StefanIsMe (imported) wrote: Sat May 14, 2011 12:09 am But, when you have semi-retarted Tea Partiers, many over middle-age and obviously not wealthy, holding up signs at rallies that read "No Socialist Health Care!", one wonders if change can ever happen. Your own people who most need "socialist" (non-profit) health care are scuttelling their own health care needs. Wow. Just, wow.

These people are what I call the "stupid and gullible" voting block. They believe whatever they see on TV commercials. Whenever someone tries to reform the medical system in the US, the insurance industry spends millions or tens of millions of dollars on TV commercials. The "stupid and gullible" believe the commercials and go to rallies and call their representatives. These people also usually vote republican because the republicans usually outspend the democrats by a substantial margin.

StefanIsMe (imported) wrote: Sat May 14, 2011 12:09 am We do have it a bit better in Canada than you folks in the USA. Not much, but somewhat.

I live in the country, near a small town that as a great hospital, and I get better doctors and surgery scheduling than anybody in Winnipeg. There are four doctors at my towns hospital, and whenever I've had a diagnosis from one he SUGGESTS I talk to one of the others if I wish. They all use the internet database for checking symptoms, as well as experience.

I have read from several sources that the USA spends far more per capita than any other first world country on health care, yet has the worst mortality. From what I can tell, it's all because of the insurance industry. They suck up all your health care money, through wages for themselves and the horrendous way they 'manage' doctors and the choices they are ALLOWED to make re. their patients.

It's horrific. Sure, if you have money, you can get a good doctor who is free to do what is needed, but who can afford that?

For-profit insurance running medical systems and making "health" (read "profit") decisions can only ruin the health of the people. In Canada, yes, we have government-run health care, but it's not for profit; this makes a HUGE, MASSIVE difference.

But, when you have semi-retarted Tea Partiers, many over middle-age and obviously not wealthy, holding up signs at rallies that read "No Socialist Health Care!", one wonders if change can ever happen. Your own people who most need "socialist" (non-profit) health care are scuttelling their own health care needs. Wow. Just, wow.

My God, I pity USA'ers who get sick. Emergency care involving obviously "broken" body parts (fractured legs, cut-off hands, stab-wounds) are about the only thing doctors are allowed to treat properly. God help you if you get a disease, though. Then, you better hope it's covered by your HMO; chances are, it won't be.

You poor folks.

You do realise that "non-profit" doesn't actually mean no profit is made, right?

They are PRACTICING physicans.. They are practicing on each one of us.

KittenAB (imported) wrote: Sun May 15, 2011 11:38 pm Another reason is the extremely high amount of hypochondria now rampant in the US. We all think we're sick even when we aren't. This leads to the doctors not listening to most of the symptoms and often missing important ones because they are tired of hearing the rapid fire long list of most likely imaginary symptoms brought on by self and media driven diagnosis.

I very strongly suspect that most, if not nearly all, of the symptoms that physicians attribute to hypochondria are actually real symptoms caused by physical illnesses that the physicians are unwilling or unable to diagnose.

curious_guy (imported) wrote: Tue May 17, 2011 3:48 pm I very strongly suspect that most, if not nearly all, of the symptoms that physicians attribute to hypochondria are actually real symptoms caused by physical illnesses that the physicians are unwilling or unable to diagnose.

I suspect you probably haven't known as many patients as I have then. Not to be rude, just can't figure out a nicer way to say that. One of the doctors I saw (my favorite one who I only got to see for a month before she retired) said it was a breath of fresh air because when I said I had a problem sleeping I didn't want anything considered addictive and wanted her advice on the safest one. We actually discussed medications instead of me demanding one by name or making up symptoms to try to get a specific one. Many people I have met in life (can safely say I have known at least 1 thousand people well in all walks of life) actually complain when a doctor doesn't want to prescribe them what they ask for. Then there are the invented illnesses that really are not illnesses but patients think they are some deadly condition and demand excessive care for them (IBS, RLS, etc). We are being told all the time by media, friends, etc. that we are sick or have some medical condition even when we don't.

Depression is often self diagnosed, probably one of the best examples now. People who are a little overweight are told they're sick by so many. If you have a cough they suspect the flu, though doctors know coughs can be a symptom of a lot of things or not even a symptom at all, there are many healthy reasons a person may cough a lot. Then there's the blowing the flu out of proportion ..... I don't think I should detail that one or I will lose track of thought here. I have been diagnosed by friends (no longer are they friends FYI) just because they think they're doctors. So yes, there is a state of hypochondria in the US, it's probably because we have it too easy here that we want things to be wrong with us.

Unwilling or unable to diagnose does happen though, I am not discounting that. The problem is just far more complex than "that's who's to blame" ... you can't solve it with legislation, or even with money. The only real solution is something even I don't want to go through, returning to the Dark Ages so people have more to worry about. It's a problem with progressing scientifically and technologically that we as a society will just have to learn to deal with and hopefully find a balance. But it's also only one of many problems really, it's just the biggest one at this time.

The Physicians view, considered. <the horror>

A friend was telling me on the phone he was watching, "House".

I said I couldn't watch it, too realistic. Physicians have high divorce rates. His father was a doc, and he confirmed. What should a good spouse to a physician do? Or consider?

Add to that the "economic stress" to be a primary care physician.

And the frustrations of caring and knowing the system is killing, but ya gotta eat too. (who said, "Kaiser"?).

Sometimes, a doc you have known for years just seems to,"change".

Most can still choose another doctor.

Try make a list and a copy to the doc and ask it "we" could discuss or schedule time.

Good Luck. I like my new Aetna, after high deduct, 100% - no games.

Moi

KittenAB (imported) wrote: Tue May 17, 2011 1:26 pm You do realise that "non-profit" doesn't actually mean no profit is made, right?

Of course. But, being run by government, which is forced to open the books yearly, it is at the very least more transparent than "for profit" health care run by purely profit-driven "insurance" companies.

Yes, corruption can occur, but certainly to a less extent than what happens i the USA.

If the government-run "non proft" health care shows itself to be doing horrendous things, we vote them out.

Try that with your profit-minded insurance company.

Also, of COURSE hypochondria is rampant. Uneducated folks, looking for a reason for their feeling a little run down, are exposed to endless advertisements for drugs; ads which tell them with all sorts of pretty pictures and happy, smiling faces how better life is with this statin drug or that anti-depressant. They are easily lead via bright shiny flashing lights (TV, print ads) straight to their doctors where they can ask for the newest pill.

StefanIsMe (imported) wrote: Wed May 18, 2011 4:53 am Of course. But, being run by government, which is forced to open the books yearly, it is at the very least more transparent than "for profit" health care run by purely profit-driven "insurance" companies.

Yes, corruption can occur, but certainly to a less extent than what happens i the USA.

If the government-run "non proft" health care shows itself to be doing horrendous things, we vote them out.

Try that with your profit-minded insurance company.

Also, of COURSE hypochondria is rampant. Uneducated folks, looking for a reason for their feeling a little run down, are exposed to endless advertisements for drugs; ads which tell them with all sorts of pretty pictures and happy, smiling faces how better life is with this statin drug or that anti-depressant. They are easily lead via bright shiny flashing lights (TV, print ads) straight to their doctors where they can ask for the newest pill.

The government messed up Social Security, Medicare, banks, production, farming, endangered species, war, the entire budget, pretty much everything and you expect them to somehow run this additional aspect of our lives correctly? They are already debating what's covered, what isn't, what procedures doctors are allowed to to (something insurance companies do NOT do) and what will require you going to another country. Insurance companies do not tell you what you can and cannot get, they just tell you what they cover. So as it is, administration in the hospitals and clinics are the ones denying care. Sometimes that means the doctors themselves are doing it (oh the humanity). The insurance companies also negotiate lower costs, otherwise you'd have to pay a LOT more than you do, and you can choose which insurance company you want. This is taking all the choice away. Under the new proposal of government run insurance hormone treatments will NOT be covered, FYI, nor will contraception at the rate they're going. Also all transgendered (that includes eunuchs and such) practices will not be covered. Take the time to read the bill, don't just swallow what one media network or another is showing you.

"

KittenAB (imported) wrote: Wed May 18, 2011 10:09 am They are already debating what's covered, what isn't...

". Right there is the first problem. Why are such things being debated? EVERYTHING should be included. Public Health Care, as practiced in Engand, France and here in Canada, doesn't ASK questions of whether something is covered or not, or if you have to go to another country (huh!?). Whether I break my leg, get cancer, get M.S., or have a hernia, it's all the same. I go to the hospital, get treated, and go home; no money exchanges hands.

"

KittenAB (imported) wrote: Wed May 18, 2011 10:09 am The insurance companies also negotiate lower costs...

" My God. Like hell they do. They may negotiate lower costs from the hospital or suppliers, but that's so their PROFIT increases. They may put together packages for group insurance to lower costs a bit, but if you think the insurance companies in the USA are doing what they do to try to lower your costs and increase your benefits, you're high. It's to increase profit.

"

KittenAB (imported) wrote: Wed May 18, 2011 10:09 am Insurance companies do not tell you what you can and cannot get, they just tell you what they cover

". Those two things are the same things. You make a decision on some insurer that is offering what you think you might need in the future, and then you hope and pray that you don't get whatever that particular package doesn't offer. What choice is that? All that is, is another roll of the dice, gambling your money that you will suffer this disease and not that one.

Sorry, but the USA system is so deeply flawed that I can't even understand how what you are saying is supposed to seem reasonable.

How do you explain the fact that the USA spends

StefanIsMe (imported) wrote: Sat May 14, 2011 12:09 am more per capita than any other first world

nation on health care (of which the insurers suck up far too much) yet have such horrendous track records on mortality? Why should a poor person who can only afford the most basic insurance have to NOT get treated for an un-included illness out of fear of being in debt for the rest of their lives?

In Canada, yes, the horrible, messed up "Gubermint" oversees all aspects of health care. Here's the rule; "Everything for Everybody".

I have had several surgeries in the last 20 years. I consult doctors every few months. I take meds. And I've never paid a dime out of pocket.

Yes, they do use my taxes for it, but I pay very comparable income tax as you do. I made 45,000 last year, and paid 17% of it in tax. Is that so horrible?

I just cannot understand how you can be so apparantly happy with paying whatever you pay per month for insurance, and STILL have to worry about particular, un-included diseases.

Sounds like this "bill" is barely half-assed.

I am not denying that whatever bill you are talking about may be flawed. And I assure you I'm not "swallowing what one media network is showing me". I read a lot, from many sources, and nothing I've ever seen makes me regret living in a country where I can get any disease, any illness, and not worry that it will force me to borrow 50,000 bucks so I can get fixed.

Hmm.. looking back... my last post is a wee titch accusatory and harsh. I stand by my points, but I'll pull back on the vitriol from here on

BTW, Kitten, classy pic!

Oh, and profit-based-insurace schemes suck :p