# Couch to Eddy: Say NO to the DNA test



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

http://www.suntimes.com/output/couch/cst-spt-greg09.html



> Unless the Bulls are planning to clone Eddy Curry and pay him double, they have no place pressuring him into taking a DNA test.
> 
> Let's look at the Bulls' job application form. Name, age, salary demands, experience. Now all we need is a deep look into your biological and chemical makeup, a full screening of all your genetic abnormalities and mutations, and in turn your family's, and we can process your application?
> 
> ...



how invasive is a dna test anyway? they just draw blood.

i would think the bulls would keep all results not pertaining to the heart issue confidential and private - and eddy's family should insist on it. but to suggest the bulls are doing this with bad intent is just off base.

very sensitive subject, still no closer to being resolved.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Nice how he briefy notes that cardiomyopathy killed Reggie Lewis, but then treats it as some kind of throw away fact with no bearing on the Curry situation.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

mizenkay said:


> http://www.suntimes.com/output/couch/cst-spt-greg09.html
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Uh, YEAH! It's against the law to disclose any test results to unwanted parties. If Curry says to check only for this one genetic malfunction, then it's unlawful to release any other DNA patterns. What's the purpose behind this article? To put ideas in Eddy's head and create more soap opera? Jeez, let the guy find out what the problem is. How would a sportswriter know more about this than a leading cardiologist in the country?


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

*VERY* unprofessional article....


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

I don't see any link between Eddy taking a genetics test and some kind of draft requirement that would lead to the eventual destruction of the world, like Couch alludes to. Theres no slippery slope here. Even if by some stretch of the imagination a genetics test was adopted by professional sport, what would be the end result? Less people would die on the playing field? Yeah, that would be horrible.


----------



## WestHighHawk (Jun 28, 2003)

Still more pot stirring by the media...sheesh!

If I were Eddy, and this would tell me one way or another whether it is cardiomyopathy, I would do it without hesitation. Why go through life not knowing when science has come so far?

And as far as disclosing any other information gleaned from the DNA testing, with the privacy laws in place, there would be a major law suit involved, I'm sure.

Agreed, very bad article.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Looks like Eddy hired an agent who is trying to protect his finanical interests, not his best interests. Submit to the testing, but only allow the doctors to report the pertinant information to the Bulls. Tear the rest of the information up for all I care.


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

This idiot obviously just got bored and decided to try and open up a can of worms. 

What a stupid a-hole.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

Rhyder said:


> Looks like Eddy hired an agent who is trying to protect his finanical interests, not his best interests. Submit to the testing, but only allow the doctors to report the pertinant information to the Bulls. Tear the rest of the information up for all I care.


do we think that this was somehow fed to couch via the new agent rose? wow, if that's the case. wow. 

what do they all want to see eddy collapsed at the free throw line?

take the test eddy.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

I thought the DNA test would go so far as to tell whether Eddy has a genetic predisposition for a heart condition and not whether he actually has caridomyopawhatchamacallit. If the testing will either narrow down possibilities or make clearer a course of action, why in the world wouldn't he take it?

As others have already written, this sure looks like someone simply trying to stir the pot. It's terrible advise. Worst case, you don't run the test and Eddy drops dead because there really is a problem. Best case, the tests indicate further courses of action and Eddy gets to continue to breathe for a few decades more.


----------



## madcows_playing_point (Mar 31, 2005)

"Great Scott, Eddy's heart is fine, but he's missing the All-Star gene! We must not resign him!!"
That idiot needs to stick to sports and leave medicine alone. The Bulls won't be allowed to see any results that Eddy doesn't clear them to see. Just because they are his employer doesn't mean they will be handed over the all the test results. There are laws that prevent that. Unless they want Eddy to be able to sue the hospital and doctors where the test takes place so he can get millions even if he can't continue playing.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> Looks like Eddy hired an agent who is trying to protect his finanical interests, not his best interests. Submit to the testing, but only allow the doctors to report the pertinant information to the Bulls. Tear the rest of the
> information up for all I care.


Perhaps thats what this is, a calculated leak by Eddy's agents in the event that the tests come back positive. 


I suppose it's important to voice concerns about controversy surrounding the test. A bad test result could mark a substantial road block to his career and the tests are not universally accepted. Eddy may want to keep his playing options open -- even if he is diagnosed with a genetically enlarged heart. Otherwise, this article is absolutely unfathomable. 

Even if this is Eddy's representation is protecting themselves against a controversial test, there are so many better ways to go about this article. It could have simply been about how a positive test does not necessarily mean Eddy can no longer play. Instead Couch spun this article to make ill-formed accusations. Yuck.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Curry should do the test privately and only release the information he wants to release.

The Bulls don't have the right to sift through all of that information.

All of this "we're doing what's best for Eddy" crap is getting old. Eddy and his representation will have to make a decision as to what is best for Eddy. His potential employers will then have to make a decision whether to sign him or not. If they don't have 100% of the information, then fine, people make decisions with limited information all the time. If the Bulls are not comfortable signing him with that limited information, then there will be some other team out there that will be. Live with it. 

"We're doing what's best for Eddy" == "I get to take a look under the hood of this investment I'm considering"

This whole media-backlash thing confuses me as well. It’s a valid, interesting article and a question that needs to be asked.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> This whole media-backlash thing confuses me as well. It’s a valid, interesting article and a question that needs to be asked.


Nice post. I agree 100%


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

If there are other ways to conclusively test for cardiomyopathy, I'd say to go with those first. DNA tests DO reveal a lot about someone, stuff that people don't even know about themselves. What if Eddy's got a dormant gene for Parkinson's or Altzheimer's? What if he's got a recessive gene for multiple sclerosis? What if he's just genetically pre-disposed for homosexuality? Or what if it's negative things, like violent rape or anger management?

Genetics are tricky, and post-HGP, they are scary to hear about. I can understand the privacy issue; as much as we, as fans, like to think that the Bulls are somewhat of a happy family as long as everyone is getting paid, it's still their workplace. I'd never want my peers or bosses to know what my DNA says about me.

I'm sure he could elect to have the test limited in scope only to the cardio problems, but I wonder if 1) that's very possible and 2) what assurances he could have that they would honor that agreement?


----------



## madox (Jan 6, 2004)

What's the big deal?

This DNA test should be a part of the routine physical exam for proffesional athletes. This article makes it sound like Eddy should be personally offended that the Bulls would even suggest it. 

People are getting way too suspicious. Some people honestly have the attitude like, "Hey, just give him the Guaranteed $75 million and if heaven forbid he keels over and dies then, hey again, at least it was ONLY $75 million..."

These folk must have like a really genuine physical disinterest in the realities of our modern living. 

Eddy can do whatever the **** he wants, but let's not act like the Bulls drove him to it with this tasteless request.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

Of course the Bull is going to stick to the "we're doing it for Eddy" line. Of course, the Bull is also interested in whether Eddy will ever play again before they sign him to a long term contract. I think both points of view are valid concerns for Bull management -- personal and business.

Big Ed should have the same concerns. He should be just as interested in knowing as much as possible about his own physical health as the Bull staff. His business concern should be to get the biggest contract he can get. Ethically I know I would have a hard time taking the money if I knew I couldn't play, but I realize I'm in the minority here. 

I agree, then, with *kukoc4ever!* that Ed should get the tests done privately. Problem is, if the Bull knows he's getting the test, and he doesn't reveal the results, the Bull can assume a poor diagnosis.

If I were Pax, I'd be very hesitant to make a long-term commitment to Ed without knowing as much about his heart as possible.

I can see arguments for both sides. I think both have their merits. There is no law that requires Ed to take the test. There is also no law that requires the Bull to make Ed a contract offer. Unlike the coaches contract, however, Ed's contract will have a huge impact on how the Bull is able to do business over the next few years, and it is vital to Pax to know what he's getting.

Bottom line, if I'm the Bull and can't get the results I want from Eddy's tests, I cut him loose. $50 million will buy a heck of a replacement...


----------



## BealeFarange (May 22, 2004)

Nice post, Wynn, as usual. 

This is a really difficult decision and that's why I share K4E's surprise that this article (and others) is being so heavily dumped on. I thought it was a well written article and that there are many angles to explore. I do think everyone wants the best for Eddy...even the Bulls organization, though they're inclined to approach things from a different angle. Most importantly, no one wants Eddy to come to harm. 

I agree with those that think Eddy should take the test privately and disclose NOTHING about the test. I think he should make that clear to the Bulls as he enters the testing: no matter what, these results will remain private. If Eddy comes away from the results with a desire to play--"healthy" or not--that's his decision and I can't imagine he'd play with his own life lightly. If the Bulls choose to not sign him under anonymous testing conditions, that is their perogative. If Eddy comes away from these tests with the desire to play, though, someone will trust his judgment enough to sign him...and then Eddy will have made the decision in his best interest as ONLY Eddy can do.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Looks like the Telender show on THE SCORE will be focusing on this subject this afternoon.

Should be interesting. Bringing on some doctors/academic types. Perhaps we'll learn more about Eddy's condition.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> Looks like the Telender show on THE SCORE will be focusing on this subject this afternoon.
> 
> Should be interesting. Bringing on some doctors/academic types. Perhaps we'll learn more about Eddy's condition.


Cool. What does "1 down 14 to go" mean?


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

such sweet thunder said:


> I don't see any link between Eddy taking a genetics test and some kind of draft requirement that would lead to the eventual destruction of the world, like Couch alludes to. Theres no slippery slope here. Even if by some stretch of the imagination a genetics test was adopted by professional sport, what would be the end result? Less people would die on the playing field? Yeah, that would be horrible.


 *points and screams like the aliens (in Invasion of the Body Snatchers)* 

Republican!!!!!


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

BealeFarange said:


> Nice post, Wynn, as usual.
> 
> This is a really difficult decision and that's why I share K4E's surprise that this article (and others) is being so heavily dumped on. I thought it was a well written article and that there are many angles to explore. I do think everyone wants the best for Eddy...even the Bulls organization, though they're inclined to approach things from a different angle. Most importantly, no one wants Eddy to come to harm.
> 
> I agree with those that think Eddy should take the test privately and disclose NOTHING about the test. I think he should make that clear to the Bulls as he enters the testing: no matter what, these results will remain private. If Eddy comes away from the results with a desire to play--"healthy" or not--that's his decision and I can't imagine he'd play with his own life lightly. If the Bulls choose to not sign him under anonymous testing conditions, that is their perogative. If Eddy comes away from these tests with the desire to play, though, someone will trust his judgment enough to sign him...and then Eddy will have made the decision in his best interest as ONLY Eddy can do.


ditto


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

kukoc4ever said:


> This whole media-backlash thing confuses me as well. It’s a valid, interesting article and a question that needs to be asked.



I'm with you, too, Kukoc.


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

on k4es side for once. right is right. Whats the problem?
everytime someone takes a stance that may be go against the Bulls isn't necesarily wrong (perish that thought)



> *''That's for you to ask Eddy and his representation*,'' Paxson said. *''You're trying to put me in position to defend this test, and I'm not going to*.''
> 
> No. Not to defend the test, but to defend your right to all these detailed results.
> 
> *''Privacy is a valid point,*'' Paxson said.


----------



## HAWK23 (Jul 1, 2002)

on the score Buffone and the other guy just said "The rumor is his career is done" (talking about curry)....

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF :curse:


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Wow.

Telender and Buffone on THE SCORE both said that the word on the street is that the Bulls are worried/suspent that Eddy's career is OVER.

Cardiomyopathy.

They are having a doctor on next.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

fleetwood macbull said:


> *points and screams like the aliens (in Invasion of the Body Snatchers)*
> 
> Republican!!!!!


 first it was free trade.

then it was bush's proposed social security plan.

now, genetics and eddy curry???

what the hell is happening to me . . .  

might as well start sending campaign contributions to zell miller. :biggrin:

fleet, i'm not sure that k4e's stance and those criticising the article are necessarily at odds. 

my problem with the article is that instead of just stating that genetic testing is unreliable and sets a bad precedence, it goes off on some bizarre tangent. i can say without reservations that the bulls have curry's health in their best interests because success on their potential investment is directly tied to eddy not dying on the court. it's a dark statment but speaks in the truth. what could the bulls possibly gain by genetically proving that eddy shouldn't be playing the game? 

actually, your view is probably more quientisentially republican. eddy curry deserves the freedom to control his own body and big government should butt out? i'd probably would rather curry not have the choice to play if he is successfully diagnosed with Cardiomyopathy -- the freedom isn't worth me having to risk watching him drop on the court.


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

such sweet thunder said:


> first it was free trade.
> 
> then it was bush's proposed social security plan.
> 
> ...


i'll admit, it did give credence to the theory of Bulls selfishness and (horrors) trying to worry about the bottom line on his new deal. Its a very cynical point of view that i too find distasteful 



> actually, your view is probably more quientisentially republican. eddy curry deserves the freedom to control his own body and big government should butt out?


color me more an idealistic Libertarian :biggrin: 



> i'd probably would rather curry not have the choice to play if he is successfully diagnosed with Cardiomyopathy -- the freedom isn't worth me having to risk watching him drop on the court.


Uh well, I'm kind of dubious on that. I would like to extend that freedom, only if i could give him an unguaranteed deal (more to the point if his health deteriorates but the poor guy stays alive). As in all walks of life. I think those kinds of risks should be personal


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Showtyme said:


> I'm sure he could elect to have the test limited in scope only to the cardio problems, but I wonder if 1) that's very possible and 2) what assurances he could have that they would honor that agreement?


To my knowledge, it's against the law to disclose ANY medical information to outside parties. That includes the Bulls. If that right is violated, then Eddy doesn't need basketball to make money anymore. He'd have a big cash settlement coming in.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

fleetwood macbull said:


> Uh well, I'm kind of dubious on that. I would like to extend that freedom, only if i could give him an unguaranteed deal (more to the point if his health deteriorates but the poor guy stays alive). As in all walks of life. I think those kinds of risks should be personal


yeah, i love boxing. so i guess the bottom line is i'm just a hypocrite.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> Cool. What does "1 down 14 to go" mean?


I think he means Skiles is re-signed, so now it's time to get our 7-footers re-signed, too (7 + 7 = 14 feet).


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

such sweet thunder said:


> yeah, i love boxing. so i guess the bottom line is i'm just a hypocrite.


 :laugh: 
don't be so hard on yourself. at least you're not a horses *** like me :redface:


----------



## grace (Mar 22, 2005)

I haven't read the entire thread so if I'm repeating anything, I apologize. I don't see what the need is for a DNA test to determine the cause of cardiomyopathy. To me it doesn't matter what caused it, only that he has if, if he truly does. 

If Eddy were to call me for advice (I'm a nurse) I'd tell him I didn't see the need for the test. To me it sounds like a bunch of research doctors wanting a ginnea pig.

I've got a question. Just who released all this stuff about what tests they want to run on Eddy? Unless whoever did it has Eddy's permission to release the information it's a big HIPPA violation to do it.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

I don't have a major problem with Couch's article, except that it took the wrong angle.

- The DNA test could alert Curry to potentially life-threatening results if he chooses to keep playing professional basketball.

- If Curry has the test done now, and it says he's fine, it could increase his market value.

- If Curry has the test done now, and it says that continuing to play professional basketball risks his life, no one will touch him at any price if they know about the test results. He could choose to keep this information to himself, but if he gets a big contract knowing that he can't play, it's fraud.

- Curry could wait until after he gets a contract and then have the test done. If the test comes back good, he'll have missed an opportunity for a bigger payday. If it comes back bad, he'll have avoided questions of fraud.

I understand why the Bulls would like to have him take the test (so would every other team that may be interested in Curry), but I think Pax is not totally sincere when he says it's all about Eddy's best interests. If it was all about Eddy, Paxson would be OK with having Eddy take the test after they sign a contract. This would still help avoid disastrous results for Curry.

At this point, no one knows what the DNA test might say. Without the test, Curry is still worth serious money. With the test, he could be worth nothing. If I'm Curry, I take the test after I sign a contract (wqith as much unconditionally guaranteed as possible). This way, I get what I can, but don't risk my life.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

grace said:


> I've got a question. Just who released all this stuff about what tests they want to run on Eddy? Unless whoever did it has Eddy's permission to release the information it's a big HIPPA violation to do it.


How is it a HIPPA violation to talk about what kind of medical test you'd like to see performed on an employee? I thought HIPPA related to medical records. If there is no test, there is no record.


----------



## grace (Mar 22, 2005)

HIPPA is pretty freakin' strict. If they wanted to make a case that plan of care is covered they would. I don't know that they could go after the Bulls, but it wouldn't surprise me if Eddy pushed they'd try.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

grace said:


> HIPPA is pretty freakin' strict. If they wanted to make a case that plan of care is covered they would. I don't know that they could go after the Bulls, but it wouldn't surprise me if Eddy pushed they'd try.


HIPAA is very strict, but it only deals with medical info. To this point there are no issues.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

fwiw - this was the 4th topic on PTI today:

should curry take the DNA test?

mentions the couch column, the fact that it potentially opens the door for the bulls to use genetic info against him.

privacy is a legit issue, the public doesn't have the right to know the outcome, but if you are potentially going to be paying someone tens of millions of dollars, the employer has the right to know the state of the health of the player.



basically they both said that eddy should take the test.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

I like how people say Eddy Curry doesn't need to worry about anything form the Bulls. Wasn't it supposed to be illegal to leak Grand Jury testimony in the steroid case? Everything got leaked, nobody got punished.

If the Eddy wants to keep playing basketball w/o the test that is his business, the Bulls have the right to pass on his services.

The rumour inChicago might be that Curry's career is over but the rumour around the NBA is that the Bulls are trying to get Eddy on the cheap.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

mizenkay said:


> fwiw - this was the 4th topic on PTI today:
> 
> should curry take the DNA test?
> 
> ...


What little legislation is in place regarding genetic testing and employment actually dictates that the employer doesn't have the right to know. It's illegal for the Federal government to know the outcome of genetic testing of any Federal employee. And the small number of states to pass legislation on the matter have ruled the same way -- DNA testing is strictly and uniformly off-limits to employers. 

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/legislat.shtml

I think Couch's premise is very interesting. He's not asking Eddy to refuse the test just to thwart the saintly, completely un-self-interested Bulls. He's asking Eddy to refuse the test because of the chance it would open an unbelievably messy can of worms for all professional sports. Athletes are already subjected to a very advanced degree of physical screening, and they are an overwhelmingly healthy bunch. The kinds of serious diseases DNA screens can most accurately predict usually manifest themselves early in life (Down's syndrome, cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, etc.), or long after a player's playing days would be over (Alzheimer's, most cancers, heart disease, etc.). It would be intrusive, distracting, and largely ineffective to screen the DNA of pro athletes.

My opinion of DNA testing is mixed: On the one hand, the research aspects of it are powerful and will likely lead to cures or a better understanding of a lot of serious illnesses. On the other hand, the behavorial genetics stuff scares the hell out of me. I'd like to think that in the history of humankind there have been plenty of people who didn't commit any crimes despite a genetic sequence that would suggest criminality, plenty of famous musicians who've lacked the "perfect pitch" gene, plenty of scholars, leaders, and inventors who didn't have optimal teaching, leading, and inventing genes, plenty of athletes with not-great athletic genes, and so on. Misapplied behavorial DNA testing could endanger freedom and possibility and the human spirit, imo.

As far as Curry goes, he is in a huge pickle. The DNA test has no upside for him -- the only thing it can conclusively show is that he has congenital irreversible cardiomyopathy, and his career will be over. If his DNA test comes back clean, nothing's really changed -- he has an enlarged heart and an irregular heartbeat that no one has diagnosed or explained. So I can understand his reluctance. But I think he should take the test, with the stipulation that the NBA gets only a yes or no answer as to whether his cardiomyopathy is congenital. The rest of it is Eddy's business, and I hope we never have to hear about a guy slipping to the second round because his DNA screen showed a tendency for criminal aggression and a strong predisposition for Type II diabetes.

(Insert "on what chromosome is the jib gene found?" joke here.)


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

I wonder if the estate of Eddy Curry would sue the Bulls if they just slap dashed over this to put their prized Bull on the floor and ride him like Zorro until he drops.

Duty of care in the circumstances to the employer?

I think so.

I think the Bulls genuinely want to do what's right for Eddy Curry but its not about screwing his market ..its about the possible litigious nature of their action or inaction should the worse happen that would cost them a lot more than a comparative bit of chump change they might be the sum of young Edward's next contract

That's not a can of worms 

Its a worm farm


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Why can't Eddy take the DNA test and only share the part of it that has to do with his heart?

Why does he have to disclose all of the results to the Bulls, when the only issue is his heart?

Is there something I'm missing about Doctor-Patient relationship?


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

ScottMay said:


> What little legislation is in place regarding genetic testing and employment actually dictates that the employer doesn't have the right to know. It's illegal for the Federal government to know the outcome of genetic testing of any Federal employee. And the small number of states to pass legislation on the matter have ruled the same way -- DNA testing is strictly and uniformly off-limits to employers.
> 
> http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/legislat.shtml
> 
> ...


All very libertarian which is all very nice

Doesn't cost a dime to be the bigger man when its not your dime

You talk about civil servants and privacy legislation etc etc for rights accruing to a $35K a year Joe Schmo

Can you really equate the civil rights for the common person wrapped up in "for the people" politics with someone who aspires to ink a $70M contract ?

And who, against his own and advisers best counsel , could be putting his own life in danger ?

Couch talks a lot of crap about poking and prodding and the indignation of what these guys are subject to 

Bigger the stakes - bigger the breaks . 

Good and bad . Its the territory . Deal with it.

The real issue is with " the employee" is "All Care and No Responsibility"

At least no self responsibility

Because if I decide to go to work and I' have a congential heart problem that is life threatening in the ambit of work that I am expected to perform in my employment contract , and my employer is privy to that information , yet still sends me out to perform that work , knowing , that I run the risk of dropping dead in the work place ......

Yeah sure let's wipeout the rich devil slavemaster boss man 

What does the dead man care? 

He doesn't want to look reality in the face because it can never happen to him right ?

And at the time those that love him probably don't want to face up to the possibility of loss either .. but they'll be the ones that benefit when they take the slavemaster down if he didn't exercise a reasonable duty of care with predisposed knowledge of the contingency of what might happen

Its not about precedents what you allege for the rest of the pro sports brotherhood and fear smears .. although doubtless some half twit F_ ck will probably want to make it about that

What its really about is economic primalism and villianary that follows from such and its been happening since the dawn of time

They that have it .. they that don't and they that don't forever mistrusting those that have it that every action which is undertaken is designed to keep the working man down .... we just have to further rationalise it with a good ole dose of liberalism and rights to mask the underlying resentment emanating from the fundamental issue.

Problem is is that no one is honest or courageous enough to admit it
if in fact they were aware of the root of their dogma in the first place


----------



## grace (Mar 22, 2005)

futuristxen said:


> Is there something I'm missing about Doctor-Patient relationship?


It's not necessarily the doctor I'm worried about. Any number of hospital personel, employees of a doctor's office, or people at a lab can get their hands on anyone's test results. A well placed bribe to the right shmuck and Eddy's test results will be everywhere.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Btw, why is Eddy talking to his furniture???


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

One thing I don't think I've seen mentioned is the insurability of Eddy's next deal. I would have a hard time believing that any insurance company is going to insure any contract of Eddy's without knowing exactly the status of his ticker.

It seems to me it's standard that if a player is injured and his career is over, that insurance kicks in and takes care of about 80% of the value of the contract. That way, the owner isn't monetarily committed to that contract. It still counts against the cap but at least those resources can be allocated to other players. Is there a team in the league that is that willing to roll the dice on a $50 - $70 million dollar contract without the safety net of a policy to cover them in case of a career ending injury? (I'm guessing death falls under that category)

I'm no doctor and I don't know if this DNA test will even conclusively determine the state of Eddys' heart, but isn't any and every team going to want to have answers to these questions, if only from an insureability standpoint?

We can talk about the rights of the individual and that's fine. If Eddy gets such a test done he really only needs to disclose that which is pertinant to his heart condition. It's unfortunate that this is happening to Eddy and the Bulls, but I tend to believe that any team faced with the same circumstances would, for the most part, be taking the same tact. This makes good ammo for those that enjoy taking shots at the Bulls ownership, yet I think every team would be looking for these same answers. It's too bad that it looks like a lock out is comming because it would have been very intereting to see the interest in Curry and what other teams were going to ask of him in terms of medical clearance and such.


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

It sounds like this is a test that is in the best interest of Curry. It could detect something that could kill him. If he fails his life has been saved, if he passes he gets paid. Sounds like a win win, as long as only info on his heart is passed on to the NBA/media/everyone.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

Hustle said:


> It sounds like this is a test that is in the best interest of Curry. It could detect something that could kill him. If he fails his life has been saved, if he passes he gets paid. Sounds like a win win, as long as only info on his heart is passed on to the NBA/media/everyone.


It's not a win for Curry if the test determines that he can't play. Then he's stuck without a contract.

If he refuses the test, there's at least a chance (how big a chance is debatable) there would be a team out there who would roll the dice and sign him in the hope that he would be cleared to play at some point.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

I agree with ScottMay. The article was not so much about Eddy but what the DNA would bring to professional sports. 

I also think the Bulls do indeed have Eddys interest in mind. 

I hope things work out for the Bulls and Eddy. I hope the kid does not have a life threatening disorder.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

You guys can think what you want and all...but seriously, what is Pax (or anyone from the Bulls organization for that matter) supposed to say to convince everyone that he is genuinely looking out for Curry's best interests? Considering the difficult managerial position that he is in with a very sensitive situation, it's seems literally impossible to convince the public that he isn't just trying to lower Eddy's market value, sign him cheap, etc etc.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Shawn Kemp has 1-800 DNA TEST on speed dial. What's the problem?


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> Shawn Kemp has 1-800 DNA TEST on speed dial. What's the problem?


But why bother with a long-distance call to Kemp, I'm sure Scottie has a "buy 9 tests, get 1 free" card with the number on it as well.


----------



## fleetwood macbull (Jan 23, 2004)

SausageKingofChicago said:


> All very libertarian which is all very nice
> 
> Doesn't cost a dime to be the bigger man when its not your dime
> 
> ...


"Fight the power!"
I believe Chuck D is the root of the dogma

:whoknows: :|


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

http://www.suntimes.com/output/sports/cst-spt-letters12.html


Sports letters 

June 12, 2005







Dear Greg Couch:



Mr. Couch raises a valid question of an employee's right to privacy from his employer ("About this test of Curry's DNA ... No way,'' June 9). Unfortunately, Mr. Couch feels a need to scandalize this story. We are talking about a man's heart, not his credit history or political leanings. If Eddy Curry dies on the court because he has cardiomyopathy, then what good is all this grandstanding about privacy and baiting of John Paxson and the Chicago Bulls? What good is $50 million to Eddy Curry if he is not around to enjoy it? 

The Bulls or any other team do not need to have access to any of the other DNA results. Eddy Curry can have this DNA test done privately and use the results to declare himself ready to play (or retire). I understand that this would be frustrating to Curry and his family. He has gone from a lock for a multi-million-dollar payday to complete uncertainty. I would be suspicious of people's motives, too. And the Bulls, being a business, have the bottom line as an agenda. That doesn't change the fact that, for his own well-being, the best thing Eddy Curry can do is make sure he is healthy.

Aaron E. Joseph, Chicago


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

bullsville said:


> But why bother with a long-distance call to Kemp, I'm sure Scottie has a "buy 9 tests, get 1 free" card with the number on it as well.



:rofl:


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

2 things popped into my head when i read the article .

1. what makes anyone think has not Curry already taken a DNA test knows the results and is either hiding what he knows about his heart or hiding some other thing picked up in the test?

this whole thing started 3 months ago during which time curry has had ample time with his advisors (of which he felt the need to switch during this time) to discuss his future paths, decisions and medical tests.

2. This whole thing from the bulls side seems like a calculated attempt to lower curry's value . there is no need to make this a public matter , we as fans dont need to know this , that he went through a battery of tests was more than enough....and he has done that.

nothing works better on people than fear....fear that curry might not be able to play again or have to quit suddenly , cant get insurance or possibly die on the court, is basically all DNA stuff highlights in regards to curry and it cant do him any good on the open market.

yeah curry deserves his privacy and if he doesn't want to take it he shouldn't be forced or even prodded because it really isn't fair to him or his family (DNA tests can be a be a tell all on Curry's family tree) If the situation is life threatening than its curry's decision ...it is after all his life. But i doubt very much he would play if it was , and I'm pretty sure he has more of a vested interest to know if playing would kill him than Jerry reinsdorf.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

disgruntledKNICKfan said:


> 2. This whole thing from the bulls side seems like a calculated attempt to lower curry's value . there is no need to make this a public matter , we as fans dont need to know this , that he went through a battery of tests was more than enough....and he has done that.


Well, it became public the moment Eddy Curry sat out the game in Charlotte way back in April. The press demanded answers and they've followed the situation ever since. I don't think there was ever a way to get around it.

And allow me to pose this question once again...what are Paxson and the Bulls *supposed* to say to silence the critics about "lowering Eddy's market value"? Pax can state that this is all about Eddy's best interests over and over, and it wouldn't budge most of your opinions. What is he supposed to say to convince the public that these tests aren't just business-related?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

yodurk said:


> Well, it became public the moment Eddy Curry sat out the game in Charlotte way back in April. The press demanded answers and they've followed the situation ever since. I don't think there was ever a way to get around it.
> 
> And allow me to pose this question once again...what are Paxson and the Bulls *supposed* to say to silence the critics about "lowering Eddy's market value"? Pax can state that this is all about Eddy's best interests over and over, and it wouldn't budge most of your opinions. What is he supposed to say to convince the public that these tests aren't just business-related?


the press *demanded* to know who deep throat was too. for 30 years that demand went unfulfilled ...and i can assure you the media cared alot more about that than eddy curry.

How would we even know its a DNA test unless someone squealed....or purposely divulged it?

if its not your business to know , there is no gun to their head they dont have to say a thing. after you tell the press no ...what can they really do ?

we are talking about one person's medical condition ....the curry side seemed to be able to hold their toungue about it just fine.

it just smells like a scare tactic.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

disgruntledKNICKfan said:


> the press *demanded* to know who deep throat was too. for 30 years that demand went unfulfilled ...and i can assure you the media cared alot more about that than eddy curry.
> 
> How would we even know its a DNA test unless someone squealed....or purposely divulged it?
> 
> ...


If you ask me, Eddy's value takes a hit just as bad if everyone keeps it hush hush, because then it smells like he's hiding something. In fact, I would go so far to say that's exactly what Eddy is doing...the Curry side is keeping silent because they're playing everything off like nothing is wrong. Why you ask? Because they're trying to keep his market value high. How is that any more acceptable than the Bulls' keeping his market value low by releasing the sorts of tests being done (which I see nothing wrong with, personally)? Both sides are reeking of self-servience. 

And btw, nobody has still answered the 2nd part of my question. I guess we'll just continue to assume the worst.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

yodurk said:


> If you ask me, Eddy's value takes a hit just as bad if everyone keeps it hush hush, because then it smells like he's hiding something. In fact, I would go so far to say that's exactly what Eddy is doing...the Curry side is keeping silent because they're playing everything off like nothing is wrong. Why you ask? Because they're trying to keep his market value high. How is that any more acceptable than the Bulls' keeping his market value low by releasing the sorts of tests being done (which I see nothing wrong with, personally)? Both sides are reeking of self-servience.
> 
> *And btw, nobody has still answered the 2nd part of my question. I guess we'll just continue to assume the worst.*


i dont see how it takes a hit if no one is talking about it. Teams do their own physicals before the deal is official, they can always void the deal due to health concerns...but curry's side takes a hit because it lowers his bargaining position if public perception is the guy has some serious health concerns.

and for the bolded part.

how about not continually bringing it up for public scrutiny in the 1st place , then no one would question their motives about it.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

I don't think anything the Bulls do or say (or don't do or say) will have the least bit of bearing on the next contract Eddy receives. These are NBA teams we're talking about here, not the general public who gets all their information from cable TV and local sports radio. Each NBA team, I'm quite sure, has their own criteria for signing players with health questions. Some will no doubt err on the side of caution, choosing not to sign any player until he is 100% cleared of any health concerns. Others might be willing to roll dice on a player with a potentially career-ending malady. And there will be lots of teams in between.

But let's please stop all this talk about things John Paxson says or doesn't say to the local radio stations as somehow sabotaging Eddy Curry's worth. NBA teams will make up their own minds.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Kneepad said:


> But let's please stop all this talk about things John Paxson says or doesn't say to the local radio stations as somehow sabotaging Eddy Curry's worth. NBA teams will make up their own minds.


Thank you. :thumbsup:


----------

