[powercf]

> Sorry, where does he say this

He didn't state that. That's my interpertation of his well written and very reasonable (at face value) statement. His central messages are "the doctors know best, and we shouldn't listen to patients as they are work-shy and/or drug addicts", and "I won't talk about the whistleblower, Anna Watson, except to say that she's a trouble-maker, whom we had to fire, and is being investigated for malpractice".

I'm not a medical professional, but I don't agree that machines can always diagnose pain. If a patient says he's in pain, then the doctor should take his word for it. It becomes more complicated if the patient is potentially addicted to pain medication, but fundamentally the word of the patient needs to be central in medicine.

[loceng]

Okay, so I agree with everything you say except for the false assertion that he's being dismissive that just because the pain can't be "proven" - that it's to be dismissed. He doesn't seem to say that anywhere.

[_ea1k]

I'll agree that he is dismissive of some of the claims, but only because I have never heard of a doctor in these situations not being somewhat dismissive. Its an interesting environment with a lot of moral hazard at a lot of companies.

I know nothing specific to Tesla's environment.

[Aeolun]

Not saying it and not thinking it are two different things. If he didn’t have an opinion on the matter, I just cannot see why he would even bring it up.

In the best case, I feel like he intents to say that even though people claim to be in pain, there’s nothing medically wrong with them, and it’s fine to send them back to work.

[loceng]

This is why I asked. And really, that's your best case understanding or your most skeptical/negative case of the interpretation, and without allowing for any assumptions for the full context of the scenario? Honestly there isn't enough context with what the doctor said there as to what actions would be taken and under what types of circumstances - however then people like to make wild accusations/speculation based on not enough context; sure, you can get worry and emotional at the possibilities, and state those potential worries - however assuming that the doctor's ultimate intent is to sweep something under the rug and send an adequately injured worker back to work... that's less to not reasonable.

[Aeolun]

I’m just saying the mentality of dismissing primarily mental anguish lends itself extremely well to dismissing worker complaints and sending them back to work.

Whether or not that is actually the case, as you say, is hard to prove.