Health Care.
 

Who else watched 20/20 Tonight? Very interesting, indeed. A universal healthcare policy may hurt research. Without big profits, who will come up with new cures and technology?

Let's discuss it tomorrow, when we are fresh..

Sally,
Probably some foreign companies. :) If we get access to their products that is okay with me. There are some very smart people in other parts of the world, and they don't get paid the big bucks. Go figure..

I didn't see the show, but I read that there will continue to be institutions such as Universities, NIH, and other privately funded institutions, that will continue to research extensively for the reputation and/or the "other sales" it brings. Research funds are hugely important for "good" medical schools, it helps them attract the best and brightest students as well as instructors who need to publish research papers to advance their career and build a reputation.

It probably really depends on how the health care plan is structured in the end.

Seems like big celebs, when they find a cause, can really get a fundraiser going. Too bad they have to *get* something before it's important to them.

But even the rest of us... if we didn't have to spend SO much on day to day medical, do you think we'd be more apt to do some grass roots fundraising? Now that we know how critical it is, I do.

MS studies/research - as well as medical studies for all medicine - goes on all around the world. I read that Israel and Great Britain both have MS studies that look sorta/hopefully promising. Both have a form of socialized medicine.

Scientists, doctors, nurses, lab techs do not go into the medical field because of the money. They go into it because it interests them. At least that is what I know. Maybe there are SOME that go in for money. But lots of people, like teachers, become so because of their love for what they will do.

I was listening to the radio yesterday. A woman called in to say the health position should rename socialized medicine to civilized medicine because EVERYONE has a right to good medical care.

I liked that way of thinking.:)

If health care (I am selfish for ME and my kids) means healthcare for all but I can continue my own private policy thru DH's work but get some to defray his end of cost (YIPES!), I'm all for it. Everyone should get health care. I did not see 20/20 so know nothing. Government health care quality scares me. I like quality I get. But right now I get it. Things change. I know that.

I get the feeling that could happen. Whet I see is, there are too many companies who may not make it if they have to dole out for ins. And too many people who do not qualify for either work benefits or gov't benefits as things stand now.

This is where one big happy social policy is needed badly. There may still be companies who see it beneficial to offer such a perk as private insurance, just as they offer other things, to attract a better workforce.

I too am not too certain if our gov can utilize the money in a good way. We have a history of horrible waste and misdirection of funds. That is really my biggest worry in this. I'd like to see a team of coupon clipping moms run the committee if it happens.

These are the people who would not be buying jets and having huge parties in Vegas while kids went without chemo.

Pay the bills, no frills.

Sally - whatever happens, we will survive. Change is always scary.

:hug:

But keep this in mind too, with our gov, change is always slow, lol.

The whole change things scares me. I see good points on both sides of the fence. I see changes already in my own insurance company in anticipation of these bills passing. They have stopped offering the top tier programs, and are making statements that many will be asked to join the "government policy" to lower the costs of the programs they are currently providing. I have friends who run small business' and they are hurting. The minimum wage was just increased, and that was a hit, and now they are facing being forced to open and provide healthcare programs that are prohibitively expensive. Most are saying they will not be able to keep their doors open. From my friend who makes bath products, and perfumed honey products, to my mates that run an oil change business. They are all saying that with the current costs they will not be able to handle it, and will be forced to release employees to be able to cover the costs. As it is, the oil change guy had to lay off one employee to afford the increase in min wage.

I am trying hard to listen carefully, and examine both sides of the street, but so far while i do want healtcare for all, I also want my friends to be able to keep their doors open, and I want to be able to continue to count on my current policies not cutting costs, and slashing what they are currently paying for as a way to save costs.

Im afraid. I am worried.

I worry that the premium plan that I have now will be discontinued. I mean, it's already been discontinued but the original plan members had the choice of staying in it or going for one of the lesser plans.

I pay a HUGE chunk of my weekly pay for this plan and I kept it before I was diagnosed because it was so good. Now I NEED it and the thought of it going away scares me. If I had a lesser plan I would be broke, and unable to afford anything else in my life in order to cover my medical stuff.

I'm not a big user. I don't ask for extra tests. I make sure my test results are shared between all my doctors and if one wants to order something I shuffle through my notes and give them the latest results if that test has already been done. I've got a HUGE binder with everything in it. BUT- my plan pays 100% for major medical and that includes my Tysabri infusion. It covers all but my OOP portion of regular medical and the OOP is limited to $500.00 a year. It has an excellent prescription plan.

Unless the government is going to match it, I don't want the government. If the government plans make my insurance company raise my premiums, then I want the government to make up the difference. It's already 1/5th of my weekly salary. I can't afford much more.

Why is it ok for the Senate and House to have cheap premium plans, but not the citizens of this country? I want what they have. I want to be able to get what I need at a reasonable price. Is that so hard?

Are we dreamers, to think that maybe everyone in this country could actually HAVE the same health plan for a reasonable cost?

I try to read up and educate myself on the subject....and watch the news shows if I know they're on. But my cog fog problems prevent me from retaining alot of the information I hear. I hear it, I understand it, but after it's over it flies right out of my head. :mad: It's terribly frustrating because I need health care insurance desperately. I'll have to wait until 2010 for Medicare if something isn't done soon. I hesitate to comment on alot of the topics because I'm afraid I'll look dumb....because I can't remember alot of it. :o Some days I'm good. I'll read or see something and "get it". Other days it may as well be written in gibberish. :rolleyes:

The parts of the bill that I've read (less than 1%) are not something I would want. Actually, some of it's downright creepy (mandatory old age planning - Kevorkian comes to mind).

I'm alive today because of our current system, so I'm biased. I don't want change.

Oh, and the government is not the entity most qualified to manage health care. Would you want a bunch of GS-11's and GS-13's running your plan? I don't.

I'm curious how people in other countries feel about their plans. I know several Canadians that winter in the US for alot of reasons - one being health care. People who have spoken out about the UK don't sound positive, but maybe only the vocal individuals are the dis-heartened. I do not want anything like Germany's cradle-to-grave plan.

Anybody know a good web site for comparisons? I'm curious but am limited on free time.

Tom

I have good healthcare and I welcome a public option. There is no doubt it has great potential to be amazing. It just needs support in Congress to not water it down and make it ineffectual. I have a dear friend with diabetes, despite having been a body builder and in great shape when diagnosed.

He has become very frail now that he is in his 60's. He is a Viet Nam veteran and his medical is so much better than I would ever expect and FREE. Cutting edge stuff.

Then there is Marcstk. Have you looked at his website? He went to the NIH (national institute of health). That is a government program. Just see what he has to say.

Canada has a good health care system. They did it in the 1960's.

Medicare and medicaid began 40 years ago. Same fears but now, it is a program people need.

Why does everything with the government have to be feared? Look at it like the post office. You have a choice to send your letter by post office or you can pay more and have it sent by FedEx or UPS. Same with packages.

I have never had a problem with the post office. If I do not want to wait in line, I go to my local Mail Vault and they do what I need, including boxing it with plastic peanuts, etc.

I welcome the change. I think insurance companies have made a huge profit and my deductible is scary if I need hospitalization.

Change is good!:)

Okay, I have said enough! I will stop posting on this thread and just read!

I dont want Canadian style healthcare for America. My friends who live in Canada dislike their healthcare. I have 2 that are on a wait list for a local MD because there are not enough regular MDs to take care of everyday needs like sore throats, or gyn exams. One had a bad car accident and had to wait 4 months for an MRI to see that she had two spinal fxs in her back. it took another 2 weeks of wait list to see a surgeon and she waited anther 2 weeks to be booked into surgery. After surgery she has many issues with bowels and bladder, and her surgeon told her that is the best he can do for her. IF she wishes to see another MD he can have her wait listed for another service. To me that is scary!

I guess I worry about what adding 46 million people will do to our current system. Will there be wait lists for treatments? Will we be told that the expense upon the government is so great that unless you meet a higher level of disability you wont be given your DMD or MRI? I agree that our current system is messed up, and has many miles to go, but I am having alot of troubling accepting some of the things I am being told. So much of what they are offering america is shrouded in mystery and vague answers. Even the senators and congressmen are saying that they WONT be reading this bill because it would take 3 days and 2 lawyers standing beside them to explain it all before they could fully understand what this bill is proposing. So, if they dont even have enough understanding to want to read it, then...whats is in that package?! I dont want a skimmed, skipped over, badly prepared package to become common standard forms of care for us as americans.

I dunno...I need to read more. I need to understand more. I need to do more research, and if I didnt have cog fog so bad lately, I would be tearing the internet apart to find solid research. Between visual issues, and MS issues, I find I stay more in the dark than in the light with this whole issue. I dont believe its a simple as "all americans need healthcare." oh, ok, then "here you go." Can it be that simple?

I don't think they even know what's in the bill. What scares me is all the extra things that will be "hidden" in the content of it just to appease some special interest groups.

I think it will take years of tweaking to get it right. It won't be a perfect fit for everyone. How could it be? I just hesitate to get excited about it because our government doesn't have any experience in universal healthcare. To me it just seems like the same thing as insurance companies trying to play "doctor".

I am dead set against government run healthcare. I work every day as a contractor to government agencies, and they are absolutely HORRIBLE at accomplishing even the smallest tasks without huge delays and costs many times higher than what they need to be. I have ZERO confidence that government can get this right, and quite frankly, my life and everybody else's DEPENDS on them getting it right. For those who are about to get angry with me...this isn't a democrat vs republican issue with me. A republican government would be just as bad as a democratic government at trying to manage a system like this.

All I need to do to understand why ANY single payer government run option (which is what we are really talking about here) is bad is look at all the places it has been tried. In Britain, women with early stage breast cancer may have to wait 6-12 months for "observation" before being allowed to begin treatment because they are forced to ration the treatment availability due to cost. Women with advanced cancers are often denied treatment altogether because they are deemed lost causes.

For those of us on CRABs, only certain ones are even available in Britain and the government, not you, gets to decide which one you go on. Forget about Tysabri or any advanced drugs...they are too expensive.

In Canada, people are forced to wait insanely long periods of time for very simple procedures with specialists. Sure, they may see a PCP doc easily and quickly, but even something as simple as a cortisone shot for an inflammed shoulder routinely requires wait times of 6-9 months (yes I said MONTHS) to see a specialist who is authorized to give the shot.

And for all of the president's squawking about how we can keep our existing plans if we like them, he is either lying or is totally ignorant of the bill currently being considered by congress. That bill specifically says if you change jobs, you have to go on the govt plan...if your employer changes their plan or the existing plan expires, it has to then switch to the govt plan...if you lose your job or get laid off...no more COBRA, you get stuck on the government plan.

Look, what we are talking about here is not a problem with the system...it is a problem of availability. For what the government is preparing to pay for this plan, we could take every person who currently doesn't have insurance and buy them a high quality Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan. Our current system creates the best, most innovative and most effective medical treatments on the planet and makes them available without insane government rationing or restrictions. I fail to see the benefit to tearing that system apart so that we can cover a few more people that aren't currently covered.

Most of all, as I said at the beginning, I simply don't trust the government to get it right. They have run medicare and medicaid for years and those programs are utter disasters full of waste, fraud, and poor care quality. They have run the VA for years and that program is a disaster that is a disgrace to the sacrifices of our veterans. Why on earth do we want to create a new government program and put it under the control of the same people who have so badly screwed up every program they have ever touched? It just doesn't make sense to do that...

I have been reading all of your responses, on both sides of the issue and I can't help but agree with all of you..:rolleyes:

The truth is, something has to be done, so we all have access to the best of healthcare...to me, that's a given. Why should the people who are able to afford the best of coverage be treated to better healthcare than the poorest of us? :confused:

Is Government run healthcare the answer? Not with their track record, but then what is the answer, folks, if our Gov't doesn't step in and step up to this challenge? Private Insurance can still work, if the gov't regulates the coverages and premiums and subsidises, where necessary.

All I know is, this status quo stinks and I have little faith in our Congress to step up to the plate and hit a home run. It's just not in the nature of the political beast to do something for it's people without a big payback.:(

I'm glad they're working on it in earnest, this time, and I hope they can keep their greedy little paws out of the pot and get it done, for all our protection and benefit.:rolleyes: :D

I haven't checked to see if it is accurate or not but I got an email that said that members of Congress would be exempt form this wonderful new health care. In other words, they don't want it!

Want to read the new Health Plan?

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...=f:h3200ih.pdf

Congress has a platinum package. They get any test, at any time, by any MD whether they are in the USA or Ukraine. They dont have copays, and they dont pay a deductible. They have it for LIFE as long as they serve at least one term. it is the best of the best. Just like they always vote a raise for themselves every year, they always vote to keep their healthcare. I dont blame them for not wanting to lay down one of the best crafted plans ever, in exchange for one that has so many maybes. I have a dang good package, but would lay it down in a heartbeat for what they have.

Not to nit pick, but as far as my PO goes, they are pretty good. One out going thing destroyed - my city taxes lol - one thing lost forever - sold on ebay - and one incoming torn - from Tom. In all these years, pretty good.

On the other hand, ds moved out 2 yrs ago and we still get his mail. Some of our stuff goes to his addy. He and dh do not have the same first name, so what gives? Parts of the system just do not work.

And the PO is one of the better gov offices. Think about the justice system.

:eek:

Not just is it often wrong and ineffective, it is just plain s - l - o - w.

Tom - I like your point about looking at how other countries are running their systems. If we have to go this route, we can at least look at other programs, even if they are not how we'd model ours.

Sometimes a bad example is a a good way to avoid disaster.

I have the best ins I've ever had - but when dh got layed off, where was I? All of a sudden, no coverage. Scary. So the best ins in the world is only as good as your job security, which is questionable in these times.

TBax, I understand what you are saying. And I believe you. But what I'm saying is this: When dh was layed off, Cobra was over $800. More than half a month of what RR pays furloughed employees. Might as well be a million. Who can pay that?

There's gotta be a better way. Cover people, but not like this is a 3rd world country.

You guys are smart. Why not put together a proposal? What kind of companies should offer their own ins? Which ones should not? If the gov has civil health care, what should that do for us? what does that look like in a perfect world? And how would it be possible?

Sheesh, Lady, thanks but, you don't expect me to read that long, War and Peace version, do you..LOL!! Besides, that is just the skeleton...all the dang porky amendments haven't been added yet..:eek:

If it passes as is and I doubt it, the Senate will have it's way with it and then back to the congress for compomises..:rolleyes:

I'll believe it when I see it and maybe not even then..:D

Interesting responses! One way or another, we'll have someone in between us and our doctors. Today it's the HMOs and quite frankly, I'd rather have the government in that position. Like others have said, the health plan for federal employees is pretty good, they know how to do THAT right and the government is responsible to us by way of elected officials.

The HMOs are unbridled capitalists. They're relatively new to this picture and since they got their hooks in they've done nothing more than add complexity and layers of administrative nonsense to something that should NOT be this complicated. And they're making ungodly amounts of money doing it.

I have better than average health insurance but like everyone else on my plan, I'm one health crisis away from having to throw a 'benefit' in order to pay for extended or complex care - even though much of my income goes to pay for my health insurance.

I won't debate it, I just hope the national conversation shifts to include what's 'in it' for all the players. Including HMOs. It'll be eye-opening....

:)

Good point.

Maybe they should just give us all the same health plan they have. That'd be the easiest thing to do....it already works and they wouldn't have to try and figure anything new out. :rolleyes: Too bad that won't work. I think we all deserve the same quality care that they get.

What I can't understand is why they sacrifice quality for price. They're either going to pay it now (preventative care) or pay it later. It'd be more cost effective to prevent some of the conditions that they're going to have to treat due to inadequate care now.

Just like me.....it's agreed that I'm disabled. I'm on SSDI. But do you think I have access to any medical insurance? Medicare? Nope.....I have to wait two years! They agree I'm disabled but refuse to provide basic medical care. That makes about as much sense as.....well, I can't say that here but it doesn't make any sense! :rolleyes::o

I hope they come up with something but I'm not holding my breath.

I just hate that we are put in this position.....having to beg for decent affordable healthcare.:(

If everyone, with their hand in our pockets, would just charge a decent price for their service and wares, most of us could afford it, without the giant, blood sucking, Insurance Cos..:D

We will always have the poor, who can't and that's where our Gov't should and does step in to help with Medicade and our Old (Me) with Medicare..:)

BGB,

I agree...Cobra coverage is expensive and it sucks if you have to use it. That is why I say it is not a problem of the care or the system...it is a problem of availability. The system didn't cause the coverage to go up in price, being unemployed caused it to go up in price. So if we could find a way to extend reasonably priced coverage as a part of unemployment benefits, maybe that would be part of a logical solution. I just can't see the wisdom in tearing down the whole system when the real problem is that a relatively small percentage of people who want coverage can't get it.

I have BC/BS. The federal government is basically self insured but contracts the administration of the insurance policies to a whole long list of companies, to include BC/BS. There's like 50 plans I can participate in.

My dental PPO is thru Aetna. It's not very good.

Coverage is not cheap. I pay $70.18 every 2 weeks for medical and $19.50 every 2 weeks for dental/vision (I have vision???). I'm also apparently contributing to a charity (I don't look at my statement ever).

This is just for myself. My wife is covered thru her work. The government pools $155.66 every two weeks for me (what they "paying" in premiums).

I became a civil servant 3 years ago. Prior to that, I had BC/BS with an engineering firm that was free. They paid the whole premium. My wife's plan is a whole lot cheaper than mine. My prescription coverage as a federal employee is also alot worse than before.

Federal employees have basically the same as everyone else, more than some, less than others.

Congressmen, however, are in a wholly different parallel universe. Your coverage would be too if you could vote for the best...

Tom

Todays headlines read that a tax hike it going to be coming to fund the programs being asked for. That while many politicians (both sides!) ran on the campaign promises of NO new taxes on the middle and lower classes, the headlines are now saying that its inevitable. we MUST find ways to pay for these programs, and taxation is one of the only avenues left.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/fina...31/US.Economy/

I hope this doesnt turn out to be true.

Congress uses FEHB too don't they? Just like every other federal employee.
http://www.opm.gov/insure/federal_employ/index.asp

Your personal medical contribution is significantly lower than mine, as is your employer's. I work for a private company with 11,000 employees and the company's trying very hard to maintain retiree benefits. The grass is not greener here. ;)

thanks for the info.

consider the source
 

Thanks for the link, Dej

BUT although it came from comcast (and I do not know who comcast represents, i.e. ideology) the actual interview is with FOX news, a cable news broadcast that is VERY Republican. So that must be taken into account. Plus the reference at the top of the video says "FOX - Populist Pitch."

I believe realistically, I cannot get something for nothing. If I do not have to pay my exorbitant premium and co-pay, and medication, I may actually have more money in my pocket. BUT that is the question.

Insurance/Pharmaceutical industry is For Profit. Prices have gone up, not down and profits have gone up. Just look at the fancy commercials for drugs!

Sorry. I try to keep quiet.:)

LOL, why? I like hearing it all and what you've said so far is good....keep it coming. All news is baised by one side or the other..:rolleyes:

:hug:

Aarcyn,

Thank you for your insight into this topic. DH and I pay $12,000 out of pocket annually for our monthly premium. That doesn't include our deductible, all the RX's and my monthly infusion costs, etc... Most people cannot afford this. Heck, WE can't afford it, but we can't afford not to pay it either! There are lots of other things I could use that money for, retirement savings being one that stands out.

I know many people who cannot afford to see the doctor or get their prescriptions. I'd like to see my friends be able to get their meds, have a checkup etc...

I think preventative care should be at the top of any new plan, it will probably save us billions in the long run.

This is how it's suggested we oldsters save on healthcare costs..:eek: :D

http://home.earthlink.net/~sal.pal/s...ctures/hcc.gif

So does it make it any easier to believe if it is AP quoting the Obama administration economic advisor refusing to rule out a middle class tax hike to pay for health care?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/2-Obam....html?x=0&.v=7

As Sally said, all of the media is biased one way or the other...if you refuse to accept any news from one side you believe to be biased, then you are guaranteeing that what you see and read will always be biased in the other direction. You are far better off accepting information from all sources and then deciding which actually makes sense and is believeable.

I am not against government trying to find a way to help pay for health insurance for people who want it, but can't afford it. But the reality is that alot of the people who don't have it don't want it even though they can afford it. They are young, healthy, and think nothing will ever happen to them, so they spend their money on fancy clothes or nice stereo equipment instead of health insurance. The trick is trying to weed out those who really can't afford it from those who have just chosen other priorities over heath insurance.

I am willing to see government spend a modest amount of money on helping make cheap insurance available to those who truly can't afford it. But I like my current plan; it is affordable to me and my co-workers and it covers the treatments and testing I need covered. So why fix what isn't broken? Why come up with a government plan that either forces my employer to scrap our plan or that forces me to go on a government plan?

That's what I'm sayin' Tbax. I don't see why it has to be either/or.

Gov health should be a back-up, not the whole tamale. Just like, some people work, not everyone is on assistance. The gov insurance should be assistance for *those who need it*.

And it needs to be better than the plans currently available. Seriously. My mom deserves better than deciding between meds and dinner. So do my kids. As do yours.

I have had this discussion at great lengths on another forum recently, so fortunately (for y'all :p), I don't have the inclination to rehash it all in intricate detail again. I do have a couple of comments though ...

The Canadian system was very good, until the government decided that they would rather rid themselves of the responsibility and costs, like the US had done. Over the years, the system has gotten less responsive, private enterprise has been allowed to compete, and the government AIMS to make the socialized healthcare less desirable. Smart thinking!

Many of our doctors have gone down to the US because they can make a ton more money for doing the same job ... who'd blame them? We have a shortage of doctors, mainly because of that; the ability to make more somewhere else.

There are two separate systems here; socialized healthcare and private coverage. The socialized healthcare portion ensures everyone gets BASIC healthcare for an extremely low premium (or free for those who can't afford it). This covers surgeries, doctor appointments, hospital stays, etc.

Our system relies heavily on the the private coverage too though, and most people ALSO pay for those benefits (usually cheap, or paid through our employers). Our private coverage is for prescriptions, ambulance charges, dental, pensions, etc.

So ... ONLY basic healthcare is covered by the government, unless the person is low income and then the government does pay for extended coverage too ...

The "stories" that you hear about wait times, the reason people travel to the US during the winter months, etc. might occassionally have some merit, but most of these stories are WAY over-exaggerated or taken out of context. For instance, we can get an IMMEDIATE MRI for $500 - $800 from a private clinic here (if we don't want to wait our turn to get it free), so why would anyone go down to the US and pay up to $5,000 for one?

We have neurotic people here too, and some are not willing to wait or want cadillac service for the price of a bike ride ... but most people still get VERY adequate service and care.

Just one more thing ... I think there is considerable corruption in the way that the industry operates in the US, and on account of that, much of what people "think" they need, they really don't.

Cherie

TxBat - please do not misunderstand me.

I happen to agree with you that there are many "sources" of information or misinformation. It is not that I refuse to listen to any perspective other than my own. I just consider who is saying it to determine if it is credible. I am a healthy skeptic.

In other words, I am doing the same as you. The only difference may be our philosophy on how America should act on a public option. I believe that you should be able to KEEP your insurance plan.

I have good insurance, I may keep mine. It WAS better but DH's company made a change. I was forced to give up my 10 year relationship with my OB/GYN (which is important to us women) to use a doctor that takes CIGNA or pay myself and get a smaller portion paid by insurance.

I have a 23 year old son. I do not know a singe kid in that age bracket who does not want health insurance. To be able to go to the eye doctor, the dentist, the dermatologist. And if he/she has some sort of accident, to know the problem will not ruin he/she financially.

My DD is 20. Same for her and her friends.

Health care is very broken. Medical costs (insurance/pharmaceuticals/doctor fees) have gone up considerably and I would rather pay the government than insurance. Other industrial countries do it, why can't America?

Thanks Lady Express...I won't try to tell you about the Canadian system, as you know better than I would. However, the story I related about the cortisone injection was told to me first hand by a friend. He was suffering from a rotator cuff impingement causing inflammation and excruciating pain in his shoulder. It is a very easy dx to make and his PCP made it during an office visit. The problem is that PCPs are apparently not allowed to do cortisone shots for rotator cuff impingements under the Canadian system...only orthopedic specialists. When he tried to get a specialist appt. he was told that the earliest they could get him in was nearly 9 months later, since his problem was one that was not considered serious.

I have had a rotator cuff impingement myself. While they may not consider it "serious" in Canada, let me tell you...it was excruciatingly painful and extremely debilitating. I pretty much lost use of my left arm for about a day and a half before I was able to see my Orthopedic specialist and get a cortisone shot. The shot cleared it up overnight and the pain has never come back. My friend in Canada had to either wait 9 months in pain and without much use of his arm...or find a way to pay for the specialist visit out of pocket in the US.

For another example of how government run health care means rationing care to reduce costs, see this article on Britain's latest cost-saving measure...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/he...njections.html

As MS sufferers who deal with many symptoms without definable causes, I would hope that seeing these kinds of decisions made by government run plans based on cost would give us pause in wanting to emulate those plans here in the US.

Taxman, I can't speak to that example of course, because I don't know all the circumstances. What I can tell you is that my GP does cortisone shots in his office cause he offered me one when I had tendonitis a few years ago. I opted for PT instead.

It may be that they don't do them in the rotator cuff specifically, but I will find that out from my doctor tomorrow when I have to take my daughter in for something else.

My eldest daughter had a baseball knee injury a few years ago, and she was into a specialist within a few weeks, and a MRI within a few weeks after that. My youngest daughter just had a neurological scare, and within 3 days of the discussion on whether testing was required, she had a MRI. Within another two days of that, she had a LP.

I live in the city though, and this is what happened in British Columbia ... so maybe things are different elsewhere in the country, especially in small towns.

I have a friend in SC who chopped through his hand with a saw. It took him a couple of months to get the surgery, and now he has one tendon operating two fingers, because it was too late to do anything about the damage at that point.

We can all come up with stories, I'm sure ... I'm just saying be careful what you believe, because most of what you hear is WAY exaggerated, even WHEN you know the person telling the story.

Cherie

Aarcyn,

When I was fresh out of college, there were plenty of my coworkers who didn't pay for the company's health plan because they didn't think they needed it (I wasn't one of them). Stats from various studies have shown that quite a significant percentage of the people in the US who don't have insurance do have it available to them, they just choose not to pay for it. Some can't afford it, others just choose other priorities.

As for the costs going up, one of the things that isn't talked about much is the role of medicare/medicaid reimbursement rates in the rising cost of medical care. The government has set medicare/medicaid reibmursement levels to doctors VERY low, and has refused to increase them much over time as a way of keeping the overall cost of the plan down. So what many doctors and hospitals have been doing is tacking that gap between what it costs them and what medicare reimburses on to costs paid by non-medicare/medicaid patients. As a result, non-medicare costs are going up rapidly as that gap widens.

Lately, the government has been exceptioanlly slow in reimbursing medicare/medicaid claims from doctors. As a result, many doctors are starting to refuse to continue accepting medicare/medicaid. My mother in law is currently in the process of having to find another doctor, since hers just informed her last week that she had not received any reimbursement from medicare in the last 9 months for any of the claims she had submitted. She has decided to stop being a bank for the government by doing work for free and she told my father in law to find another doctor still taking medicare quick because most of the doctors in her specialty that she knows are about to quit accepting it as well...so the ones who do still take it are going to be overwhelmed and will quickly stop accepting new patients.

As for having to switch plans, I understand completely how hard it is when you have to switch docs due to a plan change. But keep in mind that under the plan being considered in congress...those kind of plan changes by companies would not be allowed. You would either have to keep the same plan and pay the higher price...or you would have to go onto a government plan. Private companies would not be allowed to write new coverage. That isn't what Obama is saying when he speaks publicly and answers questions about being able to keep your existing coverage...but that is what is in the bill being considered. I suspect he isn't deliberately lying...I am assuming he just doesn't know all of what is in the bill...very few people do.