Is a vaccine mandate a racist policy?

[steve_bank]

Anything that puts blacks in a negative light is racist.

The solution in Seattle is to remove categories deemed racist.

More blacks riding bikes without helmets were being stripped by police than whites so the solution is to remove the helmet law.

I think harm has been done to the black community by black leaders amplified by media declarers all issues racist. It gives blacks excuses.

I am not whitewashing the historical and current problems, however 'playing the race card'' has become a convenient excuse to hide behind.

That being said from all the commentary on vaccinations I have heard I did learn one thing. Us whites who think we understand probably do not grasp the deep fear and suspicions in black culture based on events like Tuskegee.

 

[Metaphor]

Of course you did not write the words house arrest. But that is what your proposed policy is: detention and confinement at home for the unvaccinated, for an indefinite period of time.

The only reason it's indefinite is vax resistance.

But that isn't the point. I was attacked for describing Toni's policy correctly.

Stop being dramatic, you weren't attacked. Your mischaracterization and strawmanning were simply pointed out.

But it was not a mischaracterisation: that's the point. There is a consistent pattern on this board from certain actors who dispute (from their perspective) any definitional anomaly.

For example, laughing dog attacked me because he did not think Toni's house arrest policy was 'indefinite' according to a second denotation of 'indefinite'. laughing dog's mindset must be on attack mode all the time. Who could think that something that fully satisfies the first definition of a word cannot be described by that word if it fails to fit some other definitions? I doubt even laughing dog thinks something like that. He was desperate to get a point against me.

And it seems he succeeded, because now you are calling my description of Toni's house arrest policy as 'indefinite' a 'straw man'.

I call them like I see them. I see you doing the exact same thing to myself, and everyone else with whom you disagree in practically every thread you start. It is a bit too late for you to declare your innocence now, you should rather change your behavior in these discussions if you don't want to be perceived in this manner.

Do you think laughing dog was right to point out a second definition of 'indefinite' which he claimed did not characterise Toni's policy, in order to
i) claim it contradicted my claim of Toni's policy being indefinite
ii) call me dishonest for leaving it out?, and
iii) not apologise for doing either thing?

ZiprHead also made up false things in this thread about me (that I said 'the left started it). He didn't apologise either.

Boo hoo.

You've said false things about me, not reading a link for example, after I said I did read the link (iirc). You said I didn't provide a reason a link was wrong when I did several times. You just didn't like the answer.

You don't remember correctly. No, I did not repeat the claim that you hadn't read the link after you claimed you did.

And no, you did not provide a good reason why we should distrust the Quillette article. You did not say what was wrong with it, I imagine because there was nothing wrong with it.

You also have not told me why you trust your "media bias" site but you don't trust Quillette. Which website told you you could trust the media bias site? And why do you have faith in your ability to discern good 'media bias' sites from bad ones, but you don't have faith in your ability to tell good arguments from bad ones in a particular Quillette article?

Yes, you did.

https://iidb.org/index.php?threads/trans-derail-from-ilhan-omar-vs-colorism.25113/#post-948015 October 23rd

You accused me on not reading Trausti's link, I did.

https://iidb.org/index.php?threads/trans-derail-from-ilhan-omar-vs-colorism.25113/#post-948931 October 25th

ZiprHead dismissed a report without reading it

I apologise for misremembering the second accusation.

 

[ZiprHead]

Thank you. Cheers!

 

[Metaphor]

Like “triage”, right?

No, not like that. Nobody produced a second definition of triage and said my characterisation of emergency room triage had to match both definitions.

Right. You just chose the second, less commonly used definition, which though possibly used technically correctly ended up obfuscating the conversation because everyone else was assuming the first, much more commonly used definition.

No. I chose the first definition, and the denotation I had in mind. I quoted the definition. There was no ambiguity.

Laughing dog chose a second definition, claimed Toni's policy could not be characterised by this second definition, and therefore her policy was not "indefinite".

As painfully nonsensical as this was, laughing dog compounded his error by accusing me of dishonesty.

SM is talking about the word "triage", a word for which you chose the second definition without quoting it, when the first definition, which is the more common understanding, is the one that was presented in this thread.

I didn't quote a second definition of triage, I don't know that I really presented one.

Toni quoted a definition of triage that almost, but did not completely, capture what I understood by the word. That is, the definition produced said that triage was something done when many patients presented during a time of limited resources, but I do not believe it has to be 'many'. If just two people show up at once, and one has a severed finger and the other has a broken wrist, the severed finger is more time sensitive and will be seen first.

But, although I was evidently wrong in my understanding of how crowded or empty American ERs are, the situation is not parallel to what laughing dog did. I used the word indefinite, then quoted the meaning of indefinite. Since I was the one who described Toni's house arrest policy as indefinite, I would be best-placed to choose the denotation I meant (though it seemed quite obvious to me what I meant).

But laughing dog chose a second denotation of the word and claimed that this somehow invalidated my use of the word 'indefinite', which it did not (as a matter of fact) and could not (as a matter of logic). Then he called me dishonest for not quoting what he thought I (should have) meant.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Like “triage”, right?

No, not like that. Nobody produced a second definition of triage and said my characterisation of emergency room triage had to match both definitions.

Right. You just chose the second, less commonly used definition, which though possibly used technically correctly ended up obfuscating the conversation because everyone else was assuming the first, much more commonly used definition.

No. I chose the first definition, and the denotation I had in mind. I quoted the definition. There was no ambiguity.

Laughing dog chose a second definition, claimed Toni's policy could not be characterised by this second definition, and therefore her policy was not "indefinite".

As painfully nonsensical as this was, laughing dog compounded his error by accusing me of dishonesty.

SM is talking about the word "triage", a word for which you chose the second definition without quoting it, when the first definition, which is the more common understanding, is the one that was presented in this thread.

I didn't quote a second definition of triage, I don't know that I really presented one.

Toni quoted a definition of triage that almost, but did not completely, capture what I understood by the word. That is, the definition produced said that triage was something done when many patients presented during a time of limited resources, but I do not believe it has to be 'many'. If just two people show up at once, and one has a severed finger and the other has a broken wrist, the severed finger is more time sensitive and will be seen first.

But, although I was evidently wrong in my understanding of how crowded or empty American ERs are, the situation is not parallel to what laughing dog did. I used the word indefinite, then quoted the meaning of indefinite. Since I was the one who described Toni's house arrest policy as indefinite, I would be best-placed to choose the denotation I meant (though it seemed quite obvious to me what I meant).

But laughing dog chose a second denotation of the word and claimed that this somehow invalidated my use of the word 'indefinite', which it did not (as a matter of fact) and could not (as a matter of logic). Then he called me dishonest for not quoting what he thought I (should have) meant.

I have no stake in the “indefinite” discussion but I do think you are off the mark on “triage”. In a true triage situation, the person with the broken wrist could actually be treated first If the severed finger person were bleeding out with a lower chance of survival.

Prioritization of treatment during non-crisis situations is not typically referred to as “triage”. For most of us the word triage implies a crisis situation in which resources are so scarce compared to the need that decisions are made more on outcome rather than severity.

You seemed to imply any prioritization of treatment is triage and to most people that’s just not true. To use the word that way diminishes the value in the shade of meaning that the word provides.

 

[Metaphor]

Like “triage”, right?

No, not like that. Nobody produced a second definition of triage and said my characterisation of emergency room triage had to match both definitions.

Right. You just chose the second, less commonly used definition, which though possibly used technically correctly ended up obfuscating the conversation because everyone else was assuming the first, much more commonly used definition.

No. I chose the first definition, and the denotation I had in mind. I quoted the definition. There was no ambiguity.

Laughing dog chose a second definition, claimed Toni's policy could not be characterised by this second definition, and therefore her policy was not "indefinite".

As painfully nonsensical as this was, laughing dog compounded his error by accusing me of dishonesty.

SM is talking about the word "triage", a word for which you chose the second definition without quoting it, when the first definition, which is the more common understanding, is the one that was presented in this thread.

I didn't quote a second definition of triage, I don't know that I really presented one.

Toni quoted a definition of triage that almost, but did not completely, capture what I understood by the word. That is, the definition produced said that triage was something done when many patients presented during a time of limited resources, but I do not believe it has to be 'many'. If just two people show up at once, and one has a severed finger and the other has a broken wrist, the severed finger is more time sensitive and will be seen first.

But, although I was evidently wrong in my understanding of how crowded or empty American ERs are, the situation is not parallel to what laughing dog did. I used the word indefinite, then quoted the meaning of indefinite. Since I was the one who described Toni's house arrest policy as indefinite, I would be best-placed to choose the denotation I meant (though it seemed quite obvious to me what I meant).

But laughing dog chose a second denotation of the word and claimed that this somehow invalidated my use of the word 'indefinite', which it did not (as a matter of fact) and could not (as a matter of logic). Then he called me dishonest for not quoting what he thought I (should have) meant.

I have no stake in the “indefinite” discussion but I do think you are off the mark on “triage”. In a true triage situation, the person with the broken wrist could actually be treated first If the severed finger person were bleeding out with a lower chance of survival.

It was merely an example that I consider the ordering of two people a triage.

Prioritization of treatment during non-crisis situations is not typically referred to as “triage”.

It is in Australia.

Going to hospital - Hospital triage

In hospital emergency departments, triage is done by a specialised triage nurse as soon as possible after a patient arrives. Patients are allocated a triage category based on the time in which they need medical attention.

www.health.nsw.gov.au

In hospital emergency departments, triage is done by a specialised triage nurse as soon as possible after a patient arrives. Patients are allocated a triage category based on the time in which they need medical attention.


Most NSW public hospitals use a triage scale for patients presenting to emergency and aim to achieve certain levels of performance with respect to the amount of time patients wait to be seen.

Triage in Australian emergency departments: Results of a New South Wales survey - PubMed

The purpose of triage is to ensure that the level of emergency care provided is commensurate with clinical urgency. Variability in the preparation, education and evaluation of triage nurses may in and of itself, contribute to poor patient outcomes. Further, workforce size and geography may...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Background: Triage is a critical component of emergency department practice; affecting patient safety and access to emergency care. Within Australia, triage is an autonomous role predominantly conducted by trained emergency nurses. Patient safety and timely access to emergency care relies upon the experience, education and training of emergency triage nurses. To date, little is known about triage models of care, the preparation and education of triage nurses, and assessment of triage practice and decision accuracy.

I know some physicians and they have called the sorting of patients in ER 'triage' and it is carried out by the triage nurse.

For most of us the word triage implies a crisis situation in which resources are so scarce compared to the need that decisions are made more on outcome rather than severity.

You seemed to imply any prioritization of treatment is triage and to most people that’s just not true. To use the word that way diminishes the value in the shade of meaning that the word provides.

Prioritisation of treatment in emergency rooms is triage.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Like “triage”, right?

No, not like that. Nobody produced a second definition of triage and said my characterisation of emergency room triage had to match both definitions.

Right. You just chose the second, less commonly used definition, which though possibly used technically correctly ended up obfuscating the conversation because everyone else was assuming the first, much more commonly used definition.

No. I chose the first definition, and the denotation I had in mind. I quoted the definition. There was no ambiguity.

Laughing dog chose a second definition, claimed Toni's policy could not be characterised by this second definition, and therefore her policy was not "indefinite".

As painfully nonsensical as this was, laughing dog compounded his error by accusing me of dishonesty.

SM is talking about the word "triage", a word for which you chose the second definition without quoting it, when the first definition, which is the more common understanding, is the one that was presented in this thread.

I didn't quote a second definition of triage, I don't know that I really presented one.

Toni quoted a definition of triage that almost, but did not completely, capture what I understood by the word. That is, the definition produced said that triage was something done when many patients presented during a time of limited resources, but I do not believe it has to be 'many'. If just two people show up at once, and one has a severed finger and the other has a broken wrist, the severed finger is more time sensitive and will be seen first.

But, although I was evidently wrong in my understanding of how crowded or empty American ERs are, the situation is not parallel to what laughing dog did. I used the word indefinite, then quoted the meaning of indefinite. Since I was the one who described Toni's house arrest policy as indefinite, I would be best-placed to choose the denotation I meant (though it seemed quite obvious to me what I meant).

But laughing dog chose a second denotation of the word and claimed that this somehow invalidated my use of the word 'indefinite', which it did not (as a matter of fact) and could not (as a matter of logic). Then he called me dishonest for not quoting what he thought I (should have) meant.

I have no stake in the “indefinite” discussion but I do think you are off the mark on “triage”. In a true triage situation, the person with the broken wrist could actually be treated first If the severed finger person were bleeding out with a lower chance of survival.

It was merely an example that I consider the ordering of two people a triage.

Prioritization of treatment during non-crisis situations is not typically referred to as “triage”.

It is in Australia.

Going to hospital - Hospital triage

In hospital emergency departments, triage is done by a specialised triage nurse as soon as possible after a patient arrives. Patients are allocated a triage category based on the time in which they need medical attention.

www.health.nsw.gov.au

In hospital emergency departments, triage is done by a specialised triage nurse as soon as possible after a patient arrives. Patients are allocated a triage category based on the time in which they need medical attention.


Most NSW public hospitals use a triage scale for patients presenting to emergency and aim to achieve certain levels of performance with respect to the amount of time patients wait to be seen.

Triage in Australian emergency departments: Results of a New South Wales survey - PubMed

The purpose of triage is to ensure that the level of emergency care provided is commensurate with clinical urgency. Variability in the preparation, education and evaluation of triage nurses may in and of itself, contribute to poor patient outcomes. Further, workforce size and geography may...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Background: Triage is a critical component of emergency department practice; affecting patient safety and access to emergency care. Within Australia, triage is an autonomous role predominantly conducted by trained emergency nurses. Patient safety and timely access to emergency care relies upon the experience, education and training of emergency triage nurses. To date, little is known about triage models of care, the preparation and education of triage nurses, and assessment of triage practice and decision accuracy.

I know some physicians and they have called the sorting of patients in ER 'triage' and it is carried out by the triage nurse.

For most of us the word triage implies a crisis situation in which resources are so scarce compared to the need that decisions are made more on outcome rather than severity.

You seemed to imply any prioritization of treatment is triage and to most people that’s just not true. To use the word that way diminishes the value in the shade of meaning that the word provides.

Prioritisation of treatment in emergency rooms is triage.

Well, fair enough if that’s what it means in Australia.

The following describes my understanding of the word:

“Triage is used when the medical-care system is overloaded, meaning there are more people who need care than there are available resources to care for them.

There may be mass casualties in a war zone, terrorist incident, or natural disaster that results in many injuries. There may be a need for triage when a school bus accident or a large pile-up of cars on a highway results in too many injured people for too few ambulances or EMTs.



In the United States, emergency rooms may be full of people who need immediate attention plus people who are seeking treatment for less serious conditions. The department may be staffed just to meet the expected need. When there are too many patients arriving and not enough personnel or other resources, triage is used to determine who gets care first. This ensures the patients who need lifesaving treatment or hospital admission are seen before those who may be presenting for a less serious condition.”

My guess is that most of the people on this thread were thinking similarly to me when they disagreed with you that every ER is in triage every day. But according to your definition I can see why you would say that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Toni quoted a definition of triage that almost, but did not completely, capture what I understood by the word. That is, the definition produced said that triage was something done when many patients presented during a time of limited resources, but I do not believe it has to be 'many'. If just two people show up at once, and one has a severed finger and the other has a broken wrist, the severed finger is more time sensitive and will be seen first.

It depends on how many doctors there are. Chances are the ER has more than one doc and thus both get seen.

In general I do agree, though--the definition I have been given in some very basic emergency training is triage applies anytime patients (or even possible patients) exceeds those providing help. (Possible patients will never happen in the ER--I'm talking about disaster situations. There's a badly wrecked bus--expect injuries but you have no idea what you'll find until you've gone through it.)

There's also the secondary version--the reds will be immediately sorted out and get care while they're worrying about the paperwork, the others they'll pay attention to paperwork first. (Generally you want to get what medical history you can, but for sufficiently urgent problems they'll treat while trying to get the information. This means once in a while the doctors trip over a land mine but they lose fewer patients that way than delaying to find out.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Prioritization of treatment during non-crisis situations is not typically referred to as “triage”. For most of us the word triage implies a crisis situation in which resources are so scarce compared to the need that decisions are made more on outcome rather than severity.

You seemed to imply any prioritization of treatment is triage and to most people that’s just not true. To use the word that way diminishes the value in the shade of meaning that the word provides.

Disagree. It covers any situation in which care should be prioritized to those with the most urgent needs.

What you are talking about is the crisis standards of care we are seeing in a few places where the system is so overloaded that the doctors are not providing care to those with critical needs but low probability of success. Usually we only see that sort of thing in transplant lists.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Well, fair enough if that’s what it means in Australia.

The following describes my understanding of the word:

“Triage is used when the medical-care system is overloaded, meaning there are more people who need care than there are available resources to care for them.

There may be mass casualties in a war zone, terrorist incident, or natural disaster that results in many injuries. There may be a need for triage when a school bus accident or a large pile-up of cars on a highway results in too many injured people for too few ambulances or EMTs.



In the United States, emergency rooms may be full of people who need immediate attention plus people who are seeking treatment for less serious conditions. The department may be staffed just to meet the expected need. When there are too many patients arriving and not enough personnel or other resources, triage is used to determine who gets care first. This ensures the patients who need lifesaving treatment or hospital admission are seen before those who may be presenting for a less serious condition.”

My guess is that most of the people on this thread were thinking similarly to me when they disagreed with you that every ER is in triage every day. But according to your definition I can see why you would say that.

It's the US meaning, also. He's describing emergency rooms that are always backed up and thus always operating in a triage situation. Here I have heard urgent care & ER people explicitly use the word "triage" in reference to initial sorting more than once. However, US emergency rooms normally don't operate at constant overload, it's not nearly the factor that it is in Australia. (I suspect inner city emergency rooms are much like what he describes, though.)

 

[ZiprHead]

When I worked in the lab on the night shift, our samples came primarily from the ED. Some nights we were dead, sat around bullshitting and playing cards. Some nights we could have used twice the numbers of techs and assistants. I assume it was the same in the ED those nights.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

When I worked in the lab on the night shift, our samples came primarily from the ED. Some nights we were dead, sat around bullshitting and playing cards. Some nights we could have used twice the numbers of techs and assistants. I assume it was the same in the ED those nights.

Exactly. Demand is uneven, if you don't want the heart attack sitting in the waiting room you have to staff to above the average demand level. This is basic queuing. Any ER that doesn't have a decent amount of time with near zero wait times is not going to fare well when things go badly.