You heard it here, first...

[stephen55]

I know who's going to be the Formula 1 champ in about 15 years...

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/police-boy-7-stopped-20-mile-30-kilometre-152737720.html

If he can drive at 50 mph at age seven...

 

[Stella_Omega]

Stephen, have you tracked down any sort of corroboration for your rectangular burn story?

I ask because I care.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I know who's going to be the Formula 1 champ in about 15 years...

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/police-boy-7-stopped-20-mile-30-kilometre-152737720.html

If he can drive at 50 mph at age seven...

So mom was asleep after working all night and junior got lonely? Was totally unsupervised? I suspect that questions about custody will be raised, poor little guy.

 

[stephen55]

Stephen, have you tracked down any sort of corroboration for your rectangular burn story?

I ask because I care.

No, and all I ever had was the talk given by the forensic pathologist. This particular doc was not known for suffering fools gladly, but that doesn't preclude being fooled.

So, not having anything to back up my comments, they are withdrawn and I apologize to the the woman involved.

 

[Stella_Omega]

No, and all I ever had was the talk given by the forensic pathologist. This particular doc was not known for suffering fools gladly, but that doesn't preclude being fooled.

So, not having anything to back up my comments, they are withdrawn and I apologize to the the woman involved.

Not to mention other folk that you didn't believe because of what this guy told you.

*musing*
That's the pernicious aspect, and why we should try, at least, to run down the facts that influence our personal policies.

 

[stephen55]

Not to mention other folk that you didn't believe because of what this guy told you.

Stella, you're making an assumption that you shouldn't be making.

 

[sr71plt]

Stella, you're making an assumption that you shouldn't be making.

That's a scream.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Stella, you're making an assumption that you shouldn't be making.

ROFLMAO!

Here's the assumption I made:

Not to mention other folk that you didn't believe because of what this guy told you.

Gender aside, is that a wrong assumption?

 

[sr71plt]

Just shows how deeply ingrained these things are. I do the same thing quite a lot.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Just shows how deeply ingrained these things are. I do the same thing quite a lot.

I use "guy" as a default quite often. And I totally admit I reflexively expect a female forensic pathologist to be more wary of claims like "perfect rectangle" then a male forensic pathologist might be-- especially as relates to the lap of a 72-year-old female burn victim. That might be knee-jerk, now that I think about it.

Stephen, my assumptions aside-- was your doc male or female?

 

[sr71plt]

I reflexively expect a female forensic pathologist to be more wary of claims like "perfect rectangle" then a male forensic pathologist might be

Hmmm. I think that's more prejudicial than using the term "guy."

 

[Stella_Omega]

Hmmm. I think that's more prejudicial than using the term "guy."

It could be considered the basis of the prejudicial nature of using the word "guy" as I did. And probably-- correctly so. I have my prejudices.

On the whole though, I think mine are pretty benign, beyond hurting someone's feewings once in a while. I can't really inflict any hardship by belittling men's general powers of observation on the internet.

What worries me about the doc's statement is that s/he may have influenced Stephen, who is a good and compassionate man, so that Stephen actually harmed someone by not believing that they were an actual victim of coffee wrongdoing.

 

[stephen55]

Stephen, my assumptions aside-- was your doc male or female?

The doc in question is female. She was passing on something she had leaned from the forensic grapevine. While the info she was given very well may be wrong (and likely is), the real point of her talk to us mere GP's (especially the ones who work in Emergency) was to always consider what you see in regards to what the patient has told you. Any discrepancy between what you see and what you expect to see, based on the history, needs careful examination. That goes triple if the history was given by someone other than the patient, such as a parent or caregiver. If that was happening and the patient, usually a child, was looking very apprehensive or frightened, it was time to go over everything with a fine toothed comb.

Not every banged up kid is the victim of child abuse and not every patient with an unusual presentation of an injury is a lawsuit-seeking flake. That said, as I posted somewhere, about a week after the news of the McDonald's coffee burn hit the press, into Emergency came a guy with a perfectly rectangular burn and a story of having spilled a cup of McDonald's coffee.

Moving on, having harmed someone by not believing that they were the victim of coffee wrongdoing, I also admit to having told more than a few people that they were the victim of excessive cheeseburger wrongdoing. As for excessive beer wrongdoing...