CNBC fawning over Buffett

[Valuist]

Absolutely unwatchable today. Yeah, he's got stage 1 prostate cancer. Big deal. The guy is over 80 years old and even if it isn't treated, he probably will die from something else. I guess they got tired of talking about Apple all day long.

[newtothegame]

Absolutely unwatchable today. Yeah, he's got stage 1 prostate cancer. Big deal. The guy is over 80 years old and even if it isn't treated, he probably will die from something else. I guess they got tired of talking about Apple all day long.
I am far from anywhere near the medical profession. And, I felt like I need to qualify my upcoming statment in advance.....
BUT OMG....seriously??? "stage 1 cancer" and your comment is "big deal" because he is "over 80" ????? Seriously??? Should we just toss them out when they get over what?...is seventy too soon?
Now again, I do not know stage one from any other but, I think my comments still hold valid.
Regardless if I like Buffet or not, if I read comments correctly, extremely distasteful!!!!!

[Valuist]

I am far from anywhere near the medical profession. And, I felt like I need to qualify my upcoming statment in advance.....
BUT OMG....seriously??? "stage 1 cancer" and your comment is "big deal" because he is "over 80" ????? Seriously??? Should we just toss them out when they get over what?...is seventy too soon?
Now again, I do not know stage one from any other but, I think my comments still hold valid.
Regardless if I like Buffet or not, if I read comments correctly, extremely distasteful!!!!!

People live for years with prostate cancer. This isn't lung cancer, or colon cancer. At his age, treatment wouldn't be worth it. Even a doctor from MD Anderson said last night, Buffett would likely die from another cause.

[newtothegame]

People live for years with prostate cancer. This isn't lung cancer, or colon cancer. At his age, treatment wouldn't be worth it. Even a doctor from MD Anderson said last night, Buffett would likely die from another cause.
So, then is it safe to say you are ok, ( I know its slightly off of THIS EXACT topic), with the "death panels" that was mentioned throughout the healthcare debate?
I mean here we have a DR. from MD Anderson saying so......so at what point (age) do we start determining when people can or can't recieve medical care due to it "being worth it"???

[thaskalos]

People live for years with prostate cancer. This isn't lung cancer, or colon cancer. At his age, treatment wouldn't be worth it. Even a doctor from MD Anderson said last night, Buffett would likely die from another cause.

In all fairness, whether treatment at this age is worth it or not should be left for the patient to decide.

IMO...being told that a person has cancer is a shock...at any age.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Absolutely unwatchable today. Yeah, he's got stage 1 prostate cancer. Big deal. The guy is over 80 years old and even if it isn't treated, he probably will die from something else. I guess they got tired of talking about Apple all day long.

I've read some amazing posts on this board, but this one ranks right up there. If there's any confusion, by amazing I mean disgraceful.

[Valuist]

The doctor from MD Anderson specifically stated it was caught very early and, I will repeat once again, Buffett will likely die from something else.

When did I ever say Buffett had no choice to seek treatment? When the hell did I mention death panels? READING IS A SKILL.....some of you obviously do not have that skill.

Sure he can get treatment......is it worth it? Being stage 1 and it is an extremely slow form of cancer, he could live 10 more years with it.

My original post was about the fact CNBC was spending way too much time on the matter. An 84 year old man gets stage 1 prostate cancer does not warrant taking over a main financial channel, IMO.

[Ocala Mike]

I agree with Valuist on this. If you're male and live long enough, the chances are very good that you WILL develop prostate cancer. It's something you die WITH, not OF. Not a doctor, and I don't play one on tv, but one treatment for Stage 1 prostate cancer at Buffett's age is called "watchful waiting."

How you come to talk about "death panels" after reading Valuist's post is beyond me.

[Valuist]

I agree with Valuist on this. If you're male and live long enough, the chances are very good that you WILL develop prostate cancer. It's something you die WITH, not OF. Not a doctor, and I don't play one on tv, but one treatment for Stage 1 prostate cancer at Buffett's age is called "watchful waiting."

How you come to talk about "death panels" after reading Valuist's post is beyond me.

You are 100% correct. Many of us on this board will develop prostate cancer. It is not an automatic death sentence other cancers can be.

[badcompany]

You are 100% correct. Many of us on this board will develop prostate cancer. It is not an automatic death sentence other cancers can be.

There was another doctor from NY Presbyterian, also on CNBC this morning making your exact points.

[Robert Goren]

The doctor from MD Anderson specifically stated it was caught very early and, I will repeat once again, Buffett will likely die from something else.

When did I ever say Buffett had no choice to seek treatment? When the hell did I mention death panels? READING IS A SKILL.....some of you obviously do not have that skill.

Sure he can get treatment......is it worth it? Being stage 1 and it is an extremely slow form of cancer, he could live 10 more years with it.

My original post was about the fact CNBC was spending way too much time on the matter. An 84 year old man gets stage 1 prostate cancer does not warrant taking over a main financial channel, IMO. For the record, Warren Buffett is 81.

[plainolebill]

Everyone gets freaked out with any kind of cancer diagnosis and generally want it taken care of ASAP but at Buffet's age treatment is more likely to cause him problems than low grade prostate cancer.

[bigmack]

Some of you guys trade and watch CNBC? Big mistake.

[plainolebill]

I get all my information from the internet but right now I'm in Mexico and everything is a day late. :D

[badcompany]

Some of you guys trade and watch CNBC? Big mistake.

There a study which has shown you can make money shorting the picks of this guy:

http://www.talkingbiznews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Jim-Cramer.jpg

[Robert Goren]

How can anybody invest on what is said on NBC? They are all over the map. There is a more less equal number of bulls and bears on every topic. The hosts are not stock picker but reporters with exception Cramer. He is right sometimes but also wrong a lot. In other words, he just like a broker. He is also crazier than Ron Paul which can make for good entertainment at times.

[newtothegame]

The doctor from MD Anderson specifically stated it was caught very early and, I will repeat once again, Buffett will likely die from something else.

When did I ever say Buffett had no choice to seek treatment? When the hell did I mention death panels? READING IS A SKILL.....some of you obviously do not have that skill.

Sure he can get treatment......is it worth it? Being stage 1 and it is an extremely slow form of cancer, he could live 10 more years with it.

My original post was about the fact CNBC was spending way too much time on the matter. An 84 year old man gets stage 1 prostate cancer does not warrant taking over a main financial channel, IMO.
Reading??? Ok, IF you were referring to me, show me what I read that you did NOT say....

Here is your post from #1
You said " Absolutely unwatchable today. Yeah, he's got stage 1 prostate cancer. Big deal. The guy is over 80 years old and even if it isn't treated, he probably will die from something else. I guess they got tired of talking about Apple all day long."

Now, I do understand you were upset at the coverage CNBC was giving to Buffett. But, YOU took it where it went with the bolded parts.

Next, YOU said in post #3 "People live for years with prostate cancer. This isn't lung cancer, or colon cancer. At his age, treatment wouldn't be worth it. Even a doctor from MD Anderson said last night, Buffett would likely die from another cause."

Again, YOU brought in to question AGE and stated that TREATMENT WOULDNT be worth it. You even backed YOUR statement up with "even a DR. from MD Anderson" said as much.

So, I asked about the death panels, which goes STRAIGHT TO WHAT YOU BROUGHT UP. If you are unaware of the death panels and conversations regarding their possibility, it goes to the age of a person and wether or not they can get health care. I notice you didn't answer that question......

But, in all fairness, I get you were attempting to discuss the coverage CNBC was giving it. CNBC was more then likely giving it due to the fact Buffett has been on there regularly. AND, I still think it is disgusting that you think its ok to determine when a person can or can't get healthcare based on age.

So please, show me what I didn't read right IF you were referring to me.....

[Tom]

Lots of better people have worse problems.
It is what it is.

So it goes.

[newtothegame]

Lots of better people have worse problems.
It is what it is.

So it goes.
You're right Tom but the point is just because we may or may not like someone, does not issue us the right to say they are too old anyway. Providing them health care isn't worth it. Hell, Buffett doesn't need our money. But, what if it was your mom, dad, etc etc.... Or maybe even us when we get older. Is that what we would be ok with? Someone else, with no ties or relationship deciding if we are worth providing health care too???

[thaskalos]

The doctor from MD Anderson specifically stated it was caught very early and, I will repeat once again, Buffett will likely die from something else.

When did I ever say Buffett had no choice to seek treatment? When the hell did I mention death panels? READING IS A SKILL.....some of you obviously do not have that skill.

Sure he can get treatment......is it worth it? Being stage 1 and it is an extremely slow form of cancer, he could live 10 more years with it.

My original post was about the fact CNBC was spending way too much time on the matter. An 84 year old man gets stage 1 prostate cancer does not warrant taking over a main financial channel, IMO.

I can't understand your angry reaction here.

First you say "big deal" to a guy's cancer diagnosis...and then you declare that treatment for this type of cancer at his age..."is not worth it".

Who gets to decide if treatment is worth it or not? YOU?

Some doctor on TV?

When that doctor is diagnosed with cancer himself at 81 years old...then he can decide if cancer treatment is worthwhile at that age.

Until then...this decision is best left to Buffett.

Don't you think?

[PaceAdvantage]

So, then is it safe to say you are ok, ( I know its slightly off of THIS EXACT topic), with the "death panels" that was mentioned throughout the healthcare debate?
I mean here we have a DR. from MD Anderson saying so......so at what point (age) do we start determining when people can or can't recieve medical care due to it "being worth it"???Let's not turn this into something it's not. For years now the medical community has been stating that elderly men diagnosed with prostate cancer (which is usually a very slow growing cancer) will most likely die from something else well before the effects of prostate cancer start to take hold.

In fact, many in the medical community have urged that men over the age of 75 shouldn't even be screened for the disease...

http://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/578591

[Robert Goren]

Buffett is not your average 81 year old. He is actively managing a company with billions of dollars in assets. His health is a concern to his stock holders, potential stock holders and people who business with his holdings. CNBC does tend to fondle a little bit over him. Thats because he so rich and he is willing spend a lot time with them answering their questions. And he doesn't lie to them. He spends a couple of hours with them several times a year. The few other people in the world who are as rich as he is don't do that.

[newtothegame]

Let's not turn this into something it's not. For years now the medical community has been stating that elderly men diagnosed with prostate cancer (which is usually a very slow growing cancer) will most likely die from something else well before the effects of prostate cancer start to take hold.

In fact, many in the medical community have urged that men over the age of 75 shouldn't even be screened for the disease...

http://www.medscape.org/viewarticle/578591

Mike, this is NOT about the actual cancer. As I said, I am no DR. nor claim to be.
As to trying to turn this into something it's not, I posed a simple question, that was relevant, based on what Valu stated in his OPENING of this topic.

But, if you wish, I will let it go. But, I will say I do NOT want the GOVERNMENT, VALU, NOR ANYONE else deciding my parents fate due to age. I don't want anyone deciding my fate because of my age.
Now we can say well prostate cancer isnt a "big deal". I really can't comment if it is or isnt. I will leave that to the medical community. But, just because the medical community deems something as not critical or otherwise, it should ALWAYS rest with the patient or family as to what decisions need to be made.

And to valuist, I have always valued your opinons and will continue to value them. It just so happens we disagree on this one.
Next topic??? :cool:

[Tom]

You're right Tom but the point is just because we may or may not like someone, does not issue us the right to say they are too old anyway. Providing them health care isn't worth it. Hell, Buffett doesn't need our money. But, what if it was your mom, dad, etc etc.... Or maybe even us when we get older. Is that what we would be ok with? Someone else, with no ties or relationship deciding if we are worth providing health care too???

This what Obama has said on the record, not me.

What I said here was that I do not care what Buffet has or does.
Far more people out there to care about - far better people.

[newtothegame]

This what Obama has said on the record, not me.

What I said here was that I do not care what Buffet has or does.
Far more people out there to care about - far better people.
And, I agree with you again tom....
I didnt say you said anything other then what you posted.
All I said, in the context of my post throughout this thread, is no one else should have the right to make that determination for another person.
The patient or family is there to make these determinations.