Talking Footy

Topper wrote:

It's good enough for anyone if they are interested in the truth.

Vic Govt
Vic Police

they're not interested in the truth

oh dear

oh wait
they just have a differing veiw based on their expertese ... but because it paints the AFL out to be clowns
its NOT the truth

typical

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

don't care what so called experts in the employ of the AFL have got to say
K

I think a panel of 40 of Australia's leading experts on drug abuse and rehab deserve a lot more respect!

Having worked with many medical experts I can honestly say they operate with professional integrity at all times. Their decisions are held accountable by their peers. They don't make policies like this without basing them on extensive research and evidence. If they didn't they would be held accountable by their professional bodies.

That's good enough for me.

thats your opinion
I don't.
experts are consistently being proved wrong .... law inforcement experts say the " medical " opinion is flawed
academics have their heads up their dates mainly & have no practical sense
if the Vic Police say its a poor policy .... thats good enough for me .. I don't care what you or your " experts " think.

Hence i said "I think".

Law enforcement experts! LOL these are medical issues! Sure they have an opinion but certainly not a medical one.

Medical policy isn't based on academics. It's based on treatment and outcomes. It uses data from thousands of cases to form a conclusion about what is the most effective treatment.

Sure treatments are eventually proven wrong or superseded by better treatments or policies. That is what consistent research is used for. To test the effectiveness of new treatments against current methods. That's healthy!

Finally, they aren't my experts, or even the AFLs. They are the leaders of countless Australian medical bodies which specialize in this field. They based their policy on evidence they all considered. It lead them to this policy. It has been adopted by other bodies, or variants of it anyway.

It's clear you do not work in the medical field. I do. I know how medical treatments, such as this policy, are developed. They are always evidence based. They must be otherwise they are held accountable.

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

I think a panel of 40 of Australia's leading experts on drug abuse and rehab deserve a lot more respect!

Having worked with many medical experts I can honestly say they operate with professional integrity at all times. Their decisions are held accountable by their peers. They don't make policies like this without basing them on extensive research and evidence. If they didn't they would be held accountable by their professional bodies.

That's good enough for me.

thats your opinion
I don't.
experts are consistently being proved wrong .... law inforcement experts say the " medical " opinion is flawed
academics have their heads up their dates mainly & have no practical sense
if the Vic Police say its a poor policy .... thats good enough for me .. I don't care what you or your " experts " think.

Hence i said "I think".

Law enforcement experts! LOL these are medical issues! Sure they have an opinion but certainly not a medical one.

Medical policy isn't based on academics. It's based on treatment and outcomes. It uses data from thousands of cases to form a conclusion about what is the most effective treatment.

Sure treatments are eventually proven wrong or superseded by better treatments or policies. That is what consistent research is used for. To test the effectiveness of new treatments against current methods. That's healthy!

Finally, they aren't my experts, or even the AFLs. They are the leaders of countless Australian medical bodies which specialize in this field. They based their policy on evidence they all considered. It lead them to this policy. It has been adopted by other bodies, or variants of it anyway.

It's clear you do not work in the medical field. I do. I know how medical treatments, such as this policy, are developed. They are always evidence based. They must be otherwise they are held accountable.

use of illicit drugs is not a law enforcement issue ?


that'll do me...........

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

thats your opinion
I don't.
experts are consistently being proved wrong .... law inforcement experts say the " medical " opinion is flawed
academics have their heads up their dates mainly & have no practical sense
if the Vic Police say its a poor policy .... thats good enough for me .. I don't care what you or your " experts " think.

Hence i said "I think".

Law enforcement experts! LOL these are medical issues! Sure they have an opinion but certainly not a medical one.

Medical policy isn't based on academics. It's based on treatment and outcomes. It uses data from thousands of cases to form a conclusion about what is the most effective treatment.

Sure treatments are eventually proven wrong or superseded by better treatments or policies. That is what consistent research is used for. To test the effectiveness of new treatments against current methods. That's healthy!

Finally, they aren't my experts, or even the AFLs. They are the leaders of countless Australian medical bodies which specialize in this field. They based their policy on evidence they all considered. It lead them to this policy. It has been adopted by other bodies, or variants of it anyway.

It's clear you do not work in the medical field. I do. I know how medical treatments, such as this policy, are developed. They are always evidence based. They must be otherwise they are held accountable.

use of illicit drugs is not a law enforcement issue ?


that'll do me...........

nothing is stopping these players from being charged by the law you know. The AFL policy says nothing about legal charges. the police are free to do as they please.

The policy is about their medical treatment and involvement in the sport of AFL.

Seeing what Xman quoted from Raiderdave proves that he makes no cogent point. He also claims that law enforcement experts dispute the medical experts. Without links to prove this is the case. Besides, cops aren't doctors.

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Hence i said "I think".

Law enforcement experts! LOL these are medical issues! Sure they have an opinion but certainly not a medical one.

Medical policy isn't based on academics. It's based on treatment and outcomes. It uses data from thousands of cases to form a conclusion about what is the most effective treatment.

Sure treatments are eventually proven wrong or superseded by better treatments or policies. That is what consistent research is used for. To test the effectiveness of new treatments against current methods. That's healthy!

Finally, they aren't my experts, or even the AFLs. They are the leaders of countless Australian medical bodies which specialize in this field. They based their policy on evidence they all considered. It lead them to this policy. It has been adopted by other bodies, or variants of it anyway.

It's clear you do not work in the medical field. I do. I know how medical treatments, such as this policy, are developed. They are always evidence based. They must be otherwise they are held accountable.

use of illicit drugs is not a law enforcement issue ?


that'll do me...........

nothing is stopping these players from being charged by the law you know. The AFL policy says nothing about legal charges. the police are free to do as they please.

The policy is about their medical treatment and involvement in the sport of AFL.

Just Like AFL players where drugs are concerned.

Now THAT needs to be revoked!

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

use of illicit drugs is not a law enforcement issue ?


that'll do me...........

nothing is stopping these players from being charged by the law you know. The AFL policy says nothing about legal charges. the police are free to do as they please.

The policy is about their medical treatment and involvement in the sport of AFL.

Just Like AFL players where drugs are concerned.

I dont think this is serious. If it is it needs proof.

Okay then. Dave, was your comment serious? Or was it intended as a joke?

NSWAFL wrote:

Now THAT needs to be revoked!

NSWAFL wrote:

Okay then. Dave, was your comment serious? Or was it intended as a joke?

Say it was serious Dave and watch the lil short and stout teapot boil

No, watch Dave get punished.

NSWAFL wrote:

No, watch Dave get punished.

punished ?..... spanked maybe

oh yeah baby

Raiderdave wrote:

NSWAFL wrote:

No, watch Dave get punished.

punished ?..... spanked maybe

oh yeah baby

I'm a mod, not some sicko..............well...........

Sicko! That's the word I wanted to describe that.....that....thing.

Are we back on topic yet?