OT: How badly are doctors/hospitals getting squeezed by insurance co?

[paramount]

patientrenter: My statements are not in conflict because I did not define what those limitations might be.

Medical care could be provided that was not a matter of life or death. I’m sure it happens everyday at any given emergency room.

[jficquette]

The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[jficquette]

The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[jficquette]

The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[jficquette]

The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[jficquette]

The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[equalizer]

[quote=jficquette]The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[/quote]
In CA, there is already a lawsuit cap at 250K, yet we have highest health care cost. We need a patient ratings service for doctors, hospitals, and we need doctors and staff to break blue wall of silence on bad staff.

Then why the high cost in CA? Earthquake retrofit, undocumented non-payers at emergency rooms, generally higher salaries for all staff (except doctors).

Kids and adults are generally more out of shape today. Obesity, diabetes is becoming epidemic because of office jobs, cars, long commutes, junk food, etc. Unless something changes, this problem will overwhelm all other problems here. Obesity is becoming a problem in developing countries as well.

Prevention through proper diet and exercise is most effective solution. Much easier said than followed. In the book “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness”, the authors point to simple ideas such as putting fruit at front of cafeteria line at schools which increases fruit sales. Some companies have started to subsidize fruit in corp cafeteria.

Why not ban all bad stuff? Thaler and Sunstein: “Those who are in position to shape our decisions can overreach or make mistakes, and freedom of choice is a safeguard to that. One of our goals in writing this book is to show that it is possible to help people make better choices and retain or even expand freedom. If people have their own ideas about what to eat and drink, and how to invest their money, they should be allowed to do so.

[equalizer]

[quote=jficquette]The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[/quote]
In CA, there is already a lawsuit cap at 250K, yet we have highest health care cost. We need a patient ratings service for doctors, hospitals, and we need doctors and staff to break blue wall of silence on bad staff.

Then why the high cost in CA? Earthquake retrofit, undocumented non-payers at emergency rooms, generally higher salaries for all staff (except doctors).

Kids and adults are generally more out of shape today. Obesity, diabetes is becoming epidemic because of office jobs, cars, long commutes, junk food, etc. Unless something changes, this problem will overwhelm all other problems here. Obesity is becoming a problem in developing countries as well.

Prevention through proper diet and exercise is most effective solution. Much easier said than followed. In the book “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness”, the authors point to simple ideas such as putting fruit at front of cafeteria line at schools which increases fruit sales. Some companies have started to subsidize fruit in corp cafeteria.

Why not ban all bad stuff? Thaler and Sunstein: “Those who are in position to shape our decisions can overreach or make mistakes, and freedom of choice is a safeguard to that. One of our goals in writing this book is to show that it is possible to help people make better choices and retain or even expand freedom. If people have their own ideas about what to eat and drink, and how to invest their money, they should be allowed to do so.

[equalizer]

[quote=jficquette]The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[/quote]
In CA, there is already a lawsuit cap at 250K, yet we have highest health care cost. We need a patient ratings service for doctors, hospitals, and we need doctors and staff to break blue wall of silence on bad staff.

Then why the high cost in CA? Earthquake retrofit, undocumented non-payers at emergency rooms, generally higher salaries for all staff (except doctors).

Kids and adults are generally more out of shape today. Obesity, diabetes is becoming epidemic because of office jobs, cars, long commutes, junk food, etc. Unless something changes, this problem will overwhelm all other problems here. Obesity is becoming a problem in developing countries as well.

Prevention through proper diet and exercise is most effective solution. Much easier said than followed. In the book “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness”, the authors point to simple ideas such as putting fruit at front of cafeteria line at schools which increases fruit sales. Some companies have started to subsidize fruit in corp cafeteria.

Why not ban all bad stuff? Thaler and Sunstein: “Those who are in position to shape our decisions can overreach or make mistakes, and freedom of choice is a safeguard to that. One of our goals in writing this book is to show that it is possible to help people make better choices and retain or even expand freedom. If people have their own ideas about what to eat and drink, and how to invest their money, they should be allowed to do so.

[equalizer]

[quote=jficquette]The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[/quote]
In CA, there is already a lawsuit cap at 250K, yet we have highest health care cost. We need a patient ratings service for doctors, hospitals, and we need doctors and staff to break blue wall of silence on bad staff.

Then why the high cost in CA? Earthquake retrofit, undocumented non-payers at emergency rooms, generally higher salaries for all staff (except doctors).

Kids and adults are generally more out of shape today. Obesity, diabetes is becoming epidemic because of office jobs, cars, long commutes, junk food, etc. Unless something changes, this problem will overwhelm all other problems here. Obesity is becoming a problem in developing countries as well.

Prevention through proper diet and exercise is most effective solution. Much easier said than followed. In the book “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness”, the authors point to simple ideas such as putting fruit at front of cafeteria line at schools which increases fruit sales. Some companies have started to subsidize fruit in corp cafeteria.

Why not ban all bad stuff? Thaler and Sunstein: “Those who are in position to shape our decisions can overreach or make mistakes, and freedom of choice is a safeguard to that. One of our goals in writing this book is to show that it is possible to help people make better choices and retain or even expand freedom. If people have their own ideas about what to eat and drink, and how to invest their money, they should be allowed to do so.

[equalizer]

[quote=jficquette]The plus side of that is you can get steep discounts for procedures if you are willing to pay cash for them.

Doctors and facilites are more then willing to cut deals with people who are “cash pay”.

I think we should cap malpractice suits and make it easier for providers to compete. Cap the awards to something like $200k or better yet, make the plantiff prove that the Doc intended to do harm.

We also have to consider that in 30 years there will be cures for the Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes and the elimination of the associated side effects. That and vacines for the common cold, etc will elimnate the vast majority of future health care costs. So we just need to keep it in prespective.

Kids born today should live to 100-120 easy.

John

[/quote]
In CA, there is already a lawsuit cap at 250K, yet we have highest health care cost. We need a patient ratings service for doctors, hospitals, and we need doctors and staff to break blue wall of silence on bad staff.

Then why the high cost in CA? Earthquake retrofit, undocumented non-payers at emergency rooms, generally higher salaries for all staff (except doctors).

Kids and adults are generally more out of shape today. Obesity, diabetes is becoming epidemic because of office jobs, cars, long commutes, junk food, etc. Unless something changes, this problem will overwhelm all other problems here. Obesity is becoming a problem in developing countries as well.

Prevention through proper diet and exercise is most effective solution. Much easier said than followed. In the book “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness”, the authors point to simple ideas such as putting fruit at front of cafeteria line at schools which increases fruit sales. Some companies have started to subsidize fruit in corp cafeteria.

Why not ban all bad stuff? Thaler and Sunstein: “Those who are in position to shape our decisions can overreach or make mistakes, and freedom of choice is a safeguard to that. One of our goals in writing this book is to show that it is possible to help people make better choices and retain or even expand freedom. If people have their own ideas about what to eat and drink, and how to invest their money, they should be allowed to do so.

[patientrenter]

[quote=paramount]patientrenter: My statements are not in conflict because I did not define what those limitations might be.

Medical care could be provided that was not a matter of life or death. I’m sure it happens everyday at any given emergency room.[/quote]

paramount, I may have misunderstood you. I thought you said that (a) no one should be denied lifesaving medical care, and (b) that there should be limitations on health spending.

Since (as others pointed out) a very high proportion of all medical costs are incurred to extend life by weeks or months, most efforts to limit medical expenses (not all) would have to involve allowing people who would live until tomorrow with expensive care to instead die today with less expensive care. So lifesaving care would be denied when the saving is for a very short time only. (We all die, so all lifesaving care just postpones our death. The key questions are how long the postponement is for, and what quality of life we enjoy in the meanwhile.)

[patientrenter]

[quote=paramount]patientrenter: My statements are not in conflict because I did not define what those limitations might be.

Medical care could be provided that was not a matter of life or death. I’m sure it happens everyday at any given emergency room.[/quote]

paramount, I may have misunderstood you. I thought you said that (a) no one should be denied lifesaving medical care, and (b) that there should be limitations on health spending.

Since (as others pointed out) a very high proportion of all medical costs are incurred to extend life by weeks or months, most efforts to limit medical expenses (not all) would have to involve allowing people who would live until tomorrow with expensive care to instead die today with less expensive care. So lifesaving care would be denied when the saving is for a very short time only. (We all die, so all lifesaving care just postpones our death. The key questions are how long the postponement is for, and what quality of life we enjoy in the meanwhile.)

[patientrenter]

[quote=paramount]patientrenter: My statements are not in conflict because I did not define what those limitations might be.

Medical care could be provided that was not a matter of life or death. I’m sure it happens everyday at any given emergency room.[/quote]

paramount, I may have misunderstood you. I thought you said that (a) no one should be denied lifesaving medical care, and (b) that there should be limitations on health spending.

Since (as others pointed out) a very high proportion of all medical costs are incurred to extend life by weeks or months, most efforts to limit medical expenses (not all) would have to involve allowing people who would live until tomorrow with expensive care to instead die today with less expensive care. So lifesaving care would be denied when the saving is for a very short time only. (We all die, so all lifesaving care just postpones our death. The key questions are how long the postponement is for, and what quality of life we enjoy in the meanwhile.)

[patientrenter]

[quote=paramount]patientrenter: My statements are not in conflict because I did not define what those limitations might be.

Medical care could be provided that was not a matter of life or death. I’m sure it happens everyday at any given emergency room.[/quote]

paramount, I may have misunderstood you. I thought you said that (a) no one should be denied lifesaving medical care, and (b) that there should be limitations on health spending.

Since (as others pointed out) a very high proportion of all medical costs are incurred to extend life by weeks or months, most efforts to limit medical expenses (not all) would have to involve allowing people who would live until tomorrow with expensive care to instead die today with less expensive care. So lifesaving care would be denied when the saving is for a very short time only. (We all die, so all lifesaving care just postpones our death. The key questions are how long the postponement is for, and what quality of life we enjoy in the meanwhile.)

[Author]

Posts