doctors cannot ask about guns

[Jiro]

Geeze...come up with something more recent. I had 2001 and Banjo had 2005. :roll:

We did. You didn't.

why focus on statistic? Focus on argument and misconceptions because those kind of things do not change in short time. It continues to hold true for decades.

Truth

A fatal gun accident, particularly when a child is involved, often makes state or national news. This gives the impression that: fatal gun accidents are more prevalent than other fatal accidents, gun accidents are increasing, and civilian gun ownership must be further restricted or regulated.

Truth

Compare fatal gun accidents to the number of kids killed while crossing the street. The solutions one may propose to prevent child accidents should differ from those of young adults. For example pressure sensitive pistol grips won't help much when older "kids" are playing Russian Roulette, especially in places where it's legal for eighteen or twenty-one year-olds to own firearms.

Truth

Fatal gun accidents often receive national attention. Subsequently politicians demand mandatory firearms safety classes for all gun owners, yet many more lives could be saved by randomly selecting and educating a group of drivers rather than gun owners, not to mention the populace at large regarding, administering first-aid, how to eat, and basic common sense safety habits. (It is not being suggested that such training be offered or mandated.)

 

[jillio]

why focus on statistic? Focus on argument and misconceptions because those kind of things do not change in short time. It continues to hold true for decades.

Truth


Truth


Truth

First you ask for statistics, then you try to say you don't need statistics when you can't come up with anything recent. You really are a funny little guy!

We are focused on your misconceptions. You need to focus on your misconceptions.

 

[Banjo]

Flip-flop-flip-flop-flip-flop....

 

[jillio]

Flip-flop-flip-flop-flip-flop....

And that ain't the sound of his shoes!

 

[Jiro]

**warning!!! this article may be deemed too ancient for readers**

http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/278/13/1084.full.pdf

State Gun Safe Storage Laws and Child Mortality Due to Firearms

Context - Since 1989, several states have passed laws that make gun owners criminally liable if someone is injured because a child gains unsupervised access to a gun. These laws are controversial, and their effect on firearm-related injuries is unknown.

Objective - To determine if state laws that require safe storage of firearms are associated with a reduction in child mortality due to firearms.

Design - An ecological study of firearm mortality from 1979 through 1994.

Setting - All 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Participants - All children younger than 15 years.

Main Outcome Measures - Unintentional deaths, suicides, and homicides due
to firearms.

Results - Laws that make gun owners responsible for storing firearms in a
manner that makes them inaccessible to children were in effect for at least 1 year in 12 states from 1990 through 1994. Among children younger
than 15 years, unintentional shooting deaths were reduced by 23% (95% confidence interval, 6%-37%) during the years covered by these laws. This estimate was based on within state comparisons adjusted for national trends in unintentional firearm-related mortality. Gun-related homicide and suicide showed modest declines, but these were not statistically significant.

Conclusions - State safe storage laws intended to make firearms less accessible to children appear to prevent unintentional shooting deaths among children younger than 15 year.

 

[Jiro]

First you ask for statistics, then you try to say you don't need statistics when you can't come up with anything recent. You really are a funny little guy!

We are focused on your misconceptions. You need to focus on your misconceptions.

I asked for a breakdown which you gave me a run-around. And statistic can be interpreted in any way you want. I gave an interpretation of statistic provided and you said otherwise. It's up to people to decide which one to believe.

 

[jillio]

**warning!!! this article may be deemed too ancient for readers**

http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/278/13/1084.full.pdf

Well, duh. That is why the AMA and the AAP want to address the topic with thier patients.

This article is from the Journal of the American Medical Association. How ironic that you would choose something to support my position.

 

[jillio]

I asked for a breakdown which you gave me a run-around. And statistic can be interpreted in any way you want. I gave an interpretation of statistic provided and you said otherwise. It's up to people to decide which one to believe.

Flip flop, flip flop.

Google is your friend. And Bing ain't bad. Try pulling some more JAMA articles that outline why they want doctors to address gun safety with their patients. It was just yesterday that you said doctors had no business talking about gun safety, and then you pull a JAMA article to try to support yourself. Give up, Jiro.

 

[Jiro]

Firearm Safety In America 2009

The firearm accident death rate is at an all-time annual low, 0.2 per 100,000 population, down 94% since the all-time high in 1904. Since 1930, the annual number of such deaths has decreased 80%, to an all-time low, while the U.S. population has more than doubled and the number of firearms has quintupled. Among children, such deaths have decreased 90% since 1975. Today, the odds are more than a million to one, against a child in the U.S. dying in a firearm accident.

Education decreases accidents. Voluntary training has decreased firearms accidents. NRA firearm safety programs are conducted by more than 62,000 NRA Certified Instructors nationwide. Youngsters learn firearm safety in NRA programs offered through civic groups such as the Boy Scouts, Jaycees, and American Legion, and schools. NRA's Eddie Eagle GunSafe program teaches children pre-K through 3rd grade that if they see a gun without supervision, they should "STOP! Don't Touch. Leave The Area. Tell An Adult." Since 1988, Eddie has been used by 26,000 schools, civic groups, and law enforcement agencies to reach more than 22 million children.

which backs my position that it's best for doctors to refer parents to somebody more qualified on gun safety subject.

Gun control supporters' "children" deception: Gun control supporters claim that firearm accidents take the lives of a dozen or more children daily, or 5,000 yearly, or one every 90 seconds. The Handgun Epidemic Lowering Plan (HELP) Network (dedicated to "changing society's attitude toward guns so that it becomes socially unacceptable for private citizens to have handguns") put the figure at nine per day. Some gun control supporters count anyone under age 24 as a "child," to get even higher numbers, by adding the relatively small number among children to the much larger number among juveniles and teenage adults, and calling the total "children." In fact, on average there is one such death among children per day, including one accidental death every seven days.

which backs my statement above that misconception still continues to be used to this date.

 

[Jiro]

Flip flop, flip flop.

Google is your friend. And Bing ain't bad. Try pulling some more JAMA articles that outline why they want doctors to address gun safety with their patients. It was just yesterday that you said doctors had no business talking about gun safety, and then you pull a JAMA article to try to support yourself. Give up, Jiro.

They have no business asking us if we have guns or not but they are free to tell us about gun safety and to provide information about it.

Big difference there, doc.

 

[jillio]

They have no business asking us if we have guns or not but they are free to tell us about gun safety and to provide information about it.

Big difference there, doc.

And you said they had no business discussing gun safety because they didn't know anything about it. Yet you used the American Medical Association article on gun safety to support your points. Give it up, jiro. Maybe tomorrow will be a better day for you.

 

[Berry]

What I don't like is the doctor making a note and keeping a record of the person owning a gun.

If you don't like the idea of the government knowing you own a gun -- Think about the idea that people work in doctor's office who have no security clearance -- Think how secure the doctors records actually are -- Maybe the clean up guy's cousin wants a gun to off somebody --

No, I don't like that.

 

[Jiro]

Try pulling some more JAMA articles

here ya go -

http://www.uvm.edu/~vlrs/Safety/Child Access Prevention to Firearms.pdf

Effectiveness of CAP Laws

One of the studies regarding the effectiveness of Child Access Prevention (CAP) Laws, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1997, estimated the effect of 12 different state CAP laws, which were enacted prior to 1994.38 The study concluded that the CAP laws were associated with a 23% decrease in unintentional shootings among children under 15 years old, with the strongest evidence coming from states that made failure to follow CAP laws a felony. The study found no decline in gun‐related suicide deaths following the adoption of CAP laws. 39

A more recent and comprehensive study, performed by the Center for Gun Policy and Research at the Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, investigated the issue of CAP laws from a public health perspective.40 This study, completed in the year 2000, took the model and methods of the Cummings study and applied it across the country, accounting for states with and without CAP laws. Their results found that only Florida’s CAP law was associated with a decline in accidental deaths of children by firearms. Florida’s law, which is the oldest and one of the toughest (violation of it is a felony), resulted in a 51 percent reduction in accidental firearm deaths among children in that state over the eight years for which there was data. While the 14 other states with CAP laws saw no statistically significant reduction in accidental deaths for children, the authors caution that, given the significant findings in Florida, such findings should not be interpreted to say that CAP laws are ineffective—those findings could be because the laws were not in effect long enough, or because those laws are not enforced with felony penalties, or because changes in accidental deaths are hard to track because of deficiencies in the data collection on these incidents.41

Several medical experts also conducted a study in order to measure the relationship between firearm storage and the risk of firearm injuries by evaluating incidents in which a youth under the age of 20 used a firearm to harm themselves or another, whether intentionally or unintentionally. The factors evaluated were, “(1) whether the subject firearm was stored in a locked location or with an extrinsic lock; (2) whether the firearm was stored unloaded; (3) whether the firearm was stored both unloaded in a locked location; (4) whether the ammunition for the firearm was stored separately; and (5) whether the ammunition was stored in a locked location.”42

The study concluded that “the 4 practices of keeping a gun locked, unloaded, storing ammunition locked, and in a separate location are each associated with a protective effect and suggest a feasible strategy to reduce these types of injuries in homes with children and teenagers where guns are stored.”

which is why I support a law mandating households with children to have a gun vault.

and which pretty much backed my statement that one treatment is not a solution for all problems. One has to find a symptom in order to apply appropriate treatment to fix the problem.

 

[Jiro]

And you said they had no business discussing gun safety because they didn't know anything about it. Yet you used the American Medical Association article on gun safety to support your points. Give it up, jiro. Maybe tomorrow will be a better day for you.

If they are not qualified on gun subject, then they should refer us to somebody more qualified. Is there a problem with that?

Do you believe many doctors in NJ are qualified on this subject and that they are gun-friendly people? I seriously doubt it. :roll:

 

[jillio]

What I don't like is the doctor making a note and keeping a record of the person owning a gun.

If you don't like the idea of the government knowing you own a gun -- Think about the idea that people work in doctor's office who have no security clearance -- Think how secure the doctors records actually are -- Maybe the clean up guy's cousin wants a gun to off somebody --

No, I don't like that.

Chances are the note says something like this:

Discussed gun safety issues with Patient A's father today. Or even something as innocuous as
Discussed childhood safety issues with Patient A's father today."

My notes, in reference to something like this would read: Patient expressed suicidal (homicidal) ideation and was questioned regarding plan and access to means. Patient indicated means were readily available.

If I need to note something more than that, then I put it in my personal notes that cannot be accessed by anyone, even under court order. Only my treatment notes can be accessed with a court order if they pertain directly to a legal case in process. My personal notes are mine, and are even kept in a separate location.

And yes, I do not even use a name. I refer to the individual as "patient" or "client" depending upon the location of the session.

 

[TXgolfer]

That is a completely absurd statement and completely false. But to be expected.:roll:

A national medical record database was a major part of obamacare. You know this, you have even posted about it.

 

[jillio]

If they are not qualified on gun subject, then they should refer us to somebody more qualified. Is there a problem with that?

Do you believe many doctors in NJ are qualified on this subject and that they are gun-friendly people? I seriously doubt it. :roll:

Then why did you use JAMA as a source?

Put that gun away, jiro. You just shot yourself in the foot again.

 

[Jiro]

Then why did you use JAMA as a source?

Put that gun away, jiro. You just shot yourself in the foot again.

So you believe NJ doctors are as qualified as Texan doctors on gun subjects?

 

[jillio]

A national medical record database was a major part of obamacare. You know this, you have even posted about it.

And exactly what information do you think is in that medical data base? Only treatment information e.g. medical procedure and code. No extraneous notes. Those are for physcician's use only.

See, the problem is that people are working themselves up over things that they really don't know anything about. You really need to understand legalities regarding medical records and what information can even be accessed with court order in an open case or by signing a consent to release form.

 

[jillio]

So you believe NJ doctors are as qualified as Texan doctors on gun subjects?

Why wouldn't they be? Do you think that NJ docotrs and TX doctors receive different educations? Chances are neither one grew up or was educated in the state they practice? You are again bringing in irrelevent issues.

You cited a national publication of the American Medical Association. Both NJ doctors and TX doctors belong and read the same publication.

Again, give it up for tonight. You are not thinking clearly.