@Jarmann @skwalker1964 So data accuracy debate aside, a problem was indicated but not investigated & the indication turned out to be valid?
@WikiPickie @iHealthP @Jarmann @skwalker1964 We're pushing metaphors to the limit, but there was a problem on the road, no? If not as large.
-
-
@C7RKY@iHealthP@Jarmann@skwalker1964 If there r bandits ahead,it's a problem If I stop in time,as a sign warns of Martians,is it worthy? -
@WikiPickie@iHealthP@Jarmann@skwalker1964 Ok, we've gone from avalanches, to rocks, to bandits, to martians? I'm picturing a mountain > -
@WikiPickie@iHealthP@Jarmann@skwalker1964 pass (appropriate for healthcare) where all life is precious & even small obstacles threaten. > -
@WikiPickie@iHealthP@Jarmann@skwalker1964 In such circumstances, you check out all warnings, surely? Even suspected exaggerated ones. -
@C7RKY@iHealthP@Jarmann@skwalker1964 Yes,u'd check out all warnings u'd b grateful 4 true ones u'd hate false ones u'd b wary if exaggrtd -
@WikiPickie@iHealthP@Jarmann@skwalker1964 But if I leave the metaphor & consider my own regulated background? In that, you ignore nothing -
@C7RKY@iHealthP@Jarmann@skwalker1964 Yes,u ignore nothing & check each is true If warned of fish but u find bread,u butter it not fillet -
@WikiPickie@iHealthP@Jarmann@skwalker1964 Agreed, you act based upon what you find. But you go & see what's there to be found, every time - 33 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.