Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Trump's Health Exam - Bad News!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
    A doctor doesn't need to learn what he already knows.
    WHOOSH!

    And the point sails straight over your head.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      A smart doctor realizes he doesn't know everything.
      True.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
        WHOOSH!

        And the point sails straight over your head.
        No, the point was idiotic.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Zymologist View Post
          Just a thought...you're this confident in your diagnosis of Trump as having a personality disorder? Speaking as someone who myself has a personality disorder, this just seems odd. I honestly wouldn't know the first thing about identifying such a thing in other people.
          Neither does Tass Zym. Neither does Tass.
          Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

          Comment


          • And now here's Hillary hacking and coughing her way through another speech:

            https://twitter.com/charliespiering/...851584/video/1

            I'm sure it's just allergies. Or was it pneumonia? I forget.
            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
            Than a fool in the eyes of God


            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              And now here's Hillary hacking and coughing her way through another speech:

              https://twitter.com/charliespiering/...851584/video/1

              I'm sure it's just allergies. Or was it pneumonia? I forget.
              it's like she is her very own SNL skit.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                And now here's Hillary hacking and coughing her way through another speech:
                She did cough a dozen times or so at the end of that speech. But she didn't cough and hack throughout the speech. That's misleading.

                https://www.makers.com/playlists/5a7...bc2544e01b102f

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                  I'm sure it's just allergies.


                  Or was it pneumonia? I forget.
                  She had pneumonia during the election. She continued speaking though, but eventually after that fainting incident she was ordered to take it easy for a while.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    Neither does Tass Zym. Neither does Tass.
                    Not just Tass!

                    "A number of experts have become so concerned about Trump they are willing to face reprisals from their organisations for breaking such rules, including Psychotherapist John D Gartner. The John’s Hopkins Professor has said Trump displays signs of 'malignant narcissism', also reportedly stating: ‘Donald Trump is dangerously mentally ill and temperamentally incapable of being President.’

                    https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/v...d-donald-trump

                    "More than 60,000 mental health professionals have signed the petition, which states: “We, the undersigned mental health professionals, believe in our professional judgment that Donald Trump manifests a serious mental illness that renders him psychologically incapable of competently discharging the duties of President of the United States. And we respectfully request he be removed from office, according to article 4 of the 25th amendment to the Constitution, which states that the president will be replaced if he is ‘unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.’”

                    https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...e-donald-trump
                    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                      Not just Tass!

                      "A number of experts have become so concerned about Trump they are willing to face reprisals from their organisations for breaking such rules, including Psychotherapist John D Gartner. The John’s Hopkins Professor has said Trump displays signs of 'malignant narcissism', also reportedly stating: ‘Donald Trump is dangerously mentally ill and temperamentally incapable of being President.’

                      https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/v...d-donald-trump

                      "More than 60,000 mental health professionals have signed the petition, which states: “We, the undersigned mental health professionals, believe in our professional judgment that Donald Trump manifests a serious mental illness that renders him psychologically incapable of competently discharging the duties of President of the United States. And we respectfully request he be removed from office, according to article 4 of the 25th amendment to the Constitution, which states that the president will be replaced if he is ‘unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.’”

                      https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...e-donald-trump
                      Those quacks need to treat own TDS.

                      Unprofessional! Fire them all!!!
                      Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        "More than 60,000 mental health professionals have signed the petition...
                        Having not personally met and evaluated the man, a bunch of individuals signed a petition. Try to think about that, Tass, apart from your own hateful bias.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • No competent doctor with any integrity would attempt to diagnose someone without performing a personal examination. The one doctor who has personally examined Trump says that he is mentally and physically fit.
                          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                          Than a fool in the eyes of God


                          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            No competent doctor with any integrity would attempt to diagnose someone without performing a personal examination. The one doctor who has personally examined Trump says that he is mentally and physically fit.
                            But... but... they SIGNED A PETITION!!!!! That's worth... um....... (reminds me of all the videos of people getting others to sign a petition for really dumb stuff by explaining "well, all this means is...")
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                              Not just Tass!

                              "A number of experts have become so concerned about Trump they are willing to face reprisals from their organisations for breaking such rules, including Psychotherapist John D Gartner. The John’s Hopkins Professor has said Trump displays signs of 'malignant narcissism', also reportedly stating: ‘Donald Trump is dangerously mentally ill and temperamentally incapable of being President.’

                              https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/v...d-donald-trump

                              "More than 60,000 mental health professionals have signed the petition, which states: “We, the undersigned mental health professionals, believe in our professional judgment that Donald Trump manifests a serious mental illness that renders him psychologically incapable of competently discharging the duties of President of the United States. And we respectfully request he be removed from office, according to article 4 of the 25th amendment to the Constitution, which states that the president will be replaced if he is ‘unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.’”

                              https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...e-donald-trump
                              Are you familiar with what is colloquially called "The Goldwater Rule"[1]? It is contained in part 3 of Section 7 of the American Psychiatric Association's "The Principles of Medical Ethics" which has been in effect for 44 years (and can be downloaded in pdf form HERE). I'll bold the pertinent portion for you

                              3. On occasion psychiatrists are asked for an opinion about an individual who is in the light of public attention or who has disclosed information about himself/herself through public media. In such circumstances, a psychiatrist may share with the public his or her expertise about psychiatric issues in general. However, it is unethical for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement.


                              As Maria A. Oquendo, President of American Psychiatric Association, emphasized last year

                              Source: The Goldwater Rule: Why breaking it is Unethical and Irresponsible


                              "Every four years, the United States goes through a protracted elections process for the highest office in the land. This year, the election seems like anything but a normal contest, that has at times devolved into outright vitriol. The unique atmosphere of this year’s election cycle may lead some to want to psychoanalyze the candidates, but to do so would not only be unethical, it would be irresponsible."



                              Source

                              © Copyright Original Source



                              She reemphasized this in the conclusion where she wrote "Simply put, breaking the Goldwater Rule is irresponsible, potentially stigmatizing, and definitely unethical."



                              Likewise the American Psychological Association's code of ethics also cautions its members against diagnosing any person, including public figures, whom they have not personally examined. The president of that association, Susan H. McDaniel, reminded the members of this when she wrote about the guidelines during the 2016 election cycle in a letter in The New York Times, reproduced below in full.

                              Source: Response to Article on Whether Therapists Should Analyze Presidential Candidates


                              Re: Should Therapists Analyze Presidential Candidates? (Campaign Stops, Op-Ed, nytimes.com, March 7):

                              The American Psychological Association wholeheartedly agrees with Robert Klitzman, PhD, that neither psychiatrists nor psychologists should offer diagnoses of candidates or any other living public figure they have never examined. Our association has declined requests from several reporters seeking referrals to psychologists who would make such speculations.

                              Similar to the psychiatrists Goldwater Rule, our code of ethics exhorts psychologists to take precautions that any statements they make to the media are based on their professional knowledge, training or experience in accord with appropriate psychological literature and practice and do not indicate that a professional relationship has been established with people in the public eye, including political candidates.

                              When providing opinions of psychological characteristics, psychologists must conduct an examination adequate to support statements or conclusions. In other words, our ethical code states that psychologists should not offer a diagnosis in the media of a living public figure they have not examined.

                              Susan H. McDaniel
                              President
                              American Psychological Association



                              Source

                              © Copyright Original Source



                              McDaniel also sent a letter to the Chronicle of Higher Education regarding a similar article

                              Source: Response to Article on Diagnosing Public Figures


                              The American Psychological Association does not have a Goldwater Rule per se, but our Code of Ethics clearly warns psychologists against diagnosing any person, including public figures, whom they have not personally examined. Specifically, it states: “When psychologists provide public advice or comment via print, Internet or other electronic transmission, they take precautions to ensure that statements (1) are based on their professional knowledge, training or experience in accord with appropriate psychological literature and practice; (2) are otherwise consistent with this Ethics Code; and (3) do not indicate that a professional relationship has been established with the recipient.” Throughout this presidential campaign season, APA has cited this ethics standard to explain to journalists why we could not assist them on stories seeking to diagnose the mental state of Donald Trump or any other candidate.



                              Source

                              © Copyright Original Source



                              So much for scurrilous petitions signed by irresponsible, unethical butthurt partisans.


                              ETA: Having studied questionable "petitions" like this in the past my suspicions are immediately raised when I see terms like "mental health professionals" in that they might include receptionists, billing secretaries, and sales representatives working for companies that sell to psychologists/psychiatrists in order to greatly pad the numbers.











                              1. It came about after the now defunct Fact magazine published the results of a 1964 survey of 2417 psychiatrists about whether U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater was fit to be president and which concluded no, that he was "psychologically unfit" to be president. Even though this "diagnosis" was obtained "by merely observing him on TV or reading what he writes," Goldwater was labeled a "dangerous lunatic," "paranoid," "emotionally too unstable" and that he had a "Godlike self-image." Sound familiar?

                              Goldwater sued the editor for libel and won (extremely difficult for a public person to win such cases in the U.S.) a $75,000 (approximately $592,000 today) judgment for damages.
                              Last edited by rogue06; 02-11-2018, 10:46 AM.

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                                Are you familiar with what is colloquially called "The Goldwater Rule"[1]? It is contained in part 3 of Section 7 of the American Psychiatric Association's "The Principles of Medical Ethics" which has been in effect for 44 years (and can be downloaded in pdf form HERE). I'll bold the pertinent portion for you

                                3. On occasion psychiatrists are asked for an opinion about an individual who is in the light of public attention or who has disclosed information about himself/herself through public media. In such circumstances, a psychiatrist may share with the public his or her expertise about psychiatric issues in general. However, it is unethical for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement.


                                As Maria A. Oquendo, President of American Psychiatric Association, emphasized last year

                                Source: The Goldwater Rule: Why breaking it is Unethical and Irresponsible


                                "Every four years, the United States goes through a protracted elections process for the highest office in the land. This year, the election seems like anything but a normal contest, that has at times devolved into outright vitriol. The unique atmosphere of this year’s election cycle may lead some to want to psychoanalyze the candidates, but to do so would not only be unethical, it would be irresponsible."



                                Source

                                © Copyright Original Source



                                She reemphasized this in the conclusion where she wrote "Simply put, breaking the Goldwater Rule is irresponsible, potentially stigmatizing, and definitely unethical."



                                Likewise the American Psychological Association's code of ethics also cautions its members against diagnosing any person, including public figures, whom they have not personally examined. The president of that association, Susan H. McDaniel, reminded the members of this when she wrote about the guidelines during the 2016 election cycle in a letter in The New York Times, reproduced below in full.

                                Source: Response to Article on Whether Therapists Should Analyze Presidential Candidates


                                Re: Should Therapists Analyze Presidential Candidates? (Campaign Stops, Op-Ed, nytimes.com, March 7):

                                The American Psychological Association wholeheartedly agrees with Robert Klitzman, PhD, that neither psychiatrists nor psychologists should offer diagnoses of candidates or any other living public figure they have never examined. Our association has declined requests from several reporters seeking referrals to psychologists who would make such speculations.

                                Similar to the psychiatrists Goldwater Rule, our code of ethics exhorts psychologists to take precautions that any statements they make to the media are based on their professional knowledge, training or experience in accord with appropriate psychological literature and practice and do not indicate that a professional relationship has been established with people in the public eye, including political candidates.

                                When providing opinions of psychological characteristics, psychologists must conduct an examination adequate to support statements or conclusions. In other words, our ethical code states that psychologists should not offer a diagnosis in the media of a living public figure they have not examined.

                                Susan H. McDaniel
                                President
                                American Psychological Association



                                Source

                                © Copyright Original Source



                                McDaniel also sent a letter to the Chronicle of Higher Education regarding a similar article

                                Source: Response to Article on Diagnosing Public Figures


                                The American Psychological Association does not have a Goldwater Rule per se, but our Code of Ethics clearly warns psychologists against diagnosing any person, including public figures, whom they have not personally examined. Specifically, it states: “When psychologists provide public advice or comment via print, Internet or other electronic transmission, they take precautions to ensure that statements (1) are based on their professional knowledge, training or experience in accord with appropriate psychological literature and practice; (2) are otherwise consistent with this Ethics Code; and (3) do not indicate that a professional relationship has been established with the recipient.” Throughout this presidential campaign season, APA has cited this ethics standard to explain to journalists why we could not assist them on stories seeking to diagnose the mental state of Donald Trump or any other candidate.



                                Source

                                © Copyright Original Source



                                So much for scurrilous petitions signed by irresponsible, unethical butthurt partisans.


                                ETA: Having studied questionable "petitions" like this in the past my suspicions are immediately raised when I see terms like "mental health professionals" in that they might include receptionists, billing secretaries, and sales representatives working for companies that sell to psychologists/psychiatrists in order to greatly pad the numbers.











                                1. It came about after the now defunct Fact magazine published the results of a 1964 survey of 2417 psychiatrists about whether U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater was fit to be president and which concluded no, that he was "psychologically unfit" to be president. Even though this "diagnosis" was obtained "by merely observing him on TV or reading what he writes," Goldwater was labeled a "dangerous lunatic," "paranoid," "emotionally too unstable" and that he had a "Godlike self-image." Sound familiar?

                                Goldwater sued the editor for libel and won (extremely difficult for a public person to win such cases in the U.S.) a $75,000 (approximately $592,000 today) judgment for damages.
                                The APsaA which is an affiliate of the APA, disagrees with the Goldwater rule. So there!

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                231 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                291 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X