RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight

RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DesideriScuri -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:17:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri The use of close monitoring to ensure compliance implies a threat of force. That there is going to be any force is not something I hold. I've already stated that point, just not in those words. monitoring means to observe or record (the activity or performance) of (an engine or other device) close monitoring is close recording of facts....weight loss, blood sugar levels, wieght, diet , calories, fluid intake, urine tests.... nothing to do with implied force. REALLY you are going with that? its really bloody ridiculous paranoia. UNFOUNDED paranoia OMFG!! Are you serious with that? The phrase "close monitoring" leaves open to interpretation just how close one will be monitored. We agree that it's not going to be even close to a 1984 situation. Did you ever hover over a child to keep them from not doing their homework? Wouldn't that constitute "close monitoring" that "ensures" compliance? Why would I stop my kids from doing their homework? Reading is fundamental. The example I gave was your hovering to keep them from NOT doing their homework. That is, your hovering would keep them doing their homework.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:21:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri The use of close monitoring to ensure compliance implies a threat of force. That there is going to be any force is not something I hold. I've already stated that point, just not in those words. Not in my English it doesn't. There is NO such implication at all. quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Yes, "compliance" wasn't in the quote. However, compliance would mean they are "eating better and exercising more." So, if you "ensure" they are "eating better and exercising more," you are ensuring compliance. Nope. I can "ensure" that my plants grow better. But if they don't??? Meh!! What do I do, chop them down or dig them up? Jeeezz... You can be a real dunce sometimes Desi. Merriam Webster Main Entry: com£pli£ance Pronunciation:km-pl-n(t)s Function:noun Date:circa 1630 1 a : the act or process of complying to a desire, demand, proposal, or regimen or to coercion b : conformity in fulfilling official requirements 2 : a disposition to yield to others 3 : the ability of an object to yield elastically when a force is applied : FLEXIBILITY "We" (generally), are using definition 1a (the main part); with the doctors using 1b. You, however, are taking ONLY the latter part of 1a and 2 and are refusing to even acknowledge the main part of 1a (and 1b). Once again, I do not think the NHS or it's doctors are going to force anyone into doing anything. The verb "to ensure" has as it's object, "they are eating better and exercising more." That was the phrase. That is how it is parsed. How am I wrong in that?

Lucylastic -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:22:57 AM)
actually it was simply bad grammar.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:27:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Reading is fundamental. The example I gave was your hovering to keep them from NOT doing their homework. That is, your hovering would keep them doing their homework. And what if they refuse to do it?? For most of us, we would just say 'fuckit' and let them get on with whatever they were doing. By your definitions, there is going to be some physical violence or curtailment of liberty. Or at least that is your assumption and posit - you said so. Oh really?? You must live in a fucked up world Desi, to hold such violent views. quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Once again, I do not think the NHS or it's doctors are going to force anyone into doing anything. And has been reiterated many times: there is NO force or coercion!! quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri The verb "to ensure" has as it's object, "they are eating better and exercising more." That was the phrase. That is how it is parsed. How am I wrong in that? Because you are only taking ONE part of the definition of how it is used and refusing to see the others. Ergo: you end up on the wrong end of the argument and failing to see the other.

Musicmystery -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:30:47 AM)
It's his MO. Find one part of one section of a hair split and then spend pages defending it as if it were the entire sole absolute truth. Just stop playing the game with him so he can tell himself he won and we'll all get on with life. Including grateful people in the UK diagnosed earlier with pre-diabetes.

mnottertail -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:31:01 AM)
I have not seen the actual documents of implementation, however I have read the Telegraph article, and there were no direct quotes on this ensure or report or anything from Stevens. Therefore, the hubris of the reporter in combining words does not make factual any implied or impugned Nazi-ism by the nutsuckers. We would have to go to the DailyMail for that.

ExiledTyrant -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:33:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery It's his MO. Find one part of one section of a hair split and then spend pages defending it as if it were the entire sole absolute truth. Just stop playing the game with him so he can tell himself he won and we'll all get on with life. Including grateful people in the UK diagnosed earlier with pre-diabetes. The end or the follicle? I mean, do you choose an end to split said hair, or does it split to a point then you split another... do you pluck the hair before splitting, or swing with the ax hoping to stop at the scalp, or do you just go ahead and cleave through the skull?

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:37:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I have not seen the actual documents of implementation, however I have read the Telegraph article, and there were no direct quotes on this ensure or report or anything from Stevens. Therefore, the hubris of the reporter in combining words does not make factual any implied or impugned Nazi-ism by the nutsuckers. We would have to go to the DailyMail for that. You are as subtle as a brick up side of tha' heed son!! [:D] [:D] But very true![:)]

mnottertail -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:40:13 AM)
koyaanis qatsi must be preserved.

Musicmystery -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:53:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery It's his MO. Find one part of one section of a hair split and then spend pages defending it as if it were the entire sole absolute truth. Just stop playing the game with him so he can tell himself he won and we'll all get on with life. Including grateful people in the UK diagnosed earlier with pre-diabetes. The end or the follicle? I mean, do you choose an end to split said hair, or does it split to a point then you split another... do you pluck the hair before splitting, or swing with the ax hoping to stop at the scalp, or do you just go ahead and cleave through the skull? This is the part where we bring in dictionary pastes of each word, simultaneously ignoring connotation for some words while inventing non-existent ones for others. Oh, and to spend 113 posts repeating "I didn't say follicle, moron, I said hair" while emphasizing the semantic difference. Also, since you mentioned cleaving the skull with an ax, the usual 2nd Amendment fetishists will be rushing in to spend another 113 posts proclaiming "See! Death by Ax! Are you going to ban firewood now????" Makes me think that THESE guys are the sane ones, combining 1st and 2nd Amendment themes... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ubtt1RDk_M0 [:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D]

ExiledTyrant -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:56:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery It's his MO. Find one part of one section of a hair split and then spend pages defending it as if it were the entire sole absolute truth. Just stop playing the game with him so he can tell himself he won and we'll all get on with life. Including grateful people in the UK diagnosed earlier with pre-diabetes. The end or the follicle? I mean, do you choose an end to split said hair, or does it split to a point then you split another... do you pluck the hair before splitting, or swing with the ax hoping to stop at the scalp, or do you just go ahead and cleave through the skull? This is the part where we bring in dictionary pastes of each word, simultaneously ignoring connotation for some words while inventing non-existent ones for others. Oh, and to spend 113 posts repeating "I didn't say follicle, moron, I said hair" while emphasizing the semantic difference. Also, since you mentioned cleaving the skull with an ax, the usual 2nd Amendment fetishists will be rushing in to spend another 113 posts proclaiming "See! Death by Ax! Are you going to ban firewood now????" Makes me think that THESE guys are the sane ones, combining 1st and 2nd Amendment themes... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ubtt1RDk_M0 [:D][:D][:D][:D][:D][:D] [sm=rofl.gif] Yep, that seems to be the sum of it all.

Lucylastic -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 8:58:12 AM)
snorts

DesideriScuri -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 10:43:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Reading is fundamental. The example I gave was your hovering to keep them from NOT doing their homework. That is, your hovering would keep them doing their homework. And what if they refuse to do it?? For most of us, we would just say 'fuckit' and let them get on with whatever they were doing. By your definitions, there is going to be some physical violence or curtailment of liberty. Or at least that is your assumption and posit - you said so. Oh really?? You must live in a fucked up world Desi, to hold such violent views. That would be up to the parent, Lucy, in this situation. But, yes, I do ensure my kids do their homework with various incentives and "monitoring." [:D] quote: quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Once again, I do not think the NHS or it's doctors are going to force anyone into doing anything. And has been reiterated many times: there is NO force or coercion!! That's what I fucking said! Holy shit! quote: quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri The verb "to ensure" has as it's object, "they are eating better and exercising more." That was the phrase. That is how it is parsed. How am I wrong in that? Because you are only taking ONE part of the definition of how it is used and refusing to see the others. Ergo: you end up on the wrong end of the argument and failing to see the other. It really hasn't anything to do with the definition there. It's rules of grammar, unless Yoda was the article's writer.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 10:44:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery It's his MO. Find one part of one section of a hair split and then spend pages defending it as if it were the entire sole absolute truth. Just stop playing the game with him so he can tell himself he won and we'll all get on with life. Including grateful people in the UK diagnosed earlier with pre-diabetes. The end or the follicle? I mean, do you choose an end to split said hair, or does it split to a point then you split another... do you pluck the hair before splitting, or swing with the ax hoping to stop at the scalp, or do you just go ahead and cleave through the skull? That depends entirely on the grower of said hair.

Musicmystery -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 10:45:52 AM)
Thinking of syntax, not grammar, you are.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 11:02:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Thinking of syntax, not grammar, you are. Syntax, specifically, yes. Part of grammar, syntax is.

LiveSpark -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 11:08:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Thinking of syntax, not grammar, you are. Writing like Yoda he is.

dcnovice -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 11:14:13 AM)
quote: Writing like Yoda he is. One Yoda not enough was? Still, better than Jar Jar, Yoda is.

LiveSpark -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 11:16:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: Writing like Yoda he is. One Yoda not enough was? Still, better than Jar Jar, Yoda is. HARD LIMIT!!!!! Kindly do not make mention of that....creature....in my presence [sm=rantint.gif]

Musicmystery -> RE: Doctors told to report patients who put on weight (1/3/2015 11:17:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Thinking of syntax, not grammar, you are. Syntax, specifically, yes. Part of grammar, syntax is. No, it's not. That's why "Joe went off to the store" and "Off to the store went Joe" are both fine (different syntax), while "Joe go to the store" is not (without changing the meaning to a command, in which case there's a punctuation error, a comma after "Joe"). Grammar plays with the meaning and clarity; syntax plays with the emphasis and the "story" of a sentence (though granted, poor syntax will harm clarity). Then there's style. "Joe went off to the store" is technically correct grammatically, but it's poor style, as the extra preposition "off" is unnecessary. I've been doing this for 30 years. I'm pretty on top of it. Nonetheless, there always have been, and always will be, self-proclaimed "grammar" police: [image]http://blog.writeathome.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Ancient-Grammar-Police.gif[/image] [it's a style problem, not a grammar error]

Page: << < prev 13 14 [15] 16 17 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

7.800293E-02