Its starting already.

Life, the universe, and everything.
Forum rules
- No personal attacks against players or staff members - please be civil!
- No posting of mature images/links, keep content SFW. If it's NSFW, don't post it on these forums.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:07 am

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,575354,00.html

"Most women don't need a mammogram in their 40s and should get one every two years starting at 50, a government task force said Monday. It's a major reversal that conflicts with the American Cancer Society's long-standing position."

...

The new advice says:

—Most women in their 40s should not routinely get mammograms.

—Women 50 to 74 should get a mammogram every other year until they turn 75, after which the risks and benefits are unknown. (The task force's previous guidelines had no upper limit and called for exams every year or two.)

—The value of breast exams by doctors is unknown. And breast self-exams are of no value.

...

The new guidelines balance these risks and benefits, scientists say.

The probability of dying of breast cancer after age 40 is 3 percent, they calculate. Getting a mammogram every other year from ages 50 to 69 lowers that risk by about 16 percent.

...

Starting at age 40 would prevent one additional death but also lead to 470 false alarms for every 1,000 women screened. Continuing mammograms through age 79 prevents three additional deaths but raises the number of women treated for breast cancers that would not threaten their lives.

"You save more lives because breast cancer is more common, but you diagnose tumors in women who were destined to die of something else. The overdiagnosis increases in older women," Mandelblatt said.


--------------

First off, I don't know whether women should get screened at 40, 50 or 80. What I want to point out is that its convenient that the government is now figuring out that "self exams" are worthless after the hundreds of millions of dollars we have spent over the past 30 years propagandizing our people on its life saving benefit.... and that the politicians who are pushing healthcare reform who have been coming out to say we are over spending are releasing their own study to validate their line... Is Obama going to blast the government for their self supporting study? Or do we only blast insurance companies.

First its tests... that don't statistically provide "value" (cost too much). Next its procedures, then its life saving procedures because you're too old or don't provide enough "revenue" for the government. De facto death panels are coming as soon as its politically correct or necessary to reduce costs of services that don't provide enough value (replacing grandma's heart for $500,000 cuz shes gonna die anyways within 5 years since she has diabetes).

I'm not saying its wrong (changing screening to 50), I'm not saying the doctor's aren't supporting a position that enriches them (screening at 40), I'm saying under national healthcare, we are goign to ration care. Every socialist country with free healthcare does it whether by official policy, government "expert medical boards" or long waiting lists.... They do it and we will to.
Ambar
Sojourner
Posts: 2872
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Our House in Va.
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Ambar » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:11 pm

That article jumps around too much to be anything but silly imo .. looks like the Cancer Society isn't changing its recommendations, nor will health care costs be changing over these *findings* tho so that's good.

It also clearly states *most* women then there is the statement that cites it doesn't take into consideration familial history or genetic mutations ..

foxnews ftw

For the record, every time you go in for an annual gyn exam they ask if you do self exams .. I personally do not, but am honest about it .. I wonder how many women actually do them .. my aunt almost died of ovarian cancer and my godmother did die of breast cancer .. so yeah I will get my exams every year, uncomfortable or not.

and where did it state hundreds of millions of dollars promoting self exams? I read that article a few times looking for that and only found them handing out cards to hang in the shower .. granted I didn't follow any links or do any other research.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Ragorn » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:13 pm

It's interesting to see the spin placed on the story by Fox News. The link to the same story on CNN is:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/11/16/ma ... index.html

Fox News spends the first five paragraphs referring to the US Preventative Services Task Force as "a government task force" and "a government panel of doctors and scientists" before properly identifying the group. When reaching for quotes, they choose to first go to an insurance company spokesperson, even before they quote the American Cancer Society. Just interesting to see how Fox News caters to their target audience.

As for the advice itself.

I think there's very little harm in preventative medicine. Mammograms may not be medically necessary, and they may produce more false positives at 40 than they do at 50, but I see no harm in keeping up with them. I don't think there's anything in the PSTF's advice that's medically unsound though... they're not advising women not to be checked, they're simply stating the fact that mammograms are less reliable for women in their 40s, and women should consult their doctors to discuss the risks and specifics of the procedure. All in all, I kind of feel like this is a non-story.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:54 pm

I didn't see the article on CNN until this morning. I noticed the spin fox used too, but it still illustrates what I believe which is... Yea the article is very disjointed, its not a very good piece of writing for sure.

Jen, today you can get your screenings, but as government takeover of health care / health insurance happens, these kinds of government findings will = harassing doctors over ordering too much tests = reduction in payments to doctors from medicare / insurance companies = you won't get them unless you private pay = you won't get them. Maybe not true for your individually, but true in general. They have been developing these mechanisms for the last couple years. putting in place the boards, talking about how they are going to identify doctors that over test, over prescribe over operate...

Right now we get treatment based on ability to pay + doctor's profit motive + your health, tomorrow we are going to have decisions based on what the government thinks is best based on its "science" (spun by politics, evidence Obama today, Bush last year) and its budget (which we already know is fukd). You want to see government healthcare in action, take a look at native americans. Don't get sick after June is their motto because there is no money left for treatment after June. This is a right they are guaranteed by treaty (vs something less accountable like domestic law).

The hallmark of socialism is a reduction in services... its the only way they can mak the budget work. Their line sounds good, we're just cutting out waste of "over testing", but the reality is a very slippery slope and government is anything but nimble. Hugo Chavez just went on the air in Venuzela making fun of people who take longer than 3 minute showers because their infrastructure can't handle the demand, its "waste".
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:15 pm

From the CNN article

"The task force advice is based on its conclusion that screening 1,300 women in their 50s to save one life is worth it, but that screening 1,900 women in their 40s to save a life is not, Brawley wrote.

That stance "is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives, just not enough of them," he added.

--

yep, and I personally agree with the government's position on this. A lot of stuff we do is just not worth the lives we save or "make better". My autistic daughters ridiculously expensive education for one. Others include fining the shit out of our population for speeding in school zones to save 4 kids a year, spending hundreds of millions fighting drunk driving to save a couple thousand lives... The government strives to do 99.999% of what is possible at orders of magnitude higher costs rather than doing 90% because us stupid voters get teary eyed remembering some little girl who got run down in a crosswalk on her way to school.
Ambar
Sojourner
Posts: 2872
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Our House in Va.
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Ambar » Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:05 pm

Looks like more agencies disagree with the findings of this task force than agree with it unless I am reading wrong .. you are quoting phrases not the entire paragraph the statement was made in .. Anyone can skew anything to their favor but again unless I am reading wrong the cancer society hasn't changed their beliefs or recommendations, no insurance will go up nor will medicare coverage change on these screenings or now. Mammograms save lives, period. Will it change in the future? I don't see evidence of it right now. Then again, we didn't forsee anything would be better than Betamax or VHS years ago, either :)

It just seems that you haven't had personal tragedy in your life, Mike .. I'm sure if it was your daughter, you'd feel differently. Yes there are ridiculous laws, but they are there for a reason, same as that obvious tag on a hair dryer .. "Do not use in or near the bathtub" .. obvious to me but not to some .. I don't have a problem paying higher premiums to get my screenings every year if it comes down to it (I personally wont have to but that's my insurance) I don't have a problem slowing down in school zones or paying higher taxes on crap food. It is for our better good (for the most part) I don't have issues paying higher premiums to help those that cant afford them, I have issue with people who CHOSE not to have insurance even if they can afford it tho.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:21 pm

I'm not skewing anything. I'm not taking an article against gay marriage and turning it into one that supports gay marriage. I'm telling you what is coming.

What makes you think that this task force's recommendations aren't going to affect health insurance / medicare? Let me tell you how it works, medicare/medicaid decide something... whether what they cover or how much they pay... the insurance industry jumps on board and demands the same things from doctors and hospitals. healthcare is already heavily influenced by government, they want complete control.

Why else do you think the government is putting together its own expert medical boards. Make no mistake, this is testing the waters to see if they can replace private "experts" like the AMA, ACS with government experts. The governments position is that basically breast cancer screening for women under 50, under 40 is not a good value. Yet we know that it does actually save people. They say its not effective and not necessary because of what boils down to cost. I'm quite sure that they are right its not effective as policy for managing us like a herd of cows. Its interesting that the government's position for healthcare reform is that there is "waste" in the healthcare system, especially from over ordering tests, and they come out with this huge reversal of decades of common knowledge. All that is missing is Obama going out on TV Hugo Chavez style and blasting the American Cancer Society for their self serving views.

Socialism leads to reduction in services, not universal services. Whether its rationing by policy or rationing by long waits it is rationing adn that is where we have to head because we can't afford it... no one can. You don't have to believe me, look at the VA (I have 30 years of experience watching my dad work through the system). Look at the Native Americans who have a saying, Dont get sick after June (cuz all the money for treatment is gone and they won't get it). We ration care to the Native Americans even though its guaranteed in Treaty.

--

And no, I wouldn't feel different if its my daughter just because you would or the average person would. I'm comfortable with the natural order of things. I'm comfortable with death with acceptable losses. If its time for one of my kids or wife to die, its time. I won't spend everything I have and that which I don't to save my kids life unless I felt it was God's plan that I do so. I will not make good health and continuing life the focus of my days; it can be idolatry. Thats not to say I won't do basic maintenance to keep us functioning, but anything extreme needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis. It may be God's will that I spend everything I've been given, it may not, but I'll leave that up to him.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:41 pm

Heres an article that pretty much covers what I'm pointing out. A few choice comments, yea they are all Republican law makers and its on Fox, that doesn't mean its not true.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11 ... endations/

"I absolutely believe this could be a form of rationing," said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga, a practicing obstetrician and gynecologist for 26 years. "It scares me."

...

Gingrey told FoxNews.com on Tuesday that he and other lawmakers are gravely concerned that insurance companies will seize upon the new guidelines to deny mammogram coverage for women under 50.

...

Commer said she is very concerned that the new guidelines are the top of a slippery slope toward rationing, and questioned the timing as the Senate is about to vote on health care reforms that could end up containing a so-called public option.

"The government-run insurance companies are definitely going to be using these federal guidelines as opposed to using the American Cancer Society guidelines, and the American Cancer Society is not going along with these guidelines, and we can only hope that the private insurance companies don't follow suit," she said.

"I think it's coming down to saving costs. I don't think we should be doing that at the expense of women," she added.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:47 pm

kiryan wrote:yea they are all Republican law makers and its on Fox, that doesn't mean its not true.


Actually I think "it's not true" is the literal translation of Republican Law Makers on Fox... :P
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Ragorn » Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:02 pm

kiryan wrote:Heres an article that pretty much covers what I'm pointing out. A few choice comments, yea they are all Republican law makers and its on Fox, that doesn't mean its not true.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11 ... endations/

"I absolutely believe this could be a form of rationing," said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga, a practicing obstetrician and gynecologist for 26 years. "It scares me."

The US Preventive Services Task Force first convened in 1984, under President And God Damned Fine American Ronald Reagan. The task force was created to research preventive medical procedures and provide recommendations to the health care community. This task force has been making recommendations for 25 years, some of them embraced by the health care community, some not.

Why is their recommendation suddenly a move toward "rationing?"

This group's recommendations have been shaping private health care providers' policies and costs for 25 years. Now that we're considering public health care, NOW it's a problem?
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:09 pm

Assuming your correct

1) because the stakes are higher now with the government posed to take control of healthcare, or 20 cents out of every dollar you have (+ the 30 cents they take out for taxes).

2) the administration in power often determines how powerful an individual department is. Look at the labor department under Bush. It may not be new, but the power they wield may be increased and essentially be new. Furthermore, the new healthcare bill creates a whole slew of these government advisory groups.

3) So it only took them 25 years to realize that breast cancer screening wasn't effective. Why exactly did we recommend it in the first place if they were wrong? Why should we listen to them now? It took 25 years to figure this out (assuming they got it correct)... are you ready for them to start deciding healthcare policy (which is what they will do)?
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:16 pm

kiryan wrote:3) So it only took them 25 years to realize that breast cancer screening wasn't effective.


I'm really trying not to get drawn into this, but that made my brain hurt. Are you honestly stating you think Breast Cancer is the ONLY thing this organization has ever done?
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:24 pm

Obviously they've been doing other things. Does that make it ok that they've been wrong for 25 years supposedly?

or was this proclamation politically motivated not scientifically based?
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:38 pm

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/OnCallPlus ... 145&page=1

"Their justification: these new guidelines capture 81 percent of mammography's benefits, save a lot of resources, with only a 3 percent drop in survivorship from the most common cancer to affect women," ...

(3% is acceptable losses for the amount of money they are going to save!)

...

"The task force doesn't deal with insurance and coverage," Petitti said. "Cost was not a part of what the task force looked at."

Instead, the task force reviewed a number of studies to compile the benefits of mammograms, such as how many cancers were detected and how many lives were saved, and the harms of mammograms, such as how many false positives popped up, how many unnecessary tests were done and how much extra radiation women were exposed to during the false positive testing.

(um isn't looking at unnecessary tests and "extra" biopsies basically looking at cost?)
...

"The reason to do it less often is to decrease the harms and the negatives -- false positive tests -- and the anxiety that goes along with it, the biopsies that will be done and the unnecessary tests," said Petitti. "Those harms and negatives are both common and serous."

(seriously... your anxiety is a "harm" they are seriously worried about.)
....

Forty-nine states mandate that health insurance companies cover routine mammograms. The laws vary from state to state on whether the insurance company pays all or part of the costs, but the vast majority require a baseline mammogram for an insured woman at age 35 and above, routine mammograms every two years for women age 40-49 and annual mammograms for women older than 50.

....

Health insurance lobbyist group America's Health Insurance Plans, doesn't foresee a change in coverage soon.

(Right until they change the laws... which first obviously you have to have this kind of report before anyone could go after a sacred cow like this... why the f*k is this stuff law in the first place).
...

"Occasionally, a woman who is not high risk, and she's 32, wants it done," Pisano said. "In those cases, the woman might have a discussion with her doctor and talk about the risks and benefits. ... At the end of the discussion, if the doctor orders a mammogram for that woman, then it's typically covered."

(again for now... the government is designing the mechanisms with which they will inform doctors when they are ordering too many tests that go against conventional wisdom, provided by the government experts of course, that supposedly don't improve outcomes... I call those threats)
...

"I hope that the insurers will change reimbursement, because it is probably the only way that women will be spared the extra radiation exposure of too many mammograms," Love said. "Since our system pays the radiologist, hospital or mammography center and biopsying surgeon by the more they do, there is no incentive for this to come from the medical profession."

(still waiting for Obama to blast the medical profession for protecting their profits).
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:42 pm

kiryan wrote:Obviously they've been doing other things. Does that make it ok that they've been wrong for 25 years supposedly?

or was this proclamation politically motivated not scientifically based?


Or maybe, just maybe, they've been looking at other things until recently?

How have they "been wrong for 25 years?" Nothing in any of the articles you've posted suggests that they ever said anything about mammograms previously.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Ragorn » Tue Nov 17, 2009 11:17 pm

kiryan wrote:Obviously they've been doing other things. Does that make it ok that they've been wrong for 25 years supposedly?

or was this proclamation politically motivated not scientifically based?

Science changes opinion as new evidence presents. I think this proclamation WAS scientifically based, and YOU (and Fox News) are the ones making it political.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:46 am

Everything is political when the government is the one doing it.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Ragorn » Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:10 am

kiryan wrote:Everything is political when the Democrats are doing it.

Fixed that for you? I don't seem to remember you holding the same opinion about the Bush administration's crackdown on science...
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Ashiwi » Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:00 pm

Just a personal observation ... Every woman I know who has been diagnosed with breast cancer found the initial mass through self-examination.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Wed Nov 18, 2009 3:15 pm

In case you misse it, I'm still making fun of Obama for his claim that he was going to put science back in charge when obviously both administrations looked at the work of scientists they felt supported their views. I'm outraged that he thinks he can just say it and it'll be true.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:27 pm

and since I'm bitchign about healthcare again... You really want government running healthcare when they made 50 billion in "improper payments" in Medicare, Medicaid and Medicare Advantage in just 2009? Whatever "savings" they are supposedly going to create, are going to be lost to waste.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch ... waste.html

During fiscal year 2009, improper payments totaled $98 billion, up 36 percent from the prior fiscal year when $72 billion in improper payments were made. The increase, Office of Management & Budget director Peter Orszag said on a conference call with reporters, stemmed from stricter scrutiny implemented by the administration and greater government spending due to the economic downturn. More than 50 percent of the $98 billion total came from Medicaid, Medicare, and Medicare Advantage.

In a new effort to combat this government waste, President Obama within the next week will sign an executive order boosting transparency, increasing accountability, and creating new incentives for compliance.

The executive order will mandate that each agency have a website for the public to access and report information on improper payments. Each agency will also have to designate a Senate-confirmed appointee to be accountable to the President on meeting targets for reducing improper payments. The administration will also seek to create incentives to boost compliance, such as giving states the ability to recoup more federal grant money for administrative expenses if they show improved results in


----

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/11 ... -recs.html

"The U.S. Preventive Task Force is an outside independent panel of doctors and scientists who make recommendations. They do not set federal policy and they don’t determine what services are covered by the federal government," said Sebelius in a written statement.

(see, 100% pure science! No politics involved at all. Gartner is probably the best known, best respected market research company in the world, but because the insurance companies commissioned the study it was blasted by Obama as self serving.)

...

But Republicans are drawing parallels between the advisory panel recommendations and so-called "comparative effectiveness efforts" that would be employed under Democratic health plans to control skyrocketing costs. The idea is that panels would study different treatments would be studied to determine which are the most effective.

(I told you the framework for implementing these mechanisms are in the new health bill. They have to be, its the only way to reduce the cost is to eliminate "waste" and reduce services in a macro sense.)
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:51 pm

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11 ... uidelines/

The independent government panel of doctors and scientists has insisted that the cost of such preventive testing was not a factor in its assessment of breast cancer screening.

"These recommendations have nothing to do with any kind of analysis that addressed cost effectiveness," Dr. Diana Petitti, vice chairwoman of the panel, told CBS News in an interview Tuesday.

"Cost effectiveness was not a part of the discussion. Cost was not uttered in the room," she said.

But costs were referenced at least three times in the panel's report when assessing common types of breast cancer screenings, including clinical breast examinations, film and digital mammographies, and magnetic resonance imaging -- or MRIs.

"Digital mammography is more expensive than film mammography," the guidelines note, while MRIs are "much more expensive" than either film or digital mammography.

"They [the White House] want to say that you can't connect those dots," said Rep. Phillip Gingrey, R-Ga., a practicing obstetrician and gynecologist for 26 years. "We clearly can connect them."

--

Yea I noticed that too. lets play a game called which one doesn't belong.

1. White house says there is waste in healthcare.
2. White house says we over test.
3. White house says radiologists and other specialists make too much money and order extra tests just to pad their profits.
4. Government Task force comes up with a recomendation that shows we over test on mammographies (managed by radiologists)
5. White house says don't worry nothing is changing.

They must really think we are stupid ...or... there is no hope the government take over can actually save us any money. Either they are lieing that nothing is going to change, or they lack the courage to take "science" and actually make needed change.

Lets look at their #s...

"The USPSTF says that screening 1,339 women in their 50s to save one life makes screening worthwhile in that age group. Yet USPSTF also says screening 1,904 women ages 40 to 49 in order to save one life is not worthwhile. ... With its new recommendations, the USPSTF is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives; just not enough of them."

If a mammography costs on average $1,000 (which its probably more expensive), it costs 1.3 million to save one 50-74 year old women from Breast Cancer. or 1.9 million for a woman 40-49. I have to imagine we could save more than 1 life with half of that money in any number of places in the USA let alone the world.

This is one major reason why I'm against government health insurance, mandatory health insurance, and health insurance in general. You lock in this cost. You can't personally decide to take the risk that you are not going to be that 1 person (.0004% chance) and save the money instead of spending it on health care. Health costs will be a permanent 20% or more of our economy forever if we accept government run healthcare.

They are right though, coverage of breast cancer screening will probably not go away as long as radiologists and imaging equipment manufacturers continue to lobby Congress to keep them covered. If anything, they'll get paid more because now they have a lot bigger pot of money to divvy up.

Let me ask you this, if people lose health insurance coverage and die prematurely is it going to ruin our country? If the government takes over and mismanages 20% of our economy, could they put the final nail in our coffin?
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:01 pm

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/18 ... ?tag=stack

"The Republican health care plan does nothing to stop premium discrimination against women, does nothing to end denials based on pre-existing conditions, does nothing to make breast cancer care more affordable, and in fact does not even change the percentage of uninsured Americans," she said.

(This is rich. Its premium discrimination rather than making you pay for what it actually costs. Women consume 2x as much healthcare as men do for some obvious reasons like their more complicated reproductive system and for other less obvious reasons like so many woman I know are hopped on anti depressants and thyroid medication. Men deal, women go to the doctor)
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:14 pm

kiryan wrote:Men deal, women go to the doctor)


Women also live longer.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Kifle » Thu Nov 19, 2009 12:44 pm

Sarvis wrote:
kiryan wrote:Men deal, women go to the doctor)


Women also live longer.


If I remember correctly, this is starting to correct itself -- and wasn't due to going to the doctor more often :)
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Its starting already.

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:22 pm

I think what Kiryan is trying to say is that under socialized government healthcare, our healthcare will become more about statistics than about our individual wants, needs, and capabilities.

Prepare to become a statistic, even if you've done everything right to avoid being one.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:26 pm

teflor the ranger wrote:I think what Kiryan is trying to say is that under socialized government healthcare, our healthcare will become more about statistics than about our individual wants, needs, and capabilities.

Prepare to become a statistic, even if you've done everything right to avoid being one.


Because you're not a statistic to your insurance company?
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:26 pm

I'll agree with that.

Although I think locking in healthcare costs as a permanent 20% of gdp is a bad bad bad idea. Nothing government ever does gets smaller, it only gets bigger, touches more things, costs more and wastes more.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Its starting already.

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:38 pm

Sarvis wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:I think what Kiryan is trying to say is that under socialized government healthcare, our healthcare will become more about statistics than about our individual wants, needs, and capabilities.

Prepare to become a statistic, even if you've done everything right to avoid being one.


Because you're not a statistic to your insurance company?


I'm not subject to the rulings and mandates of my insurance, nor do they control what services I can access, or even my continued membership in said insurance company.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:53 pm

teflor the ranger wrote:
Sarvis wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:I think what Kiryan is trying to say is that under socialized government healthcare, our healthcare will become more about statistics than about our individual wants, needs, and capabilities.

Prepare to become a statistic, even if you've done everything right to avoid being one.


Because you're not a statistic to your insurance company?


I'm not subject to the rulings and mandates of my insurance, nor do they control what services I can access, or even my continued membership in said insurance company.


Really? Lots of insurance companies only pay for you to go to "in network" doctors. That's control. Your only choice is to not use the insurance. Sure, that's a choice... but...

Ah... fuck it. This is Teffie. Silly me. You're right, you have full and total control over all the procedures you couldn't possibly afford without the insurance. :roll:
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Its starting already.

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:03 pm

Sarvis wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:
Sarvis wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:I think what Kiryan is trying to say is that under socialized government healthcare, our healthcare will become more about statistics than about our individual wants, needs, and capabilities.

Prepare to become a statistic, even if you've done everything right to avoid being one.


Because you're not a statistic to your insurance company?


I'm not subject to the rulings and mandates of my insurance, nor do they control what services I can access, or even my continued membership in said insurance company.


Really? Lots of insurance companies only pay for you to go to "in network" doctors. That's control. Your only choice is to not use the insurance. Sure, that's a choice... but...

Ah... fuck it. This is Teffie. Silly me. You're right, you have full and total control over all the procedures you couldn't possibly afford without the insurance. :roll:


If there are procedures that I couldn't afford, then I wouldn't use the government to force YOU to help me pay for them. That's socialism, and that's tyranny. I prefer dignity to facism.

FYI, my current insurance provider (that I chose by my own will, and had a choice in choosing) covers my out of network provider costs up to 80%. So when I negotiate with my doctors over the price, I'm actually doing more to help my shared risk pool (other human beings using the same insurance) than I am helping myself out.

When is the last time you tried to save your risk pool (other human beings) money?
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:31 pm

My sister tried, the doctor told her they are going to charge the maximum the insurance allows once they found out she was insured. They wouldn't let her use her health spending account to negotiate, if you have private insurance they want the private insurance rates.

When one of my sons had his chin split open with a baseball bat, we negotiated with the emergency department to get it covered for I think $80 bucks. That wasn't the end of it though since they tried to submit it on insurance anyways even though we told them not to and we ended up paying another $120 I think. Still $200 for an ER visit and 5 stiches ain't bad.

And thats not the entire story since their first offer was no we won't stitch it up, you have to see a cosmetic surgeon which was a lot more to which I said fine I'll put a fuking bandaid on it if you won't do it. Help us or stop wasting my time. Yea hes got a scar that he wouldn't if I'd hired a cosmetic surgeon... and your point is?
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:34 pm

I'd make a sarcastic comment about how being scarred for life "makes him stronger" but, let's face it... chicks dig scars.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Its starting already.

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:54 pm

I honestly believe that most people would agree with me if only they understood the simple fact that government money doesn't fall out of the sky or appear like magic. Government money is our money, it's a farmer in Kansas and a longshoreman in Seattle that are being told to give up their money so some political party can try to buy your vote by telling you that they'll give you "free" stuff.

None of us want to make other honest, hard working families to be forced to suffer at the hands of the government just because we're sick and x political party needs our vote.

I believe that, because I believe in Americans. It's nice to have a health care system that would cover more people, but this has to be voluntary, something people want and express through their own will - and something they should be allowed to escape.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:05 pm

Vanity is a poor character trait and this was the direct consequence of his actions (which I had repeatedly warned him about).

It is interesting to note that I would get my daughters face fixed because women are vain by nature and also judged on their looks.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Its starting already.

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:06 pm

kiryan wrote:Vanity is a poor character trait and this was the direct consequence of his actions (which I had repeatedly warned him about).

It is interesting to note that I would get my daughters face fixed because women are vain by nature and also judged on their looks.

Sexist pig!
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:06 pm

Well said teflor. You thought the Christians, Catholics and the Muslims were bad... wait till you meet the Democrats and Unions!
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:06 pm

kiryan wrote:Vanity is a poor character trait and this was the direct consequence of his actions (which I had repeatedly warned him about).

It is interesting to note that I would get my daughters face fixed because women are vain by nature and also judged on their looks.


Everyone is judged by their looks. Women are no more vain than men, either. Society just discourages it in men.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:12 pm

The Bible lays out some basic character traits of each sex and for the sinful desires of our physical bodies in general.

We are not equal in a 1=1 sense and just because society today has drug men down and made it acceptable for them to take on the weaknesses associated with women doesn't mean men are just as vain as women. We have predispositions some are gender based, some are cultural, some are spiritual.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:21 pm

The only thing the Bible ever did to men was teach them it isn't necessary to learn facts or think for themselves.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:44 pm

I love this topic. So much great material. BTW, I am 100% in support of these recommendations. 1.5 million to save 1 life is just not worth it (99.9999999999% of the time). Not worth it in terms of their economic value to society.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/HealthyLiving ... id=9124113


Wilt said that according to the task force's research, the benefits of saving about one life out of every 2,000 through mammograms for women between the ages of 40-49 "needs to be balanced" with the sometimes serious harms that come with incorrect treatment and overtreatment.

"We place great value in being able to reduce a death occurrence in breast cancer, [but] that occurs very rarely -- one in about 2,000. The other 1,999 wouldn't benefit," Wilt said. "Up to 30 percent of breast cancers would never progress to the point that they would ever be noticed in a woman's lifetime. We often treat those. They may be unnecessary treatments [resulting in] pain and disfigurement from surgery.

"Those harms that occur with many women need to be balanced out with the benefits for a few," he said.

(I'm still wondering how cost isn't a consideration when over treatment can be directly related to cost and the only "badness" they cite is "anxiety" of false positives and unnecessary pain and disfigurement from surgery...)

...

"I was so surprised about these recommendations," Savard said. "I think women should stay put in terms of what they're doing."

(How are you going to bend the cost curve if Doctors ignore you... the answer is they'll pass laws that prevent Doctors from ignoring you, nm its already in the current healthcare reform bill, they'll cut your reimburesmsent rates)

...

Meanwhile, the American Cancer Society and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology are among the many groups that supported the old guidelines and have stood firmly by them since the Preventive Serivces Task Force released its new recommendations.

(Obama better get busy discrediting all other experts so government has the only voice, oh wait theres a bill for that)
...

It's not just professional organizations that are bucking the new guidelines. Since they were issued Monday, the changes in recommendations have met a groundswell of rejection from many medical centers, breast cancer survivors and numerous doctors, some of whom have advised their patients to ignore the recommendation.

(great, ignore the recommendations for now great solution Docs. I'd like to see them ignore their reimburement rates being cut under Obama care)

...

"[Some] women don't understand how screening can cause problems," said Dr. Bob Crittenden, an associate professor in family medicine at the University of Washington. "Personally, I think this is symptomatic of many people in medicine promising good health if you get screened. As we know with PSAs and other screenings of asymptomatic people, we have only a few things we can do that actually help extend life and then usually only marginally."

(a statistic they cite is 30% of the cancers found wouldn't have grown fast enough to affect their life before the individual died, theres 30% of the waste Obama is going to save us from, and only 70% of them have to undergo dramatically more costly service and many die to save that 30%).

...

Lyman said his primary criticism is that in between the last set of screening guidelines in 2002 and the current ones, only one study has come out in the area, and it did nothing to change what doctors know about mammograms.

"I'm puzzled why, when the evidence hasn't really changed, when the estimate in benefit and risk hasn't really changed, why they reversed their position," he said.

(I'm not so puzzled, its called politics. Additionally, assuming they did good science which I believe they probably did and the recommendations are perfectly valid, the data was there but hadn't been analyzed in this manner before).

...

"At the Methodist Breast Center, we diagnose and/or treat about 500 patients with breast cancer every year," said Dr. Luz Venta, medical director of the Methodist Breast Center in Houston and fellow at the Society of Breast Imaging, in a statement. "And about 21 percent of these are women under age 50. Should these women be sent away and told the cost of screening for breast cancer is not justified in the number of lives that can be saved?"

(No... what we are going to do is when grandma has cancer at 80, we're going to decide not to treat her because it would only statistically increase her life expectancy by 1%. aka death panels).

This is the kind of common sense we all need to be employing. I'm dead serious, 1.5 million to save 1 woman's life or give you another 6 months to live is ridiculous. You had your whole life to save up and make enough money to buy yourself that extra 6 months if you can afford it. I know several hospitals building cancer centers because its so lucrative. Obama is right on this, there is waste in the medical field from over testing... Instead of taking it over and letting the government decide... you should be able to opt yourself out by buying insurance premiums that don't cover cancer or yearly mammographies ect or simply not carrying insurance.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:44 pm

I love this topic. So much great material. BTW, I am 100% in support of these recommendations. 1.5 million to save 1 life is just not worth it (99.9999999999% of the time). Not worth it in terms of their economic value to society.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/HealthyLiving ... id=9124113


Wilt said that according to the task force's research, the benefits of saving about one life out of every 2,000 through mammograms for women between the ages of 40-49 "needs to be balanced" with the sometimes serious harms that come with incorrect treatment and overtreatment.

"We place great value in being able to reduce a death occurrence in breast cancer, [but] that occurs very rarely -- one in about 2,000. The other 1,999 wouldn't benefit," Wilt said. "Up to 30 percent of breast cancers would never progress to the point that they would ever be noticed in a woman's lifetime. We often treat those. They may be unnecessary treatments [resulting in] pain and disfigurement from surgery.

"Those harms that occur with many women need to be balanced out with the benefits for a few," he said.

(I'm still wondering how cost isn't a consideration when over treatment can be directly related to cost and the only "badness" they cite is "anxiety" of false positives and unnecessary pain and disfigurement from surgery...)

...

"I was so surprised about these recommendations," Savard said. "I think women should stay put in terms of what they're doing."

(How are you going to bend the cost curve if Doctors ignore you... the answer is they'll pass laws that prevent Doctors from ignoring you, nm its already in the current healthcare reform bill, they'll cut your reimburesmsent rates)

...

Meanwhile, the American Cancer Society and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology are among the many groups that supported the old guidelines and have stood firmly by them since the Preventive Serivces Task Force released its new recommendations.

(Obama better get busy discrediting all other experts so government has the only voice, oh wait theres a bill for that)
...

It's not just professional organizations that are bucking the new guidelines. Since they were issued Monday, the changes in recommendations have met a groundswell of rejection from many medical centers, breast cancer survivors and numerous doctors, some of whom have advised their patients to ignore the recommendation.

(great, ignore the recommendations for now great solution Docs. I'd like to see them ignore their reimburement rates being cut under Obama care)

...

"[Some] women don't understand how screening can cause problems," said Dr. Bob Crittenden, an associate professor in family medicine at the University of Washington. "Personally, I think this is symptomatic of many people in medicine promising good health if you get screened. As we know with PSAs and other screenings of asymptomatic people, we have only a few things we can do that actually help extend life and then usually only marginally."

(a statistic they cite is 30% of the cancers found wouldn't have grown fast enough to affect their life before the individual died, theres 30% of the waste Obama is going to save us from, and only 70% of them have to undergo dramatically more costly service and many die to save that 30%).

...

Lyman said his primary criticism is that in between the last set of screening guidelines in 2002 and the current ones, only one study has come out in the area, and it did nothing to change what doctors know about mammograms.

"I'm puzzled why, when the evidence hasn't really changed, when the estimate in benefit and risk hasn't really changed, why they reversed their position," he said.

(I'm not so puzzled, its called politics. Additionally, assuming they did good science which I believe they probably did and the recommendations are perfectly valid, the data was there but hadn't been analyzed in this manner before).

...

"At the Methodist Breast Center, we diagnose and/or treat about 500 patients with breast cancer every year," said Dr. Luz Venta, medical director of the Methodist Breast Center in Houston and fellow at the Society of Breast Imaging, in a statement. "And about 21 percent of these are women under age 50. Should these women be sent away and told the cost of screening for breast cancer is not justified in the number of lives that can be saved?"

(No... what we are going to do is when grandma has cancer at 80, we're going to decide not to treat her because it would only statistically increase her life expectancy by 1%. aka death panels).

This is the kind of common sense we all need to be employing. I'm dead serious, 1.5 million to save 1 woman's life or give you another 6 months to live is ridiculous. You had your whole life to save up and make enough money to buy yourself that extra 6 months if you can afford it. I know several hospitals building cancer centers because its so lucrative. Obama is right on this, there is waste in the medical field from over testing... Instead of taking it over and letting the government decide... you should be able to opt yourself out by buying insurance premiums that don't cover cancer or yearly mammographies ect or simply not carrying insurance. I shouldn't have to convince the general public or the government that I don't need this extra expense, I should be able to choose it for myself.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Thu Nov 19, 2009 7:30 pm

Oh and I forgot, all those doctors and medical organizations that disagree with Obama are racist.

Thank you Jimmy "the retard" Carter.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Thu Nov 19, 2009 10:02 pm

http://www.kulr8.com/news/local/70459337.html

Campgrounds closed because there isn't enough money. When government becomes responsible for healthcare, what else is going to have to be closed. Accessing public lands used to be our right since it belonged to us. Not anymore, it belongs to the government and they'll dole it out to you. Just like the future of healthcare.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:13 pm

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/ ... ontentBody

A good article on rationing or "waste" or doctors and hospitals running up the bill...

We've got to stop over testing, over treating just because people want to live longer. You either have to let the private sector do it by increasing premiums so high that people stop going to get an MRI every time they have a headache (or get on an affordable plan that doesnt cover MRIs), or you have to ration it under a government healthcare plan.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:16 pm

kiryan wrote:http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/19/60minutes/main5711689.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

A good article on rationing or "waste" or doctors and hospitals running up the bill...

We've got to stop over testing, over treating just because people want to live longer. You either have to let the private sector do it by increasing premiums so high that people stop going to get an MRI every time they have a headache (or get on an affordable plan that doesnt cover MRIs), or you have to ration it under a government healthcare plan.


Umm.. did you get your threads confused? This is the one where you're outraged the government is suggesting less testing, not the one where you're advocating less testing.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:25 pm

About my 4th or 5th post in this thread.

"yep, and I personally agree with the government's position on this. A lot of stuff we do is just not worth the lives we save or "make better"."

I'm just against the government doing it. I want to ration healthcare for my family by my standards. I don't want this healthcare reform bill to pass, even though it may do some of what I'd agree with because ultimately, I do not want to pay for what the government decides is the proper amount of rationing for everyone because I assure you, their standard is much higher than mine and I'm about to lose the right to decide how to use my financial resources.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:39 pm

kiryan wrote:About my 4th or 5th post in this thread.

"yep, and I personally agree with the government's position on this. A lot of stuff we do is just not worth the lives we save or "make better"."

I'm just against the government doing it. I want to ration healthcare for my family by my standards. I don't want this healthcare reform bill to pass, even though it may do some of what I'd agree with because ultimately, I do not want to pay for what the government decides is the proper amount of rationing for everyone because I assure you, their standard is much higher than mine and I'm about to lose the right to decide how to use my financial resources.



Oh sorry, I was only skimming. As long as you admit you're bitching about the government doing something you agree with though!
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby kiryan » Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:53 pm

I agree with the what they are proposing to do, I don't agree they should be the ones doing it.

We individually need to step up and make these decisions based on how much we individually want to spend to maintain our lives. Not just go get an MRI because the doctor told us too and because it only costs us $100 bucks to do a $6,000 test.

In the end, we need to stop giving government more authority to manage us like a herd of milk cows... We are free individuals, not a resource to be cared for and exploited by our owners.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Its starting already.

Postby Sarvis » Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:08 pm

kiryan wrote: Not just go get an MRI because the doctor told us too and because it only costs us $100 bucks to do a $6,000 test.


Oddly enough, when I suggested that people should think for themselves rather than listen to others, this was your reply:

kiryan wrote:Thats silly at best and downright ignorant. A wise person doesn't draw on only his own understanding of the facts from only his own perspective. I'd love to see if anyone else agrees with you.

heres the facts, your a human being, you have a temperature of 98 degrees, you weight 180 pounds, your left arm hurts the chance of a person of your exact situation of having a heart attack is .05%. Make your own decision, don't go and consult a doctor because "intelligent" people discern for themselves utilizing only facts they personally know.



In the end, we need to stop giving government more authority to manage us like a herd of milk cows... We are free individuals, not a resource to be cared for and exploited by our owners.


We're getting exploited no matter what. You want them to not care while they do.

Besides which, this was a recommendation made by a panel created several decades BEFORE any healthcare bill... and as such has nothing to do with it.

Return to “T2 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest