virgil

For all of you guys commenting about how the ACA causes poor people to receive health care subsidized by "successful" people...how do you think they have been receiving care before the ACA? What I mean is: legally, no one can be refused care in a hospital emergency department. So, people with no insurance use ER's for their care. Their bills go unpaid and the cost is passed on to the paying customers. The ACA is meant to address this problem. It can't possibly solve the problem altogether. But, it's a start.

Would you actually prefer to live under the current administrations in either China or Russia?

This type of letter makes a whole lot better impression than a rant from Ted Nugent. There are probably a lot more people on the fence on this issue than you might think; and a rational, intelligent letter is much more likely to sway people than a crazy rant.

That's crazy. Why was he even charged? I lived in Huntington Station for a while during grad school, right near the railroad tracks. Bad area.

Interesting about the beet juice. But, I can tell you that the East End LI issue is not just in the winter. It's year-round. The East End is loaded with small woodlots, farms, and poorly lit and windy roads. In addition, there are many areas that are mostly unpopulated in the 'off seasons'. So, the deer roam freely, often onto roadways. I'm not saying that I doubt that the beet juice idea couldn't be a factor. Just saying that out here, there are a lot of other factors as well that contribute to the huge numbers of roadkills.

What about keeping a little john boat or canoe down there? Maybe set up a rope to pull yourself across if the current is an issue.

I butterflied mine and stuffed it with venison sausage stuffing, tied it up, and roasted it. Was excellent.

Well, if it was 'reported' on Fox News, it must be true.

Alaska the Last Frontier. Awesome show. Those bear shots were a bit sketchy. But, there were a couple of episodes recently where they were deer hunting and it was portrayed in a much better fashion.

My opinion is that he is of no benefit to his cause. He's outspoken and says the things that his followers want to hear. But, he's entirely offputting to the general public and probably does more harm than good.

Slow hand, I agree that WE know that this is just Ted being Ted. But, the general public sees him as a lunatic in camo saying crazy things. And that reflects badly on us as hunters.

This sounds like a decent idea in theory- decrease recidivism rates by providing inmates an education. But, the taxpayer funding part is hard to swallow. If, as the Governor states, this idea has been successful using private funds, I think it should remain privately funded. As others have stated, this idea is a slap in the face to the victims of crime as well as to those of us who had to work hard to pay for our educations while obeying the law. If the program has been a success using private grants to the Bard Initiative, the Governor could help the Bard Initiative raise more funds to expand the program, instead of committing taxpayer money.

'SUNY Attica' t-shirts would sell like hotcakes, especially on this site.

US hockey tomorrow morning at 7:30am. I'm planning to stay home from work to watch- will use the pending snowstorm as an excuse.

That's a new one? Isn't that kinda what's been going on at the federal level for the past five years in Congress?

Thanks for the advice, guys. The braising idea sounds perfect. I'll probably make a bunch of jerky also.

Any suggestions for cleaning and cooking pheasants. A buddy of mine has a bunch of birds and I'm looking forward to giving it a try. I've never cleaned or cooked pheasants. Just watched a couple of YouTube videos. But, they all seem to show you how to just pull the breasts out without the skin on. Seems like that'd make them cook up dry. Any advice would be appreciated.

This is not new. Most states have had mandatory reporting. New York upgraded from permissive to mandatory last year. But, there are other circumstances where practitioners have been obligated to 'break' HIPAA laws, for example when we suspect abuse or neglect. An example would be if an ER doc is treating a child (or older person) and sees signs of abuse (multiple healed fractures, frequent unexplained injuries, malnourishment, etc.)- they are obligated to report. This is not new and is not considered a violation of HIPAA laws.

Mike, you're right about the ACA and HIPAA part. There really is no issue there. HIPAA relates to disclosure of private health information and does not regulate conversations between provider and patient. Under the SAFE act, licensed healthcare practitioners are obligated to report a patient who, in their professional clinical judgement, is a danger to himself or others. Most states have similar laws. NY's law changed from 'permissive' to mandatory this past year.

Mike Rossi, my post about dodging the issue was not directed at you. Apologies if it looked that way. It was directed at the previous post.

The thread veered into the subject of doctor's offices asking questions related to whether or not patients had guns in the house. Someone made the claim that the ACA mandates that doctors ask these questions. I clarified that the ACA does not mandate any such thing. The ACA states that healthcare practitioners are not required to ask these questions, but that they may ask them if they choose. Has nothing to do with the SAFE act. The HIPAA question was raised because the people that were claiming that the ACA required gun-related questions also claimed that this was a violation of HIPAA laws. Again, the fact is that any doctor currently asking these questions is doing so purely because he or she chooses to, not because they are required. If you want to see where the ACA states what I've been citing, I listed a couple of headings to google (I can't copy and paste on this site).

You're dodging the issue. Did you look up the information that we've been debating? Or, are you now just going to try to turn this into a pissing contest?

How'd you know I was referring to you when I used the term 'wingnuts'? So, really...did you look it up?

Really? A half hour and no response? Should I assume that all the wingnuts are suddenly too busy to google? Or, did they actually finally read the sections in the ACA that discuss the 'gun-related questions' topic, and decide to simply move on without acknowledging what they learned?

I'm not able to copy and past. But, if any of you would like to see the actual language in the ACA as it relates to the subject of gun-related questions being asked by doctors, google the following: 'Disclosure of information related to firearms' or 'Affordable Care Act Title X, page 2037, line 23' or 'PHS Act Section 2717c' To summarize, the law does not require that these questions be asked. Neither does it forbid them from being asked. Again, this subject is not a matter of opinion. I am a licensed healthcare provider in NYS and run multiple practices and therefore am required to follow the law- we do not ask any gun-related questions.