ot. do we need doctors

[scaredyclassic]

Let’s focus on the best yielding 20% of med. Serv8ces, take 15% of total savings and have national dental care, and pay down debt with the rest.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=scaredyclassic]Let’s focus on the best yielding 20% of med. Serv8ces, take 15% of total savings and have national dental care, and pay down debt with the rest.[/quote]I’m all for this plan, scaredy.

I’m probably going to get slammed for saying this, but I don’t feel chemo (at $20K++ month) works for most cancer patients, stage 3.5 and up. All it does is ruin what few weeks or months of life the patient has left. I think a lot of people use very, very expensive medical procedures and drugs as a last ditch effort to try to buy more weeks/months of life when they would have a much better quality of life just letting the cancer have it’s way … which it will do, regardless of how much medical care they access simply because they can.

[no_such_reality]

Go even simpler, go single payer. Eliminate all the office staff and insurance overhead that is bundled in costs to handle the insane billing hoops.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi]When I had a dog I quickly grew sick of paying vet bills, and being upsold useless services.
I vaccinated and scrapped the tartar off the golden retriever’s teeth myself. I even froze warts off myself. No need for a Vet. She lived to 18 and could have lived to 20. I put her down at animal control in mission valley for $5.[/quote]Good for you, brian. I have given shots before to my pets but not in recent years because the place I used to get them (Spring Valley Feed) closed down years ago in an eminent domain action in favor of Caltrans for the SR-125 to SR-54 overpass. I have given my dog several “human” topical creams and ointments (incl Lidocaine spray) that were safe for dogs.

I DO have the stainless steel dental implement to pick and scrape my pets teeth and they are fairly cooperative but I’m not confident enough to use it properly on them (afraid I’m going to damage their gums). Dental care for a cat or dog is super expensive because of the pre-op bloodwork and anesthesia required ($350 – $700, depending on if they need extraction(s)) but I DO get it done on them at least once every 2 years. I wish I was able to perform this job competently myself.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=no_such_reality]Go even simpler, go single payer. Eliminate all the office staff and insurance overhead that is bundled in costs to handle the insane billing hoops.[/quote]I’m starting to lean this direction, but I want to see and hear what it actually looks like. Since “Medicare” is a “single-payer” for those 65 and up, that group can buy good (Plan F) Medicare supplement plans (Part B) and also better drug plans (Part D) to supplement the Medicare “single payer” plan everyone has. Those who do so (for about $350-$400 mo in SD) have nearly “Cadillac plans” because nearly ALL providers accept Medicare. I might be interested in single-payer if I will be allowed to buy the supplement of my choice.

[scaredyclassic]

Atul Gawande on too much medicine…

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/05/11/overkill-atul-gawande

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=bearishgurl] Dental care for a cat or dog is super expensive because of the pre-op bloodwork and anesthesia required ($350 – $700, depending on if they need extraction(s)) but I DO get it done on them at least once every 2 years. I wish I was able to perform this job competently myself.[/quote]

Pre op blood work is not necessary. It’s basically mandatory money making abundance of caution.

My dogs all lived to 18 iwhen average is 12. Keep them skinny, diet and exercise.

[FlyerInHi]

Bring on the computers. Medicine is not a free market. Doctors have captive audience of not well educated patients. They charge accordingly.

Drug companies are shysters. Different pricing for the same drug at different dosage for different applications. Example proscar for prostate vs propecia for hair growth. Ban drug advertizing.

[ucodegen]

[quote=ocrenter]a better question would be “do we need people”.

ultimately AI will prove to be superior to human beings in all aspects. And a mechanical body with infinitely exchangeable and upgradeable parts will be superior to biologic based, age limited body.

Do we want to go there is the question…[/quote]
We are already going there… IBM Watson has entered the market.

[Coronita]

[quote=ucodegen][quote=ocrenter]a better question would be “do we need people”.

ultimately AI will prove to be superior to human beings in all aspects. And a mechanical body with infinitely exchangeable and upgradeable parts will be superior to biologic based, age limited body.

Do we want to go there is the question…[/quote]
We are already going there… IBM Watson has entered the market.[/quote]

…or maybe not….

http://money.cnn.com/2016/03/25/technology/microsoft-sorry-tay/index.html

Microsoft ‘deeply sorry’ for chat bot’s racist tweets

Microsoft admits that it could have prevented its chatbot Tay from turning into a raging racist online.
The company launched the bot as an experiment in AI on Wednesday, and in less than a day, it began to tweet things like “Hitler was right I hate the jews” and “I f—— hate feminists and they should all die and burn in hell.”
Tay is essentially one central program that anyone can chat with using Twitter, Kik or Groupme. As people talk to it, the bot picks up new language and learns to respond in new ways.
But Tay also had a “vulnerability” that online trolls picked up on pretty quickly.
By telling the bot to “repeat after me,” Tay would retweet anything that someone said. Others also found a way to trick the bot into agreeing with them on hateful speech. Microsoft called this a “coordinated attack.”

Lol

[ucodegen]

@flu

You might want to check the history of IBM Watson. It is ‘Deep Blue’s spawn, not something weird (yet again) from Microsoft.

With the Microsoft chatbot, some people realized that they were dealing with a parrot, a not particularly bright one at that, instead of an AI. An AI would have asked why the person wanted it to repeat everything said.

PS: IBM Watson bought some critical medical companies recently. It would probably do better at analyzing xrays, CTs and MRIs than sending them off to some cheap sweatshop in India. It will probably be more consistent than can be achieved even with well trained individuals.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-ibm-watson-is-transforming-healthcare-2015-7

[njtosd]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Bring on the computers. Medicine is not a free market. Doctors have captive audience of not well educated patients. They charge accordingly.

Drug companies are shysters. Different pricing for the same drug at different dosage for different applications. Example proscar for prostate vs propecia for hair growth. Ban drug advertizing.[/quote]

Brian – I really do think you got duped into going to the infomercial lunch.

How much insurance do you think you have to have to sell something that is being put on someone’s head for a cosmetic purpose? Let’s say, for example, something destroys the active ingredient somewhere in the manufacturing cycle. Good heavens, someone’s hair doesn’t grow. What a catastrophe.

Now let’s say you sell a separate formulation having the same active ingredient for treating cancer. Let’s say you have the same manufacturing glitch – what is the potential downside? People dying. So you have to have a lot more testing, insurance, etc. This should be pretty easy to understand, even for you.

I have a question. Why do people hate drug companies? The public really doesn’t know what the drug companies charge but it is A LOT less than what is charged at the pharmacy. What they do know is what Walgreens or CVS charges (which can be a lot). But no one hates CVS or Walgreens – they don’t even come up on the radar. Has anyone noticed that the drug companies are slowly disappearing but there is a flipping CVS on every corner? End of rant. I like some drug companies much better than others – but I’ve never understood why drugstores never suffer the same criticism that drug companies do.

[La Jolla Renter]

Personally, I would take my chances with a good algorithm that has my lifetime history of blood panels, medical history, family history, dna, etc.

No way a primary care doctor is going to beat the algorithm. But sure would like a good one that likes studying the algorithm with me.

I found out years ago that I could order blood work online myself and get a more extensive test than my doctor orders. A better test for the same price at the same lab. I get the results emailed to me, study it, then go see my doctors for an annual check up. It does not go through my insurance, and I pay less.

Another reason I like the algorithm is that I have learned in life that 80% of all workers in their respected professions are mediocre or suck. Plumbers, mechanics, personal trainers, dentist, doctors, etc. (The only exception to this rule is politicians, where 99.9999% of them suck.)

I don’t think we need less doctors, just less sucky ones.

[Coronita]

[quote=ucodegen]@flu

You might want to check the history of IBM Watson. It is ‘Deep Blue’s spawn, not something weird (yet again) from Microsoft.

With the Microsoft chatbot, some people realized that they were dealing with a parrot, a not particularly bright one at that, instead of an AI. An AI would have asked why the person wanted it to repeat everything said.

PS: IBM Watson bought some critical medical companies recently. It would probably do better at analyzing xrays, CTs and MRIs than sending them off to some cheap sweatshop in India. It will probably be more consistent than can be achieved even with well trained individuals.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-ibm-watson-is-transforming-healthcare-2015-7%5B/quote%5D

I’ve very familiar with Watson…. I saw it on Jeopardy one time 🙂

I think more impressively is if Watson can replace a $300-400/hr attorney. We have way too many lawyers and folks in the legal profession in this country that way over complicates simple things, more so than doctors.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=flu][quote=ucodegen]@flu

You might want to check the history of IBM Watson. It is ‘Deep Blue’s spawn, not something weird (yet again) from Microsoft.

With the Microsoft chatbot, some people realized that they were dealing with a parrot, a not particularly bright one at that, instead of an AI. An AI would have asked why the person wanted it to repeat everything said.

PS: IBM Watson bought some critical medical companies recently. It would probably do better at analyzing xrays, CTs and MRIs than sending them off to some cheap sweatshop in India. It will probably be more consistent than can be achieved even with well trained individuals.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-ibm-watson-is-transforming-healthcare-2015-7%5B/quote%5D

I’ve very familiar with Watson…. I saw it on Jeopardy one time 🙂

I think more impressively is if Watson can replace a $300-400/hr attorney. We have way too many lawyers and folks in the legal profession in this country that way over complicates simple things, more so than doctors.[/quote]

It will be tricky to program the machine to do the type of bulls hitting premium lawyers do…

[Author]

Posts