placing my family first? After all, I love them and they are trusting me to fill my family role...
I would call the response "good faith" if it was executed faithfully and consistently by an actor who makes his course transparent. If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.
D
// ? ?In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no.? ? //
"I was just following orders." ?Would you call that "good faith"?? How about: ?"I was following orders that my contract obliged me to follow on pain of losing my job.? I have a family to support."
? 1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual[s] are?
If we are speaking of the public official's private behaviour and if the offense is a crime or a civil violation, why not? Politicians and public?employees are not exempt from the law.
On the other hand, if this is a matter of an official act made in the execution of official's duties, this is more difficult. Some professions have internal regulatory processes for ethical or mechanical transgressions. Some are entangled in complex interactions between different forces, such as the challenges of teachers brought by the exploration of gender identity in public schools. In such a case, suing a teacher for supporting the stance of his school district?or applicable?governing body would be punishing the teacher for doing his job.
In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no. Those who violate civil rights while?transgressing the trust of their position are fair game.
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
Another new term for me.
Yes. I had to check with the wife, who handles the shopping, and my suspicions were right: she mentioned chips and cereal as examples.
Two members of my family have been growing vegetables and one even dries her own stores because the grocery?situation is getting worse for the consumer?such unobvious ways.
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
Duh.
4.? Were you surprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
It was about what I expected, but my tax situation has simplified immensely since I retired.
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
I would say yes if the public expense or other impact is negligible. No fanfare is necessary--a simple decision?based upon precedent, law and which considers the seriousness of the offense should suffice.?
|
Much maligned after being attributed to the German citizenry in WWII, the "following orders" rationale still has some validity. The key point is whether?it is being used to abdicate responsibility?for unethical?behavior or whether it is being more validly applied as shorthand for "I was never expected to know the full reasoning for my superior's orders but I did my best as I understood the situation."
Were the orders legal? Were they ethical? Were they moral? National guard troops controlling protests come to mind. A nurse declining to provide treatment when her facility's management clearly does not allow it. or a nurse declining to provide life-saving measures when a doctor orders them stopped and a MOLST is known to be present. There could be a case for civil liberties violations in any of these scenarios.
Then come personal values. Do mine lean toward fitting in as a reliable component of my establishment, as with?a soldier who believes in the overarching?mission of his army? Or am I more of an individualist who finds myself in a tough position, or even in the wrong profession altogether? Do my values insist I should be placing my family first? After all, I love them and they are trusting me to fill my family role...
I would call the response "good faith" if it was executed faithfully and consistently by an actor who makes his course transparent. If any of those structures were missing or altered, I imagine it would?be a matter of an individual assessment.
D
// ? ?In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no.? ? //
"I was just following orders." ?Would you call that "good faith"?? How about: ?"I was following orders that my contract obliged me to follow on pain of losing my job.? I have a family to support."
? 1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual[s] are?
If we are speaking of the public official's private behaviour and if the offense is a crime or a civil violation, why not? Politicians and public?employees are not exempt from the law.
On the other hand, if this is a matter of an official act made in the execution of official's duties, this is more difficult. Some professions have internal regulatory processes for ethical or mechanical transgressions. Some are entangled in complex interactions between different forces, such as the challenges of teachers brought by the exploration of gender identity in public schools. In such a case, suing a teacher for supporting the stance of his school district?or applicable?governing body would be punishing the teacher for doing his job.
In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no. Those who violate civil rights while?transgressing the trust of their position are fair game.
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
Another new term for me.
Yes. I had to check with the wife, who handles the shopping, and my suspicions were right: she mentioned chips and cereal as examples.
Two members of my family have been growing vegetables and one even dries her own stores because the grocery?situation is getting worse for the consumer?such unobvious ways.
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
Duh.
4.? Were you surprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
It was about what I expected, but my tax situation has simplified immensely since I retired.
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
I would say yes if the public expense or other impact is negligible. No fanfare is necessary--a simple decision?based upon precedent, law and which considers the seriousness of the offense should suffice.?
|
// ? ?In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no.? ? //
"I was just following orders." ?Would you call that "good faith"? ?How about: ?"I was following orders that my contract obliged me to follow on pain of losing my job. ?I have a family to support."
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 19, 2024, at 12:12, Darrell King <DarrellGKing@...> wrote:
? 1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual[s] are?
If we are speaking of the public official's private behaviour and if the offense is a crime or a civil violation, why not? Politicians and public?employees are not exempt from the law.
On the other hand, if this is a matter of an official act made in the execution of official's duties, this is more difficult. Some professions have internal regulatory processes for ethical or mechanical transgressions. Some are entangled in complex interactions between different forces, such as the challenges of teachers brought by the exploration of gender identity in public schools. In such a case, suing a teacher for supporting the stance of his school district?or applicable?governing body would be punishing the teacher for doing his job.
In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no. Those who violate civil rights while?transgressing the trust of their position are fair game.
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
Another new term for me.
Yes. I had to check with the wife, who handles the shopping, and my suspicions were right: she mentioned chips and cereal as examples.
Two members of my family have been growing vegetables and one even dries her own stores because the grocery?situation is getting worse for the consumer?such unobvious ways.
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
Duh.
4.? Were you surprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
It was about what I expected, but my tax situation has simplified immensely since I retired.
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
I would say yes if the public expense or other impact is negligible. No fanfare is necessary--a simple decision?based upon precedent, law and which considers the seriousness of the offense should suffice.?
|
1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual[s] are?
If we are speaking of the public official's private behaviour and if the offense is a crime or a civil violation, why not? Politicians and public?employees are not exempt from the law.
On the other hand, if this is a matter of an official act made in the execution of official's duties, this is more difficult. Some professions have internal regulatory processes for ethical or mechanical transgressions. Some are entangled in complex interactions between different forces, such as the challenges of teachers brought by the exploration of gender identity in public schools. In such a case, suing a teacher for supporting the stance of his school district?or applicable?governing body would be punishing the teacher for doing his job.
In general, I would?say that if the official?is acting in good faith within the boundaries of his office, then no. Those who violate civil rights while?transgressing the trust of their position are fair game.
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
Another new term for me.
Yes. I had to check with the wife, who handles the shopping, and my suspicions were right: she mentioned chips and cereal as examples.
Two members of my family have been growing vegetables and one even dries her own stores because the grocery?situation is getting worse for the consumer?such unobvious ways.
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
Duh.
4.? Were you surprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
It was about what I expected, but my tax situation has simplified immensely since I retired.
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
I would say yes if the public expense or other impact is negligible. No fanfare is necessary--a simple decision?based upon precedent, law and which considers the seriousness of the offense should suffice.?
|
Re: [m-scholars-and-scribes] Re: Friday Five April 19
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual are?
Emphatically yes - just because they are public officials should not give them any special privileges
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
Yes - I notice that a lot of commodiities are changing container size - and never for larger.
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
I thin?employees of any political campaign should be excluded from any trial involving politics - which this definitely is
4.? Were you suprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
Not really - my income swas way down this year so I didn't pay as much as last year.? But I still pay almost as much as I get in Social Security
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
Of? course - high school graduation is the highlight of a lot of people's lvies
?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "M-Scholars and Scribes" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to m-scholars-and-scribes+unsubscribe@....
To view this discussion on the web visit .
|
?
?
?
?
?
?
1.? Should public officials be chargeable for violations of civil rights of individuals to the same degree that private individual are?
2.? Have you experienced shrinkflation on?
3.? Do you think employees of the Biden presidential campaign should be removed from the Trump trial jury pool?
4.? Were you suprised by the taxes due on April 15 this year - whether you got a refund or not?
5.? Should Trump be allowed to attend his son's high school graduation?
|
. ?Dr. Aseem Malhotra testifies in Helsinki regarding mRNA vaxx and heart attack, and some of the reasons that people refuse to acknowledge the link. ?
|
1.? Is the Iranian drone and ballistic missile attack on Israel a declaration of war?
It is a development in an existing war. Islamist extremists and Jewish extremists have made no secret of each having the goal of exterminating the other. Religious clothing is a long-existing fashion statement in the historical effort to drape the human lust for power in prettier bling. This is definitely an escalation, though, and a declaration of the willingness of Iran's various special interests to risk more in their determination?not to be seen as less. The children are drawing lines in the sand and then each is crossing the other's. I expect we will not see the end of such behavior anytime soon.
2.? ?What do you recommend?the Israelis do?
The Jews have a very powerful self-identity that is strongly founded on religious fervor as their God's chosen, on the concept of being unjustly persecuted, on the statement that they are entitled to their place in the Holy Land and on the perceived need to be seen as too scrappy to be worth attacking. My recommendation is that they promote their existing responses as propaganda to support that last part and otherwise secure the alliance with the wider world as part of an overwhelming coalition to enforce a rule of law on the international community and thus avoid widespread bloody warfare being used to settle differences.
What I expect?from the response is that the Old Testament example of God directing the?Israelites?to enact Holy punishment against the heathens for their transgressions against the Chosen of God will be a frontline banner was the IDF pours over terrorist positions. The Islamic groups will, of course, pursue the Holy jihad against the Israeli?heathens, so the Hebrew cause will have plenty of opportunity to wave such a banner.
With a little luck, Allah and God will get annoyed by all the noise and jackslap both sides.
3.? Is this the incident that is going to precipitate a full blown war in the Middle East?
I expect it is six and a half dozen because I can easily see it headed that way, yet such would be a very big step for the National Faces of the backroom extremists. Presently these have money, sex, sunshine and all the other material trappings of a great life. To officially join an all-out war would be too place everything they have on the line in a very risky move. OTOH, it presently is a fight for survival anyway and if their status quo is threatened by the global powers that be, they become cornered rats.?
I think it depends upon saving face and securing an attractive power balance in Palestine. If this does not happen, then war it is. Final answer.
4.? Will such a war extend beyond the Middle East?
Duh.
5.? What should the US do about this?
Pick the winning side and support it.?(Aligning with the losing side is obviously ill-advised.)?History has made it apparent that rooting out terrorist and guerrilla forces will be draining and expensive. Not to mention all to often unsuccessful. Colonization is not likely to be tolerated by the global community nor by the US citizenry. An overwhelming global coalition might have a chance putting the brakes on both terrorist activity and rogue state threats. Maybe.
I am personally hoping the actual international powers running the various national thrones decide that a global conflagration is not in line with their plans, but I am a diehard conspiracy theorist!
|
1.? Is the Iranian drone and ballistic missile attack on Israel a declaration of war?
No.? The Iranians have stated that it's a measured response to Israel's bombing a Iranian embassy in another country.
2.? ?What do you recommend?the Israelis do?
Nothing. ?
3.? Is this the incident that is going to precipitate a full blown war in the Middle East?
It could precipitate WWIII
4.? Will such a war extend beyond the Middle East?
Possibly
5.? What should the US do about this?
Immediately suspend all aid to Israel?until Netanyahu resigns and a centrist government is in office.
|
The Palestinians are the most Privileged refugees in the World
. ?The Palestinians are the most Privileged refugees in the World - Travelingisrael.com
|
?
?
1.? Is the Iranian drone and ballistic missile attack on Israel a declaration of war?? Definitely - the question is who else is involved in the declaration.
2.? ?What do you recommend?the Israelis do?
Stand tall and take out as much of the Iranian military structure as possible.
3.? Is this the incident that is going to precipitate a full blown war in the Middle East?
I think such a war has been going on for years - it merely got really hot yesterday
4.? Will such a war extend beyond the Middle East?
Probably so
5.? What should the US do about this?
Enforce the embargo on Iranian oil exports - the best way would be to take out the loading facilities in the Arabian Sea.
|
? 1.? Is the Iranian drone and ballistic missile attack on Israel a declaration of war?
No more than any other action Iran has done over the past decades.
2.? ?What do you recommend?the Israelis do?
I think they should do nothing. Israel shouldn¡¯t have attacked the Iranian consulate in Syria, but they did, so Iran retaliated. Now Israel should just drop it.
3.? Is this the incident that is going to precipitate a full blown war in the Middle East?
No, I don¡¯t think this will.
4.? Will such a war extend beyond the Middle East?
If the Middle East breaks out in full blown war, then yes, I think the war will spread, and every country will be affected. I also think China will take advantage of such a distraction to move into Taiwan.
5.? What should the US do about this?
Keep talking to both sides and try to get them to stop fighting.
|
Re: More bad news - from Japan
<<My doc is highly regarded.? Does open heart surgery and teaches.? He is not the only heart doc that has told me they can't write scripts for Valium. I've been doing my own research on afib.? It's a nerve problem, and Valium seemed to fit what I was looking for.? So I gave it a try, and sure enough, it calms my attacks or ends them in a half hour.?? I think the doc knows it works.? When I mentioned it he said 'Ah, good ol' Valium!'? followed by 'If I prescribed it I'd lose my license.' ?>>
He can¡¯t write you a prescription for valium, because you want the valium for a nerve problem. Heart doctors are only going to treat your heart, they specialize in that. Patients insurance will only reimburse them for treating the patient¡¯s heart, and the doctor¡¯s own liability insurance will only pay for them for treating the patients heart (or will charge them a higher premium for doing non-heart treatments.) Because valium is a controlled substance, the DEA closely watches controlled prescribing¡ªespecially if the prescribing does not match the doctors speciality. This is why your doctor said he¡¯d lose his DEA license if he prescribed Valium (DEA license is completely separate from physician license, but losing a DEA license means a doctor can no longer prescribe any controlled substance, which would be a huge problem for a doctor who does surgeries)¡ªand your was undoubtedly being hyperbolic, the DEA doesn¡¯t pull DEA licenses because of 1 questionable prescription, but it would be a red flag.
What you need to do is to talk to either 1) a neurologist 2) a pain specialist or 3) your general physician about getting a prescription of Valium for your nerve problem. These types of doctors can evaluate you for your nerve problem and decided the best course of therapy. Heart doctors don¡¯t treat nerve problems.
<<Seems they can only prescribe what the drug companies recommend.??>>
This is 100% incorrect for many reasons. 1) all drugs (including valium and all of its generics) are made by drug companies. All drug companies recommend their own drugs. Including generic companies¡ªin fact if you look through trade magazines, generic manufacturers often run just as many ads as the brand manufacturers do. 2) Drug companies have ZERO say over what doctors prescribe, and even wineing/dining to bribe a doctor into prescribing their drugs has been extremely curtailed for over 20 years. 3) it is insurance companies that dictate what doctors prescribe in that the vast majority of patients will not pay for prescriptions out of pocket, so doctors must prescribe what people¡¯s insurance pays¡ªeven if the doctor thinks it¡¯s a lesser treatment for that patient, a lesser treatment is better than no treatment. ? Rhonda
? So far, the pills have have gotten from him make things worse.
? I've been doing my own research on afib.? It's a nerve problem, and Valium seemed to fit what I was looking for.? So I gave it a try, and sure enough, it calms my attacks or ends them in a half hour.?? I think the doc knows it works.? When I mentioned it he said 'Ah, good ol' Valium!'? followed by 'If I prescribed it I'd lose my license.'
|
David Smith
David Smith
FreedomRocks