Ruth Bader Ginsburg had surgery to remove cancerous lung nodules, doing well
24 replies, posted
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/21/justice-ginsburg-had-surgery-to-remove-malignant-nodules-in-her-lung-1073268
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had surgery to remove two malignant nodules in her left lung, the Supreme Court announced on Friday, adding that there was no evidence of any
remaining disease and that no further treatment is planned.
Doctors found the nodules in Ginsburg's lung when inspecting potential damage from a fall she sustained on Nov. 7. Ginsburg fractured three ribs during the fall, but was back at work
only a few days later. Critically, doctors said there is no evidence the disease spread beyond her lungs — a development that could have precipitously cut the odds of survival.
Ginsburg said last Saturday during an appearance in New York that her health was fine and her ribs were almost fully recovered, and the Friday announcement from the court was her
first public acknowledgment of the disease.
“The implication would be that this is localized to the lung, and therefore it may very well be stage one,” said Albert Rizzo, the chief medical officer at the American Lung Association.
“That tends to imply it’s a localized disease, and it’s just a matter of recovering from the surgery.”
Most lung cancer patients survive the disease if it’s caught early, as it appears is the case with Ginsburg. According to the American Cancer Society, the five-year survival rate for stage
one lung cancer ranges between 60 percent and 92 percent depending on its size and characteristics. Still, Rizzo cautioned that the Supreme Court’s statement doesn’t provide enough
specifics to determine Ginsburg’s exact prognosis.
The Supreme Court's statement also noted that doctors found the cancer incidentally while conducting other tests — a sign that the disease was detected earlier than normal. Lung
cancer symptoms typically don’t show up on their own until the disease is at a far more advanced stage.
This is not Ginsburg's first encounter with cancer. She was treated for colorectal cancer in 1999 and pancreatic cancer in 2009, NPR reported. At 85 years old, Ginsburg's has never
missed a day of oral arguments during her time on the court. The court said on Friday that Ginsburg is resting comfortably and is expected to remain in the hospital for a few days.
It will be truly tragic on so many levels if she dies during Trump's term.
HOLD ON GOD DAMMIT
Goddamn this woman is just a fucking tank. Three rounds with cancer and she is still going at 85.
FUCK.
C'mon Ruth, you can make it just 2 more years on the bench!
Death - "Damn this one is a fighter".
Keep on fighting Ruth.
RBG has always been one of the most underappreciated badasses in the current US government, I'm glad that people are finally recognizing just how much of herself she puts in to her work. Three rounds of cancer, broken bones, and still tries her damnedest to be there every day she can.
boy i sure am glad she didn't retire during the obama administration and get replaced by a young judge who isn't on death's door, thanks for fighting for the american people ruth
ruth bader ginsburg revealed to have fought a bear 'for the heck of it'
It's like nobody remembers what happened with Merrick Garland.
If she retired before 2014 a replacement probably would have been confirmed.
people were calling for her to retire in 2013 and she refused to because she thought the democrats were going to win in 2016
In this case, her falling was probably a blessing because they wouldn't of caught her cancer.
Breaking those ribs during her fall saved her life. Without the X-Rays, they undoubtedly wouldn't have discovered the cancer before it was too late. Incredible luck.
https://twitter.com/kept_simple/status/1076169996852699138?s=19
I've been seeing this talked about recently, and I kind of find myself agreeing. I'm not one to tell someone they should quit their job, but we could of had someone younger and healthier where we wouldn't be worried about her lasting 2 more years minimum. But that's why shit voting has consequences I guess
RBG is a hero and easily the best justice on the court. I would give her ten years of my life in a heartbeat.
It's easy to say she should have quit with hindsight, but pretty much everyone thought that Trump would lose. Quitting such a big part of her life must have seemed insane on what looked like such low odds.
Seems like a broken system to me when so much hinges on the health of an 85 year old...
Props to her for fighting this through and dedicating so much energy to her job, but this is just another example of an ill-thought-out US political structure.
The reason justices are set for life is so that they don't have to play politics to stay in office they can solely focus on being the parent that tells congress and the president how much ice cream they can have before going to bed.
Justices can also retire whenever they want and they usually retire after about 30 years of service. Besides there is a list of judges and lawyers in case a justice dies in office already made by each party in hopes of stacking the court. I'm not sure what the fuck your going on about with the whole "some people live longer than others and that's dumb" argument though.
So what you actually mean is that they don't have any accountability? Kind of bothersome in a system that relies on checks and balances, isn't it?
They are political. They're picked by the executive and confirmed by the legislative. Of course they'll be chosen based on whether they'll support the ruling party's agenda, just look at Trump's picks. Not having to seek re-election doesn't change that. Your analogy isn't very fitting, it's more like kids choosing "parents" that will allow them to have ice cream whenever they want until they die.
Besides, if you really want to avoid the effects of their seeking re-election, just limit judges to a single, fixed length term. There, problem solved without giving them lifetime powers as if they were royalty.
Then you shouldn't have any issues with them having finite terms instead if you're going to argue that they "usually" spend "about" as long as each other?
Irrelevant to my point. Under the current system, if a democrat pick dies early at a time when republicans are in power, he'll be replaced by a republican supporter, not by whoever was next on the democrats' list. It's fucked up Russian roulette type crap, where judges have to make sure they retire or die at the right time to be replaced by someone with a similar ideology, rather than have a guaranteed term safeguarded by a potential replacement, like with your president/vice-president system. It's even worse given that they typically keep their job for so goddamn long, so if RBG dies before the end of Trump's term you'll be stuck with a GOP-stacked court for up to 40 years, regardless of how much the political landscape changes during that time. Fucking stupid.
A younger, healthier but less competent candidate will be preferred over an more competent, older and weaker one. This shouldn't be a criterion in a properly designed system.
I don't know what they told you in civics class to convince you that it's actually smart and wise, but no matter how you put it, this is all utterly nonsensical bullshit.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
