Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers

  • Thread starter Dianelos Georgoudis
  • Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
C. E. White wrote:

>
> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>
>>When I used "we", I meant those of us who are in the field of science.
>
>
> It is commendable that you have appointed yourself the voice of science. I
> wonder if all scientist would agree with the appointment?

I can answer that right now. I don't. It even says "Scientist" in my job
title. Woohoo for me.

:)

 
Please stop abusing groups with your cross posts.

Mike

Brandon Sommerville wrote:
>
> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 11:49:02 -0500, "The Ancient One"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >"Daniel J. Stern" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:p[email protected]...
>
> >> Mine is based on getting very suddenly struck down with a large and lodged
> >> kidney stone at 4 in the morning while in Toronto. Extremely painful, but
> >> not life threatening. I was diagnosed, treated, operated upon and
> >> prescribed suitable meds in a fast, efficient, capable, thorough manner.
> >
> >You were lucky they still had money in the budget at that time, otherwise
> >you would have been placed on a waiting list.
>
> Have you ever been to Canada?
> --
> Brandon Sommerville
> remove ".gov" to e-mail
>
> Definition of "Lottery":
> Millions of stupid people contributing
> to make one stupid person look smart.
 
Just a simple request. Thousands of messages have been crossposted to
automotive newsgroups for the past month and it's gone on to long. Please
stop crossposting.
Nick

"Jeepers" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <TDLzb.23548$o9.11675@fed1read07>,
> "Nick N" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Please stop your crossposting.
>
> Or what?
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----


 
Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Jenn Wasdyke wrote:
>
>
>>>So your perception of Canadian healthcare is based on the experience of a
>>>friend of yours who was warned off the system by some unknown other
>>>individuals.
>>>Mine is based on getting very suddenly struck down with a large and lodged
>>>kidney stone at 4 in the morning while in Toronto. Extremely painful, but
>>>not life threatening. I was diagnosed, treated, operated upon and
>>>prescribed suitable meds in a fast, efficient, capable, thorough manner.
>
>
>>As opposed to the American health care system where kidney stone
>>patients are tossed out on the street and beaten before being put out of
>>their misery...
>
>
> Try getting a lodged kidney stone in America without medical coverage or
> lots of money, then get back to us.
>
> DS
>

Dan, living in America without medical coverage is stupid. I don't have
any patience for people who are deliberately stupid, nor do I want to
subsidize them. Decent health care is affordable here, so let's stick to
comparing someone in the US who HAS coverage (not lots of money) to
someone in Canada. At least you get to PICK your coverage and your
doctor here.





 

"Mike Romain" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Please stop abusing groups with your cross posts.

When I think it is time to stop posting I will. It is not abuse. Have a good
day.

>
> Mike
>
> The Ancient One wrote:
> >
> > "David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "Daniel J. Stern" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >
news:p[email protected]...
> > > > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Canada's healthcare system sucks.
> > > >
> > > > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American
> > living
> > > > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is
*vastly*
> > > > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
> > > > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the
> > Canadian
> > > > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare
needs
> > of
> > > > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
> > > >
> > > > DS
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's great. My experience in a French system was that it did fine
for
> > > everyday stuff: bandages, pain killers, antibiotics. Even then it
could
> > be
> > > a littel scary depending on the doctor you see. I was in an accident
and
> > > hurt my hand and wrist. No big deal, but I was rushed to the hospital
in
> > a
> > > scary ambulance ride (for sprain wrist!) and then when I got there,
they
> > > took my vitals and then took care of my hand. All went well enough
until
> > > the doctor saw my pulse rate. She thought is was too slow,
dangerously
> > so,
> > > and so perscribed some pills (in a plastic bag) to speed my heart up.
> > When
> > > I got home I promply threw them away. I think my heart rate was in
the
> > > 50's, which is not too slow. I felt great. No different than I ever
did.
> > >
> > > A friend of mine had a more serious condition and even though he had
the
> > > money to see a private doctor, went to the clinic. He went home in a
box
> > > because they didn't misdiagnosed his condition.
> > >
> > > The problem was, in my view, that the best doctors wouldn't come near
the
> > > socialized system, which paid poorly and rationed care. You cannot
avoid
> > > the trade-offs of a socialized system and a private competitive
system. A
> > > private system will leave some behind. A socialized system will give
> > > everyone less quality and quantity overall. It's true with any
"product".
> >
> > For a local example just look at the VA hospitals.


 
Please stop abusing groups with your cross posts.

Mike

"David J. Allen" wrote:
>
> "vlj" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "C. E. White" <[email protected]> sez:
> > <snip>
> > >It is not a marriage. <snip>
> >
> > Marriage started out as a property rite of ancient societies. It was then
> > co-opted by the church(es). Then governments got into the act when the
> > church was no longer one in the same as the government.
> >
> > Sticking to a dogmatic ritual that had its roots in protection of property
> > and bloodlines when the involved had little say or choice in the matter
> and
> > then foist that definition on everyone at large in today's society is most
> > medieval ...
> >
>
> Sounds like the first lecture in Feminism 101. Talk about dogma! The
> purpose of marriage, even to patriarchal societies, is still vital for the
> purpose of raising children.
>
> > VLJ
> > --
> >
> >
 
Lloyd Parker wrote:


> And the US refusing to buy any military hardware from Airbus isn't a form of
> subsidy to Boeing?
>

Nope. Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, and even Gulfstream and Cessna are
free to submit bids also. Its restricting military contracting to US
companies, and I have no problem with that.

 
Lloyd Parker wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, Steve <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>Oh, sure it does, Ed, if recognized as "marriage" they then get huge tax
>>>>>and benefits advantages, all of which are denied singles.
>>>>
>>>>The "new class of civil union" would cover that just fine.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Didn't "separate but equal" get discredited in the 1950s?
>>
>>Don't try to pretend that its about discrimination against homosexuals.
>>Many heterosexual couples would also take advantage of a new class of
>>civil union that didn't incorporate the religion-based term "marriage."
>>
>>Since suppressing religion is right up your alley, you ought to be
>>loving the idea.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> But there are no tax benefits to "civil unions", no inheritance benefits, no
> insurance benefits, etc.

Sure there would be. That's the whole point of creating the "new class
of civil union." "Duh" is the only appropriate response.




 
Steve wrote:
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Jenn Wasdyke wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> So your perception of Canadian healthcare is based on the experience
>>>> of a
>>>> friend of yours who was warned off the system by some unknown other
>>>> individuals.
>>>> Mine is based on getting very suddenly struck down with a large and
>>>> lodged
>>>> kidney stone at 4 in the morning while in Toronto. Extremely
>>>> painful, but
>>>> not life threatening. I was diagnosed, treated, operated upon and
>>>> prescribed suitable meds in a fast, efficient, capable, thorough
>>>> manner.
>>
>>
>>
>>> As opposed to the American health care system where kidney stone
>>> patients are tossed out on the street and beaten before being put out of
>>> their misery...
>>
>>
>>
>> Try getting a lodged kidney stone in America without medical coverage or
>> lots of money, then get back to us.
>>
>> DS
>>
>
> Dan, living in America without medical coverage is stupid. I don't have
> any patience for people who are deliberately stupid, nor do I want to
> subsidize them. Decent health care is affordable here, so let's stick to
> comparing someone in the US who HAS coverage (not lots of money) to
> someone in Canada. At least you get to PICK your coverage and your
> doctor here.
>

Um, I get to pick my doctor here, well, my wife did (in fact, my doctor
is a very attractive woman!). I pick which hospital I go to (I pick the
closest, normally because it is only three blocks away). I consult my
doctor as to which specialist I should see if I need it, and she sets it up.

Where do you get the idea that we get shoved where the "government"
wants us to go?

In small communities, there may be only one choice, but that is because
there is not enough sickness to go around |>) or because doctors don't
want to live in small communities!

Speak not of what you do not know!

Dan

 
please stop cross posting

Steve wrote:

> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>
>> And the US refusing to buy any military hardware from Airbus isn't a
>> form of subsidy to Boeing?
>>
>
> Nope. Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, and even Gulfstream and Cessna are
> free to submit bids also. Its restricting military contracting to US
> companies, and I have no problem with that.
>

 
Lloyd Parker wrote:


>>
>>Consumer Reports???
>>You've GOT to be kidding.
>>
>
> Why is it all the right-wing Taliban here would believe anything an HMO or
> drug company tells them but reject the main voice for the consumer?

Why is it the left-wing Stalinists belive a propaganda rag and can't use
multiple sources for reference?

 

Please stop cross posting
Dan Gates wrote:

> Steve wrote:
>
>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Jenn Wasdyke wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> So your perception of Canadian healthcare is based on the
>>>>> experience of a
>>>>> friend of yours who was warned off the system by some unknown other
>>>>> individuals.
>>>>> Mine is based on getting very suddenly struck down with a large and
>>>>> lodged
>>>>> kidney stone at 4 in the morning while in Toronto. Extremely
>>>>> painful, but
>>>>> not life threatening. I was diagnosed, treated, operated upon and
>>>>> prescribed suitable meds in a fast, efficient, capable, thorough
>>>>> manner.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> As opposed to the American health care system where kidney stone
>>>> patients are tossed out on the street and beaten before being put
>>>> out of
>>>> their misery...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Try getting a lodged kidney stone in America without medical coverage or
>>> lots of money, then get back to us.
>>>
>>> DS
>>>
>>
>> Dan, living in America without medical coverage is stupid. I don't
>> have any patience for people who are deliberately stupid, nor do I
>> want to subsidize them. Decent health care is affordable here, so
>> let's stick to comparing someone in the US who HAS coverage (not lots
>> of money) to someone in Canada. At least you get to PICK your coverage
>> and your doctor here.
>>
>
> Um, I get to pick my doctor here, well, my wife did (in fact, my doctor
> is a very attractive woman!). I pick which hospital I go to (I pick the
> closest, normally because it is only three blocks away). I consult my
> doctor as to which specialist I should see if I need it, and she sets it
> up.
>
> Where do you get the idea that we get shoved where the "government"
> wants us to go?
>
> In small communities, there may be only one choice, but that is because
> there is not enough sickness to go around |>) or because doctors don't
> want to live in small communities!
>
> Speak not of what you do not know!
>
> Dan
>

 
C. E. White wrote:

>
> Del Rawlins wrote:
>
>
>>The only equitable solution is for the government to get out of the
>>marriage business completely. That ought to **** off everyone equally.
>
>
> I can agree with this idea!
>
> Ed

Saves me taxes. I like it.

 

"Steve" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> C. E. White wrote:
>
> >
> > Del Rawlins wrote:
> >
> >
> >>The only equitable solution is for the government to get out of the
> >>marriage business completely. That ought to **** off everyone equally.

or just keep crossposting.
Please everyone. Stop.
Nick


 

"Brandon Sommerville" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 15:49:21 GMT, "David J. Allen"
> <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Brandon Sommerville" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 18:17:50 GMT, "David J. Allen"
> >> <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >The Europeans and Canadians choose to tax themsleves to provide cradle
to
> >> >grave care for health care. It's a choice they make. Good for them.
> >> >There's a price they pay for that. There's far less innovation and
change
> >> >in Europe than there is in the US. They tend to stick with the status
quo.
> >> >In the US, the competitive juices among companies are often too much
for
> >> >European companies. Airbus was subsidized for years to support
foreign
> >> >sales. Another example is telecommunications. Nokia has struggled
with
> >> >CDMA technology in the US because of the constant change and forward
> >> >movement in technology here. Europe would be happy to stay with GSM
as a
> >> >universal standard while US companies are pushing the technological
> >> >envelope. Is the most efficient? Maybe not, but it's the price we
pay for
> >> >innovation and new technologies. High energy competition is dollar
driven
> >> >(oh, how evil.... the greed!). The European model severely dampens
that
> >> >energy.
> >>
> >> Enron was dollar driven as well.
> >
> >Your point? Maybe that the profit motive is akin to corruption? If you
> >want to go there, be prepared to point the finger at more than corporate
> >corruption.
>
> No, that dollar driven isn't by definition a good thing. I'm not
> saying that it's a bad thing, but you appear to be saying that it
> simply makes it better by being that way. If you really want the
> latest in techno gadgets you have to look at the Japanese market, not
> the American.
>

Then we agree. The profit motive is key to a market driven ecnomy, which
works as opposed to central planning. Techno gadgets? Hmph. The point is
an economy that allows supply and demand to work and allows hard work and
innovation (read create wealth) to occur will respond to demand more
readily.



> >> >You can see the desparation to bring in outside money in Europe;
> >> >like government subsidies, their selling of weapons systems (France,
> >> >Germany) to ANYONE (read Saddam Hussein), willingness to accept
despotism in
> >> >exchange for lucrative trade deals (do you really think France opposed
the
> >> >war on "moral" grounds?).
> >>
> >> Give me a break. American companies were perfectly happy to sell to
> >> Saddam as well and as far as "accepting despotism" who do you think
> >> put him there in the first place and kept him there for years?
> >
> >Saddam's ledger is a long list of German, French and Russian companies.
> >France's reputation for selling to anyone for the right price is decades
> >old.
>
> And American companies didn't sell to him at all, right? You don't
> seriously believe that, do you?

Don't know and don't think it matters. There's always somebody out there
willing to do anything to make a buck. If they did, they broke the law.

>
> >The US did tolerate despotism in some countries, but not for money. You
> >just had to be anti-communist (or in Iraq's case a counterweight to
Iran).
> >It was cold war politics and it was a calculated risk. Were they
mistakes?
> >Probably. You can focus on the consequences of supporting a despot to
run a
> >country, but don't forget to wonder how things would had gone had
Communism
> >not been contained.
>
> The US has demonstrated that it's willing to support a friendly
> dictator to a democracy that doesn't agree with them many times over,
> regardless of the cost to the people involved. Claiming that they
> were going to go communist is a good way of justifying the actions,
> but that's all it is.

Bull. You don't understand the cold war for what it was. You look at bad
things that happened and extrapolate to the strategy as if the whole
strategy was flawed and designed to make (or not prevent) bad things happen.
The west had a strategy that ended up working. Some bad things happened
along the way.

The French were purposefully subverting the agreed upon UN strategy in Iraq.
It wasn't an accident or byproduct. There's a culture of "me and mine"
there that was the point I was making previously.

> --
> Brandon Sommerville
> remove ".gov" to e-mail
>
> Definition of "Lottery":
> Millions of stupid people contributing
> to make one stupid person look smart.


 
Please stop abusing groups with your cross posts.

Mike

Dan Gates wrote:
>
> Steve wrote:
> > Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Jenn Wasdyke wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>> So your perception of Canadian healthcare is based on the experience
> >>>> of a
> >>>> friend of yours who was warned off the system by some unknown other
> >>>> individuals.
> >>>> Mine is based on getting very suddenly struck down with a large and
> >>>> lodged
> >>>> kidney stone at 4 in the morning while in Toronto. Extremely
> >>>> painful, but
> >>>> not life threatening. I was diagnosed, treated, operated upon and
> >>>> prescribed suitable meds in a fast, efficient, capable, thorough
> >>>> manner.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> As opposed to the American health care system where kidney stone
> >>> patients are tossed out on the street and beaten before being put out of
> >>> their misery...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Try getting a lodged kidney stone in America without medical coverage or
> >> lots of money, then get back to us.
> >>
> >> DS
> >>
> >
> > Dan, living in America without medical coverage is stupid. I don't have
> > any patience for people who are deliberately stupid, nor do I want to
> > subsidize them. Decent health care is affordable here, so let's stick to
> > comparing someone in the US who HAS coverage (not lots of money) to
> > someone in Canada. At least you get to PICK your coverage and your
> > doctor here.
> >
>
> Um, I get to pick my doctor here, well, my wife did (in fact, my doctor
> is a very attractive woman!). I pick which hospital I go to (I pick the
> closest, normally because it is only three blocks away). I consult my
> doctor as to which specialist I should see if I need it, and she sets it up.
>
> Where do you get the idea that we get shoved where the "government"
> wants us to go?
>
> In small communities, there may be only one choice, but that is because
> there is not enough sickness to go around |>) or because doctors don't
> want to live in small communities!
>
> Speak not of what you do not know!
>
> Dan
 
In article <[email protected]>, Steve <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Dan, living in America without medical coverage is stupid. I don't have
> any patience for people who are deliberately stupid, nor do I want to
> subsidize them. Decent health care is affordable here, so let's stick to
> comparing someone in the US who HAS coverage (not lots of money) to
> someone in Canada. At least you get to PICK your coverage and your
> doctor here.

enough already


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
 
Please stop abusing groups with your cross posts.

Mike

Steve wrote:
>
> C. E. White wrote:
>
> >
> > Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >
> >
> >>When I used "we", I meant those of us who are in the field of science.
> >
> >
> > It is commendable that you have appointed yourself the voice of science. I
> > wonder if all scientist would agree with the appointment?
>
> I can answer that right now. I don't. It even says "Scientist" in my job
> title. Woohoo for me.
>
> :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Defenders Vs Insurers tomfoolery
Replies
1
Views
4K
lightning
lightning
300bhp/ton
Driven: New Defender - On & Off Road. Is it a Pretender?
2
Replies
30
Views
6K
lightning
lightning
P
Range Rover P38 EKA and BeCM Lockout
Replies
6
Views
5K
Doolinjames
D
natas
Hurricane Dorian survivor.
Replies
8
Views
2K
ProjectX
ProjectX
Alibro
How to recondition a VCU yourself.
15 16 17
Replies
325
Views
46K
Alibro
Alibro
Back
Top