ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Affordable Care Act , AHCA , donald trump , health care issues , health insurance issues , obamacare , Trumpcare

Reply
Old 11th May 2017, 06:10 AM   #3201
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 76,398
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
Providers probably disagree, though.

xjx388 has raised the main challenge: the US healthcare economy is proportionally larger than other countries while producing less outcome. It's a mix of inefficiency and higher margins. Fixing inefficiency means layoffs (mostly administrators, marketing, and lawyers). Lower margins means less cash for those who remain employed (the actual health service providers, such as doctors and nurses).

The end users will benefit, the taxpayers will benefit, but the current crop of service providers will probably lose half their dough. That's a big hit, and I understand why they are lobbying hard against it. The longer the gravy train lasts, the more invested they will be, the more wealth they can throw at Congress to kill anything that gives taxpayers and end users the value they want to keep for themselves.

The window of opportunity may have passed.
This was a problem even back in the days of the UK UHCs, the famous phrase from then is by Bevan: "stuffed their mouths with gold" - he was talking about what he had to do with the medical consultants to get the NHSs founded.

It could be that the USA will have to accept there will not be overall lower costs for the short term just that everyone has good healthcare from cradle to grave, I would have thought that would be a benefit well worth having.

But again that is only if a system like one of the UKs NHSs is decided on. There are many other models for achieving good healthcare for all (some with better outcomes than the UK) that still require all the paraphernalia of private business.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 06:54 AM   #3202
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 12,934
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Bull ****.
Agreed. I've taken a 50% cut in pay and the only impact it had on me was to slow down my rate of investment. I was living on 30% of my pay, so instead of investing 70%, I dropped to investing 20%.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 09:20 AM   #3203
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,213
Originally Posted by Tero View Post
Columnist confused about free market
http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...te-free-market
Health care providers and insurance together are essentially a monopoly.
If you lump all the companies in any given industry together, they are essentially a monopoly on that industry.


ETA: the author of that article appears quite ignorant of the topic about which he/she is writing.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.

Last edited by Emily's Cat; 11th May 2017 at 09:22 AM.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 03:11 PM   #3204
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 14,139
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
If you lump all the companies in any given industry together, they are essentially a monopoly on that industry.


ETA: the author of that article appears quite ignorant of the topic about which he/she is writing.
I suspect that oligopoly would be a better description
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 03:22 PM   #3205
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,213
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
I suspect that oligopoly would be a better description
In some areas, maybe, but in a lot of areas there are many competitors to choose from.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 03:33 PM   #3206
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 60,388
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
The problem is that the ER is not obligated to provide care for minor problems. They can and do turn people away for inability to pay.
Really, you sure about that?

I think you are confusing a couple of things. The ED is not required to provide uncompensated follow-up care. They can also tell you what you need, such as a medication, but not dispense it.

But in order to determine if any patient has a true emergency, you have to examine the patient. If a hospital didn't do that they'd be open to lawsuits if the person had an inapparent emergency condition. I don't know of any ED that doesn't at least treat the initial problem including dispensing medications.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 11th May 2017 at 03:42 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 03:43 PM   #3207
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,213
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Really, you sure about that?
Yes, completely. If you show up at the ER wanting a routine pelvic exam, they will turn you away.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I think you are confusing a couple of things. The ED is not required to provide uncompensated follow-up care. They can also tell you what you need, such as a medication, but not dispense it.

But in order to determine if any patient has a true emergency, you have to examine the patient. If a hospital didn't do that they'd be open to lawsuits if the person had an inapparent emergency condition. I don't know of any ED that doesn't at least treat the initial problem including dispensing medications.
Jenny: Hi, I'd like a pelvic exam please.
ER Triage Desk: Are you in pain?
Jenny: No.
ER Triage Desk: Do you think something is wrong or endangers your life?
Jenny: Nope.
ER Triage Desk: So... you feel fine, you don't have an emergency, and you just want routine care?
Jenny: Yep, that's right!
ER Triage Desk: Well, ma'am, here's the number for a women's health center just around the corner from here. Why don't you call them and get an appointment.
Jenny: Oh, no, I couldn't do that, I don't have any money.
ER Triage Desk: I'm sorry ma'am, we can't help you. This is an Emergency Room.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.

Last edited by Emily's Cat; 11th May 2017 at 03:47 PM.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 06:44 PM   #3208
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,100
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Yes, completely. If you show up at the ER wanting a routine pelvic exam, they will turn you away.



Jenny: Hi, I'd like a pelvic exam please.
ER Triage Desk: Are you in pain?
Jenny: No.
ER Triage Desk: Do you think something is wrong or endangers your life?
Jenny: Nope.
ER Triage Desk: So... you feel fine, you don't have an emergency, and you just want routine care?
Jenny: Yep, that's right!
ER Triage Desk: Well, ma'am, here's the number for a women's health center just around the corner from here. Why don't you call them and get an appointment.
Jenny: Oh, no, I couldn't do that, I don't have any money.
ER Triage Desk: I'm sorry ma'am, we can't help you. This is an Emergency Room.
Are you claiming that people do not go to the emergency room when they have a cough? Because I know people with no insurance who have done that. I would call that routine care, and something that people with insurance would see a family doctor for.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2017, 02:47 PM   #3209
Pterodactyl
Muse
 
Pterodactyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 514
Seems like there might be some anger out there over this.

Quote:
A Tennessee woman hated that her congressman voted for the controversial Republican health-care bill in the House of Representatives, authorities said.

So Wendi L. Wright tried to run Rep. David Kustoff (R-Tenn.) off the road after he visited the University of Tennessee at Martin, they said.

The Weakley County Sheriff’s Department said Wright tailed the car carrying Kustoff. At some point, the congressman and his aide became afraid and worried that Wright wanted to force them off the road.

They then turned into a driveway and stopped. That’s where Wright got out, screamed at the congressman and struck the windows of his vehicle, even reaching inside the car, the sheriff’s department said.

Authorities said Wright then stood in front of the vehicle to try to keep Kustoff from leaving. At some point, someone called 911, but Wright left before authorities arrived.

The incident happened on May 8, four days after House Republicans narrowly passed a bill to overhaul the country’s health-care system.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.9e9525a2b4ab
Pterodactyl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2017, 04:56 PM   #3210
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,118
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Are you claiming that people do not go to the emergency room when they have a cough? Because I know people with no insurance who have done that. I would call that routine care, and something that people with insurance would see a family doctor for.
But they have to wait until the cough becomes an emergency to get treatment.

Last edited by Beelzebuddy; 14th May 2017 at 04:57 PM.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2017, 05:20 PM   #3211
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,100
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
But they have to wait until the cough becomes an emergency to get treatment.
I've seen otherwise.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2017, 05:56 PM   #3212
fromdownunder
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,611
I am not sure I understand any of this as it relates to Health care. Where I live (Geelong, pop. 195,000), we as in everybody in Australia, have Universal Health Care, nationally funded by a tax levy, but all medical services can also be obtained through private cover from non-Government organisations.

So, Geelong, one publicly funded provider - Barwon Health, and three private self-funded Hospitals and every medical practitioner can charge what he/she wishes, and the public gets a % of that charge returned from public funds.

The private Hospitals seem to be doing just fine. St John of God recently built a six story addition, and added an ER. Likewise, none of the Private Health insurers seem to be going belly up either.

But, if I happen to get hit by a truck, I will be taken to hospital (in an ambulance - for me, free) and get public ward and free access to emergency care. If, as I recover, I want my own specialist, I can then choose to do so, and pay for the service.

Elective surgery is exactly that. If you want it, you pay for it, although at times "elective" means what the Government says it means. Hip replacements, cataracts are public, but low end of the scale, and are loosely defined under "elective". So if you want one quickly, you pay for it.

Norm
__________________
Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in Vain


fromdownunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2017, 06:08 PM   #3213
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,016
Originally Posted by fromdownunder View Post
I am not sure I understand any of this as it relates to Health care. Where I live (Geelong, pop. 195,000), we as in everybody in Australia, have Universal Health Care, nationally funded by a tax levy
Communist!

So your government steals from hard-working rich people, and gives the ill-gotten gains to moochers who deliberately let themselves get sick? That might be acceptable to a people whose ancestors were all convicts, but not here!
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2017, 06:09 PM   #3214
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 8,828
Originally Posted by fromdownunder View Post
I am not sure I understand any of this as it relates to Health care. Where I live (Geelong, pop. 195,000), we as in everybody in Australia, have Universal Health Care, nationally funded by a tax levy, but all medical services can also be obtained through private cover from non-Government organisations.

So, Geelong, one publicly funded provider - Barwon Health, and three private self-funded Hospitals and every medical practitioner can charge what he/she wishes, and the public gets a % of that charge returned from public funds.

The private Hospitals seem to be doing just fine. St John of God recently built a six story addition, and added an ER. Likewise, none of the Private Health insurers seem to be going belly up either.

But, if I happen to get hit by a truck, I will be taken to hospital (in an ambulance - for me, free) and get public ward and free access to emergency care. If, as I recover, I want my own specialist, I can then choose to do so, and pay for the service.

Elective surgery is exactly that. If you want it, you pay for it, although at times "elective" means what the Government says it means. Hip replacements, cataracts are public, but low end of the scale, and are loosely defined under "elective". So if you want one quickly, you pay for it.

Norm
Yes, but are you "free" to go without health coverage and then die/go bankrupt if you get sick?
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2017, 06:40 PM   #3215
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,337
These two things are not the same...

Quote:
So Wendi L. Wright tried to run Rep. David Kustoff (R-Tenn.) off the road after he visited the University of Tennessee at Martin, they said.
Quote:
The Weakley County Sheriff’s Department said Wright tailed the car carrying Kustoff. At some point, the congressman and his aide became afraid and worried that Wright wanted to force them off the road.
So did she actually try and force them off the road, or did they just think that she might try and force them off the road because of her aggressive driving?
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2017, 01:39 AM   #3216
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cymru
Posts: 21,118
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
That might be acceptable to a people whose ancestors were all convicts, but not here!
Errrrrmmm ?

Quote:
The British used colonial North America as a penal colony through a system of indentured servitude.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_colony

We started to use Australia because the other place became unavailable
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2017, 03:04 AM   #3217
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 27,651
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Reporter attested.
The Trumpublicans had a lady arrested for laughing at an absurdity said at a Trumpublican press conference. They said she was disruptive. Now they arrest this reporter for asking a challenging questions, saying he was disruptive. Comey was fired for treating Hillary bad in an investigation, or being a showboat, but definitely not because Trump wants to stop investigations into Russia.

They tell lies that only the Trumpsters will believe, but that's good enough for them because Trumpublicans control all three branches of government.

The USA is a cleptocracy.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2017, 04:34 AM   #3218
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 16,202
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
They tell lies that only the Trumpsters will believe, but that's good enough for them because Trumpublicans control all three branches of government.
I don't even think the Trumpsters actually "believe" these lies. More that they accept them because, you know, it puts those liberals in their place, and therefore it's acceptable.
__________________
I have a permanent room at the Home for the Chronically Groovy - Floyd from the Muppets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2017, 04:45 AM   #3219
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 27,651
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
I don't even think the Trumpsters actually "believe" these lies. More that they accept them because, you know, it puts those liberals in their place, and therefore it's acceptable.
Some of them do, for sure. After all, some say that they will support Trump even if it is proven that he colluded with Russia to become POTUS.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2017, 04:05 PM   #3220
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,213
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Are you claiming that people do not go to the emergency room when they have a cough?
What? No. How did you get to that from what I said? I even gave an example. Why are you extending it to something completely different?

Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Because I know people with no insurance who have done that. I would call that routine care, and something that people with insurance would see a family doctor for.
If there is a reasonable possibility that the patient has symptoms that are indicative of an emergent condition, they will be evaluated. If they show up with a mild cough, it could potentially be indicative of pneumonia. If after evaluation, however, it is deemed to be a common cold... the ER isn't going to provide robitussin.

I gave an example of something that was clearly and unambiguously routine care, as opposed to something that could be argued to be potentially emergent. Don't conflate something that you, in your non-professional view, would call 'routine'... with what an ER triage desk might reasonable consider to be routine.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2017, 04:38 PM   #3221
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,337
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Yes, completely. If you show up at the ER wanting a routine pelvic exam, they will turn you away.



Jenny: Hi, I'd like a pelvic exam please.
ER Triage Desk: Are you in pain?
Jenny: No.
ER Triage Desk: Do you think something is wrong or endangers your life?
Jenny: Nope.
ER Triage Desk: So... you feel fine, you don't have an emergency, and you just want routine care?
Jenny: Yep, that's right!
ER Triage Desk: Well, ma'am, here's the number for a women's health center just around the corner from here. Why don't you call them and get an appointment.
Jenny: Oh, no, I couldn't do that, I don't have any money.
ER Triage Desk: I'm sorry ma'am, we can't help you. This is an Emergency Room.
Yet your own argument shows that SG is right. In an ER the examination process starts at the front desk. This is where the Triage Nurse determines your condition and how fast they need to move you on. How do they do this? Step one is asking questions, just as you showed. Since from the questions the Nurse can determine that there is no Emergency requirements she can then skip to providing the patient with the information she needs, in this case going to a Woman's Clinic (if she can find one that the Republicans haven't shut down.) So the process that SG described; Examine, stabilize if required, provide further information, is still in effect in your example.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th May 2017, 05:00 PM   #3222
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,213
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Yet your own argument shows that SG is right. In an ER the examination process starts at the front desk. This is where the Triage Nurse determines your condition and how fast they need to move you on. How do they do this? Step one is asking questions, just as you showed. Since from the questions the Nurse can determine that there is no Emergency requirements she can then skip to providing the patient with the information she needs, in this case going to a Woman's Clinic (if she can find one that the Republicans haven't shut down.) So the process that SG described; Examine, stabilize if required, provide further information, is still in effect in your example.
There's no facility fee if the triage desk turns them away. It's not a professional examination. They are not being treated. SG's process doesn't apply.

Consider... Let's say you want to work for a high-profile stock broker. You walk in and talk to the receptionist at the front desk. He takes stock of your torn tshirt and ragged jeans and is pretty sure you're not a good candidate. But he dutifully asks you some basic screening questions about your education and work history. Based on your answers, she declines to give you an application and suggests you check out Walmart.

Does that experience count as you having interviewed at that brokerage firm?
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 06:00 AM   #3223
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,100
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
What? No. How did you get to that from what I said? I even gave an example. Why are you extending it to something completely different?



If there is a reasonable possibility that the patient has symptoms that are indicative of an emergent condition, they will be evaluated. If they show up with a mild cough, it could potentially be indicative of pneumonia. If after evaluation, however, it is deemed to be a common cold... the ER isn't going to provide robitussin.

I gave an example of something that was clearly and unambiguously routine care, as opposed to something that could be argued to be potentially emergent. Don't conflate something that you, in your non-professional view, would call 'routine'... with what an ER triage desk might reasonable consider to be routine.
When people talk of getting routine care at the ER, I'm pretty sure they are speaking in a "non-professional" manner.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 08:47 AM   #3224
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,213
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
When people talk of getting routine care at the ER, I'm pretty sure they are speaking in a "non-professional" manner.
What do you mean?
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 09:08 AM   #3225
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,100
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
What do you mean?
What I mean is that when the claim is made that people use the ER for routine care, that claim is made in the sense of what a lay-person thinks is routine care. In that sense, it is, as you say, "non-professional", but it is true that people are using the ER for things which people with insurance would see a regular doctor for.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 09:17 AM   #3226
Bob001
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,875
Here's something that might explain a lot: Trump thinks health insurance costs $15 a month.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...nsurance-costs
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 10:22 AM   #3227
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,213
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
What I mean is that when the claim is made that people use the ER for routine care, that claim is made in the sense of what a lay-person thinks is routine care. In that sense, it is, as you say, "non-professional", but it is true that people are using the ER for things which people with insurance would see a regular doctor for.
I'm pretty sure you're squishing the interpretation of "routine" so it perfectly fits whatever it is you're trying to argue.

End of the day, people cannot receive comprehensive care at an ER. If their symptoms are not reasonably indiciative of a possible emergent or urgent condition, they can and will turn people away. ERs are not obligated to treat patients for all symptoms. They are required to stabilize emergent and urgent symptoms and nothing more.

An ER will not administer chemotherapy for someone with cancer. They will not perform routine non-emergent gynecological exams. They will not perform routine non-emergent proctology exams. They will not provide information, support, or medication for basic dermatological complaints. They will not perform non-emergency surgeries.

FFS, I went to the ER with a uterine hemorrhage, and they didn't even discuss the possibility of an emergency hysterectomy! They provided me with sufficient liquid to stabilize my blood pressure, diagnosed a fibroid as the cause, and sent me home with a recommendation to see my regular gynecologist for further treatment! They didn't even give me a blood transfusion, despite me having lost a substantial amount of blood and already having been severely anemic!
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.

Last edited by Emily's Cat; 16th May 2017 at 10:23 AM.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 10:35 AM   #3228
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,100
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm pretty sure you're squishing the interpretation of "routine" so it perfectly fits whatever it is you're trying to argue.

End of the day, people cannot receive comprehensive care at an ER. If their symptoms are not reasonably indiciative of a possible emergent or urgent condition, they can and will turn people away. ERs are not obligated to treat patients for all symptoms. They are required to stabilize emergent and urgent symptoms and nothing more.

An ER will not administer chemotherapy for someone with cancer. They will not perform routine non-emergent gynecological exams. They will not perform routine non-emergent proctology exams. They will not provide information, support, or medication for basic dermatological complaints. They will not perform non-emergency surgeries.

FFS, I went to the ER with a uterine hemorrhage, and they didn't even discuss the possibility of an emergency hysterectomy! They provided me with sufficient liquid to stabilize my blood pressure, diagnosed a fibroid as the cause, and sent me home with a recommendation to see my regular gynecologist for further treatment! They didn't even give me a blood transfusion, despite me having lost a substantial amount of blood and already having been severely anemic!
Alternatively, I think you're trying to define 'routine' in far to narrow a fashion in order to support your claim.

The folks using the ER as their only source of medical care aren't getting proctology exams, or gynocological exams, or pretty much any sort of preventative exam/care at all. They are going to the ER when they are sick, or think they have a problem, rather than only going when there is an emergency. You may not call that routine care, but I'm pretty sure most other folks would.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 10:46 AM   #3229
Bob001
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,875
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm pretty sure you're squishing the interpretation of "routine" so it perfectly fits whatever it is you're trying to argue.

End of the day, people cannot receive comprehensive care at an ER. If their symptoms are not reasonably indiciative of a possible emergent or urgent condition, they can and will turn people away. ERs are not obligated to treat patients for all symptoms. They are required to stabilize emergent and urgent symptoms and nothing more.
.....
I think we get that. But many people without insurance go to an emergency room or take their kids there because that's the only access to medical care that's available to them. And there has to be some basic exam to determine whether a cough is from a cold or allergy or pneumonia or TB or industrial exposure, or whether a sore ankle is from a sprain or a break, etc., etc. I'm not sure what's being debated here. Obviously ERs don't treat everybody for everything, but a lot of what ERs see isn't really an emergency either, and would be treated in a doctor's office or a walk-in clinic if they were available.

Last edited by Bob001; 16th May 2017 at 10:47 AM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 02:15 PM   #3230
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,213
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Alternatively, I think you're trying to define 'routine' in far to narrow a fashion in order to support your claim.

The folks using the ER as their only source of medical care aren't getting proctology exams, or gynocological exams, or pretty much any sort of preventative exam/care at all. They are going to the ER when they are sick, or think they have a problem, rather than only going when there is an emergency. You may not call that routine care, but I'm pretty sure most other folks would.
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
I think we get that. But many people without insurance go to an emergency room or take their kids there because that's the only access to medical care that's available to them. And there has to be some basic exam to determine whether a cough is from a cold or allergy or pneumonia or TB or industrial exposure, or whether a sore ankle is from a sprain or a break, etc., etc. I'm not sure what's being debated here. Obviously ERs don't treat everybody for everything, but a lot of what ERs see isn't really an emergency either, and would be treated in a doctor's office or a walk-in clinic if they were available.
My argument stems from several pages back, where Skeptical Ginger claimed that ERs being obligated to stabilize emergent conditions was tantamount to health care being a right in the US:
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
If it wasn't a right, why is there a US law that forbids emergency departments from turning away people who cannot pay?
The response to this was to point out that we decided that leaving a person to die of an emergent condition is something we as a community don't want:
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
3. Because we've (society, lawmakers, etc) decided that you have a right not to die or be seriously harmed, not necessarily to all health care.
Skeptic Ginger then countered that it was the same thing, poor people use the ER as their regular doctor:
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
That still amounts to a right to health care since poor people use the ED as their regular doctor.
That's where my argument came in - No, poor people do NOT use the ER as their regular doctor. They use the ER in some subset of circumstances where a person with insurance or wealth would use a primary care doctor. That doesn't however, mean that the ER is functioning as a regular doctor for those people. There's a plethora of services that a regular doctor performs that an ER will NOT perform, regardless of ability to pay. It doesn't matter how much cash you have on hand, they're still not going to give you a routine pelvic exam if there's not a worry or concern, if there aren't symptoms that suggest an emergent or urgent condition. It doesn't matter whether you're wealthy or poor, an ER still won't administer chemo drugs to a person with cancer.

An ER does not perform the function of a regular doctor. The existence of laws obligating ERs to respond in emergent and urgent situations does not imply that general health care is a right in the US.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 02:27 PM   #3231
xjx388
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,712
Our hospital has a pretty good solution in place for non-emergent care. The ER also has an Urgent Care center. There's a FP resident, NP or PA on duty at all times and the ER docs supervise. The Urgent Care also doesn't turn anyone away, regardless of ability to pay, which was a decision made by the hospital owners (who happen to mostly be doctors in the community).
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 02:28 PM   #3232
KDLarsen
Illuminator
 
KDLarsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,520
Anyone catch John Oliver's segment on dialysis treatment on sunday night? It's the free segment of the week, and I have to say it surprised me quite a bit.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


I suppose the profiteering part is what dialysis treatment has in common with the rest of the health care system.

Having said that, I'm genuinely surprised that dialysis treatment is paid for by the government.
KDLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2017, 10:50 AM   #3233
Bob001
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,875
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Our hospital has a pretty good solution in place for non-emergent care. The ER also has an Urgent Care center. There's a FP resident, NP or PA on duty at all times and the ER docs supervise. The Urgent Care also doesn't turn anyone away, regardless of ability to pay, which was a decision made by the hospital owners (who happen to mostly be doctors in the community).
That sounds like an excellent solution to a continuing problem. The next step would be to create walk-in Urgent Care centers in neighborhoods where there is high need, to reduce unnecessary trips to the hospital entirely. They could accept insurance from people who have it, charge reasonable fees to people who can pay cash, and send bills to others (without any real expectation of getting paid).
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2017, 02:21 PM   #3234
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 8,828
House May Be Forced to Vote Again on GOP's Obamacare

Two weeks after passage, measure still not sent to Senate

CBO report could force Ryan, other party leaders into redo

Quote:
House Republicans*barely managed to pass their Obamacare repeal bill earlier this month, and they now face the possibility of having to vote again on their controversial health measure.

House Speaker Paul Ryan hasn’t yet sent the bill to the Senate because there’s a chance that parts of it may need to be redone, depending on how the Congressional Budget Office estimates its effects.*House leaders want to make sure the bill conforms with Senate rules for reconciliation, a mechanism that allows Senate Republicans to pass the bill with a simple majority.

Republicans had rushed to vote on the health bill so the Senate could get a quick start on it, even before the CBO had finished analyzing a series of last-minute changes. The CBO is expected to release an updated estimate next week.

Last edited by Tony Stark; 18th May 2017 at 02:23 PM.
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 01:06 PM   #3235
Stacko
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,210
Does he realize he's going to own this disaster?

Quote:
President Donald Trump has told advisers he wants to end payments of key Obamacare subsidies, a move that could send the health law's insurance markets into a tailspin, according to several sources familiar with the conversations.

Many advisers oppose the move because they worry it will backfire politically if people lose their insurance or see huge premium spikes and blame the White House, the sources said. Trump has said that the bold move could force Congressional Democrats to the table to negotiate an Obamacare replacement.

Lawyers and other administration officials are trying to thread the needle.

Trump told aides in a Tuesday Oval Office meeting that he wants to end the payments to insurers, according to people familiar with his comments. Trump has previously expressed conflicting opinions on the issue. Insurers have been pressing for certainty as they plan for next year.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 01:21 PM   #3236
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 8,828
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
I don't understand why he thinks Democrats would rush to the table and help him repeal Obamacare if he does that. How does scewing up the individual market give Democrats incentive to help Trump pass his healthcare tax cut bill?
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 01:49 PM   #3237
Random
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,845
Originally Posted by Tony Stark View Post
I don't understand why he thinks Democrats would rush to the table and help him repeal Obamacare if he does that. How does scewing up the individual market give Democrats incentive to help Trump pass his healthcare tax cut bill?
He's hoping that Democrats actually care about people being denied healthcare by this move (unlike Trump), and will cave in to protect them. Of course it won't work, since Trumps goal is to kick millions of people off of their health insurance*, and so threatening to kick millions of people off their health insurance if Democrats don't help him kick millions of people off of health insurance isn't much of a negotiating ploy.



*Well, that's not his actual goal, per se. His goal is a massive tax cut for the rich, kicking millions of people off of their health insurance is just a side-effect.
__________________
"...Am I actually watching Big Bird argue with the Egyptian God of the Dead? Is PBS sending some kind of weird religious message here?"

Last edited by Random; 19th May 2017 at 01:50 PM.
Random is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 01:53 PM   #3238
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,641
Originally Posted by Tony Stark View Post
I don't understand why he thinks Democrats would rush to the table and help him repeal Obamacare if he does that. How does scewing up the individual market give Democrats incentive to help Trump pass his healthcare tax cut bill?
One of his goofball defenders, Jeffrey Lord, claimed that it was akin to Martin Luther King marching his Movement into dangerous parts of the South so that the world could see the violence and hate against black people:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Of course, the reason MLK and Co. were in danger is that ******** in the South were willing to beat them. If there weren't any violent, racist white people, King would be putting no one in danger.

In the analogy, Trump is the sheriff turning loose the dogs. He's creating the danger and violence by screwing up the healthcare markets.

Their brains work in ways that I cannot follow.
TraneWreck is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 02:07 PM   #3239
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 8,828
Originally Posted by Random View Post
He's hoping that Democrats actually care about people being denied healthcare by this move (unlike Trump), and will cave in to protect them. Of course it won't work, since Trumps goal is to kick millions of people off of their health insurance*, and so threatening to kick millions of people off their health insurance if Democrats don't help him kick millions of people off of health insurance isn't much of a negotiating ploy.



*Well, that's not his actual goal, per se. His goal is a massive tax cut for the rich, kicking millions of people off of their health insurance is just a side-effect.
More people would lose insurance if Trumpcare passes than if Trump stops the subsidies. So if Trump actually did stop the subsidies, Democrats wouldn't have any incentive to cave and help him pass Trumpcare. Telling Trump to **** off would result in fewer people losing insurance.
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 05:00 PM   #3240
Random
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,845
Originally Posted by Tony Stark View Post
More people would lose insurance if Trumpcare passes than if Trump stops the subsidies. So if Trump actually did stop the subsidies, Democrats wouldn't have any incentive to cave and help him pass Trumpcare. Telling Trump to **** off would result in fewer people losing insurance.
Hey, I didn't say it was a good plan...
__________________
"...Am I actually watching Big Bird argue with the Egyptian God of the Dead? Is PBS sending some kind of weird religious message here?"
Random is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:53 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.