Ok, that's it; nobody else move to Utah

[p-tex]

Solution: Live fast; die young; leave a good looking corpse. (says the guy in his 30's )

[Trackhead]

Preventive Medicine is one of the cornerstones of a good Socialized Medicine program. In those countries where it's utilized (Norway & Sweden, eg) the average health & lifespan are greater than here. Do not believe the Hype.

Again, a black hole discussion.

But here is how OUR government (not Germany) responds to preventative health care.

Medicaid patients don't get coverage for dental hygiene, but tooth extraction is covered. Hmmmmmmmm...........extraction is not preventative, hygiene is.

I agree that preventative medicine is the best medicine. But look at OUR society, it won't work. We eat ourselves into morbid obesity and have a frigging gastric bypass to lose weight!!!!!!!! Some of our stupid ass insurance companies pay for this invasive procedure too. It makes me sick that my premiums increase because people have a 10,000+ dollar surgery to correct years of stuffing their faces. We don't exercise or eat right, then have a four vessel coronary bypass. We are an instant gratification society, buy it on the credit card, pay it later.

Believe me, I don't subscribe to the hype. And I voted for Kerry, not because of health care reform.

[mountainbored]

I was thinking of Ogden, so that doesn't count right?

[meatdrink9]

Actually it is.....lot's of other words

I wasn't being sarcastic. It's totally FUKT, but we're not going to solve it here today on a message board.

[UTdave]

I wasn't being sarcastic. It's totally FUKT, but we're not going to solve it here today on a message board.

Fucking non believers. We'll solve it damnit!

[shmerham]

I personally don't know what the answer is reguarding the health care issue. I think it is a big quagmire without a simple solution, like a political thread.

Well, for one it needs to be streamlined. Family doctor visits shouldn't be covered. Same with a trip to the ER for stitches once every five years. You KNOW you're going to go on average once a year (probably none some years and maybe two or three times on a bad year). So, why should you pay insurance for something you know you're going to pay for?

Insurance should be for catastrophes. You're supposed to purchase insurance for situations that you don't expect to occur, but can't handle by yourself if they do.

What we've essentially done is forced ourselves to pay the insurance companies a fee to see the family doctor, just so we can cover ourselves in case we need major surgery.

Insurance companies have a right to do this, it is a free market after all; but because of the regulation within the industry, the barriers of entry are so high, that competition is stifled and better plans aren't available.

[shamrockpow]

Well, for one it needs to be streamlined. Family doctor visits shouldn't be covered. Same with a trip to the ER for stitches once every five years. You KNOW you're going to go on average once a year (probably none some years and maybe two or three times on a bad year). So, why should you pay insurance for something you know you're going to pay for?

Insurance should be for catastrophes. You're supposed to purchase insurance for situations that you don't expect to occur, but can't handle by yourself if they do.

What we've essentially done is forced ourselves to pay the insurance companies a fee to see the family doctor, just so we can cover ourselves in case we need major surgery.

Insurance companies have a right to do this, it is a free market after all; but because of the regulation within the industry, the barriers of entry are so high, that competition is stifled and better plans aren't available.

Totally agree Shmerm. Why the F can't I find any decent catastrophic care insurance (even with a high deductable)? I haven't been to anything more than the free clinic in 5 years and I feel fine.

[bagtagley]

I blame Bagtagley. He is now a Utarded one! Anyone got a job for him??

Hey, 2 of us moved into a house that had 4 people living in it. So, the population decreased in Sugar House.

Also, most of my clothes are still boxed up. I've been wearing the same pair of pants and few shirts for over a week now, so I'm doing my part to conserve water.

[Tippster]

Kiss Ass. Wash yer jeans....

[zion zig zag]

I was thinking of Ogden, so that doesn't count right?

Right, Ogden is a different country. Speak spanish?

[Trackhead]

If we had national health care costs for everyone would go down, and the only losers might be some doctors/administrators who wouldn't see the six and seven figure paychecks they currently do.

Dex,

IMHO Docs need the salaries they get to pay the liability insurance premiums they have. The docs up here in the ER in little Logan, UT pay an average of 25 to 30 THOUSAND dollars a year for liability insurance. And they go to school for four years after college, and 3-4 years of residency, perhaps even a fellowship. They incur huge debt obtaining their education, so I think there salaries are justified. Reduce there pay to sub 100k/year and who is ever going to want to give there life up for med school, only to get paid shit and be struggling to pay student loans in excess of 100k.

Andministrators..........that's another issue. I'm with you on that.

The cost of health care is much more related to modern medicine than it is to salaries. New MRI's, new CT scanners, new monitors, all this is the price of our health care. We want the best, and we are paying for it.

This brings us to another quagmire, litigation. There are states that are hurting for OB/GYN docs because they can't afford to practice there because the litigation rates are so high and hence the malpractice insurance is unaffordable.

Remember John Edwards? Talk to him about his pursuits.

[PaSucks]

Not to mention many Docs work rediculous hours doing the noblest of work, they deserve lots of cash to throw around if that is what will help relieve the stress. I have no problem rewarding life savers like that.

[Dexter Rutecki]

I'm really tired of hearing about how hard it is for doctors to make a living because they have to pay something in the low five figures for malpractice. For a guy right out of residency who's making 250k+ (and will soon make much more), that argument just doesn't wash. There are MD's all over New York (and elsewhere) who are actually opting out of insurance altogether because they can make more money that way--I don't see many of these guys living in housing projects or driving cars that aren't new Range Rovers/Lexus type cars. And this pattern leaves even those with insurance with fewer choices.
I'm not arguing that doctors should be impoverished, just that they shouldn't see it as a right to make obscene amounts of money. We should pay for the schooling of doctors who specialize in needed fields, and give all med students a break on tuitions as long as they're not going to contribute to the explosion of health care costs (actually, I believe all higher education should be largely government financed). I don't think we need too many MD's who are primarily motivated by greed, anyway--and I don't think we'd lose too many med school students if doctors made more reasonable amounts of money. Most good doctors would still be doctors even if they didn't get rich doing it.
As for the whole damage awards question, I see that as another red-herring thrown out by GW and co. While there may be some ambulance chasers profiting excessively (like some MD's do), it's tough to say that people (and the families of those) who have been maimed or killed by malpractice shouldn't receive compensation. John Edwards' representation of malpractice victims is not what I see as a real cause of our health care crisis--it's the insurance companies and their pursuit of profit that's to blame.

[Trackhead]

If you were a doc, would you volunteer 25% of your salary to lower the cost of healthcare? I bet not.

Don't you think 25-30k a year in malpractice insurance is excessive? Cause it sure as hell is.

We agree on one point, insurance companies are crooks. That is for sure.

[Dexter Rutecki]

I would blame the cost of malpractice insurance on the insurance companies and sloppy doctors/hospitals etc., before blaming attorneys (maybe stupid juries can share some blame). As I said, compared to many doctors' salaries, I don't see that insurance costs are proportionately too much. If they were making 75k a year, that would be a different story.

[Trackhead]

Sloppy doctors, I have worked with docs for 9 years. Haven't seen a sloppy ER doc yet. Or IM, Pulm, Onc, etc. Perhaphs I haven't been doing it long enough. I'm sure they exist, but I haven't seen them yet.

It's like charging the snot out of a 25 year old male for his car insurance, even though he has a perfect driving record. He could screw up, but hasn't.

[Dexter Rutecki]

But remember, he IS a 25 year old male....

I can't personally say I've come across 'sloppy' doctors, but off the top of my head I can remember at least three times here in NYC during the past 5 years that I've heard reports of surgeons operating on the wrong limb--in one case amputating it (which of course meant the patient lost both legs). You think that person should have a damage award of less than 250k, or whatever the limit is supposed to be?

[Trackhead]

But remember, he IS a 25 year old male....

I can't personally say I've come across 'sloppy' doctors, but off the top of my head I can remember at least three times here in NYC during the past 5 years that I've heard reports of surgeons operating on the wrong limb--in one case amputating it (which of course meant the patient lost both legs). You think that person should have a damage award of less than 250k, or whatever the limit is supposed to be?

Of course not, the patient should own the doctor as their personal bitch in that type of situation. I agree. But OR's have what is called a 'time out'. Right patient, right limb, right procedure, etc.

Atleast half of the tests we order in the ER are what we call 'cover your ass' orders. Even if it isn't medically necessary, we order them to cover our ass. This fear of litigation costs the patients, insurance companies, and ultimately the public, more money and higher costs of health care.

It's unfortunate that medicine is ultimately ruled by insurance providers (health and malpractice) and fear.

[Trackhead]

Good information on medical malpractice issues.

[Core Shot]

boy did this thread take a detour!


P.S. - John Edwards is the worlds biggest douche.

[aaarrrggh]

Totally agree Shmerm. Why the F can't I find any decent catastrophic care insurance (even with a high deductable)? I haven't been to anything more than the free clinic in 5 years and I feel fine.

When I was contracting, I looked into catastrophic insurance...something like a $5k deductible. It ended up costing almost as much as the Blue Cross Blue Shield HMO, so I went with that. I just didn't see the upside given the cost.

[Bud Green]

I know that nobody is reading this thread now except for a few people, but, regressing just a bit to the conversation about water rights........There is an extremely interesting book called CADILLAC DESERT by Marc Reisner which is a history of water in the West. It's more exciting than you can imagine and very well-written. Anybody that lives west of the Mississippi should check it out. It talks all about the schemes to bring water from Canada and Alaska down to the lush deserts of the American southwest.

[Ireallyliketoski2]

The late 1800's were one of the wettest periods of the west, this coincided with the first large scale western expansion. This led many of the local Mexicans to believe that the white man brought the rain, and there were many whites who believed this as well. They believed that God would bring rain to the people as the population grew no matter where, this belief lead to more westward expansion and continues to this day.

[skiski]

The problem is the intelligent people that realize that overpopulation is the source of all the worlds ills take steps to have a small number of children, while the idiots who don't see the big picture have 10 kids.

In some ways this is true. However, I don't think it;s intelligence as much as education and, probably being a little better off. In other words, if you are raised in a fairly good situation, you don;t want tto screw it up so you get an education, a good job, and then have kids, and are careful not to have too many because too many kids dilutes your personal resources and your quality of life. People raised in a bad situation don't feel like they have as much to lose and therefore don't worry about how many offspring they create.

I agree with whoever said that no one gets to tell you when you can and cannot reproduce, but I do think it is irresponsible of certain churches to encourage abundant reproduction in this day and age. Obviously their pro-reproduction ideas are from a time when the church was tryign to create more members. In today's world they need to realize that society needs fewer people.

That is obviously a problem for Utah. THe other problem is, of course, that it's a really nice place. I'm thinking about moving there myself.

[two_planks]

Edit after reading the rest of the thread.