A PET scan is like a CAT scan but it also detects DOGS and GOLDFISH?

 

Actually, a relative’s experience was a PET scan is what the insurance won’t 
pay for and you shouldn’t either if you don’t want to know that the doctors 
have been feeding you B.S. when they say “we got it all” because you may get 
the scan back and you lit up like a Christmas tree and you’re screwed but now 
you can’t unsee it.

 

It’s like when I had a CAT scan after a brain aneurysm and then an MRI, I 
learned you should just bypass the CAT scan and get the MRI, the difference in 
image resolution is huge.  But we all get what the insurance will pay for, they 
don’t even ask us, they just check the insurance.  In fact, if the insurance 
will pay for it, you’ll probably get it whether you need it or not.

 

 

From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Steve Jones
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 8:07 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: The Kraken has missing tentacles

 

dont ever get a PET scan

 

 

 

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 7:33 AM Jaime Solorza <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

Its too funny how many times they have failed...much like his presidency.

 

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020, 6:22 AM Adam Moffett <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

I just read the federal judge's order on the Michigan "Kraken" lawsuit.

Among the various points she makes:

* The evidence offered is sworn testimony of belief that something could 
have happened.  Belief is not evidence.

* A US Court has no authority to provide the relief requested by the 
plaintiff: A court can't order a state to change it's election results.

* Under the 11th amendment of the US Constitution you can't sue a state 
in a federal court.

* Most of the same claims have already been brought to state courts and 
already dismissed.

* The point is moot because you say election tampering was immediately 
apparent, but waited 3 weeks to file a suit --after results were already 
certified.

Any one of those reasons was enough to dismiss.  Even to a non-lawyer it 
seems like this never had a chance.  Why did they bother?  Was it more 
about putting on the show?  Was it, "the client wanted it so we did it"?



-- 
AF mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

-- 
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Reply via email to