Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (13327)	2/25/2006 9:19:58 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541658

I understand your point about the hospitals and their role in the marketing of formula. ... But you're awfully cavalier about liberty if you support making it illegal. nope. Just there is no reason why there should be any public subsidy to a relatively unhealthy and unproductive substance, and every reason why there should not. And it should absolutely be the public stance not to in any way encourage or support the use of artificial, inferior and expensive substitutes for the cheap, natural and superior real thing. No way should hospitals be required to publicise any worse alternative, any more than they should be required to have cigarette vending machines.

To: Lane3 who wrote (13327)	2/25/2006 10:59:55 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541658

It is not the same as making happy holidays illegal. Let's start with the fact that this is a bona fide health issue, and wishing someone a seasonal greeting, as far as I'm aware, is not a health issue. So in at least that way it is quite different. A hospital is charged with your welfare, and has a duty to offer you the standard of care a majority of doctors would suggest is reasonable care- and to offer you something under the imprimatur of care, that is, in fact, NOT compatible with the recommendation of doctors as to what is best for the care of mothers and infants, is an abrogation of a duty. As far as I know no one is charged with offering you a specific standard of care with regard to seasonal greetings- there's another major difference. There are many more, but to have my quite specific and legalistic arguments trivialized with your "irritating and offending" language is not to my taste. I'm not cavalier about liberty, but I can balance it with the special duties I think our health care providers owe us, and with what I see as appropriate roles for government to play in public health. I could say you are pretty cavalier about public health- but I don't want to trivialize your argument the way you have trivialized mine- so I'll just say you obviously value different things- but I will say you do not appear to place a very high value on public health issues.