Healthcare Ruling: Individual Mandate Ruled CONSTITUTIONAL, entire law upheld.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

Your own link said this:

But the inclusion of infant mortality rates in calculating life expectancy creates the mistaken impression that earlier generations died at a young age; Americans were not dying en masse at the age of 46 in 1907. The fact is that the maximum human lifespan — a concept often confused with "life expectancy" — has remained more or less the same for thousands of years. The idea that our ancestors routinely died young (say, at age 40) has no basis in scientific fact.

So your link agrees with my previous post. Cool.

Only if that's where you stopped reading. The rest of the post actually REFUTES that claim.

You gotta read the whole article, not just cherry pick for points that support your assumptions.

The column later describes the statement as "completely wrong".

Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

You listed all people who lived privileged lives.

You were trying to claim that "medical science" is why we live so long today.

But they didn't have any of that stuff back in ancient Greece or Persia. Did they?

Than how did these "privileged elites" live so long? Magic?

reply to post by stanguilles7

i was responding directly to several posters who claimed they will never need a doctor, not just insurance

a clue for you, i AM one of those posters

i'm following just fine.
you're inability to accept the statement, i do not WANT a doctor ...
isn't my problem or the other posters.
you keep insisting one is Needed but you would be wrong.
a selection of them is strongly desired but again, at our choosing, not yours or anyone elses.

our ancestors did have needs and medical ones even, just none for modern day doctors or the pharamaceudical industry for that matter.

your beligerence does not impinge my comprehension one bit.

reply to post by muzzleflash
nice, well done and deserving of more than 1 star

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

i was responding directly to several posters who claimed they will never need a doctor, not just insurance

a clue for you, i AM one of those posters

i do not WANT a doctor ...
isn't my problem or the other posters.
you keep insisting one is Needed but you would be wrong.

I have never insisted one was needed. That's a straw man.

I merely stated my opinion that when people like you claim that you will refuse medical treatment, even on your death bed, under any circumstances, I do not believe you.

Perhaps instead of intentionally and repeatedly (and transparently) misrepresenting my point, you could debate with integrity?

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

You listed all people who lived privileged lives.

You were trying to claim that "medical science" is why we live so long today.

But they didn't have any of that stuff back in ancient Greece or Persia. Did they?

Than how did these "privileged elites" live so long? Magic?

Sigh. I'll ignore you now. Your arguments are all based on misconstruing my points, the sign of a weak mind.

Originally posted by stanguilles7


Only if that's where you stopped reading. The rest of the post actually REFUTES that claim.

You gotta read the whole article, not just cherry pick for points that support your assumptions.

The column later describes the statement as "completely wrong".

No it doesn't at all. Read it yourself.

It lists a few "modern references about mortality in modern Africa".

Then it goes on to refute your position by saying :

Of course, infant mortality is only one of many factors that influence life expectancy, including medicine, crime, and workplace safety. But when it is calculated in, it often creates confusion and myths.

When Socrates died at the age of 70 around 399 B.C., he did not die of old age but instead by execution. It is ironic that ancient Greeks lived into their 70s and older, while more than 2,000 years later modern Americans aren't living much longer.

And here you are, not even reading your own article to vet it, and trying to claim it says the opposite of what it actually claims.

It claims exactly what I claimed, that "medical science" hasn't really improved anywhere near as much as you believe it has, you are under the spell of an illusion.

"Isn't it Ironic?" Yeah it's incredibly ironic that the Greeks actually lived into their 70's or older, and 2,000+ years later here you are, telling me they died in their 20s and 30s.

Originally posted by stanguilles7


Sigh. I'll ignore you now. Your arguments are all based on misconstruing my points, the sign of a weak mind.

The same way you ignored the source you linked while claiming it said the opposite of what it actually said?

That's cool.
I would rather you hang out but it's your call.

reply to post by stanguilles7
oh please, if you are not going to conduct yourself better than this, find someone else to address

you did exactly that and with the word "need" ... you said specifically to me ... in this post ... www.abovetopsecret.com...

they will never need a doctor

emphasis mine

your childish rants aren't of interest to me.
integrity ?? pffft, can you even define the word without a dictionary ?

Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by habitforming

 

There are lots of people like that who pretend they 'dont need doctors'.

In my experience, the are liars.

i deos seem that you do imply that people need doctors....

Originally posted by clearmind
reply to post by Honor93

 

it would seem that they did imply that people 'need' doctors.....

edit on 29-6-2012 by clearmind because: (no reason given)

yes, i agree and i know a lot of warriors who will not see a doctor, so i'm still wondering what exactly is their point here ?

i also know a whole bunch of Scientologists who absolutely refuse to engage doctors, all of them, so again, where exactly is this great need for doctors ??

hmmm, come to think of it, i wonder how they'll (Scientologists) be exempted from this penalty?

now see, this really confuses me ... perhaps someone who has read the decisions can correct me (with links) if i'm mistaken ... as ObeyMeCare (cute ) is implemented and religious groups are granted exemptions ranging from - penalty to potential access [ie, Catholics and birth control] - how would this qualify as a Tax ??

isn't such a proposed tax supposed to be universal and based upon census records ?
if so, how do income levels or limits even apply ??

Originally posted by muzzleflash

You need modern doctors to live forever right?

I have not read the entire thread but have not seen any one saying anything about living forever.




You have never taken an antibiotic before?

reply to post by Classified Info
sure, i have but i'm guessing you never brewed any coloidal silver in your kitchen, have you?

this legislation aims to prevent me from caring for myself, how are you ok with that?

Originally posted by Classified Info

Originally posted by muzzleflash

You need modern doctors to live forever right?

I have not read the entire thread but have not seen any one saying anything about living forever.

You have never taken an antibiotic before?

Interesting point.

Chemists isolate and purify penicillin, but the government restricts our access to it and forces us to pay a doctor to get the "ok" to obtain it.

This is claimed to help reduce undesired mutation and limit resistances but it didn't work now did it? Because resistances and mutations occurred anyway. Maybe it "lessened the impact", but that's impossible to really tell.

By the way did you know that bee's honey is one of the most effective historically used antibiotic materials? And it is made by bees, and you can get it without a prescription. Granted I will concede it doesn't approach the power that penicillin or amoxicillin has , but it has less adverse reactions.

But again the "doctors" are merely a middle man between the chemist and the citizen, and the government controls the doctors through legislation.

Originally posted by Honor93
i have but i'm guessing you never brewed any coloidal silver in your kitchen, have you?

this legislation aims to prevent me from caring for myself, how are you ok with that?

If you want to brew up some of that colloidal silver in your kitchen then knock yourself out. Better you do that than buy it from the scam artist selling it on the internet.

reply to post by Classified Info
thanks for your vote of confidence - however, you slid right on by the point, why's that?

let me clarify the question.
why are you ok with being forced to see a dr to get a common antibiotic and at the same time, ok with me being put in jail for sharing a natural element (readily available) that i brewed at home ?

Originally posted by Honor93

 

thanks for your vote of confidence

- however, you slid right on by the point, why's that?

I dont think I slid by anything. How or where in the legislation does it stop you from caring for yourself or more more precisely stop you from brewing your homemade concoction?

I replied before reading your edit.

I would be very careful about giving out your homemade remedy to people. If it causes harm to someone your probably going to face civil and criminal charges.....irrespective of the legislation.

Source

................Despite the court ruling, there is still a chance that Republicans in Congress can repeal much of the law next year even if they don't have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Because Chief Justice John Roberts ruled that the mandate to purchase health insurance—one of the key provisions of the law—was a tax, Republicans can use a procedure called "budget reconciliation" to pass a repeal bill that requires only a simple majority to pass. But this scenario relies on the Republicans' ability to win the White House, keep the majority in the House and gain enough seats in the Senate.............

Originally posted by Classified Info

Originally posted by Honor93

 

thanks for your vote of confidence

- however, you slid right on by the point, why's that?

I dont think I slid by anything. How or where in the legislation does it stop you from caring for yourself or more more precisely stop you from brewing your homemade concoction?

I replied before reading your edit.

I would be very careful about giving out your homemade remedy to people. If it causes harm to someone your probably going to face civil and criminal charges.....irrespective of the legislation.

edit on 6/29/2012 by Classified Info because: (no reason given)

and that risk is no greater or less if i had a storefront and FDA approval, that's my point.

and this legislation doesn't say such yet but (i cannot acces it from here) there is a provision to make all OTC drugs prescription only.

to me, it's the same thing. coloidal was a bad example because i can make it in my kitchen but i'm not so lucky with the echanacea that i prefer.
why should i be forced to see a dr (against my will mind you) and pay him for a RX for the same thing i get at any store today?