|
Post by falgar25 on Sept 12, 2009 14:52:52 GMT -4
We could debate this back and forth (and probably will) but I am correct.
HIPAA requires that you cannot be denied coverage for an existing condition when switching from one group plan to another with no break in coverage. That was the situation that was posed and HIPAA is the answer.
The leukemia story in that link, if it is even true, is an example of illegal discrimination by the employer. I can't argue that companies or even individuals are not going to break laws.
If you don't have a group plan through your employer then HIPAA doesn't apply. But, then neither does the employer-changed-plans scenario. If you purchase your own insurance then you can avoid the preexisting condition problem by not switching insurers.
If you don't have insurance but then develop a medical condition, then you have a problem.
Now if we want to talk about the extraordinary cost of health care then we need to talk about the drivers for that cost and include lawyers in that discussion. If you want to discuss the disparity between the fee charged to the insurance company and the fee charged to a private individual then we need to discuss the extraordinary cost of healthcare, lawyers, medicare, and other artificial price controls.
|
|
|
Post by speedergurl68 on Sept 13, 2009 6:17:09 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by thesuperzman on Sept 13, 2009 8:43:55 GMT -4
I am for the Government Option for insurance - but I am *not* going to get into the debate as to why and why it will or will not work. Like the abortion/pro-life issue - you aren't going to change anyone's opinions.
However, one argument I hear against reform is that 60 years ago employers didn't offer insurance or not everyone had it and it was ok. It's now 2009 - things have changed. Life spans are longer, new dieseases are around, and as a more interconnected world - things happen across the world rapidly.
Those against any reform that provides more insurance - let's talk about this in three months after H1N1. Not just because those uninsured might not have access to Tamiflu (unless the gov't provides it - GASP!). But, those who can't be taken care of risk getting others sick or possibly mutating it to something more dangerous. And anyone who is going to get the H1N1 shot in Maryland can thank the state gov't for guaranteeing every Marylander has access to tha vaccine.
But beyond all that - this is the richest country in the World - and our expecations of what everyone should have access to should change.
I know it's not a popular opinion - but it's certainly one that some share.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Sept 13, 2009 11:34:54 GMT -4
Why you would want the Govt. option is up to you, it's personal and there's no reason to share.
However, why it would or would not work is right at the heart of the debate. Without a good discussion of the merits and some agreement of the value of the plan, what you are left with is just changing things for the sake of making a change. I'm a really unlucky gambler; I would much prefer to stick with the bad situation we are now in rather than gambling the next won't be worse.
Does tamiflu require a prescription? If not then I doubt most insurance plans would cover it. Besides, a quick check of wikipedia would imply that it is ineffective against H1N1.
I have not heard there will be free flu shots to anyone that wants one. Is this real?
Part of the discussion I mentioned above. The US may be the richest country in the World (there are some Arab countries that compete very well and if we consider the money we owe to the Chinese our standing drops considerably) but how did the US gain that standing? How would larger deficits, greater debt, and higher taxes affect that standing? The cost of the proposals need to be considered along with the benefits.
|
|
|
Post by thesuperzman on Sept 13, 2009 12:24:54 GMT -4
Tamiflu is considered an effective measure against H1N1 - my company is offering us a 'stockpile' of Tamilfu for H1N1. This is through Associated Physicians. It's healthcare benefit from my company.
I never said flu shots would be free. But Maryland is guranteeing them for all that wan them.
As for if there will be increased deficits - that's a matter if you believe Obama or not (another discussion I am not willing to have). He claims it won't - that there will be ways to recoup that. I also look at it another way - that the costs of not coming up with a comprehensive plan may make this worse - and I am not talking via health care prices. I am talking about things such as pademics, a sicker nation with less productivity, etc.
I get the unlucky gambler reference. Makes sense. But, I am from the opposite opinion - we need to do something, and I think this is our best option. I have no 'magic bullet' of why it will work. But, you want to know what I believe - it's written by much more educated people who support the public option. I really don't think things can get worse. I've always shared this opinion on health care. But, it's hit closer to home now - and it's even more clear why this reform and this option is important.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Sept 13, 2009 19:02:37 GMT -4
Tamiflu is considered an effective measure against H1N1 - my company is offering us a 'stockpile' of Tamilfu for H1N1. This is through Associated Physicians. It's healthcare benefit from my company. I looked more closely at the wikipedia and found I misunderstood the information in the article. According to the CDC, Tamiflu *is* effective against the 2009 H1N1 virus. Cool deal from your company. Mine hasn't offered anything like that yet.
|
|
|
Post by thesuperzman on Sept 13, 2009 20:44:28 GMT -4
Yeah! It is a sweet deal. At first I thought I worked for a kick ass company. The more I thought about it (running my team there) - I realize it's more about keeping employees healthy to drive dollars
|
|
|
Post by dej on Sept 14, 2009 0:20:18 GMT -4
Tort reform, or more specifically cap malpractice awards. These lawsuits drive up the costs for all of us. Now doctors order expensive test after expensive test, not because they feel they are necessary, but because they fear being sued later on. The insurance premiums are so high for doctors now that many of them are getting out of the business or becoming specialists to make more money to cover it. We're gradually getting to the point where no one is going to want to be a general practitioner anymore. Capping malpractice judgments would make a HUGE difference in the whole healthcare system in my opinion. I agree, but it ain't gonna happen any time soon. The president's speech the other night was probably the last time we'll hear anything on this subject with this Congress, unless it's in another Republican amendment being voted down.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2009 8:15:07 GMT -4
Tamiflu is considered an effective measure against H1N1 - my company is offering us a 'stockpile' of Tamilfu for H1N1. This is through Associated Physicians. It's healthcare benefit from my company. I looked more closely at the wikipedia and found I misunderstood the information in the article. According to the CDC, Tamiflu *is* effective against the 2009 H1N1 virus. Cool deal from your company. Mine hasn't offered anything like that yet. Tamiflu is not a OTC drug is it? Is there different strengths available, maybe there's two versions. I thought you needed a prescription to get it, but I'm not sure. I'm going to check Walgreen's to see.
|
|
|
Post by kl on Sept 17, 2009 6:44:44 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by truthhurts on Sept 19, 2009 19:07:26 GMT -4
Three thousand people died on September 11, 2001 because of the actions of terrorists. The nation was rightfully shocked and angered. Billions of dollars were spent fighting two wars and further billions were spent on shoring up national security at airports and ports and strategic locations around the country. The government identified weaknesses in the way the country dealt with threats to its safekeeping and proceeded to fix the problems. The trigger was the senseless death of 3000 innocent Americans.
Last week, Harvard Medical School researchers released a new study.
Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year — one every 12 minutes — in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care.
“We’re losing more Americans every day because of inaction … than drunk driving and homicide combined,” Dr. David Himmelstein, a co-author of the study and an associate professor of medicine at Harvard, said in an interview with Reuters.
Forty-five thousand people a year die because of a broken health care system which leaves millions unable to afford health care insurance. Is this not a trigger enough for everyone to understand the need for action now? In the eight years since 9/11, 360,000 innocent people have died due to lack of health insurance coverage. Put another way, 100 times more people got killed because of a broken health care system than because of the attacks on 9/11.
Every single day that Republicans delay passage of a reform bill, another 120 people die. So, the next time some heartless, lobbyist-loving so called American patriot tells you that Obama is a socialist out to impose government health care, try throwing out these numbers.
Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year — one every 12 minutes — in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care.
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Sept 19, 2009 19:32:44 GMT -4
Lots of people die daily because they do not take care of themselves, nothing to do with healthcare. If you smoke, drink and eat fastfood daily, no amount of healthcare in the world can fix you. No one in a life threatening situation is turned away from a hospital. Lots of people without insurance use the emergency room as their general practioner. Lots of people with health insurance die everyday because they refuse to go to the doctor.
|
|
|
Post by truthhurts on Sept 19, 2009 19:44:28 GMT -4
Lots of people die daily because they do not take care of themselves, nothing to do with healthcare. If you smoke, drink and eat fastfood daily, no amount of healthcare in the world can fix you. No one in a life threatening situation is turned away from a hospital. Lots of people without insurance use the emergency room as their general practioner. Lots of people with health insurance die everyday because they refuse to go to the doctor. And that's OK to a Republican. The facts are just that, facts. 45,000 die a year BECAUSE of a lack of affordable health care. Is that OK with you? Can't we do better? Look again at the FACTS. The World Health Organization's ranking of health care systems by country shows: 1 France 2 Italy 3 San Marino 4 Andorra 5 Malta 6 Singapore 7 Spain 8 Oman 9 Austria 10 Japan 11 Norway 12 Portugal 13 Monaco 14 Greece 15 Iceland 16 Luxembourg 17 Netherlands 18 United Kingdom 19 Ireland 20 Switzerland 21 Belgium 22 Colombia 23 Sweden 24 Cyprus 25 Germany 26 Saudi Arabia 27 United Arab Emirates 28 Israel 29 Morocco 30 Canada 31 Finland 32 Australia 33 Chile 34 Denmark 35 Dominica 36 Costa Rica 37 United States of America 38 Slovenia 39 Cuba 40 Brunei 41 New Zealand 42 Bahrain 43 Croatia 44 Qatar 45 Kuwait 46 Barbados 47 Thailand 48 Czech Republic 49 Malaysia 50 Poland 51 Dominican Republic 52 Tunisia 53 Jamaica 54 Venezuela 55 Albania 56 Seychelles 57 Paraguay 58 South Korea 59 Senegal 60 Philippines 61 Mexico 62 Slovakia 63 Egypt 64 Kazakhstan 65 Uruguay 66 Hungary 67 Trinidad and Tobago 68 Saint Lucia 69 Belize 70 Turkey 71 Nicaragua 72 Belarus 73 Lithuania 74 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 75 Argentina 76 Sri Lanka 77 Estonia 78 Guatemala 79 Ukraine 80 Solomon Islands 81 Algeria 82 Palau 83 Jordan 84 Mauritius 85 Grenada 86 Antigua and Barbuda 87 Libya 88 Bangladesh 89 Macedonia 90 Bosnia-Herzegovina 91 Lebanon 92 Indonesia 93 Iran 94 Bahamas 95 Panama 96 Fiji 97 Benin 98 Nauru 99 Romania 100 Saint Kitts and Nevis 101 Moldova 102 Bulgaria 103 Iraq 104 Armenia 105 Latvia 106 Yugoslavia 107 Cook Islands 108 Syria 109 Azerbaijan 110 Suriname 111 Ecuador 112 India 113 Cape Verde 114 Georgia 115 El Salvador 116 Tonga 117 Uzbekistan 118 Comoros 119 Samoa 120 Yemen 121 Niue 122 Pakistan 123 Micronesia 124 Bhutan 125 Brazil 126 Bolivia 127 Vanuatu 128 Guyana 129 Peru 130 Russia 131 Honduras 132 Burkina Faso 133 Sao Tome and Principe 134 Sudan 135 Ghana 136 Tuvalu 137 Ivory Coast 138 Haiti 139 Gabon 140 Kenya 141 Marshall Islands 142 Kiribati 143 Burundi 144 China 145 Mongolia 146 Gambia 147 Maldives 148 Papua New Guinea 149 Uganda 150 Nepal 151 Kyrgystan 152 Togo 153 Turkmenistan 154 Tajikistan 155 Zimbabwe 156 Tanzania 157 Djibouti 158 Eritrea 159 Madagascar 160 Vietnam 161 Guinea 162 Mauritania 163 Mali 164 Cameroon 165 Laos 166 Congo 167 North Korea 168 Namibia 169 Botswana 170 Niger 171 Equatorial Guinea 172 Rwanda 173 Afghanistan 174 Cambodia 175 South Africa 176 Guinea-Bissau 177 Swaziland 178 Chad 179 Somalia 180 Ethiopia 181 Angola 182 Zambia 183 Lesotho 184 Mozambique 185 Malawi 186 Liberia 187 Nigeria 188 Democratic Republic of the Congo 189 Central African Republic 190 Myanmar Is number 37 the best we can do? Or is that OK with YOU?
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Sept 19, 2009 19:53:05 GMT -4
What standard does the WHO use to substaniate their claim? I will take #37 anyday. I prefer our healthcare to other countries that have socialized medicine where you are put on waiting lists and it takes months just to get an MRI or Cat Scan. Why do many people from the other 36 countries come to USA to pay out of pocket for their healthcare? You don't see people from the USA going elsewhere unless it is for something like a boobjob or experiemental therapies.
|
|
|
Post by truthhurts on Sept 19, 2009 20:05:41 GMT -4
What standard does the WHO use to substaniate their claim? I will take #37 anyday. I prefer our healthcare to other countries that have socialized medicine where you are put on waiting lists and it takes months just to get an MRI or Cat Scan. Why do many people from the other 36 countries come to USA to pay out of pocket for their healthcare? You don't see people from the USA going elsewhere unless it is for something like a boobjob or experiemental therapies. The World Health Organization isn't a creditable source? Maybe this defines your argument...? We're not discussing the wishes of others to enter the US for treatment for whatever reason, we're discussing the deaths of 45,000 people per year ** IN ** the US because of a lack of healthcare because they simply can't afford it.
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Sept 19, 2009 20:16:38 GMT -4
What standard does the WHO use to substaniate their claim? I will take #37 anyday. I prefer our healthcare to other countries that have socialized medicine where you are put on waiting lists and it takes months just to get an MRI or Cat Scan. Why do many people from the other 36 countries come to USA to pay out of pocket for their healthcare? You don't see people from the USA going elsewhere unless it is for something like a boobjob or experiemental therapies. The World Health Organization isn't a creditable source? Maybe this defines your argument...? We're not discussing the wishes of others to enter the US for treatment for whatever reason, we're discussing the deaths of 45,000 people per year ** IN ** the US because of a lack of healthcare because they simply can't afford it. The "whatever" reason other people come to USA for treatment is because they cannot get it in a timely fashion in the country where they live. Look at the statistics for various cancer survival rates in the USA versus the other 36 countries.
|
|
|
Post by truthhurts on Sept 19, 2009 20:24:51 GMT -4
The World Health Organization isn't a creditable source? Maybe this defines your argument...? We're not discussing the wishes of others to enter the US for treatment for whatever reason, we're discussing the deaths of 45,000 people per year ** IN ** the US because of a lack of healthcare because they simply can't afford it. The "whatever" reason other people come to USA for treatment is because they cannot get it in a timely fashion in the country where they live. Look at the statistics for various cancer survival rates in the USA versus the other 36 countries. They must be uninformed. They should be headed for the UK. Uh... where they have "socialized" medicine. (OECD cancer deaths data) # 1 Netherlands: 433 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 2 Italy: 418 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 3 Hungary: 411 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 4 Luxembourg: 409.7 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 5 Slovakia: 405.3 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 6 Ireland: 357.6 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 7 Czech Republic: 335.4 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 8 New Zealand: 327.3 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 9 United States: 321.9 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 10 Australia: 298.9 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 11 Norway: 289.4 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 12 France: 286.1 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 13 Austria: 280 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 14 Sweden: 268.2 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 15 Finland: 255.4 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 16 United Kingdom: 253.5 deaths per 100,000 peopl ...and again, we're talking about 45,000 US citizens who die EVERY YEAR because of a lack of healthcare. Here. In this country. You're attempting to alter the discussion.
|
|
|
Post by - on Sept 19, 2009 20:26:28 GMT -4
If there is ANYONE in Maryland that can not afford health care. We have MHIP. Otherwise know as Maryland Health Insurance Program. They base the cost of the coverage upon one's income, or also for pre existing conditions.
AIM, not the aol messenger also has a plan for pre existing conditions. The base price is $349.00 monthly. It is an indemnity plan. If any one has any questions, please send me a PM. Better yet send an email to - _Donald@yahoo.com. This is my husband, he is a broker for many different types of insurance. Both health and life.
He does not get paid for advice, but loves to help people out. Mostly he can educate anyone about MHIP. He makes no money from it, but will be more than happy to help direct anyone with finding the best health care coverage within your budget.
-cg
|
|
|
Post by safetildecember on Sept 19, 2009 20:35:15 GMT -4
I think that has more to do with the health of the citizens in general. The USA has more health problems due to how we do not take care of ourselves. Those other countries do not have the obesity problem the USA has and lots of health issues come along with it. No amount of healthcare is going to change that.
|
|
|
Post by truthhurts on Sept 19, 2009 20:51:55 GMT -4
No amount of healthcare is going to change that. A lack of availability to those who need it certainly won't help. Healthcare, in a supposedly advanced country, for it's citizens, should be a right, not a privilege.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Sept 19, 2009 21:07:18 GMT -4
No amount of healthcare is going to change that. A lack of availability to those who need it certainly won't help. Healthcare, in a supposedly advanced country, for it's citizens, should be a right, not a privilege. Nope, NOT a right, at least not a right for ALL. Definition of that means I'll be paying for it for someone who doesn't EARN IT.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Sept 19, 2009 21:10:37 GMT -4
The "whatever" reason other people come to USA for treatment is because they cannot get it in a timely fashion in the country where they live. Look at the statistics for various cancer survival rates in the USA versus the other 36 countries. They must be uninformed. They should be headed for the UK. Uh... where they have "socialized" medicine. (OECD Data) # 1 Netherlands: 433 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 2 Italy: 418 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 3 Hungary: 411 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 4 Luxembourg: 409.7 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 5 Slovakia: 405.3 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 6 Ireland: 357.6 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 7 Czech Republic: 335.4 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 8 New Zealand: 327.3 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 9 United States: 321.9 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 10 Australia: 298.9 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 11 Norway: 289.4 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 12 France: 286.1 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 13 Austria: 280 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 14 Sweden: 268.2 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 15 Finland: 255.4 deaths per 100,000 peopl # 16 United Kingdom: 253.5 deaths per 100,000 peopl ...and again, we're talking about 45,000 US citizens who die EVERY YEAR because of a lack of healthcare. Here. In this country. You're attempting to alter the discussion. Numbers MEAN NOTHING. Look at Baltimore's crime statistics. The numbers can be altered in any poll or stat. to mean whatever you, I, or they want. "lack of healthcare" does NOT equate to affording it, or being turned down for it. It could certainly mean that someone didn't go to the Dr. when they should have.
|
|
|
Post by truthhurts on Sept 19, 2009 21:12:11 GMT -4
Nope, NOT a right, at least not a right for ALL. Definition of that means I'll be paying for it for someone who doesn't EARN IT. So we found Palin's death panel. Invisible User. Civilized countries take care of their own.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on Sept 19, 2009 21:13:33 GMT -4
I think that has more to do with the health of the citizens in general. The USA has more health problems due to how we do not take care of ourselves. Those other countries do not have the obesity problem the USA has and lots of health issues come along with it. No amount of healthcare is going to change that. I got a very similar impression from the report that I read on the study. The cool thing about statistics is you can use the same set of numbers to prove pretty much anything you want. Are the results of this analysis really surprising when the authors chose to conclude the report with the statement: "Now that health reform is again on the political agenda, health professionals have the opportunity to advocate universal coverage"
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Sept 19, 2009 21:29:55 GMT -4
Nope, NOT a right, at least not a right for ALL. Definition of that means I'll be paying for it for someone who doesn't EARN IT. So we found Palin's death panel. Invisible User. Civilized countries take care of their own. My healthcare isn't free. why should yours if you're ABLE to work but don't? Hmmm? It's not the Government's job to provide, or mandate healthcare, as it's not there place to punish someone who CHOOSES not to have it. If someone is that g d sick that they are playing with the death card, GO TO THE GD EMERGENCY ROOM or pick up the dang phone. They DON'T turn you down. Have YOU been to the ER lately? I have! Full house each and every time. FULL of sniffly spanish speaking families talking to the interpreter while SOME much more urgent cases are being delayed. Plan on a 4 hour MINIMUM. BEEN THERE, SEEN IT, DONE THAT. Want to clear up the ER? Have some AFTER HOURS X-Ray places open. Dr. sent us to the ER because no X-Ray places were open after 6pm on a Tuesday. 5 HOURS AT ER FOR AN XRAY. Dislocated Elbow: Arrived by ambo at 8pm, left 2am, we were to be sent home at 1am, WITH NO CAST. I caught that error by asking where the cast was.... Other delays were people that couldn't check out in front of us because the interpretor wasn't available and they wouldn't let us check out "AHEAD OF OUR TURN" I you don't get anything else here, get this: NO ONE SIDE IS TOTALLY RIGHT HERE. DON'T DRINK THE KOOL-AID ON EITHER TABLE. The system is not TOTALLY BROKE, so it does NOT need totally fixed. THIS IS NOT ABOUT HEALTHCARE, IT'S ABOUT CONTROL, CONTROL OF YOU, ME, AND US, ALL OF US. I refuse to believe that the gov't controlling heathcare will enhance competition. I strongly believe that it WILL run every health insurance company out of business, and I believe that is what this administration wants in order to get all that money into the gov't and out of private industry.
|
|