Hey, there! Log in / Register
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
It might be premature reporting...
The guy could easily be faking his injury, but it's also fathomable that he could be able to lift weights but not work.
When I worked for a rehab program, we had plenty of people with back injuries who required three or four hours of stretching and icing and whatnot in order to be able to leave the house and be functional. Some of these folks might get ready, get out of the house, go out for an hour or so, and then have so much pain or spasms that they had to cut their plans short. They could participate to an extent in social and community life, but work was pretty much out unless they were a highly paid professional who could make a living working 10 hours a week and coming and going as they pleased.
Also, while bodybuilding is on the pretty extreme end of things, it's pretty common with back injuries that someone is able to do smooth, controlled movements (like lifting weights, which is often done in physical therapy), but it wouldn't be smart for them to be doing on-the-job lifting, where you don't know how much stuff weighs, which way it's going to tip, might need to set it down somewhere other than directly on-center in front of you, etc. Especially as a firefighter, it seems they'd need to do a lot of running and lifting and climbing where they don't have time to plan out how to carefully do the maneuvers so that someone with a back injury can avoid injury.
Lifting?
If I read both of those Globe articles correctly, this guy doesn't actually fight fires, he inspects buildings for potential fire hazards, and for compliance with fire regulations. He's a fire inspector.
I do admit that I'm not familiar with the specifics of back problems (thank God), so I can't say whether he'd have a problem lifting a clipboard.
And Eeky, I'll take your word for it that lifting weights is therapeudic for a bad back, but only very loosely, because I personally don't buy it, and if I ever develop a back injury that prevents me from inspecting buildings, you'd better believe the last thing I'll be doing is lifting weights.
Well...
You can believe it or not, but the standard course of PT for back injuries is that you gently build muscles around the injury and especially build muscles in the arms and legs, so that you can compensate for the injury. That way, you can use your leg and butt muscles more than your back for walking, your arm and chest muscles more than your back for lifting, etc. I know this partly because I've broken my back, and also because I've worked in rehabs.
Even as an inspector, he has to be on his feet and climbing stairs all day. I do currently work (way more than) full time, and am able to do most activities, but I wouldn't be able to do his job. If I was walking around buildings all day, especially walking on steep basement and attic stairs, my back would spasm like crazy and I'd get re-injured and wouldn't be able to do much of anything.
Would you be able to lift
Would you be able to lift weights and train as a professional bodybuilder?
It's quite possible
I do (moderate) weightlifting at the gym. I have no problems moving and lifting things if I'm lying or sitting and I take my time and know exactly what I'm moving and where. I probably could do extensive weightlifting. It probably would be pretty good for me, actually. I'm not that motivated though. ;-)
There is a reason a lot of people with disabilities get very very into sports that they are able to do; it's really empowering for people to use the physical abilities they do have, and a lot of people can get pretty obsessive about it. A lot of athletes with disabilities are amazing. But another reason is that many people put their energy into such hobbies because they can largely be done on one's own time, which is a godsend if you're someone with an unpredictable body. If you're too spastic or sore or tired to go out and race today, you can wait until tomorrow. Not the case with most jobs, unless you can be self-employed or really important somewhere, which most people can't.
The bottom line though, is that this feeds into an all-too-common societal attitude that if someone is able to do anything but lie in bed and feel sorry for themselves, then they're able to work. People with disabilities are expected to either make a living completely on their own, or else stay at home out of sight and be dependent. In fact, it's quite common that someone can participate in quite a bit of life, but isn't able to get up every morning and be in a certain place at a certain time. Social and recreational life is forgiving of someone changing plans at the last minute when they wake up in pain or spasming or hearing voices. Work life isn't so much. Sure, some people abuse disability funding, but most people don't. Most people would rather work.
I'm just really tired of hearing people who don't have any of the facts attacking my clients and my friends and random guys in Globe stories with the "if you can leave the house and participate in any sort of recreation, you can work" crap. The story in the Globe didn't have any quotes from any of the individual's treatment team, or even from anyone at all in the medical or disability community. It was very one-sided.
It's true
I have a number of back and spine-related problems (and once your spine gets involved, any body part's fair game). Just the other day, I worked out with a physiologist for an hour, fairly aggressively, with no pain. Then I went on an errand, walked up half a flight of stairs, turned the corner at the landing, and - YOW! Tight calf = tender sciatic nerve = really strong pain in the ankle. It didn't happen at the gym, because I wasn't doing any sort of twisting motion; as the OP says, "controlled movements".
But the sad thing is that we've grown so accustomed to our police and firefighters standing up for their bad apples - both in the "thin blue" ranks, and, especially, from the union reps. So in a case like this one, where the guy might even be telling the truth, there's no credibility to be had by vouching for him.
Tip: If you don't want us to assume you're dirty, QUIT PROTECTING THE GUYS WHO ARE.
The last sentence of your post says it in a nutshell, Jay.
This:
is a given, Jay.
Sorry about your problems, Jay. Hope you're OK.
You never know with those clipboards
They could have one page on them, they could have a dozen. Better to stick with the 70 pound dumbbells.
Nah, this guy's a fraud, a grifter, a criminal. What should be lifting is mop buckets in Walpole.
What facts are you basing this on?
The Globe story didn't have any facts about the guy's injury or any of his medical information, since, you know, none of that is anyone's business. And since you don't have that, you don't know what type of disability he has.
FWIW, it screws up my back to write while holding whatever I'm writing. The arms are too close together in that position to provide any balance, so all the strain is on my upper legs and lower back, which have permanent damage. While lying or sitting in a good position though, I have awesome upper-body use. So yes, I could lift a barbell but not a clipboard!
I don't expect most people to know the ins and outs of spinal injuries though. This is why we leave it up to people with expertise in this area to judge what the guy can and can't do. You know, like this dude's doctors and PTs. And sure, he could in fact be faking it, but we don't have any information about that, and it's really not anyone's business until the issue has been thoroughly examined by professionals.
Nobody's business?
Nobody's business but the folks in on the scam? Pretty convenient.
Give me a break. It's nonsense, absurd on the face of it. Anyone seriously arguing that this guy could win bodybuilding competitions but is too disabled to work is either being facetious or has swallowed some serious line of bunkum. For shame!
Nobody has to know what secret diagnosis his quack doctor conspired with him to allege (let's see if investigations discover what kind of kickback he got). You just have to look at the guy. Fit for work. Not working because he's running a scam.
Hey, you know who agrees with me? The commish. But you know more than him, right?
thank you
It was a joke but thank you for your well-considered response.
Hey, that wasn't me!
This is, though.
(Damn you, Gareth.)
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
You just have to look at the guy?
Yeah, the idea that you can tell if someone has a disability "by looking" is the basis for much of the discrimination against people with disabilities.
We don't know if he's making it up or if he's being discriminated against. Because we don't have the information about his condition, since his personal medical business is, in fact, something he has a right to ensure is only shared with relevant parties. You and I aren't relevant parties.
I've already outlined the many many reasons why it's often possible for someone to participate in leisure activities but not work. But you seem intent on holding to your attitude that people who have disabilities should sit at home and be dependent, or else they're faking their disability. Zzzzz.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
Assume what you will
If it makes you happy, you can assume that anybody who questions the idea that a competitive bodybuilder could be too crippled to pick up a clipboard wishes ill of those who are truly disabled. It makes you look pretty silly to assume that, but go ahead.
What makes us relevant parties, what makes it our business to even talk about this guy is the fact that he's a public servant. If he's perpetuating a fraud here, it's not against some private party, it's against the public trust - ours. Just like it's relevant when the Glob busts a sheriff for slacking off all day and diverting public funds to his personal shopping, or a contractor gets busted shaking down the big dig for kickbacks, or when any other public servant is ripping off the state. It's not okay to say, hey, it's all cool, if you want to rip off the state, that's not our business, peace out.
If I worked all day with hard cases who are fighting to get the welfare or social security or insurance money they need to get better, I might also want to assume the unlikely, that this guy really does have some rare hidden disability, which makes him able to pump heavy iron but not lift light clipboards. But I don't work in that arena. I'm just a layperson with common sense -- who knows exactly as much about this guy's case as you do. I have, however, participated in investigations of whiplash scams (where a chiro and a lawyer work together to bilk insurance companies with fake whiplash injuries and fake treatments), and so I know that sort of thing is pretty common. There are plenty of doctors out there who will sign any damn thing as long as they'll see a buck out of it.
So you make your guesses, and I'll make mine. The great part is that time will tell. Because this guy is going back to work. So check back here in a few weeks to see if you were wrong. I know I will.
what makes it our business
Amen to that.
He has been ordered back to work, the timing of which may not be coincidental with when it became public knowledge that he was on disability leave concurrently competing in body-building competitions.
The public is bound to be less tolerant of people collecting public service salaries under dubious circumstances when every family with an average income is struggling with rising food, energy, housing and education costs.
The public servant part is a different issue
Yeah, if they actually were to have multiple independent teams of medical professionals work with the guy and the consensus was that he was able to perform his job, then I'd be annoyed that he was defrauding the public. The issue of defrauding the public would be my business, but his personal medical details would continue to not be my business.
But right now what we have is someone who's not a medical professional looking at someone and saying, "He doesn't have a disability! I can tell by looking!" So, until proven otherwise in the fashion I just mentioned, the guy is innocent of any fraud.
When I worked in a housing program for people with disabilities, my folks were constantly told by various idiots that they didn't "look" disabled, and to get a job.
Stuff like former bosses gossiping that, "he can still play pool, so I don't see why he can't work." This type of harassment is very very common. It's absolutely ludicrous to decide that any time some layperson decides someone doesn't have a disability, then yes, they must be faking it.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
you decide
The man has been ordered to go back to work.
Before the story broke, he was on disability. After the story broke, he was no longer on disability and had been ordered back to work. The professional who is in charge of making the assessment decided he is no longer disabled, not me.
You decide: Was it a remarkably fortuitous recovery that coincided with the news of his participation in body-building competitions, or was he NOT disabled?
I'm not saying there is no discrimination of disabled persons, I am saying the facts in the case of this man do not support your argument.
Yes, you're quite biased
It's clear just from the language you choose. "Rare, hidden disability." No, it's actually quite common that someone can't be on their feet all day and isn't able to be up and out of bed every day at a set time, but is able to do smooth, controlled movements at the time of day they choose.
He could be faking it, or he might not be. Sure, it's fairly common for people to fake injuries, but it's also extremely common for a "layperson with common sense" to say that they can tell by looking whether a person has a disability and whether the person is entitled to accommodations. This is just flat-out not accurate. Neither of us know what this particular guy's issues are, but I do know from working in the disability community for many years that it's common for people to not be able to work but to be able to do other things. And FWIW, I absolutely do not give people diagnoses for the sake of faking disability. I've never once been asked to, either. Usually, it's more often the case that someone has a lot of pride about wanting to be self-sufficient, so they're continuing to work and continuing to harm themselves further, and I'm the one tending toward asserting that there's no shame in choosing another line of work for a while or reducing the hours or going on SSDI if need be.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
Oh, also...
What makes you think that just because someone is an administrator somewhere means that they're qualified to decide whether someone's disability allows them to work? Gareth, you're a smart and resourceful person; I'm sure you're quite capable of pulling up all the miles and miles of case law in which someone's employer made a judgment about what the person's disability did and didn't allow them to do, and then the employee successfully sued for discrimination. In their suits, the courts deferred to medical professionals in determining what tasks the person was and wasn't capable of doing. Gee.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
Isn't that the great part of our system?
The crippled bodybuilder can sue! He'll be perfectly able to sue the commish and the force for taking his poor weak striated glutes off the whiplash brigade. And then he'll be able to present his evidence in a court of law. In the light of day. Drag that doctor who diagnosed him as irremediably crippled out to testify. Let's hear it.
But you know what? I don't think he will. I bet he'll shut his mouth and go back to work. Because if he brings the truth out into the light of day, it's not going to look good on him. But I may be wrong. Stay tuned to find out.
Yeah, your views are clear
I don't think it's going to be possible to have any sort of rational discussion here when you insist on using disability slurs.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
Great!
The rest of us can have a rational discussion using the entire English language just fine. If hearing someone call a spade a spade gives you the vapors, I recommend you take a powder.
The point here is that Mr. Beefcake is claiming not just that he has a disability. Many people have some degree of disability; I do. But he is claiming that he has a crippling disability, that he is disabled to the degree that he cannot work at all, ever, for the rest of his life, and therefore that John Q. Public should pay to support him for the rest of his life so he can hang out and lift weights. This is bogus on the face of it.
but his pics showed him buff all over...
...not just in his legs.
This comment:
"FWIW, it screws up my back to write while holding whatever I'm writing. The arms are too close together in that position to provide any balance, so all the strain is on my upper legs and lower back, which have permanent damage. While lying or sitting in a good position though, I have awesome upper-body use. So yes, I could lift a barbell but not a clipboard!"
fits your scenario. He was in a bodybuilding competition, not a "best legs" one. He was buff all over - and it was evident that he'd been working out his entire body: arms, back, abs, legs...He was scamming the system & he has to go back to work. I suspect he'll have to repay some of what he's gotten as well. It's possible that he learned about fitness while recovering from his original injury, but this guy is strong & healthy. The video even shows him standing on one foot, switching which foot he is standing on, while raising his arms over his head (His arms fully extended upwards weigh more than a clipboard held at waist-height would) and therefore demonstrates that he has excellent balance.
Then there is this:
http://bodyengineers.tripod.com/id4.html
You know how bodybuilding works, right?
Bodybuilders isolate one muscle group at a time to work on it. They do this purposely so that there's no strain on the spine. They don't do things like work on their legs and arms at the same time by walking up a flight of stairs with a bunch of weight; they work on their legs and arms generally while seated or lying down. It's much more ergonomic. They also do controlled movements using the largest muscles in a group and moving smoothly from the core outward and back. Smaller muscle groups tend to be the ones with the most problems (haven't we all injured ourselves more frequently doing things like typing or scraping paint than doing things like running or lifting?), and this is even more the case when the problems originate in the spine. When my back is really acting up, things like writing or moving in a tight space are really hard, because the small muscles get really aggravated. Walking in an open space or lifting things while seated aren't difficult and don't aggravate my back. I really should do more large-muscle work actually, because it makes everything easier and takes strain off the spine.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
that's the proper way
but I don't thinkpeople who are going for hypertrophy & entering competitions follow those rules, that's more like PT and fitness
Makes me wonder what else is
Makes me wonder what else is in the firefighters contract when the city can't even fire him for fraud, let alone recover all the sick pay. Every company I ever worked for, I'd have been fired as soon as the news was verified.
Dr. that found Arroyo "totally and permanently" taking heat
The doctor who found Arroyo "totally and permanently" is taking some heat.
Ding ding ding
We have a winner.
Dr. John F. Mahoney to the conspiracy phone, please.
It's pretty easy to see how this happened. One easy-living fake disabled ex-firefighter said to Arroyo, "Hey, buddy, you should see Dr. Mahoney! He'll say anybody is disabled, even you! Then you can really focus on your bodybuilding!"
Of course Dr. Mahoney is shocked, shocked! to find out Arroyo is a bodybuilder.
I have sat in this doctor's
I have sat in this doctor's waiting room on several occassions with a family member and have heard him throw people out of his office for faking injuries. 3 generations of my family have been going to hm for headaches, back issues, anurisms, RSD, and much more. I am inclinded to belive Dr Mahoney. For all he knew this gentleman was muscular before he got hurt! Only one paper published Mahoney's entire interview...he stated that now knowing that the patient was a body builder, he cannot be sure the injury came from work or from lifting weights.
This man is one of the most dedicated doctors I have ever had dealings with. It is a shame what is happening to his reputation.
diagnosis changed after
Why did Dr. Mahoney's diagnosis change after he learned about Arroyo's bodybuilding activity?
You see, his diagnosis of a disability has to be based on an assessment. So the doctor made his assessment and decided Arroyo was disabled. The fact that Arroyo was a body builder must have contradicted Dr. Mohoney assessment in some way as to invalidate it. Was his original assessment a mistake? The doctor thinks so, at lest in hindsight.
The mayor wants to know if any of the other 25 permanent disability assessments Dr Mahoney made were mistakes too.
Hi diagnosis did not change.
Hi diagnosis did not change. He state that he now could not be sure that the injury was caused by work related inguries..that is was possible it could be an injury sustained during workouts.
5 weeks after accident Arroyo is totally + permanently disabled
Mayor seeks records on firefighters' physicians
The mayor finally woke up to the troubling fact Arroyo's doctor has given as many as 25 firefighters permanent disability status and lifetime income... but not before the story goes national on the AP wire:
The Plot Thickens