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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (11995)	12/1/2009 3:44:46 PM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Item in Atlanta Journal & Constitution Sunday 20 April 2014 Press Release Atlanta Field Office Federal Bureau of Investigation Yesterday 4 Deputy US Marshals were detailed to serve an arrest warrant on Philip Gordon 63 of Carroll County in west Georgia. Mr Gordon refused to allow the Marshals entrance to his gated property whereupon the gate was breached using necessary force. During the process Mr Gordon's 2 Labrador retrievers charged the federal agents and were dispatched. Mr Gordon refused to submit to arrest and brandished an assault rifle accusing the Marshals of trespassing before retreating into his home. The Marshals summoned backup from the local Carroll County Sheriff's office and two of the 6 responding deputies refused to cooperate in serving the lawful warrant. They were immediately relieved of duty. Additional backup from agents in the Atlanta field offices of the FBI and BATFE surrounded the Gordon residence. Repeated demands for Gordon to surrender went unheeded and chemical agents were introduced into the structure. An hour later an unconscious Gordon was taken into custody and booked into the Fulton county jail on the warrant charging refusal to pay the $15,000.00 penalty for failure to maintain a government approved medical insurance policy. Something to ponder: What will be your reaction dear reader, when you read the above news item? fightingintheshade.blogspot.com h/t tg

To: Lane3 who wrote (11995)	12/1/2009 7:25:06 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

We already discussed this. Didn't we agree that European women are more likely to do self-exams because they aren't afforded mammograms as frequently? I don't recall that but thinking about it, I'm not so sure its true. It would make sense they ought to be doing more self-exams but I wouldn't bet on them doing more. They may well not even think about it as much. You haven't verified that she was off by a factor of ten. No, I haven't. I figured it was enough to demonstrate that she was off by a considerable amount ... was just speculating that she might be off by a factor of ten or more Again that seems like the kind of imprecision that I'd author you're criticizing did. one can tell intuitively that she was off by a whole lot. Our judgment is different there. I'd expect an accurate % if it were attainable would be at least half of 11%. Maybe higher. What matters is that her methodology for computing her percentage was totally wrong-headed due to apples and aircraft carriers. I will observe you're making an assumption as well, that early mammograms isn't anywhere close to 11%. The writer clearly assumed it was at least close to 11%. I could write more but am tiring of this discussion.