You should probably reread the articles if you still think it's an actual necklace and not a weighted exercise tool.
I'm not gonna continue with this since you think trusting a professional is equivalent to trusting a stoplight
Baguette
joined 2 years ago
It pays to not have morals. Hell it pays a lot to be narcissistic, just look at almost all the CEOs.
Again you make an assumption that people should automatically know about an MRI. I'm privileged enough to know because I love watching medical video essays and have the free time and access to do so. Not everyone has access to the same resources as you and I. Some people didn't have the opportunity to go to college. Some people had no easy access to the internet when growing up. Some people don't have time because they're working 3 jobs to survive.
I'm not going to insult someone because they don't know about x thing, because education is meant to be for helping others, not belittling anyone you meet just because you know more than them. Your first instinct shouldn't be to ridicule a deceased person for not knowing as much as you.
Put into example it's for a newfound medical examination that both you and I have no knowledge about. You trust the professional treating you that they know what they're doing. A clinic isn't going to assume you know every little detail about this. That's the job of the clinic and their technician.
You also conveniently ignore that the technician was with the said person when he entered the room, aka he trusted the technician that he wasn't doing something wrong. It's not a case of he's not allowed to be there and just so happened to trespass in with metal. He TRUSTED the professional here that he was allowed in and that there wouldn't be any issues. The technician failed by not making sure he didn't have anything metal. They should've thoroughly checked and even double checked before letting him in.
When McAllister entered the exam room with the technician, the machine suddenly “switched him around, and pulled him in,” Jones-McAllister said.
This was part of the other article I linked. It's a lot of "they said she said" but I'm gonna put more faith in the victim's word and not the clinic's.
That's an extremely privileged take. Not everyone knows about what an MRI does. Don't just judge someone's education and circumstance like that.
Common sense is that a person should be able to trust the medical professional. If the professional doesn't properly warn them, how would they know?
Did no one else read the story? I read it and it sounds moreso the clinic's fault
The necklace he was wearing was a steel weighted exercise band, not a normal necklace. He's not flexing his wealth or anything
His wife told News 12 Long Island in a recorded interview that she was undergoing an MRI on her knee when she asked the technician to get her husband to help her get off the table. She said she called out to him.
Seems like the technician was told by the wife to bring her husband in to help her up. The technician/clinic made a mistake by letting in the husband, who didn't seem properly warned about MRIs no metal policy. The technician also somehow didn't catch the giant "necklace" he'd be wearing.
The "he wasn't supposed to be there" seems like a coverup for their mistake, since how else would he have known to go in? Someone must've told him to walk into the room, it's not like he could hear through the door.
Edit: 100% the technicians fault, the technician saw it. It even had a metal padlock.
They’d even discussed his training and the hard-to-miss chain with the MRI technician during their previous appointments, Jones-McAllister said.
“That was not the first time that guy has seen that chain” on her husband, she said. “They had a conversation about it before.”
Airlines and enshittification, what's new.
Happening right now with Southwest as well. In their infinite knowledge sw decided to remove what defined them: two free checked bags and cheap flights
Now there's a worse option called basic which has a shittier cancellation policy, no checked bags, and is more expensive than the previous budget tier
Depends on the state of mercury. Mercury in an inorganic state is survivable. It'd probably still mess up your organs. Organic mercury or mercury in its vapor form is a lot more dangerous, and can cross the blood brain barrier.
A medical video essay about mercury: https://youtu.be/NJ7M01jV058
Your original point was that third places require no cost. If you want to change to low cost, then bars and cafes still fit that category.
The average person can afford to order a beer or a coffee during their hangout. I've worked at Starbucks before, in a mall. It's an average of 5 to 6 usd for a drink. The cafe my friend works in is the same. An average place is not serving 12 dollar lattes. The outliers here is some crazy customization, like if you ordered a veinte frappe with cold foam and extra pumps of syrup and subbing whole milk for oat, all that jazz, and the cashier decided to actually ring you up for all of it, or if you decided to go to erewhon.
There is obviously a financial barrier for classifying third places, but that barrier is moreso on the restaurant level in my opinion.
I could talk end to end about how capitalism and world events has led to the slow destruction of the cafe as a third place, but that doesn't mean a traditional cafe and pub is not one. I'm obviously not going to consider erewhon a third place. I'm not going to consider a bar in a penthouse hotel a third place.
Here's an example of UC talking about pubs and cafes being a third place. It even talks about the idea of spending money and free third places.
Oldenburg suggests that beer gardens, main streets, pubs, cafés, coffeehouses, post offices, and other "third places" are the heart of a community's social vitality and the foundation of a functioning democracy.[6]
The creator of the term himself had pubs and cafes listed as examples of a third place.
He is aware that modern suburbs only offer first and second places with a mandatory car-centric commute between them, and that "public" places have become commercialized to the extent in which one is required to purchase a good or service and is forbidden to "loitering."[8]
Sure the regulation against loitering obviously takes away the convenience nature of third places, but traditionally these places don't enforce the need to spend money to exist in the space. It's also not prohibitively expensive even if you spend money, i.e. its a place where people can conveniently make plans to hang out at.
To your point on capitalism, I've already talked about how capitalism are actively destroying cafes as third places. Starbucks as a notorious example has been promoting drive thru so much, taking away actual indoors space, and destroying the social aspect of cafes. Yes capitalism is bad and malicious in this sense, but a place isn't disqualified as a third place just because you can spend money there.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Oldenburg
Edit: better formatting
This article is so weirdly written
One of his points is that a vhs player is easily fixable while a wifi router isn't. These things aren't even remotely the same. They don't serve the same function, they don't have the same complexity. Comparing their repairability makes no sense because they serve different functions. Just because I know how to repair a keyboard doesn't mean I know how to fix a tv.
Most of his complaints are on the capitalization of modern technology, which is not a problem of innovation and knowledge, it's an economics and political problem.
view more: next ›
Tbh if you return the book the library will usually just waive the late fee because they really just want their book back and nothing more