44,000 DEATHS On Our Highways: And Nobody Cares!

"miles" > wrote in message
...
> TBone wrote:
>
> > Then how did he win?
>
> Convinced a jury that has zero medical background. Most of his
> 'testimony' was simply showing the horrible effects of Celebral Palsy
> complete with movies showing the bad effects. Whats that got to do with
> guilt?

LOL, if that was all he had then the judge would have overturned the
verdict. You act like Edwards was the only one speaking and that the
defense had no witnesses.

> > Wrong again. Try reading that crap that you posted. Not a single one
of
> > them said that it was impossible, only unlikely.
>
> They said very rare, very unlikely. Totally opposite of Edwards claims.
> Furthermore no changes have been made to accepted practices in
> birthing. If Edwards was right then why haven't there been more
> lawsuits all these years later??

Do you really like making this much of an ass out of yourself? Edwards was
talking about his particular case, not all cases in general. The reason
that there are not more of these cases is because after Edwards, they are
much more careful now and most of the cases Cerebral Palsy found now are due
to other reasons.

>
> > Once again, your bias and hatred for anyone or anything Democratic
prevents
> > you from seeing the truth. The medical industry has determined that it
is
> > highly unlikely that errors from the doctor is the cause of Celebral
Palsy
> > and that the damage that causes it most often occurs before birth but
highly
> > unlikely does not equate to impossible or even dismissed and not a one
of
> > them say's that it's impossible.
>
> That was not Edwards stance in his lawsuits. He claimed it was VERY
> likely and almost certainly the cause.

Yea, in those particular cases. Like you said in your own distorted way, he
did the research before taking in these cases.

>
> > While it didn't change the procedure (as the procedure itself was not
the
> > problem), you can bet that it makes the doctors and nurses performing it
pay
> > far more attention (which was the possible cause).
>
> Nothing has changed. There were never any medical journals coming out
> to warn Dr's about incorrect following of procedures etc. NOTHING from
> the medical industry at all.

LOL, get real.

--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving

TBone wrote:

> LOL, if that was all he had then the judge would have overturned the
> verdict. You act like Edwards was the only one speaking and that the
> defense had no witnesses.

Oh please. Any lawyer can get a few 'expert' witnesses to tell the
story their way. They are paid for their bs stories. They are career
witnesses. The fact remains that the medical industry did not change
their stance on the causes of Cerebral Palsy as a result of Edwards
absurd claims. Quite the opposite. They now say there is even less
evidence to support Edwards claims than during his trial years. His
main interest was making money. Pure greed you should be totally
against. Why is it that the greed of lawyers is acceptable to liberals?

> Do you really like making this much of an ass out of yourself? Edwards was
> talking about his particular case, not all cases in general.

Not true. During his trials he made the claim that birthing procedures
were a major cause of Celebral Palsy, not just in his particular cases.

> The reason
> that there are not more of these cases is because after Edwards, they are
> much more careful now and most of the cases Cerebral Palsy found now are due
> to other reasons.

Bull. The medical industry produced to changes to birthing guidelines
as a result of Edwards claims. None whatsoever. No journals were
submitted by the industry to guide Dr's and warn them of problems.
Edwards is a greedy multi-millionaire and nothing more.

> Yea, in those particular cases. Like you said in your own distorted way, he
> did the research before taking in these cases.

No!! Not just in his particular cases. He made the claim it was a
major cause and his cases were prime examples. He made the claim he was
doing good by altering the industry ways to stop this travesty. He was
wrong. There was no travesty other than his pure greed. Thats all his
cases were about. How to con non-medical oriented juries so he can line
his own pockets with millions.

>> Nothing has changed. There were never any medical journals coming out
>> to warn Dr's about incorrect following of procedures etc. NOTHING from
>> the medical industry at all.
>
> LOL, get real.

That is real TBone. No medical journals ever came out as a result of
Edwards claims. The medical industry did not back him up. The only
ones who did were paid so called expert witnesses. That still holds
true today.

Dipstick, you're the one making the out-of-your-ass claims with no proof. Quite frankly, on your $5.15 an hour burger flipping job
you couldn't afford to pay me to do research for you. Now crawl back in bed with Sean and Rush and assume your customary position
on all fours.


"miles" > wrote in message news : Fuller Rath wrote:
: > Myles is still quoting from the Moonie Times and Cybercrap News Service. Next he'll be tonguing Sean Vanity and Bill O'Liely
:
: Then show me proof that the medical industry has in any way shape or
: form adopted anything from Edwards claims. Fact is, they haven't. Not
: one bit. You won't find it.

Bull****. More ass gassings from a big, fat, lard-assed, loser reich winger


"miles" > wrote in message ...
: SnoMan wrote:
:
: > Edwards is not a bad guy but he does not have a snowballs chance in
: > "H" of winning a general election as president.
:
: He is a bad guy. He bankrupt many people with bogus medical claims that
: have never been substantiated and held up by the medical industry all to
: line his pockets with.

No doubt you're more in tune with Brownbutt, Foley and Newtie. Great job your side has down ****ing everything up. You must want
the whole world to be as screwed as you appear to be. The only way you can verify your "masculinity" is by pecking out inane
prattle while you read NAMBLA handouts under a 40 watt light bulb in your closet.


"miles" > wrote in message ...
: Fuller Rath wrote:
: > "Moderate" like Joe LIEBerman. Hahahaa You have tilted so fat to the right your lips kiss your butt. No real Democrat
gives a
: > **** what the DLC-Clinton-Repubican-lite hacks think
:
: Lieberman? He's just another idiot Democrat, I mean Democrat turned
: Independent turned Democrat.

Fuller Rath wrote:
> Dipstick, you're the one making the out-of-your-ass claims with no proof. Quite frankly, on your $5.15 an hour burger flipping job
> you couldn't afford to pay me to do research for you. Now crawl back in bed with Sean and Rush and assume your customary position
> on all fours.

I see. So you're the typical bleeding heart liberal whiner that buys
into BS without basis. You've bought into Edwards claims even though
you have no clue what those claims are even about. Too funny.

Fuller Rath wrote:
> No doubt you're more in tune with Brownbutt, Foley and Newtie. Great job your side has down ****ing everything up. You must want
> the whole world to be as screwed as you appear to be. The only way you can verify your "masculinity" is by pecking out inane
> prattle while you read NAMBLA handouts under a 40 watt light bulb in your closet.

Wow. I'm impressed. Is this rhetoric what a phd buys these days?

No, I haven't bought into your bs at all. And let's see. I'm a "bleeding heart liberal" and you're a braying jackass neonazi
Repubican. Enjoy molesting your pages and ****ing up the country. It's all your kind are good at.


"miles" > wrote in message ...
: Fuller Rath wrote:
: > Dipstick, you're the one making the out-of-your-ass claims with no proof. Quite frankly, on your $5.15 an hour burger flipping
job
: > you couldn't afford to pay me to do research for you. Now crawl back in bed with Sean and Rush and assume your customary
position
: > on all fours.
:
: I see. So you're the typical bleeding heart liberal whiner that buys
: into BS without basis. You've bought into Edwards claims even though
: you have no clue what those claims are even about. Too funny.