- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 6/10/24 at 9:13 am to LSUAngelHere1
Not sure he can. It may lie with the local DA.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 9:22 am to BamaAtl
So after multiple chances to denounce this child abuse, you choose to remain silent huh?
Posted on 6/10/24 at 9:32 am to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
I violated my own rule and replied to the OP. Everyone here could do better by not replying to threads where groomers are spiking the football. Again, you can't reason with people who support pedophiles, child mutilation, and jailing opposition to it.
I never try to persuade the evil Marxists to see right from wrong. It appears I’m replying to them but I’m really talking to all the lurkers to open their eyes.
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 7:05 pm
Posted on 6/10/24 at 9:49 am to BamaAtl
quote:hhs.gov
"Individually identifiable health information" is information, including demographic data, that relates to:
the individual's past, present or future physical or mental health or condition,
the provision of health care to the individual, or
the past, present, or future payment for the provision of health care to the individual,
and that identifies the individual or for which there is a reasonable basis to believe it can be used to identify the individual
While the information released may meet one of those criteria, it still must cross the hurdle within the above written law.
It will be interesting to see if the DOJ can prove who the patient was based on that information. I have my doubts.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 9:53 am to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
While the information released may meet one of those criteria, it still must cross the hurdle within the above written law.
DoJ doesn't have to prove it by naming a patient, releasing day-level data on individual patients in a small patient pool is absolutely reasonable to think you could re-identify.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 9:56 am to Eurocat
quote:
DOJ Indicts Doctor Who
Posted on 6/10/24 at 10:03 am to BamaAtl
quote:
releasing day-level data on individual patients in a small patient pool is absolutely reasonable to think you could re-identify.
So the individuals in this "small patient pool" have been released or identified? To my knowledge, no they have not. It would be very difficult for an individual to be identified based on the information released.
I think your argument will have a very tough time in court based on the law itself.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 10:40 am to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
I think your argument will have a very tough time in court based on the law itself.
The prosecutor has already offered to drop the charges if the defendant apologizes. That tells you right there it’s a weak case.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 12:20 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Once again, that's not the law. Per HIPAA, releasing dates is the same as releasing a name
Liar.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 12:27 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Liar.
And a serial rage downvoter
Posted on 6/10/24 at 12:30 pm to LSUAngelHere1
quote:
I never try to persuade the evil Marxists to see right from wrong.
They dont understand right from wrong.
They only understand acceptable, as defined by their people.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 12:32 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
They only understand acceptable, as defined by their people.
Clearly BamaAtl believes that cutting off little boy penises is most acceptable.
This post was edited on 6/10/24 at 12:33 pm
Posted on 6/10/24 at 12:34 pm to Alcubierre
quote:
DOJ Indicts Doctor Who
I mean, the new Doctor Who is black, and Dems are racist so…
Posted on 6/10/24 at 1:31 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
If he had concerns, he could have met with knowledgeable individuals to have them addressed. Instead, he decided to violate federal law.
Lol. Point and laugh at this idiot.
Posted on 6/10/24 at 5:34 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
These released data were identifiable
No, that is the government’s charge. No evidence has been presented that this was the case.
quote:
and did not further any legitimate statistical or scientific inquiries.
It most certainly did.
Exposing and bringing a halt to the ritual mutilation of children not only advances science, it is an objectively rational and great moral good.
Speaking of which, your continued refusal to denounce such butchery is a tacit endorsement this unholy agenda.
Posted on 6/11/24 at 6:36 am to BamaAtl
quote:
If he had concerns, he could have met with knowledgeable individuals to have them addressed. Instead, he decided to violate federal law.
quote:oh my x2. You are a mess in this thread
Good thing we'll have a trial to see IF he violated any laws!
Posted on 6/11/24 at 8:14 am to Toomer Deplorable
quote:
No, that is the government’s charge. No evidence has been presented that this was the case.
As already posted, the original article from the far-right extremist mentioned specific dates and patients with specific procedures.
That's identifiable per HIPAA.
Posted on 6/11/24 at 8:20 am to BamaAtl
quote:
the original article from the far-right extremist
Posted on 6/11/24 at 6:29 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
As already posted, the original article from the far-right extremist mentioned specific dates and patients with specific procedures.
And as already posted, nothing indicates this doctor violated HIPAA provisions as the government has claimed.
And once again, your repeated refusal to denounce this radical witch-doctory means you support it.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News