Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Post Reply
Message
Author
Spock
Posts: 4866
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm

Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#1 Post by Spock » Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:14 pm

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/healthscienc ... creen-Ban/

Bob didn't have to go all the way to Texas to find sunscreen bans and (in this case) hospitalization due to such.

I am guessing Bob didn't post this at the time as it is in Washington and not Texas.

User avatar
themanintheseersuckersuit
Posts: 7635
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#2 Post by themanintheseersuckersuit » Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:59 pm

Collateral Damage in War on Drugs
Suitguy is not bitter.

feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive

The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22160
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#3 Post by Bob78164 » Mon Jun 09, 2014 7:06 pm

Spock wrote:http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/healthscienc ... creen-Ban/

Bob didn't have to go all the way to Texas to find sunscreen bans and (in this case) hospitalization due to such.

I am guessing Bob didn't post this at the time as it is in Washington and not Texas.
What I find shocking is that I live in the only state that permits the use of sunscreen at school without a doctor's note. Until I saw this link, I was not aware of that. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
littlebeast13
Dumbass
Posts: 31594
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:20 pm
Location: Between the Sterilite and the Farberware
Contact:

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#4 Post by littlebeast13 » Mon Jun 09, 2014 7:23 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Spock wrote:http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/healthscienc ... creen-Ban/

Bob didn't have to go all the way to Texas to find sunscreen bans and (in this case) hospitalization due to such.

I am guessing Bob didn't post this at the time as it is in Washington and not Texas.
What I find shocking is that I live in the only state that permits the use of sunscreen at school without a doctor's note. Until I saw this link, I was not aware of that. --Bob

I guess everyone isn't free to use sunscreen....

lb13

User avatar
SpacemanSpiff
Posts: 2487
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 1:33 pm
Location: Richmond VA
Contact:

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#5 Post by SpacemanSpiff » Mon Jun 09, 2014 7:59 pm

Sadly, Captain Son-of-Spiff has always needed lots of sunscreen (his mother's side). But he's always been an outdoors kind of kid, playing lacrosse, soccer, rugby, plus other things. Yes, he's used sunscreen pretty much all his life (he even was dubbed "Casper" in the Scouts because of it), and he always wore the army boonie hat and long sleeves in his deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq. And as he approaches 30, his face looks like it's closer to 40.

Yes, it was over a decade ago, but he always had sunscreen with him at school. And I'll bet that if he needed a doctor's note, his ma made sure he had one.

Sorry, but this sounds like a case of where common sense isn't common here (and apparantly in most states).
"If you're dead, you don't have any freedoms at all." - Jason Isbell

User avatar
Ritterskoop
Posts: 5895
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:16 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#6 Post by Ritterskoop » Tue Jun 10, 2014 2:21 am

Sorry to be dense - isn't the reason the other story was more newsworthy is because it was in an area where it is predominantly sunny, and this one is in any area that is predominantly, well, not?

I am not wanting to stick up for any Bob in particular, really, just thinking about why some things are more newsworthy than others. Man bites dog, and all that.
If you fail to pilot your own ship, don't be surprised at what inappropriate port you find yourself docked. - Tom Robbins
--------
At the moment of commitment, the universe conspires to assist you. - attributed to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.

User avatar
themanintheseersuckersuit
Posts: 7635
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#7 Post by themanintheseersuckersuit » Tue Jun 10, 2014 8:45 am

Dr Hugo Hackenbush of the Standish Sanitarium said that Mr X’s condition was not unusual. “A hundred years ago Educators Disease was virtually unheard of. There were scattered reports in Utopian communes like the Oneida Community, but the public never heard of them. Now a week doesn’t go by without another case being diagnosed.”
Captain Spaulding said common symptoms are hysteria, in men a loss of manhood resulting in an almost complete feminization, unreasoning severity in mood and attitude, incoherence, a rapid slide into bureaucratic insistence on form and rules for the rules’ sake.
http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=12745
Suitguy is not bitter.

feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive

The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 27133
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#8 Post by Bob Juch » Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:06 am

themanintheseersuckersuit wrote:
Dr Hugo Hackenbush of the Standish Sanitarium said that Mr X’s condition was not unusual. “A hundred years ago Educators Disease was virtually unheard of. There were scattered reports in Utopian communes like the Oneida Community, but the public never heard of them. Now a week doesn’t go by without another case being diagnosed.”
Captain Spaulding said common symptoms are hysteria, in men a loss of manhood resulting in an almost complete feminization, unreasoning severity in mood and attitude, incoherence, a rapid slide into bureaucratic insistence on form and rules for the rules’ sake.
http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=12745
Unfortunately this is not a Marx Brothers movie.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
themanintheseersuckersuit
Posts: 7635
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#9 Post by themanintheseersuckersuit » Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:11 am

After Michael and Melinda May's daughter was drug-tested five times in three years at Susquenita Middle School, they refused to sign a permission slip allowing it to happen again.

Leila May was drug-tested once during her fifth grade year, once in sixth grade and three times as a seventh grader because Susquenita School District randomly tests students in grades five through 12 who participate in extracurricular activities and apply for parking permits.

Without the permission slip signed, Leila was unable to participate in the National Junior Honor Society during her eighth-grade year, which ended last week. But Melinda May said that's what had to happen to ensure the 14-year-old wouldn't have to face another "embarrassing" urine test. All of Leila's tests came back negative, she said.
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index. ... rt_m-rpt-1
Suitguy is not bitter.

feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive

The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.

User avatar
Appa23
Posts: 3775
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:04 pm

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#10 Post by Appa23 » Tue Jun 10, 2014 9:33 am

Ritterskoop wrote:Sorry to be dense - isn't the reason the other story was more newsworthy is because it was in an area where it is predominantly sunny, and this one is in any area that is predominantly, well, not?

I am not wanting to stick up for any Bob in particular, really, just thinking about why some things are more newsworthy than others. Man bites dog, and all that.
Honestly, I am much more interested in this Washington incident, based on the fact that the mother knew that one daughter had a medical condition that requires the preventative use of sunscreen, and she did not take that step.

I also found the hat prohibition very interesting. As implied by the story, the Nebraska schools that my childen attend do not allow the children to re-apply sunscreen during field trips or at recess (for the youngest). However, our youngest certainly has sunscreen applied before school, especially on field trip days. More importantly, since she started school, our youngest has worn a hat at school whenever she goes outside. Every year, the teacher is advised that she is not allowed to go to recess unless she is wearing a hat. (Her fellow classmates are very good at reminding my daughter when she forgets in her excitement for recess.) We have never been asked for a doctor's note. The huge surgical scar/"bald spot" likely serves as enough of a "note".

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22160
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#11 Post by Bob78164 » Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:26 am

Another way California is unique: We appear to be one of two states (the other is North Dakota) that largely prohibits the use of non-compete clauses. This is becoming a larger news story because employers are inserting them into contracts more frequently.

In California it's considered an issue of public policy. That means that the California courts will refuse to enforce a non-compete clause even if the underlying contract is governed by the law of a state that does permit them. So if anyone if finding their ability to change jobs restricted by such a clause, we encourage them to move to California. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 13742
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#12 Post by BackInTex » Wed Jun 11, 2014 8:57 pm

Bob78164 wrote:Another way California is unique: We appear to be one of two states (the other is North Dakota) that largely prohibits the use of non-compete clauses. This is becoming a larger news story because employers are inserting them into contracts more frequently.

In California it's considered an issue of public policy. That means that the California courts will refuse to enforce a non-compete clause even if the underlying contract is governed by the law of a state that does permit them. So if anyone if finding their ability to change jobs restricted by such a clause, we encourage them to move to California. --Bob
So you and California don't respect contracts? And you expect businesses to stay there?
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

War is where the government tells you who the bad guy is.
Revolution is when you decide that for yourself.
-- Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

User avatar
silverscreenselect
Posts: 24669
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#13 Post by silverscreenselect » Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:21 pm

BackInTex wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Another way California is unique: We appear to be one of two states (the other is North Dakota) that largely prohibits the use of non-compete clauses.
So you and California don't respect contracts? And you expect businesses to stay there?
All states place limits on non-compete clauses. They recognize that employees cannot be prevented from earning a living. Texas allows non-compete clauses in employment cases but places conditions on them. As with most states, the non-compete clause must be reasonable in terms of length of time, geographic restriction, and the scope of what constitutes "competing." In addition, Texas appears to have a requirement that the employer has to give something of value beyond a mere at-will job to an employee in order for a non-compete clause to be enforceable. Here's a discussion:

http://www.robertslegalfirm.com/busnoncomp.html

Texas is more willing to enforce a non-compete clause than California is, but it's a mistake to say that any state "respects contracts" because the laws in every state have lots of circumstances under which contracts are or may be unenforceable.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22160
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#14 Post by Bob78164 » Thu Jun 12, 2014 12:57 am

BackInTex wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Another way California is unique: We appear to be one of two states (the other is North Dakota) that largely prohibits the use of non-compete clauses. This is becoming a larger news story because employers are inserting them into contracts more frequently.

In California it's considered an issue of public policy. That means that the California courts will refuse to enforce a non-compete clause even if the underlying contract is governed by the law of a state that does permit them. So if anyone if finding their ability to change jobs restricted by such a clause, we encourage them to move to California. --Bob
So you and California don't respect contracts? And you expect businesses to stay there?
Absolutely. Businesses go where they can find employees who will meet their needs. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 7007
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#15 Post by jarnon » Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:13 am

Bob78164 wrote:Another way California is unique: We appear to be one of two states (the other is North Dakota) that largely prohibits the use of non-compete clauses. This is becoming a larger news story because employers are inserting them into contracts more frequently.

In California it's considered an issue of public policy. That means that the California courts will refuse to enforce a non-compete clause even if the underlying contract is governed by the law of a state that does permit them. So if anyone if finding their ability to change jobs restricted by such a clause, we encourage them to move to California. --Bob
A California judge has ruled that tenure in teacher contracts is unconstitutional.

California teacher tenure is struck down: Expect years of appeals

Tenure helped workers, but it hurt kids in the worst schools, who were stuck with the least experienced teachers to boot. They're serious in California about prohibiting contracts that are bad for the public.
Слава Україні!

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 27133
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#16 Post by Bob Juch » Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:48 am

jarnon wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Another way California is unique: We appear to be one of two states (the other is North Dakota) that largely prohibits the use of non-compete clauses. This is becoming a larger news story because employers are inserting them into contracts more frequently.

In California it's considered an issue of public policy. That means that the California courts will refuse to enforce a non-compete clause even if the underlying contract is governed by the law of a state that does permit them. So if anyone if finding their ability to change jobs restricted by such a clause, we encourage them to move to California. --Bob
A California judge has ruled that tenure in teacher contracts is unconstitutional.

California teacher tenure is struck down: Expect years of appeals

Tenure helped workers, but it hurt kids in the worst schools, who were stuck with the least experienced teachers to boot. They're serious in California about prohibiting contracts that are bad for the public.
Well remember that's one judge who found that violates the California constitution. The headline says it all: Expect years of appeals.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 13742
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Severe Sunburn in Washington state sunscreen ban

#17 Post by BackInTex » Thu Jun 12, 2014 8:33 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:Another way California is unique: We appear to be one of two states (the other is North Dakota) that largely prohibits the use of non-compete clauses. This is becoming a larger news story because employers are inserting them into contracts more frequently.

In California it's considered an issue of public policy. That means that the California courts will refuse to enforce a non-compete clause even if the underlying contract is governed by the law of a state that does permit them. So if anyone if finding their ability to change jobs restricted by such a clause, we encourage them to move to California. --Bob
So you and California don't respect contracts? And you expect businesses to stay there?
Absolutely. Businesses go where they can find employees who will meet their needs. --Bob
Like Toyota?
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

War is where the government tells you who the bad guy is.
Revolution is when you decide that for yourself.
-- Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

Post Reply