Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

My two cents.

generalgrog wrote:Just so we're clear, you know that Sleep Apnea is the cessation of breathing while asleep right?

My uncle has sleep apnea along with a few other serious problems. I am not sure that it is considered deadly, but it most definitely can be without treatment over a number of years. It will also lead to insomnia which is linked to numerous amounts of other problems, depression being among them. On the whole I would consider it rather serious on no uncertain terms.

Frazzled wrote:Again, you don't know what you're talking about.

When did I talk about MRI's?

As far as being denied healthcare by our illustrious American System, I certainly do know what I'm talking about. Since my illustrious Glorious insurance company has tried to deny me and my family services over and over again. I pay the highest premium I can at my work place, over $300.00 a month, and still have over $10,000 in medical bills due to insurance companies playing the deny.. services not necesary... game with me. I would gladly pay more than the $300.00 a month if I could ensure that the insurance would cover all of my expenses. I had them try and make me pay $12,000.00 in services for my son, and they would have gladly made me pay them if I couldn't prove that the Hospital didn't make a clerical error in the charge code. Welcome to the American system where the insurance companies play games to try to wear you out hoping you give up and just pay.

Until you have walked a mile in my shoes you don't have the right to say I don't know what I'm talking about.

GG

p.s. I still love ya Frazz...your just wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jp400 wrote:

My two cents.

How many Americans are bankrupt or even dead right now becuase of Insurance companies denying coverage. Ever heard of The Rain Maker, by John Grisham? I suggest you read it, or watch the film anyway.


GG

Frazzled: None of that compares to not getting a speedy MRI. If you wait and you have certain types of cancer, you're dead.

Yep, agreed.
And a huge portion of this country can not afford to get looked at by a doctor to find out if they should get an MIR.
So right now it's worse than having to wait.
Since waiting indicates that you could get treatment.
Some healthcare is better than no healthcare.

My bad, I should have addressed that to Typeline.

belphegor, everyone in the US has access to emergency room treatment. US citizens have access to medicare and cade. One reason Sr. citizens are freaking out is that hundreds of billions are being pulled out of Medicare to pay for this.

Do I think the system is great? Nope never said so. It has problems. Lets fix the problems not socialize the freeking thing and hand it over to group that brought us such successes as Amtrak, the US Post Office, and the blindi9ng cost efficiency of the US government.


Again its all irrelevant. At the end of the day we'll have national insurance (good), mandated for everyone(good) some sort of increased coverage for uninsured (good) but not malpractice reform. Insurance portabilty may be nice also-we'll see if we get that but they'll fight that one and national coverage pretty hard.

Are there any examples of a healthcare system that works that wasn't part of some socialized concept? I'm not asking to be sarcastic, but asking because I truly want to know.

I think one of the problems Americans have is memories of Russians waiting in bread lines, and we think that this is how healthcare is going to end up. Nevermind the succes stories from other countries.

And nevermind that we are the only so called civilized country that doesn't have a National Health care system.

GG

jp400 wrote:
{insert lame prop-piece}
My two cents.

Why are the Republicans so afraid of the Dems spending money like they were Republicans?
Democrats = Jogging towards a risk of 'Bankruptcy'.
Republicans = Head-on sprint into Bankruptcy wearing rocket-shoes!!!!!
ROCKET-SHOES!!!!!

Who says Ima Republican?

Look before you leap highspeed.

Frazzled: but not malpractice reform.

A silver lining on this. I've gone to several older doctors that have a no insurance accepted policy. Purely sliding scale for payment. With a strict "If your not a dick I'll treat you." policy. They also let you know if you decide to be a glowing-Popsicle-of-joy that you'd pretty-much be screwing around 50 people out of one of the few doctors that are able and willing to treat them without insurance.

Frazzled: everyone in the US has access to emergency room treatment

I wish this was true, I've know people refused care for broken bones in NYC (the day of, arm-flapping in the breeze sort of thing). And ER nurses that have be forced to (under loss of employment) deny people treatment, based on whether they could pay (specifically one bled out in a parking lot, and one drowned in her own mucus in the waiting room.)
A few city hospitals will prioritize based on payment (ie insurance) on who to treat first/at all in the ER.
...but I understand that in the less populated (ie not the NE and not the WC) areas of the country this doesn't happen as much.

generalgrog wrote:Are there any examples of a healthcare system that works that wasn't part of some socialized concept? I'm not asking to be sarcastic, but asking because I truly want to know.

I think one of the problems Americans have is memories of Russians waiting in bread lines, and we think that this is how healthcare is going to end up. Nevermind the succes stories from other countries.

And nevermind that we are the only so called civilized country that doesn't have a National Health care system.

GG

It is simply a system that need to be stream-lined according to the needs of the country that it serves. There are a high proportion of people who are very happy with socialized healthcare, and more often than not it has proven to be a complete success at least on generalized terms.

Our system on the other hand is god-awfully terrible for anyone without money. The reasons to change things are numerous, the reasons to stagnate in a ineffective system with hopes of minor improvements that may never arrive are very few indeed. It all boils down to how angry U.S. citizens get; I feel like ignoring this issue will cause HUGE problems in the long-run, but the pace it is going at now makes me feel that we are actually tuffed either way. All people appear to be saying is that we suck so very very much that we have no power over our government, and since inaction has been the game-plan before it should continue to be now.

Utter nonsense, but I cannot imagine any other compromise besides this. So hey, like I said, the U.S. will start to lose a lot of it's citizens who will continue to be replaced at an alarming rate by immigrants. At the point where action could be taken I am sure that people would be much to busy arguing over how great the U.S. should be and how gakky we are now.

jp400:
Made in us Who says Ima Republican?

Look before you leap highspeed.

My bad, I've only seen bumper stickers in that flavor on trucks in my area that belong to people who vote Republican and those that consider themselves fairly right-of-center.
It's like if I encountered a cue-ball with their boots laced with red or white.
I suppose it would be my mistake to assume.

Belphegor wrote:A silver lining on this. I've gone to several older doctors that have a no insurance accepted policy. Purely sliding scale for payment. With a strict "If your not a dick I'll treat you." policy. They also let you know if you decide to be a glowing-Popsicle-of-joy that you'd pretty-much be screwing around 50 people out of one of the few doctors that are able and willing to treat them without insurance.

1. I don't believe you. Flat out.
2. if so he's insane and a fool.

[quoteeveryone in the US has access to emergency room treatment[/color]

Frazzled wrote:
1. I don't believe you. Flat out.
2. if so he's insane and a fool.

I've seen this before as well. Usually they are people with established private practices who don't feel the need to earn more money.

Frazzled:
1. I don't believe you. Flat out.
2. if so he's insane and a fool.

That's fine. I don't know why it's so hard to swallow. Some nurse practitioners and mid-wives have been working that way for years. And recently some older doctors (ie have been practicing 35+ years) have been going to the modality of payment. A small number of doctors, I know of three, two from directly speaking to them, one from word of mouth from a patient.
Not insane or foolish, just sick of how things are being run.
So good on them taking responsibility for the care they give.
Like I said, silver lining.

It is not uncommon, and they have every right to do so.

What I am concerned with is the doctors who practically work for pill companies, and collaborate with insurance companies to establish border-line scam based fees. Makes me sick quite frankly, in more ways than one ... not funny, not funny...

Check this article out, it is pretty interesting when you think of the average 2-minute diagnosis that has become industry standard now. I see my doctor about 1% of the time that I am at the hospital... please do not talk to me about not having doctors in a socialized system because I know for a fact that my family in the U.K. has better care than I do. The only thing keeping you healthy is money now, there seems to be a huge divide in the actual application of a doctor's REQUIRED attention to patients. Too many patients? Tough, you took the job, and if you don't know where to draw the line YOU are the one at fault. Even in a socialized system doctor's can choose to take patients according to their schedule, and their seems to be no lack of doctors on the whole.

On Obama: wasn't my choice in the primaries, I voted for him in the general on general ideological grounds. He's a very good hack politician that seems to have little interest in governing, just in winning. In many ways, outside of ideology, he's very similar to George W. Bush.

On a larger scale, what I've seen from the right wing of this country bugs me. There are angry, poorly informed people on all sides of the spectrum, but the left wing protestors tend to be more extreme, younger, and generally small time. The sheer vitriol coming out of right wing, coupled with the wide spread willful ignorance on issues ranging from Obama's birth certificate to health care all the way to global warming and intelligent design casts the modern right as zealots for a belief, not a cogent platform.

I say this not as an angry leftie, but as a person that sees a huge value in fiscal and international conservatism. The marriage of the GOP to a huge swath of America that seems angry and willfully ignorant raises in me the worry that this is going to become, not simply a political, but a moral issue.

Was there outrage at W out of the box? Yes, and it wasn't all deserved. Over time, as the truth has oozed out, a lot of that outrage has panned out, IMO.

there seems to be a search for moral relativism by the right, where they can do ignore the justifiable reasons for actions by the left in order to simply do what they want. You see it in the efforts to link the actual boston tea party to these current tea parties, or the efforts of many people to disrupt town halls on health care. I'm not saying the left is always correct or has the moral high ground all the time, but sometimes it does, and that makes some actions justifiable. The right seems to be skipping past actually having a moral reason, and just attacking.

it's probably not as bad as I think, and of course the old saws about the media bias and what not make things difficult to read, but when you see the party line split on an issue like the birther thing, it makes you wonder what's really going on.

The guy has what has to be the hardest job on the planet right now. All his constituents are mad at him because he has to clean up a mess that was frankly left to him.

He's trying to subtly 'prime the pump' of the American economy as it were, and its just not working. He's going to have to start some massive (and thus more unpopular) public works projects to really achieve his goal. He *needed* to use the goodwill he had and get the people really behind the changes that need to happen. Now he's got to regain that too.

The man's original platform was positive, and acknowledged that there's going to be a suck time to get back where we need to be. I'm disappointed that we haven't simply accepted that we're in another depression (10% unemployment my big butt. If they're unemployed, but not looking, they're still unemployed!) and continued on what was (at face value) a platform of 'No more shennannigans'.

I think if he were to look into FDR's 'fireside chat' model he'd be popular again.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
1. I don't believe you. Flat out.
2. if so he's insane and a fool.

I've seen this before as well. Usually they are people with established private practices who don't feel the need to earn more money.

No free care I get Doggy. Thats admirable and we have docs at church that go to Honduras and provide free care for extended periods. I meant practice without insurance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Belphegor wrote:

Frazzled:
1. I don't believe you. Flat out.
2. if so he's insane and a fool.

That's fine. I don't know why it's so hard to swallow. Some nurse practitioners and mid-wives have been working that way for years. And recently some older doctors (ie have been practicing 35+ years) have been going to the modality of payment. A small number of doctors, I know of three, two from directly speaking to them, one from word of mouth from a patient.
Not insane or foolish, just sick of how things are being run.
So good on them taking responsibility for the care they give.
Like I said, silver lining.

Wait crap my apologies. I thought you meant they operate without malpractice insurance. You meant not taking payments? Thats admirable. Sorry and thnks Dogma for jogging my few brain cells. My bad.

Frazzled wrote: I meant practice without insurance.

I know what you meant. I know several older GPs that don't accept insurance as a means of cutting down on their internal administrative costs. It works for them because they generally don't do in-house testing, and simply act as a source for preliminary diagnosis and referrals. They don't make as much as GPs that do accept insurance, but they also have far lower costs.

Now specialists, because of the costly nature of their work, could never do this in a cost effective manner.

You mean repayments from insurance. Thats again different. I mean practicing medicine without appropriate malpractice insurance.

Belphegor wrote:

Frazzled: None of that compares to not getting a speedy MRI. If you wait and you have certain types of cancer, you're dead.

Yep, agreed.
And a huge portion of this country can not afford to get looked at by a doctor to find out if they should get an MIR.
So right now it's worse than having to wait.
Since waiting indicates that you could get treatment.
Some healthcare is better than no healthcare.

So let me get this straight, in this post, you suggest that people who cannot afford to see a doctor go get a 3000$ procedure done without any kind of opinion from a medical professional?

Typeline wrote:

Belphegor wrote:

Frazzled: None of that compares to not getting a speedy MRI. If you wait and you have certain types of cancer, you're dead.

Yep, agreed.
And a huge portion of this country can not afford to get looked at by a doctor to find out if they should get an MIR.
So right now it's worse than having to wait.
Since waiting indicates that you could get treatment.
Some healthcare is better than no healthcare.

So let me get this straight, in this post, you suggest that people who cannot afford to see a doctor go get a 3000$ procedure done without any kind of opinion from a medical professional?

I'm pretty sure his point was that lacking access to even primary care makes access to advanced care irrelevant: he won't use if if he has it.

All told, I'd rather be told I'd have to wait to get an MRI than never get a check to see if I could use one.

Frazzled wrote:You mean repayments from insurance. Thats again different. I mean practicing medicine without appropriate malpractice insurance.

Yeah. I made that post before you edited your last one. Just miscommunication.

Polonius wrote:On a larger scale, what I've seen from the right wing of this country bugs me. There are angry, poorly informed people on all sides of the spectrum, but the left wing protestors tend to be more extreme, younger, and generally small time. The sheer vitriol coming out of right wing, coupled with the wide spread willful ignorance on issues ranging from Obama's birth certificate to health care all the way to global warming and intelligent design casts the modern right as zealots for a belief, not a cogent platform

Polonius you had me until you had to throw in your dig at Intelligent Design. I'm not sure why you have such a bone to pick about this issue but to compare intelligent design to birthers and call it "Willfull Ignorance" Is over the top, especially when there is plenty of research and evidence wich have called into question Macro Evolution and other pseudo scientific theories.

And remember, you started this again not me.

GG

generalgrog wrote:
Polonius you had me until you had to throw in your dig at Intelligent Design. I'm not sure why you have such a bone to pick about this issue but to compare intelligent design to birthers and call it "Willfull Ignorance" Is over the top, especially when there is plenty of research and evidence wich have called into question Macro Evolution and other pseudo scientific theories.

And remember, you started this again not me.

GG

Three points:

1) Not this again.

2) If you think evolution is pseudoscience I'm not sure what you would consider to be real science.

3) Holes in the theory of evolution are not evidence for intelligent design.

generalgrog wrote:

Polonius wrote:On a larger scale, what I've seen from the right wing of this country bugs me. There are angry, poorly informed people on all sides of the spectrum, but the left wing protestors tend to be more extreme, younger, and generally small time. The sheer vitriol coming out of right wing, coupled with the wide spread willful ignorance on issues ranging from Obama's birth certificate to health care all the way to global warming and intelligent design casts the modern right as zealots for a belief, not a cogent platform

Polonius you had me until you had to throw in your dig at Intelligent Design. I'm not sure why you have such a bone to pick about this issue but to compare intelligent design to birthers and call it "Willfull Ignorance" Is over the top, especially when there is plenty of research and evidence wich have called into question Macro Evolution and other pseudo scientific theories.

And remember, you started this again not me.

GG

Just an FYI, calling Macro Evolution a pseudo scientific theory isn't exactly a diplomatic statement. It's a shot.

It's actually pretty similar, IMO. There is plenty of evidence to support both, but that evidence is waved away by people that don't want to see it. There are gaps, to be sure, in both, but in both areas there seems to be a demand for evidence that cannot be produced. As I've stated many times before, I don't mind teaching the flaws and holes in evolution, but intelligent design is not a better or more scientific theory for the diversity of species.

Just like with the birthers, or climate change, all the evidence that piles up is dismissed. I don't mind what people believe. I believe the universe was created by God and he had his hands in the development of every species. I also can look at the scientific evidence for evolution and realize that it's pretty solid, and ID doesn't help us in any way, scientifically.

And, I don't want to be insulting, but in our discussions about this topic the term willfull ignorance could be applied to you. It's not fair, and I don't say it to be mean, but you very clearly only see the evidence you want to. I'm not saying I've never been in that position, in fact I'm sure I probably am about any number of debates.

Part of the appeal of deliberate ignorance is that, if done right, you don't' even know you're doing it...

Leave (britney!) ID alone.
Please refer to this document for equally compelling arguments in favor of ID.

Brought to you by His Noodly Appendage.
Ramen.

Ramen brother.

And now we pray...

Look..I said my piece.

I couldn't leave polonius's crack unchallenged.

I'm not gonna respond to his second crack because even though it was insulting, I truly believe he doesn't realize it, and wasn't trying to be insulting.

That is all.

GG

General, I have great news!

I'm not picking sides - you're both big sillies!