(12-03-2018 02:18 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 01:16 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:38 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  The biggest problem with single-payer healthcare perfectly illustrated. Decisions about someone's health being made not by the patient or doctor but by some bureaucratic bean-counting panel. Only an absolute idiot would want that for themselves.

Death Panels.

We were told there would be no such thing.

Of course, we knew they were lying.

Israel do have single payer health care system. Do they have death panels? Do they have other issues? We should look at other countries that a single payer system works, and compare them to the ones that do not.

I'm the 'Single Payer' for my family's health care system. Ours works just fine so leave it alone. Don't need anybody's input or ideas on how they can make their insurance better by making mine either worse or cost more, for the same insurance I am currently getting.

(12-02-2018 11:41 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:11 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 07:55 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  the 'sip is screwed in this scenario.....

Quote:In recent years, a number of areas have introduced delays for such patients - with some told operations will be put back for months, during which time they are expected to try to lose weight or stop smoking.

Mandatory exercise is next.

Mandatory exercise might actually be a good thing.

It absolutely would be a good thing.

(12-03-2018 02:18 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 01:16 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:38 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  The biggest problem with single-payer healthcare perfectly illustrated. Decisions about someone's health being made not by the patient or doctor but by some bureaucratic bean-counting panel. Only an absolute idiot would want that for themselves.

Death Panels.
We were told there would be no such thing.
Of course, we knew they were lying.

Israel do have single payer health care system. Do they have death panels? Do they have other issues? We should look at other countries that a single payer system works, and compare them to the ones that do not.

Number one, Israel does NOT have single payer. They have universal health care, but not single payer. It’s probably closer to the German version of Bismarck than anything else.

Number two, all systems, including single payer, have some form of death panels. They have to, because providing every bit of health care to everyone would be prohibitively expenses otherwise. They come into bigger play in single-payer systems because their resources are fixed instead of responding to situations as they develop and because under-providing resources is how they save money.

Number three, the supposed cost savings from single-payer result because a monopsony (look it up if you don’t know the word) health care payer can force providers to accept below-market prices for services. Can you name one situation where below market revenues have not caused producers to exit the field? No you can’t, not once ever in the history of the planet, meaning ultimately reduction in availability or quality, or both. No thanks.

(12-03-2018 01:26 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 12:35 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:25 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  During the last 10 years you have had a small but active group of doctors, bureaucrats, and politicians who wanted to classify "gun ownership" as a health concern. At one point they tried to get doctors to ask patients about gun ownership when taking patient histories.

Smokers, obese, gun owners, go to the back of the line for treatment. Not that far-fetched. Bloomberg is probably working on it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

Every time we take our kids in to the pediatrician, they get asked about gun ownership in the house.

Seriously?

I'd find a new pediatrician.

It's a pretty common question. Gun deaths are the 3rd leading cause of death in kids, 1/3 of those being accidental deaths. And even some of the 50% they consider homicides could be considered accidents.

All the question prompted with our pediatrician was the above statistics and he asked if we wanted any information on gun safety will small children in the house.

(12-03-2018 03:23 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 01:26 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 12:35 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:25 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  During the last 10 years you have had a small but active group of doctors, bureaucrats, and politicians who wanted to classify "gun ownership" as a health concern. At one point they tried to get doctors to ask patients about gun ownership when taking patient histories.
Smokers, obese, gun owners, go to the back of the line for treatment. Not that far-fetched. Bloomberg is probably working on it.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

Every time we take our kids in to the pediatrician, they get asked about gun ownership in the house.

Seriously?
I'd find a new pediatrician.

It's a pretty common question. Gun deaths are the 3rd leading cause of death in kids, 1/3 of those being accidental deaths. And even some of the 50% they consider homicides could be considered accidents.
All the question prompted with our pediatrician was the above statistics and he asked if we wanted any information on gun safety will small children in the house.

That is the stated reason. But rest assured that information is going into some database somewhere, and will be used to discriminate against gun owners at some point. Otherwise there’s no reason to do it.

It comes down to how far do you trust government bureaucrats. I don’t, period.

(12-03-2018 03:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 03:23 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 01:26 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 12:35 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:25 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  During the last 10 years you have had a small but active group of doctors, bureaucrats, and politicians who wanted to classify "gun ownership" as a health concern. At one point they tried to get doctors to ask patients about gun ownership when taking patient histories.
Smokers, obese, gun owners, go to the back of the line for treatment. Not that far-fetched. Bloomberg is probably working on it.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

Every time we take our kids in to the pediatrician, they get asked about gun ownership in the house.

Seriously?
I'd find a new pediatrician.

It's a pretty common question. Gun deaths are the 3rd leading cause of death in kids, 1/3 of those being accidental deaths. And even some of the 50% they consider homicides could be considered accidents.
All the question prompted with our pediatrician was the above statistics and he asked if we wanted any information on gun safety will small children in the house.

That is the stated reason. But rest assured that information is going into some database somewhere, and will be used to discriminate against gun owners at some point. Otherwise there’s no reason to do it.

It comes down to how far do you trust government bureaucrats. I don’t, period.

Sometimes the stated reason is in fact the reason. I don't consider my family pediatrician a government bureaucrat. Enough of my hair is going gray as it is without thinking every person I talk to has a nefarious motive.

(12-03-2018 03:05 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-02-2018 11:41 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:11 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 07:55 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  the 'sip is screwed in this scenario.....

Quote:In recent years, a number of areas have introduced delays for such patients - with some told operations will be put back for months, during which time they are expected to try to lose weight or stop smoking.

Mandatory exercise is next.

Mandatory exercise might actually be a good thing.

It absolutely would be a good thing.

Perhaps, but it isn't government's job to be telling people they need to "exercise". Neither is it government's job to tell people how to lead their life in a free society.

If they can tell a person they MUST exercise, how long before they start telling other things you MUST do?

(12-03-2018 03:37 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 03:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 03:23 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 01:26 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 12:35 AM)bullet Wrote:  Every time we take our kids in to the pediatrician, they get asked about gun ownership in the house.

Seriously?
I'd find a new pediatrician.

It's a pretty common question. Gun deaths are the 3rd leading cause of death in kids, 1/3 of those being accidental deaths. And even some of the 50% they consider homicides could be considered accidents.
All the question prompted with our pediatrician was the above statistics and he asked if we wanted any information on gun safety will small children in the house.

That is the stated reason. But rest assured that information is going into some database somewhere, and will be used to discriminate against gun owners at some point. Otherwise there’s no reason to do it.
It comes down to how far do you trust government bureaucrats. I don’t, period.

Sometimes the stated reason is in fact the reason. I don't consider my family pediatrician a government bureaucrat. Enough of my hair is going gray as it is without thinking every person I talk to has a nefarious motive.

I single-payer he may be. In single-provider he will be. In either one, government bureaucrats will have access to his records. You may be comfortable with that. I’m not.

I don’t think every person has a nefarious motive. But I know for a fact that many government bureaucrats do.

(12-03-2018 03:42 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 03:05 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-02-2018 11:41 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:11 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 07:55 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  the 'sip is screwed in this scenario.....

Mandatory exercise is next.

Mandatory exercise might actually be a good thing.

It absolutely would be a good thing.

Perhaps, but it isn't government's job to be telling people they need to "exercise". Neither is it government's job to tell people how to lead their life in a free society.
If they can tell a person they MUST exercise, how long before they start telling other things you MUST do?

Apologize if I quoted him earlier, but Ronald Reagan said we will reach the point where, “everything that isn’t mandatory will be prohibited.”

(12-03-2018 03:37 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 03:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 03:23 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 01:26 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 12:35 AM)bullet Wrote:  Every time we take our kids in to the pediatrician, they get asked about gun ownership in the house.

Seriously?
I'd find a new pediatrician.

It's a pretty common question. Gun deaths are the 3rd leading cause of death in kids, 1/3 of those being accidental deaths. And even some of the 50% they consider homicides could be considered accidents.
All the question prompted with our pediatrician was the above statistics and he asked if we wanted any information on gun safety will small children in the house.

That is the stated reason. But rest assured that information is going into some database somewhere, and will be used to discriminate against gun owners at some point. Otherwise there’s no reason to do it.

It comes down to how far do you trust government bureaucrats. I don’t, period.

Sometimes the stated reason is in fact the reason. I don't consider my family pediatrician a government bureaucrat. Enough of my hair is going gray as it is without thinking every person I talk to has a nefarious motive.

No, its a government mandate that if you don't comply you'll get your medicare/caid reimbursement rate cut.

My doc doesn't ask those questions because he doesn't see medicare patients.

So they have death panels.

(12-03-2018 03:23 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 01:26 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 12:35 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:25 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  During the last 10 years you have had a small but active group of doctors, bureaucrats, and politicians who wanted to classify "gun ownership" as a health concern. At one point they tried to get doctors to ask patients about gun ownership when taking patient histories.

Smokers, obese, gun owners, go to the back of the line for treatment. Not that far-fetched. Bloomberg is probably working on it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

Every time we take our kids in to the pediatrician, they get asked about gun ownership in the house.

Seriously?

I'd find a new pediatrician.

It's a pretty common question. Gun deaths are the 3rd leading cause of death in kids, 1/3 of those being accidental deaths. And even some of the 50% they consider homicides could be considered accidents.

All the question prompted with our pediatrician was the above statistics and he asked if we wanted any information on gun safety will small children in the house.

Why does a pediatrician care about whether or not a gun is in the home?

One: If a child is shot, the police will get involved to determine why.
Two: If a child is not seeing a doctor for a gunshot wound, the doctor should focus on why the child is there in the first place.

The ONLY reason this question is asked is so that it can be documented and then shared with whichever authority demands the information.


I hope you told the pediatrician that you didn't need any information regarding gun safety in the home. Actually, that's your call. You do as you see fit.

I handled our gun safety program with our children and grandchildren. To date, none of them have been shot.

If our pediatrician had asked I would have replied, "No," and then found another pediatrician.

(12-03-2018 03:37 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 03:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 03:23 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 01:26 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(12-03-2018 12:35 AM)bullet Wrote:  Every time we take our kids in to the pediatrician, they get asked about gun ownership in the house.

Seriously?
I'd find a new pediatrician.

It's a pretty common question. Gun deaths are the 3rd leading cause of death in kids, 1/3 of those being accidental deaths. And even some of the 50% they consider homicides could be considered accidents.
All the question prompted with our pediatrician was the above statistics and he asked if we wanted any information on gun safety will small children in the house.

That is the stated reason. But rest assured that information is going into some database somewhere, and will be used to discriminate against gun owners at some point. Otherwise there’s no reason to do it.

It comes down to how far do you trust government bureaucrats. I don’t, period.

Sometimes the stated reason is in fact the reason. I don't consider my family pediatrician a government bureaucrat. Enough of my hair is going gray as it is without thinking every person I talk to has a nefarious motive.

When I was a teen I trusted people. I assumed everyone was basically honest. When somebody violated that trust I would no longer trust them.


As I aged I realized that no one is basically honest. We all have information we either hide or manipulate as we see fit. Now, I extend trust to those who have proven their trustworthiness to me.

Some might call it cynicism. I call it realism.

(12-02-2018 11:41 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:11 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 07:55 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  the 'sip is screwed in this scenario.....

Quote:In recent years, a number of areas have introduced delays for such patients - with some told operations will be put back for months, during which time they are expected to try to lose weight or stop smoking.

Mandatory exercise is next.

Sooner or later "the taxpayers" will electronically monitor your feces for bad habits. Be sure you fit your probe tightly each morning or you won't get fixed when you break your arm.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

Mandatory exercise might actually be a good thing.

The Nazis thought so too.

(12-03-2018 03:05 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(12-02-2018 11:41 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 08:11 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 07:55 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  the 'sip is screwed in this scenario.....

Quote:In recent years, a number of areas have introduced delays for such patients - with some told operations will be put back for months, during which time they are expected to try to lose weight or stop smoking.

Mandatory exercise is next.

Mandatory exercise might actually be a good thing.

It absolutely would be a good thing.

Private employer plans are already implementing requirements to lower premiums to normal levels if certain targets are not met. Imagine what the feds would do via well intentioned beuracrats with no accountability.

Ocasio-Cortez is Partly Right on Death Panels, States the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS)

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases...61909.html

(10-18-2017 09:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:17 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:04 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  We spend twice as much of our GDP towards healthcare as the British and they still outlive us by 2 years.

USA spends 17% of its GDP towards healthcare
UK spends 9% of its GDP towards healthcare

Evidently the reason they spend less than us is the fact that bean counters make decisions on what money gets spent, not doctors.

I prefer my medical decisions to be made by me and my physicians, not some unelected bureaucrat looking at a ledger sheet instead of a medical chart.

They spend a lot less on Democratic tort lawyers.
They spend a lot less on CYA tests to fend off Democratic tort lawyers.
They also let us spend all the money on drug research and fund it through our drug costs.
They have death panels or its equivalent while we spend most of our health dollars on the last few months of life.

(10-18-2017 10:54 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  But that's not because older Brits get better care. They don't. It's because fewer die young. The one advantage of universal care is that some basic level of care benefits everyone. It's cheaper to give everyone a tetanus shot that to perform some exotic heart surgeries. And from a statistical standpoint, the population is better off as a whole. But that's of little use to the guy with the heart attack.

All of this... and more.

It is an ABSOLUTE fact that in this country, we give expensive bypass surgery to people whom other country's would not. This was one of the MAJOR issues with the ACA. It made being a specialist BETTER while making being a PCP WORSE. It's why I said it was a tax on the healthy, not the wealthy.

FINALLY (some) people are waking up to what I've said since 2008.

(12-03-2018 03:23 PM)bobdizole Wrote:  It's a pretty common question. Gun deaths are the 3rd leading cause of death in kids, 1/3 of those being accidental deaths. And even some of the 50% they consider homicides could be considered accidents.

Part of that is how we define 'kids'.

Either way, it's not a medical question. As a provider, this creates significant liability and once again makes someone not want to be a PCP.