i think most of these problems are brought on by the
government meddling in the medicle system. i do
agreethat there are problems. there are many abuses in
both of these government programs and much is wasted
and there is fraud while many who need help do not get
it. the government does nothing well.
--- Kendall David Corbett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Ken,
>
> While I don't completely agree with Lynda, I don't
> completely agree with
> you either. There are too many people in the US who
> receive substandard
> health care, or no health care because of our
> "privatized system." With
> the cuts that have happened and are proposed for
> Medicare and Medicaid
> that will only become worse.
>
> I live in Wyoming, a state whose economy has
> directly benefited from
> Bush administration policies. Our economy is based
> mostly on taxes from
> production of oil, natural gas and coal, so as
> energy prices have gone
> up, so have state revenues. As federal match rates
> for governmental
> health insurance programs have been reduced, states
> without increased
> revenue have been forced to reduce health coverage
> for their residents.
> As illustrated in a link Meir sent to an article
> posted on MSNBC talking
> about unemployment and under-employment of people
> with disabilities, a
> large number of people with disabilities are forced
> to rely on
> governmental assistance for health care.
>
> I just got off the phone with a friend of mine who
> would love to be able
> to work, but in addition to his CP, he has seizures,
> requiring over
> $300.00 per month in medications, and the necessary
> doctors visits to
> keep those meds regulated. Because of his
> disabilities, he isn't able
> to get jobs that traditionally provide health care
> benefits, and as such
> is forced to stay underemployed or unemployed to
> maintain his Medicaid
> eligibility.
>
> The Merck case is one that, IMHO, should be allowed
> to stand, because
> Merck researchers knew of potential cardiac effects
> of the drug, and
> concealed that information. I've taken Vioxx, and
> think it's a good
> drug, but the company should have made the
> information about its
> potential deleterious effects public knowledge, so
> that doctors would
> have been able to present full information to their
> patients, and to
> accurately weigh the potential risks against the
> potential benefits of
> prescribing the drug.
>
> Many (if not most) hospitals are now publicly held
> corporations, and so
> ownership may be by doctors, or plumbers, or school
> teachers. If I
> remember correctly Linda, you, or your daughter,
> work in the travel
> industry. Should you be prohibited from owning
> shares in United
> Airlines or Hilton Hotels because of that?
>
> Because of the way the US healthcare (read:
> insurance) system is
> currently structured, doctors are often placed in
> the position of
> discharging patients before they feel they are
> ready. When my wife had
> a Baclofen pump placed a month ago, she was still
> vomiting as we got in
> the car to go home. Her doctor would have liked her
> to stay another
> day, not because it made him or the hospital more
> money, but because he
> knew that our trip home (a 3 hour drive) would be
> unpleasant at best.
> He'd been able to get our insurance to cover an
> additional 24 hours, but
> they weren't willing to do more time without an
> additional diagnosis,
> which wasn't warranted.
>
> Kendall
>
> An unreasonable man (but my wife says that's
> redundant!)
>
> The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the
> unreasonable one
> persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
> Therefore, all
> progress depends on the unreasonable man.
>
> -George Bernard Shaw 1856-1950
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ken barber [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 10:51 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Breaking News - Heart attack victim
> wins $4.5 million in
> case against Vioxx-maker Merck
>
> you only have to go north of the u.s. border to know
> how good our privatised system is. it can't be
> better
> to have people die waiting on needed care. we can't
> afford the government running it. sorry, but, you
> are
> just plain wrong here just like you are with bush.
> sorry lynda.
>
> --- Linda Walker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Yes there are trade offs for everything. I would
> say
> > these suits are
> > a major red herring reason for our rising medical
> > costs. I am against
> > our privatized medical system. Medicine is one
> > industry that should
> > NOT be run for profit in my opinion. Doctors now
> own
> > hospitals. Is it
> > right for them to have a financial incentive to
> keep
> > patients
> > hospitalized? What about investments in drug
> > companies? Any conflict
> > there? I mean there are so many problems with our
> > medical delivery
> > system, where do we begin?
> > We're something like 17th in our ratio of live
> > births per 1000. Why
> > so low? France is number one in medicine and we
> > should look at
> > modeling our system similarly.
> > You may be right and I am warped from what I've
> seen
> > of the bad guys
> > including bad docs. One doctor got a huge rep as a
> > great oncologist
> > for curing cancer. Well it is mighty easy to cure
> > cancer when you've
> > diagnosed someone who doesn't have it as having it
> > and then say
> > you've cured that person. First she underwent
> > chemotherapy treatments
> > that nearly destroyed her. Then to find out the
> doc
> > was lying for money.
> > Thanks to Bush we have the best weapons in the
> world
> > and people be
> > damned. Have I vented about Bush yet today? Sorry
> > Ken.
> >
> > At 02:01 PM 4/5/2006, you wrote:
> > >But ... but ... these sort of suits are a major
> > factor in our
> > >increasing medical bills. I think there ought to
> > be a low cap on the
> > >awards given by juries.
> > >
> > >Kat
> > >
> > >On 5 Apr 2006, at 19:59, Linda Walker wrote:
> > >
> > >I work for lawyers on these types of cases -
> > personal injury civil
> > >lawsuits. Without civil law average people would
> > have no recourse
> > >against government or business. Yes the attorneys
> > who take them get a
> > >percentage of the settlement. That percentage is
> > set by statute on a
> > >state by state basis, always to my knowledge
> less
> > than half. They
> > >also front all the costs, experts, research,
> > motions to dismiss,
> > >discovery, motions to compel, and expertly
> prevail
> > over a myriad of
> > >legal problems no one thinks about. Their payday
> is
> > often years away.
> > >Most people would never have the resources to do
> > this by the hour in
> > >order to protect themselves and if the attorneys
> > lose they take the
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-----------------------
To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
|
