Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 41 of 41

Thread: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

      
  1. #31
    Les's Avatar
    Status : Les is offline
    Rank : Legend
    Join Date : Oct 10, 2009
    Location : Secane,Pa.
    Posts : 10,207
    Threads : 48
    Last Online : Jul-04-2017 @ 07:08 AM
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    Anyone care to guess what this "unnamed" medical condition is??Maybe he has 6 toes on his left foot??

  2. #32
    BlackJackGold's Avatar
    Status : BlackJackGold is offline
    Rank : Banned
    Join Date : Oct 16, 2009
    Posts : 1,694
    Threads : 10
    Last Online : Mar-11-2010 @ 05:54 PM

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    I would guess Hep C, but I think it is unfair to guess at such things and it would be a violation of HIPPA for the team to divulge it.

  3. #33
    BlackJackGold's Avatar
    Status : BlackJackGold is offline
    Rank : Banned
    Join Date : Oct 16, 2009
    Posts : 1,694
    Threads : 10
    Last Online : Mar-11-2010 @ 05:54 PM

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    Quote Originally Posted by BigBen2112 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think both of the above comments are ridiculous.

    Yeah...the doctors that do contract work with the Steelers don't have medical licenses to worry about. They aren't the best of UPMC etc. or anything...they are just some bum doctors off the street. They forgot/didn't read/take the hippocratic oath. Comparing these doctors to doctors who do workers compensation claims is just silly.

    And oh yeah Harvard sucks. All the doctors who teach there and come out of there should be blackballed.

    Well, good for you....

    I think your entire position on this has been one fueled by arrogant indifference.

    And comparing them to the primary workers comp physicians is spot on, because that is what they are in a legal sense.

    Again, I will ask you once more the only truly important question that needs to be answered here.

    Can anyone state that beyond a reasonable doubt that Clark is not in jeopardy by playing?

    The answer is no.

    You know it and I know it.

    He has played there twice and had similar reactions both times with the incident in 2007 being much more extreme than the previous.

    Clark would be hard pressed to get another dr. to testify against one of those physicians, so your argument about their careers being in jeopardy is mute.

    The paper from Harvard is written as theory based on data collected up to the point it was written.

    It is theory, not gospel.

    Obviously since it is written on Sickle Cell alone it is not valid in this case at all.

    I have a feeling that unless you have a major change of vision and perspective your future may very well see the inside of a courtroom often.

    Well, at least three times, anyway.

  4. #34
    Beezy's Avatar
    Status : Beezy is offline
    Rank : Legend
    Join Date : Oct 11, 2009
    Location : Pig Hill
    Posts : 10,074
    Threads : 82
    Last Online : Nov-10-2016 @ 07:09 AM
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    I might just be oversimplifying the whole issue but this may not have anything to do with his physical condition but rather a mental one in that I am sure that was an extremely traumatic experience for him. There is a threat to your health any time you step on the field, something could happen sure but he may be going up there just to relive the whole experience in his mind the whole game. I'd rather him do that from the sidelines. We need him in this game no doubt but he may not be helping the team either way. Hopefully they make a decision soon so they can get on with the game plan and I also hope that we don't have a playoff game in Denver this year.

  5. #35
    BigBen2112's Avatar
    Status : BigBen2112 is offline
    Rank : Hall Of Famer
    Join Date : Oct 13, 2009
    Posts : 5,773
    Threads : 135
    Last Online : Jun-03-2014 @ 02:44 PM
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackJackGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Well, good for you....

    I think your entire position on this has been one fueled by arrogant indifference.

    And comparing them to the primary workers comp physicians is spot on, because that is what they are in a legal sense.

    Again, I will ask you once more the only truly important question that needs to be answered here.

    Can anyone state that beyond a reasonable doubt that Clark is not in jeopardy by playing?

    The answer is no.

    You know it and I know it.

    He has played there twice and had similar reactions both times with the incident in 2007 being much more extreme than the previous.

    Clark would be hard pressed to get another dr. to testify against one of those physicians, so your argument about their careers being in jeopardy is mute.

    The paper from Harvard is written as theory based on data collected up to the point it was written.

    It is theory, not gospel.

    Obviously since it is written on Sickle Cell alone it is not valid in this case at all.

    [HIGH-LIGHT]I have a feeling that unless you have a major change of vision and perspective your future may very well see the inside of a courtroom often.[/HIGH-LIGHT]

    Well, at least three times, anyway.
    I certainly hope so...especially since I am doing medical law.

    I think that your premise is misguided though my friend. No one can guarantee beyond a reasonable doubt that he cant have complications by playing and having physical exhaustion ANYWHERE he plays...let alone in Denver. He is taking a calculated risk by playing at all. Heck, all of life can be attributed to calculated risk. It may be that his calculated risk is lower in terms of playing football period vs. playing in Denver...but it also could be likely that his risk in both is within range where he'll decide to play and be fine. One of the primary recommendations for dealing with sickle-cell is to avoid physical stress and exhaustion...wouldn't that mean playing in REGULAR NFL games as well? Again...its calculated risk. (And...if you read what I have written throughout...I have advocated a patient-central approach. The medicine is what it is...and I have REPEATEDLY stressed that if he feels ANY apprehension he shouldn't even travel with the team...that is not arrogant indifference...its acceptance of the calculated risk phenomenon).
    Hidden Content
    "Like I always say, there's no 'I' in team. There's a 'me,' though, if you jumble it all up."--House

  6. #36
    BlackJackGold's Avatar
    Status : BlackJackGold is offline
    Rank : Banned
    Join Date : Oct 16, 2009
    Posts : 1,694
    Threads : 10
    Last Online : Mar-11-2010 @ 05:54 PM

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    Wait a minute...

    You are telling me that my theory is misguided, and then stating that no one can guarantee that he won't have any complications from playing anywhere?

    You just lost your first jury trial if you are defending the team drs for clearing him to play in Denver and it goes wrong.

    His prior history in Denver contrasted to other areas is the most relevant point of the case.

    Your posts and adamant defense of the drs lead me to believe you were a medical student.

    You should also be aware that if Clark has an opinion outside the Steeler med staff that it is up to him to decide which opinion to follow with impunity from the organization.

    If you are looking to defend drs in malpractice and negligence cases I think you will find after a very short period that they are all too human, motivated more by money than principal, make major mistakes, and lie about it just like anyone else.

  7. #37
    BigBen2112's Avatar
    Status : BigBen2112 is offline
    Rank : Hall Of Famer
    Join Date : Oct 13, 2009
    Posts : 5,773
    Threads : 135
    Last Online : Jun-03-2014 @ 02:44 PM
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackJackGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Wait a minute...

    You are telling me that my theory is misguided, and then stating that no one can guarantee that he won't have any complications from playing anywhere?

    You just lost your first jury trial if you are defending the team drs for clearing him to play in Denver and it goes wrong.

    His prior history in Denver contrasted to other areas is the most relevant point of the case.

    Your posts and adamant defense of the drs lead me to believe you were a medical student.

    [HIGH-LIGHT]You should also be aware that if Clark has an opinion outside the Steeler med staff that it is up to him to decide which opinion to follow with impunity from the organization.[/HIGH-LIGHT]

    If you are looking to defend drs in malpractice and negligence cases I think you will find after a very short period that they are all too human, motivated more by money than principal, make major mistakes, and lie about it just like anyone else.
    Again, it comes back to risk calculation. Without completely going into the whole philosophy of medicine...medical advice is umm...advice. He actively makes a decision from there. If a patient is advised to have a surgery and they do not choose to do so it is not negligence on the doctors part. However, here I am not even sure it is "advice" as much as a simple answer to a question--"Hey doc, you think I can go out there and play after all of this?"..."Well, Ryan, I think that in my medical opinion you could very well go out and play because it is unlikely that the exact set of circumstances that led to your last episode will occur again." I am not sure that the doctors advised him TO play...they likely simply said that medically he COULD.

    Anyways, I think the question here is over medical authority. How much authority should/do doctors have? Do doctors know anything at all? Or do they simply waste the $200+K on nothing? If these doctors do know the medicine then why is it wrong for them to answer his question from that perspective? Should they have simply said "Dude we're a bunch of idiots...we dont have a clue what would happen to you...go to a psychic to find out." Again, it comes to a point of medical decision-making/authority. I would take it that these guys (the doctors) know the medicine...what level of authority do you place on their statements etc?

    About me losing my first case. This is indeed untrue. Several factors must be present for a medical malpractice case. First, and foremost, among them is negligence. Lets return to the patient who chose not to have surgery (above). Lets say they did choose to have surgery and the surgeon--not the attending--makes a mistake during the surgery. Who is liable? Not the attending. Negligence is almost impossible to prove--you would need a consensus medical opinion that simply SUGGESTING the surgery was the wrong/negligent course of action. The only person that can be sued for malpractice/negligence is the surgeon...and again you actually have to prove that he did something negligent during the process...something that other doctors wouldn't do etc. I cannot be seen to lose the above "case" because the above discussion isn't a case at all. There are no briefs...heck we dont even know the actual particulars of the case. Furthermore, since there are multiple doctors, from multiple sources who work with the team, if they come to a medical consensus it will be even tougher for the plaintiff to uphold their burden of proof of negligence. Again, reading the article that I posted...it is possible that the doctors are looking at this circumstance and saying "you already had a scarred spleen etc...that was the cause of your problems...you now no longer have those preconditions...therefore you are fine to go play." It is seemingly impossible to know the particulars of their decisions without having the case-file in front of us.

    Ryan Clark will make his decision based on several factors--only one of which and probably the LEAST important is the medicine. I do not begrudge him that fact, as I have said multiple times already.
    Hidden Content
    "Like I always say, there's no 'I' in team. There's a 'me,' though, if you jumble it all up."--House

  8. #38
    BigBen2112's Avatar
    Status : BigBen2112 is offline
    Rank : Hall Of Famer
    Join Date : Oct 13, 2009
    Posts : 5,773
    Threads : 135
    Last Online : Jun-03-2014 @ 02:44 PM
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    Quote Originally Posted by Les View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Anyone care to guess what this "unnamed" medical condition is??Maybe he has 6 toes on his left foot??
    An underlying condition would be hard to prognosticate about. I mean it could be any of a number of things. However, since he's had this problem on a smaller scale before, I think that it might have something to do (the last episode at least) of a precondition of the spleen that caused the spleen crisis. Anything beyond that i would not even speculate about...and even the above is only a rough guess.
    Hidden Content
    "Like I always say, there's no 'I' in team. There's a 'me,' though, if you jumble it all up."--House

  9. #39
    BlackJackGold's Avatar
    Status : BlackJackGold is offline
    Rank : Banned
    Join Date : Oct 16, 2009
    Posts : 1,694
    Threads : 10
    Last Online : Mar-11-2010 @ 05:54 PM

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    Medical advice is just that.... 'advice' as you have said.

    It should contain something we all call common sense, and not a mind **** of a shell game in statements containing the words possibility and probability.

    How that plays out in the doctors office with the patient is statements like "Well, yes there is a possibility, but it is not really probable."

    The truth of possibility and probability is that with probability an instance can occur on the first test of the circumstances.

    It can occur again and again consecutively, regardless of how unlikely that is to occur.

    Any amount of possibility whether it be 2% or 20% will occur given enough tests of the circumstances.

    The authority level here is an an interesting point to raise, but not really in the way you have used it.

    The drs who have cleared him are the teams doctors and they are the primary care physicians in a workers comp case.

    By nature of the beast they are put into a position of much greater authority than any other dr Clark may or may not have seen.

    By clearing him to play, they put Clark in a position that he may be punished financially for making a decision which is in his best interests.

    They are paid directly by the employer as I am pretty sure that all NFL teams are most likely self-insured.

    Those drs, in a sense, are also employed by that same employer as Clark.

    They have a financial interest in making their employer happy and not so with the patient who's interests should be held in the highest regard.

    This causes a severe conflict of interest as they serve one master by practicing on another viewed as chattel.

    You can argue that you didn't lose a case all day long, but you know the point I am making is that in front of a jury, those contradictory statements would cause a verdict favorable to Clark.

    There was the conditional 'if' statement that also predetermined that every thing else you stated about a negligence case had already been satisfied and a case made it to court.

    Bringing up an analogy to surgery and not having surgery is irrelevant and I will raise an objection to have it stricken from the record.

    Now... if you want to discuss something more relevant in this instance...

    Are you familiar with the history behind a lineman from the Jaguars that had an open wound on his calf that would not heal over the course of the season?

    Pressure to play from the coaching staff (Coughlin) and organization along with medical clearance by the teams drs lead to that man having to have his leg amputated.

  10. #40
    BigBen2112's Avatar
    Status : BigBen2112 is offline
    Rank : Hall Of Famer
    Join Date : Oct 13, 2009
    Posts : 5,773
    Threads : 135
    Last Online : Jun-03-2014 @ 02:44 PM
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackJackGold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Medical advice is just that.... 'advice' as you have said.

    It should contain something we all call common sense, and not a mind **** of a shell game in statements containing the words possibility and probability.

    How that plays out in the doctors office with the patient is statements like "Well, yes there is a possibility, but it is not really probable."

    The truth of possibility and probability is that with probability an instance can occur on the first test of the circumstances.

    It can occur again and again consecutively, regardless of how unlikely that is to occur.

    Any amount of possibility whether it be 2% or 20% will occur given enough tests of the circumstances.

    The authority level here is an an interesting point to raise, but not really in the way you have used it.

    The drs who have cleared him are the teams doctors and they are the primary care physicians in a workers comp case.

    By nature of the beast they are put into a position of much greater authority than any other dr Clark may or may not have seen.

    By clearing him to play, they put Clark in a position that he may be punished financially for making a decision which is in his best interests.

    They are paid directly by the employer as I am pretty sure that all NFL teams are most likely self-insured.

    Those drs, in a sense, are also employed by that same employer as Clark.

    They have a financial interest in making their employer happy and not so with the patient who's interests should be held in the highest regard.

    This causes a severe conflict of interest as they serve one master by practicing on another viewed as chattel.

    You can argue that you didn't lose a case all day long, but you know the point I am making is that in front of a jury, those contradictory statements would cause a verdict favorable to Clark.

    There was the conditional 'if' statement that also predetermined that every thing else you stated about a negligence case had already been satisfied and a case made it to court.

    Bringing up an analogy to surgery and not having surgery is irrelevant and I will raise an objection to have it stricken from the record.

    Now... if you want to discuss something more relevant in this instance...

    Are you familiar with the history behind a lineman from the Jaguars that had an open wound on his calf that would not heal over the course of the season?

    Pressure to play from the coaching staff (Coughlin) and organization along with medical clearance by the teams drs lead to that man having to have his leg amputated.
    Yeah I am not really aware of the case you're talking about. I will have to go do research about it...right now I have to study for two tests and write up a 8 page presentation document. After that all is complete I will return for some more enjoyable debate.
    Hidden Content
    "Like I always say, there's no 'I' in team. There's a 'me,' though, if you jumble it all up."--House

  11. #41
    BlackJackGold's Avatar
    Status : BlackJackGold is offline
    Rank : Banned
    Join Date : Oct 16, 2009
    Posts : 1,694
    Threads : 10
    Last Online : Mar-11-2010 @ 05:54 PM

    Default Re: Ryan Clark cleared by doctors to play in Denver

    No one will ever accuse Hines Ward of being soft on the football field.

    He's caught passes over the middle with busted ribs; he's been dragged off the field by the training staff only to return and put his body on the line again. He regularly blocks defensive ends that outweigh him by 70 pounds and he's somehow stayed healthy despite being every defensive back's top target. So when Hines Ward says that if he was Ryan Clark, he wouldn't play this weekend, it means something.
    "If it were me, no I wouldn't go," Ward said. "You know what? Football's second when it comes to someone's life. Life is more important than football to me."

    The last time Pittsburgh played in Denver, Clark suffered some significant health problems because of his sickle cell condition. He eventually had to have his spleen removed, lost 30 pounds and missed the rest of the 2007 season. Doctors have cleared Clark to play this weekend, but understandably he's still trying to decide what to do when Pittsburgh plays Denver this week.


    The Steelers announced on Monday that they won't be announcing anytime soon whether Clark will play--partly because it makes no sense to give the Broncos extra time to prepare, but Mike Tomlin did say that he will play a part in the decision as well. Putting it all together, it seems like there's a decent chance that Pittsburgh will be without its starting free safety next Monday night.

    http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/11/03/h...his-week/#cont



    I like to see the team rallying behind Clark's possible decision to put himself first over the team.

    TBH, I think that this could serve as strong motivation for the team too.

    To go out and knock the snot outta the broncos and not let Clark down which could leave him second guessing himself.

    Clark should say he will play, and Tomlin should over ride him.

    Clark gets paid and is safe and in effect the teams dr.'s are benched.


Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •