Minority Rights Advocate

Fighting for the smallest minority: The Individual

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 25 other followers

  • Topics

  • Old Posts

  • Top Posts

Why a Medical Evacuation (MEDEVAC) from the world’s most advanced and modern, well equipped warship (USS Ronald Reagan, CVN -76), when it has complete on board medical facilities and staff?

Posted by mrfixit on January 20, 2012

The news reported very little detail, and to this day it is absent on any search.  Why?

Why did NO ONE ASK the question posed above?

Want to know, then read on!

Here is the story:

<http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017205492_apwacarriermedevac.html>

(check for yourself, of MANY different stories, they will all read almost IDENTICAL to this one! – Search for “Ronald Reagan medevac Seattle”…)

A super carrier has a full medical facility and staff to do just about anything, so why the need to call the Coast Guard to fly a sailor off the ship (MEDEVAC) (with the additional risks and of course costs)?  There must be something to this story, but NO ONE apparently dares ask or report….

Why no details on what happened?  A horrible accident or something very serious…  I’d expect some questions because it must have been a big deal, so the mere concern for the safety and well-being of the injured sailor would seem to beg for such questions and answers…

It is likely will never see it reported in the media.  There will likely never be a follow-up at all on this story.

There is likely a political reason for the cover up, and that is what this appears to be, so what is the medical condition that required an evacuation off the USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) on 10 January 2012…

The injured happened to be a young female sailor (age 22, typically an E4) who was pregnant with a hemorrhage; a condition that can be deadly and which requires immediate medical care by very specialized surgeons. (It will likely to be diagnosed as an Ectopic Pregnancy (sometimes called Tubal Pregnancy).

http://www.bing.com/health/article/mayo-MADS00622/Ectopic-pregnancy?q=tubal+pregnancy&qpvt=Tubal+Pregnancy

I know the political powers that be would NOT want this story to be told, even when there is no personally identifiable information to track back to the actual sailor involved, no names have been reported but this ship has a crew of about 3000 without an air wing embarked!  It can’t be that hard for the media to find out what happened!

If it was just about ANY other medical condition, we’d likely know.  Those medical conditions would be reported (especially if a MEDEVAC was involved, however that likely would not have happened at all on this ship, since they would have been treated onboard with complete facilities and staff!)  These types of details about injuries/illness are virtually are always included in such news reports, because it is normal to ask such questions, out of natural concerns for the injured.

To PROVE this point, here is an official Navy story with a fair amount of detail on medical conditions and status for a MEDEVAC involving this same ship!  (Ironically this one to the ship, not off and away, also demonstrating the extensive medical capabilities on board!)

http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=33932

And here is one with injury mentioned, and drastic actions needed for a submarine sailor:

http://mayportmirror.jacksonville.com/military/mayport-mirror/2011-01-12/story/uss-boone-helps-medevac-injured-us-submariner

And this from the Navy News Service, with medical details all over the place:

http://www.guampdn.com/guampublishing/navigator/data/EkpEZlpVZVHiBqiSJq.htm

And one more, this with extensive mention of injuries in the USS San Francisco collision (and some goofy conspiracy theories that are entertaining!):

http://bklim.newsvine.com/_news/2011/10/11/8274339-part-3-mysterious-delay-in-the-medivac-emergency-response-to-the-uss-san-francisco-accident

Let me suggest a possible explanation for the absence of information in the news:  This is EXACTLY the medical concern unique to women serving in the Navy that many have suggested makes it very dangerous to have mixed gender crews on deployments.

To illustrate the legitimacy of such concerns by reporting such an example from a super carrier provides a very dramatic obstacle to the political agenda, and it could clearly harm continued efforts to integrate in other areas.  This agenda is pushed with such reckless abandon, it may well result in very preventable deaths (to say nothing about the costs and readiness issues here as well)!

Then how many other problems have been covered up like this one?  It is reasonable that this is the ONLY one time this has happened?

What other issues are covered up?

See an earlier post on that:

https://minorityrightsadvocate.wordpress.com/2010/12/20/pattern-of-cover-up-with-mixed-gender-disaster-and-general-sexual-impropriety-in-the-military/

2 out of every 100 (2%) (source: mayo clinic, linked above) of all pregnancies are Ectopic, so this, most likely has happened before (and will happen again, even when it is 100% preventable!), but you still won’t hear about it in the news, covered up just like it was here!

It was very fortunate that when this happened, the ship happened to be near a major US city with speedy access to such very specialized medical care, care that may well save her life.  What if this happened while the ship was off the coast of a barren third world country where such carriers are very often deployed, or even worse if it were on a Submarine at sea anywhere?  She could have died before proper care could have been provided!

When pushing this agenda many such risks have been consistently ignored.  That is a real shame and it should not be permitted, but it happens because we seem to permit censoring of the truth, preferring to hold to the party line and PC, and thus we set up people to take real risks while often they are left completely unaware they are taking such risks…

I would ask proponents of mixed gender crews, and those that would willingly continue to censor these incidents… How would you feel if this woman was a family member who was not near Seattle, but rather perished in absence of such advanced medical care?  Do you really think the Navy needs to add such specialized medical care and its associated costs to ALL ships with mixed crews?  (If that were really even possible on a Submarine they normally do not even have a full doctor aboard!)

Would advocates of mixed gender crews still be willing to accept such risks if it had led to the death of a family member or friend? – Not likely, but even with that it is not expected that many will change any deeply indoctrinated opinions, since this agenda has been deeply impressed upon people in our current culture from a very young age.

I can see it now, they will say Men can die of all kinds of medical issues, and yes that is true and it does happen, but the circumstances of this one ARE 100% preventable, and that makes it different!

Ironically many of these same people who would advocate for what becomes gender inequality in the name of equality, they would be for enacting gall kinds of restrictions based upon isolated and even very rare events, such as rules and laws pushed “to save even one life”, but they’ll dismiss that same concern when applied here in a situation like this!  It goes against their agenda; they think it is vital to mix crews for gender equality.  The harsh reality aside that men and women are in fact different escapes many, that is not to saying they should be unequal before the law, but to say they are uniquely equipped with capabilities and aptitudes that are never going to be equal generally to make men and women equal in all areas (there happen to be some physical differences, even the standards demonstrate this reality).

This is not to be a comment against women serving (this incident could only can happen with a responsible MALE involved somewhere, so one could just as easy attempt label it anti-male…), but one should realize that the mixed gender crew model, while at sea carries such additional risks, costs and it is AN entirely avoidable model, even though I don’t anticipate it will be changed any time soon…

All the efforts to recruit women, and it is only 15%, and they have very high attrition.  Is it worth the costs, and risks?  That is a question we are not to ask, it is not PC, costs be damned, and we have almost $16Trillion in debt and massive defense cuts ahead!

Efforts to conceal the truth, lead to bad results.  Ignoring the truth is not a victimless choice to make – there will be many victims from such choices, history is riddled with examples, and it is not a pattern that is new or even unique to this story.

See previous comments about women on submarines:

https://minorityrightsadvocate.wordpress.com/2010/10/20/what-is-wrong-with-having-women-on-submarines/

And about the Agenda:

https://minorityrightsadvocate.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/the-modern-feminist-left-wing-movement-not-about-femininity-at-all-it-is-about-power/

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: