Comments Posted By C3
Displaying 21 To 30 Of 73 Comments
THE LOGICAL FALLACY OF SOME SLIPPERY SLOPE REFORM ARGUMENTS
Ken;
"The bill uses the term “advance care planning consultation”
I just didn’t use the bills terminology because I felt is was both vague and lengthy. (like oh so many government terms)"
Advance Care Planning is not a government term. It was "coined" to encapsulate that planning/discussion that can occur between a patient and his/her physician (with or without family involvement) on not just "end of life" planning but other health care advanced directives about the sort of care the patient would want in the future.
I've had patients tell me that if they have a stroke and were not able to have meaningful interaction with those around them they would not want ____________ (fill in the blank, among the answers folks have told me is "CPR", "a breathing machine", "surgery", "anything")
Now the "anything" answer is tough to follow up on so it usually requires a lot of follow up questioning.
But the essential point is that "advanced care planning" allows a patient to express their preference for a possible time in the future when they can't. It allows preservation of an individual's right to refuse care.
Comment Posted By c3 On 12.08.2009 @ 13:51
I'll need to read the bill to understand the specifics but I wonder why they had to purposefully write in the "end of life consultation". (I assume its for physicians?) Physicians already have the ability to bill for a visit that is primarily for counseling (end of life or otherwise). While, as a physician, I'd say doctors still have a long way to go in terms of how well we discuss advanced care planning, I'm unclear how stipulating it in such a large health care bill will change that much. And it certainly has brought a lot of "heat" into the discussion.
Comment Posted By c3 On 12.08.2009 @ 08:56
Michael;
True you did not use the word "evil" however, this phrase "like lemmings they had to pursue maximum profit, regardless of the cost in lives. " is not particularly endearing."No one is proposing any such thing." I didn't say anyone was proposing that. I wasn't trying to get you to state or respond to something that I could criticize. I was simply trying to understand how "you" felt. It was something called dialogue.
I'm sorry if you saw my comments as dishonest, arrogant and manipulative. so let me rephrase. In your opinion are the problems with an employee-based system such that ideally we would do away with that system altogher.
And in case you're suspicious of where I'm going with this, there is no trick. The English conservative has the ability to believe in many of the same "conservative principles" as the of American conservative. And yet they would not suggest doing away with their government run health system. So as a matter of interest in other people's opinions I have asked. If the asking can only lead to more fighting then I apologize.
Comment Posted By c3 On 11.08.2009 @ 23:04
Ken;
Note the by and large. i speak from experience from within a large health insurance company. Now that doesn't mean that all the times and with all companies. so yes, there are examples of this not being true. My experience tells me that most large corporations/employers ask that you "take their employees" as they are.Michael;
As I said "I understand I will never dissuade you of your conviction that insurance companies are EVIL." so I didn't expect you to see that side of the discussion. At least you didn't call them evil this time just passe.
And no I was not suggesting that the uninsured were not an issue worth considering. therein lies one of the biggest issues in this healthcare debate. Are the failures of employee-based health care such that we should leave them behind and start from scratch. I'd be curious of your opinion on that.
Comment Posted By c3 On 11.08.2009 @ 17:50
A nice post. I agree that Palin's comments were very much over the top. The irony in her comments is that they were (at least partially) based on the provision in the bill to pay for end-of-life planning. we've forgotten that end-of-life issues (i.e. the living will ) grew out of the desire of individuals to refuse health care when their doctors and hospitals insisted they MUST have it. Its an autonomy issue ("you can't make me take this treatment). Individual autonomy was once thought of as a core conservative principle.
As far as Graham's slippery slope there is (as you pointed out) some validity. Crowd out leads to diminishing bottom lines for private health insurance companies. As they feel greater financial pressure they might find it even harder to compete against the "loss leader". Particularly since that loss leader has some unique tools (i.e. you hospital MUST accept my health plan)
And to Michael, I understand I will never dissuade you of your conviction that insurance companies are EVIL.
cherry-pick the most profitable (healthiest) customers, dump the most expensive (sickest) and lie like hell to obfuscate their core business model.The big insurance companies get their biggest profit from signing up large employers. They don't have "pre-existing condition" issues with these large contracts. In other words, if United is picked by IBM to care for all of their employees, United doesn't get to say "Mrs. Jones in accounting has an abnormal mammogram and so we won't cover her". By and large "pre-existing condition" is only an issue with individual policies; that's less than 15% of the insured.
And as for their core business model. their core business is managing the health benefits of large employers. Employers want healthy employees; that's why they look for wellness programs, disease management programs etc when they consider signing up with a particular insurer.
Comment Posted By c3 On 11.08.2009 @ 14:55
LEARNING NEW THINGS CAN BE FUN
wheelers_cat Said:
9:36 pmAlso….the GOP is a party having a hard time appealing to youth and minorities.
I don’t think having the msm showcase the new GOP demographic– people you could meet at a Klan rally.
Angry old fat white people screaming and having public pyschotic episodes is not the branding you want to project.
The teabaggers aren’t persuasive….they are scary and unattrative.Either Matoko-Chan from The American Scene or disciple of his. Do you get paid for this?
Comment Posted By c3 On 9.08.2009 @ 21:54
VIOLENCE AT TOWN HALLS PREDICTABLE AND DISTURBING
"I honestly don’t get the fear of health care that is ongoing at this point. Conservative and Blue Dog pressure has whittled down much of the worst aspects of proposed health reform. "
When 70+% of Americans like their own health care but have a "general" desire for "health care reform", is it really surprising when you begin to read the details of the plan and begin to worry that the plan you have (and like) will change.
Its like saying we can solve world hunger but we'll need to give up some of our eating out habits.
Comment Posted By c3 On 7.08.2009 @ 17:09
JUST LIKE THE BIRTHERS ONLY WORSE: LIBERAL CONSPIRACIES ABOUT HEALTH CARE REFORM
"I am not a liberal. Astoundingly, I think both sides are full of bloviating money tossing douchebags who are not fixing the problem."
Comment Posted By c3 On 6.08.2009 @ 14:37
Chuck;
You've said this or something similar several times. Maybe I missed it but I've yet to see you take the left to task. You assertion seems as provable as your statement about insurance companies and the healthcare protests.
HOW MUCH IS A HUMAN BEING WORTH?
"I don’t want either making my health care decisions. I want those decisions to be a cooperative effort between ME and my own personal DOCTOR."
Comment Posted By c3 On 21.07.2009 @ 21:54
And how much are you willing to pay to exercise that freedom? My freedom, your cost is a funny kind of freedom.
Is this like fantasy baseball. C'mon folks we've go another 3 years. George Bush senior was a "shoe in" after 1st Gulf war. It all changed so fast. Its not worth the speculation.
Comment Posted By c3 On 9.07.2009 @ 22:56
