ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags !MOD BOX WARNING! , donald trump , mental illness issues , psychiatry incidents , psychiatry issues , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 16th September 2020, 05:05 PM   #921
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,801
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Ah...but you're only seeing the part he wants you because it makes Biden looks like he's lost it which he actually hasn't. Here's the rest of what Biden says in bold:



You can tell where his stutter starts to kick in and he has to stop and rethink how he's going say it. I've highlighted it in blue.



OMG! He said "Harris/Biden" instead of "Biden/Harris"! Holy Crap. They'd better put me in a home because I call my dog Lilly "Maggie" and Maggie "Lilly" all the time. Hell, I even call them Lucy and Molly sometimes....and those two have been dead for years. And forgot which side his pocket was on? MOTHER OF GOD! All I can say is if those three doctors think these are signs of dementia, the medical board should take a look at THEM because I don't want them making any decisions about MY care.



They say? LOL Who are "they"? The same "they" Trump says begin sentences with "Sir"?



I think they should say whatever they want. If they want to make fools of themselves as family practitioners and put that kind of crap up as evidence of of Biden's 'dementia' I have no problem with it. It would just give me the heads up to avoid them as doctors if I lived in that area.
I can't tell you how many times in my childhood my mother called me RichardGeoffColinStephen!. She must have been right off the deep end. We should probably have all been in care of social services. Poor woman - 4 sons!
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 05:20 PM   #922
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
I can't tell you how many times in my childhood my mother called me RichardGeoffColinStephen!. She must have been right off the deep end. We should probably have all been in care of social services. Poor woman - 4 sons!
Same thing in my husband's family! Only it was MichaelAlanStevenDavid!
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 06:27 PM   #923
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Ah...but you're only seeing the part he wants you because it makes Biden looks like he's lost it which he actually hasn't. Here's the rest of what Biden says in bold:



You can tell where his stutter starts to kick in and he has to stop and rethink how he's going say it. I've highlighted it in blue.



OMG! He said "Harris/Biden" instead of "Biden/Harris"! Holy Crap. They'd better put me in a home because I call my dog Lilly "Maggie" and Maggie "Lilly" all the time. Hell, I even call them Lucy and Molly sometimes....and those two have been dead for years. And forgot which side his pocket was on? MOTHER OF GOD! All I can say is if those three doctors think these are signs of dementia, the medical board should take a look at THEM because I don't want them making any decisions about MY care.



They say? LOL Who are "they"? The same "they" Trump says begin sentences with "Sir"?



I think they should say whatever they want. If they want to make fools of themselves as family practitioners and put that kind of crap up as evidence of of Biden's 'dementia' I have no problem with it. It would just give me the heads up to avoid them as doctors if I lived in that area.

Maybe you can then understand where I’m coming from. I am concerned about the devolution of the medical community. Let them say what they want? Ok, but that means a good percentage of people are going to believe them simply because they are trusted Family Doctors. Those white coats carry a certain amount of gravitas. They carry the assumed imprimatur of science. When they speak outside the bounds of accepted medical practice, how is a layperson supposed to know what’s true and what isn’t?

I know enough to know that doctors are not infallible and are subject to the same biases we all are. Most laypeople have a different view.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 06:33 PM   #924
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,801
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Maybe you can then understand where I’m coming from. I am concerned about the devolution of the medical community. Let them say what they want? Ok, but that means a good percentage of people are going to believe them simply because they are trusted Family Doctors. Those white coats carry a certain amount of gravitas. They carry the assumed imprimatur of science. When they speak outside the bounds of accepted medical practice, how is a layperson supposed to know what’s true and what isn’t?

I know enough to know that doctors are not infallible and are subject to the same biases we all are. Most laypeople have a different view.
The Yale group most certainly are not that.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 06:47 PM   #925
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
These three family practitioners that xjx388 mentions cite such evidence as forgetting which side of his jacket his chest pocket was on, saying 'Harris /Biden' instead of 'Biden/Harris' once,etc as evidence of dementia but fail to mention Trump saying "herd mentality" instead of "herd immunity" several times, denying saying something he said several times on tape on more than on than one occasion, and mispronouncing words like Yosemite, Thailand and origin. But there are far more words he bungled

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 06:55 PM   #926
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Maybe you can then understand where I’m coming from. I am concerned about the devolution of the medical community. Let them say what they want? Ok, but that means a good percentage of people are going to believe them simply because they are trusted Family Doctors. Those white coats carry a certain amount of gravitas. They carry the assumed imprimatur of science. When they speak outside the bounds of accepted medical practice, how is a layperson supposed to know what’s true and what isn’t?

I know enough to know that doctors are not infallible and are subject to the same biases we all are. Most laypeople have a different view.
Most people have a different view? You're assuming facts not in evidence. How many people go to their doctor's social media page? If you get your political information from some doctor's social media page then you're an idiot. And if you're an idiot, you probably believe those guys in white coats on TV commercials are doctors, too, and there's nothing anyone can do to help you.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 07:09 PM   #927
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Most people have a different view? You're assuming facts not in evidence. How many people go to their doctor's social media page? If you get your political information from some doctor's social media page then you're an idiot. And if you're an idiot, you probably believe those guys in white coats on TV commercials are doctors, too, and there's nothing anyone can do to help you.

Well, I could say that if one gets their political information from a “Yale medical conference,” that one is an idiot.

That’s the thing: it’s being sold as medical information.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 07:19 PM   #928
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Well, I could say that if one gets their political information from a “Yale medical conference,” that one is an idiot.

That’s the thing: it’s being sold as medical information.
You could, but you'd be wrong. Because they're basing their opinions on years of observable videos of interviews and Trump's behavior and not on the laughable nonsense your doctors present. Wrong side pockets and stutter induced lapses in speech. These are many mental health professionals vs three family practitioners with a clear Trump bias. Or would you like to argue that Trump does not meet the criteria in the DHS for sociopathy?

Last edited by Stacyhs; 16th September 2020 at 07:32 PM.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 03:45 AM   #929
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,801
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
You could, but you'd be wrong. Because they're basing their opinions on years of observable videos of interviews and Trump's behavior and not on the laughable nonsense your doctors present. Wrong side pockets and stutter induced lapses in speech. These are many mental health professionals vs three family practitioners with a clear Trump bias. Or would you like to argue that Trump does not meet the criteria in the DHS for sociopathy?
This comes up periodically. To the best of my recollection xjx388 has never argued or provided evidence that Trump is not bonkers. xjx388's sole position is that knowledgeable specialists in the field of psychiatry are not allowed to say publicly that he is. Saying so will apparently cause the complete destruction of medical ethics.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 08:16 AM   #930
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
You could, but you'd be wrong. Because they're basing their opinions on years of observable videos of interviews and Trump's behavior and not on the laughable nonsense your doctors present.
There are years of observable videos and interviews of Biden as well. What makes one set of data, "laughable nonsense," and not the other?



Quote:
Wrong side pockets and stutter induced lapses in speech. These are many mental health professionals vs three family practitioners with a clear Trump bias.
None of these medical professionals have professed a political bias before this. We can infer that the docs in my community have such a bias because they are selective in pointing out Biden's flaws while ignoring Trump's. Why can't we make the same inference about the Yale group?

Quote:
Or would you like to argue that Trump does not meet the criteria in the DHS for sociopathy?
No. I would like to argue that no medical professional in these two groups has enough information to make such certain claims about either candidate because they've never met them. Also, small nitpick, criteria for "sociopathy" is not found in the DSM, nor is it a well defined diagnostic term.

Dementia is found in the DSM as Major or Minor Neurocognitive Disorder. Trump has been said to have Narcissistic Personality Disorder and/or Antisocial Personality Disorder. If we approach the criteria as a checklist and we agree (for the sake of argument) that mental disorders can be diagnosed by observation of speeches and interviews, I'm not sure how you can argue that the Yale Group's observations are valid and the Family Doctors' in my community are not. My own position is that neither observation is valid because they were not arrived at through standard practice.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 08:43 AM   #931
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 9,957
xjx388:

Thank you for dedicating your life to the field of health care.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 09:52 AM   #932
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,362
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
There are years of observable videos and interviews of Biden as well. What makes one set of data, "laughable nonsense," and not the other?
....
Because of what the data show! I think fair-minded people might agree that the 77-year-old Biden has lost a step or two since he became VP in 2009. But an occasional verbal stumble, often attributable to his lifelong struggle with stuttering, can't be compared to Trump's deliberate lies, his delusional rants, his profound willful ignorance, his belligerence, his rejection of ordinary human values and worse, not to mention his deep corruption and his subservience to foreign dictators. I repeat, this is another example of false equivalence: Biden (or Clinton) isn't perfect, so he (or she) is no better than Trump. That's what got us where we are.

The simplest argument you can make for Biden is that he understands what government is for, and he will appoint competent, experienced public servants to senior positions who will act in the interests of all Americans. That will be plenty.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 10:35 AM   #933
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Because of what the data show!
If 100 doctors look at the same set of data, they should use the tools of medicine to analyse that data. Those tools are designed to produce consistent results. Therefore, the same data set should show roughly the same thing to each doctor.

If you get inconsistent interpretations of data amongst doctors, that usually means the tools aren't being used correctly by some of them. If Doctor A says, "Senile dementia" and Doctor B says, "normal age-related cognitive decline," how is a layperson supposed to know which one is right? My whole point is that laypeople can't know the answer to that question. Therefore, doctors should not speak publicly about people they've never met.

In these cases you can't rule out bias. If you can't rule out bias, the interpretations are suspect. You can't just decide that one group is biased and the other isn't. The only way you can decide that is to see if proper methodology is followed. Right now, the state of medicine is such that an in-person exam is required. The local docs disagree with that just as much as the Yale group disagrees with that and I say that makes both of them wrong.




Quote:
I think fair-minded people might agree that the 77-year-old Biden has lost a step or two since he became VP in 2009. But an occasional verbal stumble, often attributable to his lifelong struggle with stuttering, can't be compared to Trump's deliberate lies, his delusional rants, his profound willful ignorance, his belligerence, his rejection of ordinary human values and worse, not to mention his deep corruption and his subservience to foreign dictators. I repeat, this is another example of false equivalence: Biden (or Clinton) isn't perfect, so he (or she) is no better than Trump. That's what got us where we are.

The simplest argument you can make for Biden is that he understands what government is for, and he will appoint competent, experienced public servants to senior positions who will act in the interests of all Americans. That will be plenty.
Fine. But that isn't a medical evaluation.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 04:09 PM   #934
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
There are years of observable videos and interviews of Biden as well. What makes one set of data, "laughable nonsense," and not the other?
The content. Do I have to play the role of Capt. Obvious?

Quote:
None of these medical professionals have professed a political bias before this. We can infer that the docs in my community have such a bias because they are selective in pointing out Biden's flaws while ignoring Trump's. Why can't we make the same inference about the Yale group?
Because the 'flaws' the Yale group are pointing our are FAR, FAR more serious than what your docs are pointing out. The Yale docs aren't pointing out forgetting which side of a jacket a damn pocket is on or a stuttering lapse. They're pointing out that the president is a pathological liar, and a dangerous sociopath .

Quote:
No. I would like to argue that no medical professional in these two groups has enough information to make such certain claims about either candidate because they've never met them.
.

You can argue that all day long, but you don't need to meet Trump to diagnose him as a sociopath anymore than you need to meet a guy with a bloody bone sticking out of his leg with a broken leg.

Quote:
Also, small nitpick, criteria for "sociopathy" is not found in the DSM, nor is it a well defined diagnostic term

Dementia is found in the DSM as Major or Minor Neurocognitive Disorder. Trump has been said to have Narcissistic Personality Disorder and/or Antisocial Personality Disorder. If we approach the criteria as a checklist and we agree (for the sake of argument) that mental disorders can be diagnosed by observation of speeches and interviews, I'm not sure how you can argue that the Yale Group's observations are valid and the Family Doctors' in my community are not. My own position is that neither observation is valid because they were not arrived at through standard practice.
Nit pick away. Your position is not valid because you're comparing a mountain of evidence against an ant hill. Has anyone who has interviewed Biden said he has dementia? No. Has anyone who has interviewed Trump said he doesn't know reality from non-reality? Yes. Has anyone close to Biden said he has dementia? No. Has anyone close to Trump said he is a pathological liar who doesn't care about anyone but himself? Yes..many people including family.

You've been banging this drum for months and gotten nowhere with it. I suggest you put down the sticks. You haven't convinced anyone. Can you figure out why?
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 04:23 PM   #935
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,937
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
This comes up periodically. To the best of my recollection xjx388 has never argued or provided evidence that Trump is not bonkers. xjx388's sole position is that knowledgeable specialists in the field of psychiatry are not allowed to say publicly that he is. Saying so will apparently cause the complete destruction of medical ethics open up the possibility of removing Trump from office for having a dangerous mental illness.
ftfy.

xjx388 is right. Unless Trump drops into a coma it doesn't matter how dangerous his mental illness is. Many Deplorables voted for him because they wanted a mentally unstable president. We can't take that away from them with a medical diagnosis.

xjx388 is, rightly, concerned that if knowledgeable specialists in the field of psychiatry are allowed to say publicly that he is then it could be seen as a justification for removing him by means other than impeachment or election. So not 'the complete destruction of medical ethics', but more destruction of democracy in the US.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 04:36 PM   #936
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,801
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
ftfy.

xjx388 is right. Unless Trump drops into a coma it doesn't matter how dangerous his mental illness is. Many Deplorables voted for him because they wanted a mentally unstable president. We can't take that away from them with a medical diagnosis.

xjx388 is, rightly, concerned that if knowledgeable specialists in the field of psychiatry are allowed to say publicly that he is then it could be seen as a justification for removing him by means other than impeachment or election.So not 'the complete destruction of medical ethics', but more destruction of democracy in the US.
Seen by who? And what other mechanisms for removal are there? I recognize that I may have missed where xjx388 has expressed these particular concerns. Could you provide a link?
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 05:10 PM   #937
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
xjx388, Biden is holding a Town Hall right now on CNN. Why don't you watch it right now and decide for yourself if Biden has dementia?
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 05:43 PM   #938
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,362
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
xjx388, Biden is holding a Town Hall right now on CNN. Why don't you watch it right now and decide for yourself if Biden has dementia?
I'm watching. There's no evidence of anything like dementia. There is a notable tendency to ramble when he could respond more succinctly. There's also some evidence that he's still fighting his stuttering. He paused briefly before he said something like "the places where you drop your mail," when he obviously couldn't get to the word "mailbox." But he's not crazy, he's not stupid and he doesn't spew lies. That's plenty for now.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 05:47 PM   #939
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,578
The point isn’t whether or not Biden has dementia. Just as the point was never about whether or not Trump is dangerously mentally ill.

The point is whether or not medical professionals should say he does in their capacity as professionals.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 05:54 PM   #940
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
I'm watching. There's no evidence of anything like dementia. There is a notable tendency to ramble when he could respond more succinctly. There's also some evidence that he's still fighting his stuttering. He paused briefly before he said something like "the places where you drop your mail," when he obviously couldn't get to the word "mailbox." But he's not crazy, he's not stupid and he doesn't spew lies. That's plenty for now.
What I notice is that he tends to jump to another thought before he finishes expressing the previous one. It's when the brain is faster than the mouth. This is also a cause of stuttering. It gives the impression of rambling or being disorganized in his thoughts.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 05:59 PM   #941
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
The point isn’t whether or not Biden has dementia. Just as the point was never about whether or not Trump is dangerously mentally ill.

The point is whether or not medical professionals should say he does in their capacity as professionals.
And we've beaten that dead horse to a freaking pulp.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 17th September 2020 at 06:36 PM.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 06:31 PM   #942
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,801
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
ftfy.

xjx388 is right. Unless Trump drops into a coma it doesn't matter how dangerous his mental illness is. Many Deplorables voted for him because they wanted a mentally unstable president. We can't take that away from them with a medical diagnosis.

xjx388 is, rightly, concerned that if knowledgeable specialists in the field of psychiatry are allowed to say publicly that he is then it could be seen as a justification for removing him by means other than impeachment or election. So not 'the complete destruction of medical ethics', but more destruction of democracy in the US.
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
The point isn’t whether or not Biden has dementia. Just as the point was never about whether or not Trump is dangerously mentally ill.

The point is whether or not medical professionals should say he does in their capacity as professionals.
Is Roger Ramjet’s assessment of the potential political impact of your concerns correct? Or is your point very simply an opinion on medical ethics? My understanding is the latter but a clarification would be appreciated.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 06:43 PM   #943
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Is Roger Ramjet’s assessment of the potential political impact of your concerns correct? Or is your point very simply an opinion on medical ethics? My understanding is the latter but a clarification would be appreciated.

RR is way off. Purely medical ethics.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 06:45 PM   #944
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,801
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
RR is way off. Purely medical ethics.
Thanks. That is what I have understood for this entire thread.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 06:55 PM   #945
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
And we've beaten that dead horse to a freaking pulp.

Yes. The whole topic of this thread is a dead horse. Trump will be voted out (hopefully) because of his actions (and inaction) in office, not because he is mentally ill. I hadn’t chimed in for awhile but I thought the local doc situation was interesting.

I posted on one doctor’s timeline: “You are so vocal about Biden’s mental health, I’m wondering how I could have possibly missed your assessments on Trump’s mental health in 2016. Care to comment on that?” Let’s see if I get a response. This is the doc I have a closer personal relationship with -this doc was a mentor to my wife right after Residency.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 06:56 PM   #946
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Thanks. That is what I have understood for this entire thread.
It should be understand by now. It's only been repeated ad nauseum. The disagreement has been over
1) whether it's unnecessary in Trump's case as there's so much public evidence over so much time in Trump's case and
2)whether Trump's an exception due to the danger he poses to the country and the world.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 06:58 PM   #947
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Yes. The whole topic of this thread is a dead horse. Trump will be voted out (hopefully) because of his actions (and inaction) in office, not because he is mentally ill. I hadn’t chimed in for awhile but I thought the local doc situation was interesting.

I posted on one doctor’s timeline: “You are so vocal about Biden’s mental health, I’m wondering how I could have possibly missed your assessments on Trump’s mental health in 2016. Care to comment on that?” Let’s see if I get a response. This is the doc I have a closer personal relationship with -this doc was a mentor to my wife right after Residency.
That should be interesting if he responds. If he doesn't, his silence should tell us all we need to know: he's a Trumper.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 07:57 PM   #948
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 82,896
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Maybe you can then understand where I’m coming from. I am concerned about the devolution of the medical community. Let them say what they want? Ok, but that means a good percentage of people are going to believe them simply because they are trusted Family Doctors. Those white coats carry a certain amount of gravitas. They carry the assumed imprimatur of science. When they speak outside the bounds of accepted medical practice, how is a layperson supposed to know what’s true and what isn’t?

I know enough to know that doctors are not infallible and are subject to the same biases we all are. Most laypeople have a different view.
Interpretation: You as a layperson feel competent to pass judgement on thousands of medical professionals.

__________________
ORANGE MAN BAD? Why yes, yes he is.

Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 17th September 2020 at 08:00 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 08:16 PM   #949
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Interpretation: You as a layperson feel competent to pass judgement on thousands of medical professionals.


Yes, I do. I’m a member of the public as well as being a very interested party in my role in medical administration. I understand medical ethics and the trust that has been placed in medical professionals.

That trust depends on ethical practice based on standards of medicine. When ethics and standards aren’t followed, that trust can be misplaced or erode. It’s already happening in so many other ways. That doctor in Houston who supports Trump, touts hydroxychloroquine and says demon sex causes physical ailments? Her and her allies muddy the waters when it comes to good information that the public can trust. The Yale Group and my local docs are no different. As someone whose livelihood depends on the trust people have for medical professionals -someone who actively works to build that trust in the community- not only do I feel qualified to pass judgement, I think it’s part of my job.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 10:31 PM   #950
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,937
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Is Roger Ramjet’s assessment of the potential political impact of your concerns correct? Or is your point very simply an opinion on medical ethics? My understanding is the latter but a clarification would be appreciated.
That's what he will tell you, but xjx388 has made it plain that he believes the psychiatry experts at Yale have a political agenda. So he isn't simply arguing that medical ethics should always be followed, but concerned about the political consequences of not following this one.

Originally Posted by xjx388
No one who hasn't conducted a clinical examination of Trump is in a position to make an assessment of his mental status. This includes a few pissed off, liberal psychiatrists.
Originally Posted by xjx388
How does it not make sense in these days to discourage psychiatrists from attacking people that they haven't even examined or interviewed personally under the guise of giving their expert opinion?...

How do you know he/she is insane? Maybe you just vehemently disagree with them and want to find a way to discredit them. How is the public supposed to know the difference between genuine scientific opinion or simple personal attack?
Originally Posted by xjx388
I get that you guys don't like Trump. Hell, I don't like him either. But I don't feel the need to label every politician that I don't like as "mentally ill." I'd rather focus on the issues rather than an irrelevant and distracting discussion about their mental state.
The argument is that the Goldwater rule prevents everyone from expressing valid concern about Trump's mental health. If you are a lay person then you are not qualified. If you are a mental health professional who is qualified then you are neutered by the ethical rules you agreed to uphold. Anything else is 'irrelevant and distracting'.

But far from being 'irrelevant and distracting', the subject of this thread (mental health experts making it their “ethical responsibility” to warn the American public about the “dangers” Mr Trump’s psychological state poses to the country) is the heart of the matter. The Goldwater rule didn't always exist, and nothing says it must be inviolate under all circumstances. To fully justify upholding it even in extraordinary times, some other reason must be provided than simply 'because it is the rule'. xjx388 understands this, which is why he offered his reasons for why it should be upheld.

His reasons are that 'liberal psychiatrists' are 'attacking' Trump 'under the guise of giving their expert opinion'. These psychiatrists say that Donald Trump is 'not fit to lead the US'. Clearly they are pushing to get him removed from office, and that is what xjx388 is really upset about.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 11:12 PM   #951
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 82,896
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
That's what he will tell you, but xjx388 has made it plain that he believes the psychiatry experts at Yale have a political agenda. So he isn't simply arguing that medical ethics should always be followed, but concerned about the political consequences of not following this one.

The argument is that the Goldwater rule prevents everyone from expressing valid concern about Trump's mental health. If you are a lay person then you are not qualified. If you are a mental health professional who is qualified then you are neutered by the ethical rules you agreed to uphold. Anything else is 'irrelevant and distracting'.

But far from being 'irrelevant and distracting', the subject of this thread (mental health experts making it their “ethical responsibility” to warn the American public about the “dangers” Mr Trump’s psychological state poses to the country) is the heart of the matter. The Goldwater rule didn't always exist, and nothing says it must be inviolate under all circumstances. To fully justify upholding it even in extraordinary times, some other reason must be provided than simply 'because it is the rule'. xjx388 understands this, which is why he offered his reasons for why it should be upheld.

His reasons are that 'liberal psychiatrists' are 'attacking' Trump 'under the guise of giving their expert opinion'. These psychiatrists say that Donald Trump is 'not fit to lead the US'. Clearly they are pushing to get him removed from office, and that is what xjx388 is really upset about.
Thanks for that analysis. I did pick up from other threads that xjx388 leaned right But I did miss how that was affecting the dogmatic position he supported in this thread.
__________________
ORANGE MAN BAD? Why yes, yes he is.

Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2020, 04:18 AM   #952
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,801
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
That's what he will tell you, but xjx388 has made it plain that he believes the psychiatry experts at Yale have a political agenda. So he isn't simply arguing that medical ethics should always be followed, but concerned about the political consequences of not following this one.







The argument is that the Goldwater rule prevents everyone from expressing valid concern about Trump's mental health. If you are a lay person then you are not qualified. If you are a mental health professional who is qualified then you are neutered by the ethical rules you agreed to uphold. Anything else is 'irrelevant and distracting'.

But far from being 'irrelevant and distracting', the subject of this thread (mental health experts making it their “ethical responsibility” to warn the American public about the “dangers” Mr Trump’s psychological state poses to the country) is the heart of the matter. The Goldwater rule didn't always exist, and nothing says it must be inviolate under all circumstances. To fully justify upholding it even in extraordinary times, some other reason must be provided than simply 'because it is the rule'. xjx388 understands this, which is why he offered his reasons for why it should be upheld.

His reasons are that 'liberal psychiatrists' are 'attacking' Trump 'under the guise of giving their expert opinion'. These psychiatrists say that Donald Trump is 'not fit to lead the US'. Clearly they are pushing to get him removed from office, and that is what xjx388 is really upset about.
No. I will accept xjx388's statement at face value. That other issues come up during discussion has no bearing.

"X is my position"
"No, your position is actually Y. I know better than you what you actually think"
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2020, 01:29 PM   #953
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 11,362
Biden is speaking at length -- and without notes -- about his plans. He's taking shot after shot at rich boy Trump and comparing him to working-class state u. Biden. "How many people in Scranton own stocks?" He's articulate, smart and effective.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2020, 01:39 PM   #954
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 9,706
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Biden is speaking at length -- and without notes -- about his plans. He's taking shot after shot at rich boy Trump and comparing him to working-class state u. Biden. "How many people in Scranton own stocks?" He's articulate, smart and effective.
Looking forward to the debates.
__________________
"He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."--Stacyhs
"If you are still hung up on that whole words-have-meaning thing, then 2020 is going to be a long year for you." --Ladewig
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2020, 02:36 PM   #955
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Biden is speaking at length -- and without notes -- about his plans. He's taking shot after shot at rich boy Trump and comparing him to working-class state u. Biden. "How many people in Scranton own stocks?" He's articulate, smart and effective.
He has a teeny tiny microphone in his ear with someone feeding him what to say. That and the performance enhancing drugs he's taking.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2020, 03:06 PM   #956
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 9,706
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
He has a teeny tiny microphone in his ear with someone feeding him what to say.
Friendly reminder that President Bush actually did just this . Would be hilarious to see Trump do it. He'd go off on some tangent anyway while muttering under his breath to the people trying to help him, telling them he knows what he's doing, he knows this better than anyone, etc.
__________________
"He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."--Stacyhs
"If you are still hung up on that whole words-have-meaning thing, then 2020 is going to be a long year for you." --Ladewig
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2020, 03:32 PM   #957
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper View Post
Friendly reminder that President Bush actually did just this . Would be hilarious to see Trump do it. He'd go off on some tangent anyway while muttering under his breath to the people trying to help him, telling them he knows what he's doing, he knows this better than anyone, etc.
I'm surprised that they're not already claiming he's doing this. But I guess they prefer the 'he's taking drugs' stupidity instead.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2020, 04:18 PM   #958
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
That's what he will tell you, but xjx388 has made it plain that he believes the psychiatry experts at Yale have a political agenda. So he isn't simply arguing that medical ethics should always be followed, but concerned about the political consequences of not following this one.







The argument is that the Goldwater rule prevents everyone from expressing valid concern about Trump's mental health. If you are a lay person then you are not qualified. If you are a mental health professional who is qualified then you are neutered by the ethical rules you agreed to uphold. Anything else is 'irrelevant and distracting'.

But far from being 'irrelevant and distracting', the subject of this thread (mental health experts making it their “ethical responsibility” to warn the American public about the “dangers” Mr Trump’s psychological state poses to the country) is the heart of the matter. The Goldwater rule didn't always exist, and nothing says it must be inviolate under all circumstances. To fully justify upholding it even in extraordinary times, some other reason must be provided than simply 'because it is the rule'. xjx388 understands this, which is why he offered his reasons for why it should be upheld.

His reasons are that 'liberal psychiatrists' are 'attacking' Trump 'under the guise of giving their expert opinion'. These psychiatrists say that Donald Trump is 'not fit to lead the US'. Clearly they are pushing to get him removed from office, and that is what xjx388 is really upset about.
Wow... You really are a great propagandist. Have you applied at the White House? You’re a shoo in!

Conservative doctors should also be prevented from attacking Biden. Medical opinions should be free from political bias of any stripe. I remain shocked that this is so controversial.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2020, 04:22 PM   #959
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,246
xjx388, did you ever get a response from your doctor friend about his lack of an assessment of Trump's mental health?
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2020, 04:37 PM   #960
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,801
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Wow... You really are a great propagandist. Have you applied at the White House? You’re a shoo in!

Conservative doctors should also be prevented from attacking Biden. Medical opinions should be free from political bias of any stripe. I remain shocked that this is so controversial.
I know we are in stark disagreement on the thread topic, but I have to say that you have always been quite consistent in your position. How someone could get that bizarre Interpretation of your position is beyond understanding.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:47 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.