Bystander22

I'm pretty sure it's a HIPAA violation for a pharmacist to disclose the medicines prescribed to a patient/customer and they were thisclose to doing so. It's a good law, and a good pharmacist wouldn't even come that close. Otherwise, were do they draw the line? What if it's not a politician, but a teacher or a community leader or a minister, or just someone in the community that the pharmacist wants to gossip about with neighbors and friends? What if it's not Alzheimer's meds but meds for an STI, or part of alcoholism/drug addiction recovery, or the early stages of Parkinsons or ALS, or hormones for a trans person, or meds to address incontinence or a miscarriage?

And if pharmacists choose to share what they know, wouldn't that drive people to get their prescriptions filled another way (fake IDs, assumed identities, black market, cross-border/mail-order) or just not get medicine for fear of a medical secret being announced?

A better alternative: We should stop electing people who are clearly having a hard time thinking.

Published Oct. 2017.

Also, a rather important update tacked to the bottom:

> After this story went viral, the pharmacist interviewed provided an additional statement clarifying his remarks. “I am not aware of any member that actually has Alzheimer’s and would certainly not disclose any such information if I did know.” He added, “patient privacy is a very serious matter that I am committed to upholding.”

> He said that he was “[s]peaking very broadly about disease states that the general American population have and that it also applies to everyone including members of the U.S. House and Senate since they are also people just like you and I.”

Do we have examples of the 1970s women's lib movement (for one example) receiving broad financial, social, and political support from large corporations across multiple industries?

>have one person do the more-than-fulltime job of homemaking.

This was almost always the woman.

>disappeared because corporations needed

Also because women did not like the absolute dedication of their lives to homemaking as a default. They wanted the freedom to join the paying workforce, and wanted equal pay for their work (still waiting on that).

There's some truth in your comment, but it glosses over the very real problems that came with the gender roles and subsequent power structures of that time.

Related, notes from the Mod Summit 9 months ago:

>Spez - I want our users, user-users and moderator users, to make money on reddit. Specifically, I want them to make money from other users. And so we need to have business models where users are paying money to other users or to subreddits. I would like subreddits to have the ability to be businesses. We have a lot of subreddits that are kind of trying to do this, but the platform just doesn't support it.

I'm not sure they were hiding anything; maybe you just missed it among the thousands of other posts collectively across thousands of subs about the blackout protest. There was also:

* June 11: 'r/Python Will Black Out on June 12 at 00:00 UTC'

* June 12: 'By community vote, r/Python will Return to a Blackout'

* June 16: 'An Update about our Community' (text started with links, 'Here is a summary of the changes which prompted the recent Blackout. Here's our announcement for doing the Blackout....' and then 'Hence we wish to take another poll of community feedback...'

* June 28: 'By community vote, r/Python will Return to a Blackout'

Looks like the volunteer r/python mods were doing their best to keep everyone involved in the decision-making and informed of the outcomes while also juggling that volunteer activity for a for-profit company with their paying jobs and real-world responsibilities.