News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Should cancer patients be informed about their diagnosis and prognosis?

Would all patients want to be told?

Speaking only for myself, I wouldn't want to know. TMI. Certainly not the full truth if the prognosis is poor.

The doctor can tell my wife, she'll know how much she can tell me.

pattycakes said:
casita said:
Without Rob's consent, that information may not ever be made public.

No, but it doesn't stop people from asking. He should have the biopsy back by the middle of this coming week. Let's see their next move.
Click to expand...

We shall see. But, has Rob ever been very forthcoming with honest answers to questions about his personal life?

Such as, "I wasn't lying. You didn't ask the correct questions."
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/0...n-promises-and-statements-at-odds-with-facts/
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Notice how all the media outlets cite the poll that has Doug at 34% and ignore the one that has him at 18% (or whatever it is).
 
pud99 said:
Sorry, but you seem to have missed the point, I was making a joke about the pleonasm "temporarily closed until Monday" (the adverb either is otiose, because the time from now until Monday is not forever and so the closure is by definition temporary, or it makes a nonsense of the statement, as it would mean that the office is closed only part of the time between now and Monday).
Click to expand...

I can definitely get on board with someone who uses the word "otiose."

Pud99 for Mayor!
 
hper said:
Waaay behind here, but just thought this was an interesting observation. Perhaps it has to do with being members of the press and committed to verifiable, reportable facts? That said, the amount of speculation swirling around about the possible 'gaming' of the system and other machinations is fairly justified, IMO, given the last four years. But that speculation belongs outside the realm of the responsible press.

I tend to agree with what some have said here: There is no positive outcome for the Fords here. Either they are putting up a very ill man for a council seat, or they are trying to manipulate the electorate with very ridiculous and cynical ploys. In both instances, they're playing the darkest card in a very grim game. However, there is no way the press would put such out there. It would be wholly irresponsible. It might be fair game for some op-ed writer, but not for reporters (Dale) or even astute observers (Tossel).
Click to expand...

I think the reason I was intrigued by the two of them is that there was nothing to provoke their comments. When the reports of his hospitalization first came out, many people, myself included, weren't saying bad things but were definitely saying something was up. DD made a comment about the number of uncharitable comments regarding Ford's health and I immediately felt ashamed of myself (he wasn't talking to me, it was more my conscience) and then stopped that feeling immediately because I wasn't being uncharitable. He could have just not said anything because nobody was asking his opinion. I also do think that the Globe, Star and every media outlet is likely looking all over the place for info because I bet they are having the same thoughts as many of us. I don't know if Dale and Tossell are just much nicer people than me because by now you'd think they would be much more cynical, especially Dale because of his history with Ford. I haven't seen Peat make comments like they did and obviously nobody is as sickening as Warmington. It seemed very genuine from Dale and Tossell.
 
Several people have noticed a 5-6% increase anytime there's news coverage of a Ford "event". (After last week, this means even breaking wind will be breaking news.)

Margin of error in most polls cited is 3%.

A Ford is a Ford is a Ford.

And 27% is the Alan Keyes Constant / Crazification Factor. Constants are called constants for a reason.

Doug is at 27+6=33%, yes?
 
Last edited:
Paleo_gurl said:
Don't know if this has come up yet bc I haven't caught up on my reading from last night but could Randy have been collecting for Druggie?
Click to expand...

Not possible. Absurd. Nope. Ridiculous. Nnn-uh. C'mon, eh?

ETA: Geez!
 
Last edited:
hper said:
Waaay behind here, but just thought this was an interesting observation. Perhaps it has to do with being members of the press and committed to verifiable, reportable facts? That said, the amount of speculation swirling around about the possible 'gaming' of the system and other machinations is fairly justified, IMO, given the last four years. But that speculation belongs outside the realm of the responsible press...
Click to expand...

I agree, hper. People like Dale could do a story on the waves of speculation, but to what end, really? Most people are going to consider it noise. (Otherwise, they'd be here.) Also, I don't know why there's surprise over the change up. IIRC, the Fords talked about it openly during the whole COI affair, when a mayoral byelection was a real possibility. The crack scandals and Brazen II certainly had the potential to derail Rob's campaign, so I'm sure the family discussed the substitution play going back a number of months.

The shock in all this, to my mind, is that a medical emergency finally took Rob out of the race. It's possible the Fords had knowledge of a growth/tumor/mass earlier on, but decided to wait. I don't think they were prepared for what looks like it might be a full-blown malignancy. Whatever the case, it seems natural — and terribly, but not surprisingly cyncial — that they would pull out a plan developed for various contingencies when they got the latest news.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top