Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, her doctor said no such thing and neither did the article. Her doctor said she was cleared to travel but never said either her infection was minor or that her earlier hemorrhaging was minor either. Are you privy to additional information? No - you're not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
The UTI had NOTHING to do with the early labor. Most UTI are minor, this fell into that category.
You do not know this is true and are making this up!!!! You're not her doctor. Stop pretending you know enough to say this ridiculous statement.
No, her doctor said no such thing and neither did the article. Her doctor said she was cleared to travel but never said either her infection was minor or that her earlier hemorrhaging was minor either. Are you privy to additional information? No - you're not.
You do not know this is true and are making this up!!!! You're not her doctor. Stop pretending you know enough to say this ridiculous statement.
No, her doctor said no such thing and neither did the article. Her doctor said she was cleared to travel but never said either her infection was minor or that her earlier hemorrhaging was minor either. Are you privy to additional information? No - you're not.
You do not know this is true and are making this up!!!! You're not her doctor. Stop pretending you know enough to say this ridiculous statement.
So you're saying the news agency is misreporting the facts?
"Huculak told CTV there was no "high-risk pregnancy," she just had a bladder infection that caused some bleeding. Her doctor in Saskatchewan explained to Blue Cross that the infection didn't have anything to do with the early labor, but it didn't change the company's decision not to pay."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostrider275452
Their population is a lot lower, maybe that accounts for some of it.
They covered themselves with travel insurance. The travel insurance denied coverage due to her having a bladder infection TWO MONTHS before.
They answered all questions asked and filled in all of the relevant little bits on the form.
What health care system "picks up on bladder infections long since cured" and prevent you travelling due to that? What a moronic thing to suggest.
One month stability after far more major issues than a common bladder infection is usually all that is required prior to any travel insurance disclaimer being pertinent.
You're still adding information that's not in evidence. It might behoove you to stick to the facts and not make conclusions on your own and call them fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679
So you're saying the news agency is misreporting the facts?
"Huculak told CTV there was no "high-risk pregnancy," she just had a bladder infection that caused some bleeding. Her doctor in Saskatchewan explained to Blue Cross that the infection didn't have anything to do with the early labor, but it didn't change the company's decision not to pay."
I don't have an issue with her doctor saying it's not high risk but to dismiss the earlier hemorrhaging as nothing as another poster did is not fact either. People here have a tendency to extrapolate something in an article and then try to pass off their own conclusions as fact. It's irritating and frankly deserves to be called out.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.