Medical....

[gagnerants]

I am ready for a freaking change in our medical system ASAP... After hours, a CT scans, many x-rays and a EKG. To find out the pain in my fathers chest pain was just from a pulled muscle, while every doctor and nurse kept saying they would bet their cars that it was a blood clots in the lungs.

I am freaking ready for a change here and now.

 

[baggss]

Yeah, and letting the Gov't run things will make it SOOOOO much better.

Maybe you should be happy it was simply a pulled muscle...

Bet this thread gets fun.

 

[gagnerants]

I don't mean a Government run health care, I just mean a better ran system, I am happy that is was something small but at the same time it is simply aweshocking all we have to go through for something that a family doctor should have done. Btw we were taken from our family doc down to the ER.

Also I know this will get fun but will stay civil, we are all smart people that are able to us words.

 

[TenderSurrender]

Wouldn't you rather them have done all that then just say it was a pulled muscle and it be something worse?

-- Bry

 

[toMACsh]

Health Care Reform is a misnomer. Obama, et.al. is not out to change the technology or the approach to care from a scientific perspective. They are wanting to change the way it is administered. It should be called Health Care Administration Reform, otherwise it sounds like they want to change Medicine (note the capital M).

The Practice of Medicine is a scientific set of trial and error protocols. Doctors have learned much, and the knowledge base grows exponentially. Some things get solved, as in: this always works for that. But, many things are treated to "see how it goes", such as prescribing a medication at a low dosage, then adjusting it, then switching to a different one altogether. No two people are exactly alike. What works for one may not work for another.

I'd much rather have my doctor suspect a serious problem and then rule it out than to tell me it's nothing, and then discover it's serious. The thing is, you can't expect a doctor to nail the diagnosis the first time with the naked eye. That's why they run tests.

 

[baggss]

I don't mean a Government run health care, I just mean a better ran system, I am happy that is was something small but at the same time it is simply aweshocking all we have to go through for something that a family doctor should have done. Btw we were taken from our family doc down to the ER.

Also I know this will get fun but will stay civil, we are all smart people that are able to us words.

I actually don't disagree with that. I suppose it is better for them to panic and it be nothing then to have not panicked and have someone drop dead.

 

[gagnerants]

Maybe I should rephrase what I am thinking about, I would like if there was a reform of the tests that they can administer and read within a family health care center. For example I think, that is think it would be great if they could provide x-rays and the blood tests at center. I guess what I am kinda saying is there should be more strength behind our primary care givers, they are our front line of defense and although they do a lot I think it would be better for patient care if they could provide some basic services that they provide at a hospital.

/rant off

Edit: This isn't really about the money, because we have many plans of how we are going to pay this bill. IE stocks, loans from family, stepping down to a smaller home.

 

[vansmith]

Yeah, and letting the Gov't run things will make it SOOOOO much better.

I'm not quite sure why people have a fear of a health care system with government involvement. To clear something up, I need to explain something. People frequently take Canada as an example of a country with government run health care which is, to a certain extent, incorrect. While there is government involvement, the provincial governments actually provide insurance for each person. So, in other words, they provide me with health insurance just like you get it from a private company. My costs though are regulated by a ministry not motivated by profit and making money at all costs (including denying coverage). I have never been denied coverage nor have I ever heard of anyone ever being denied coverage.

I realize that some people say that a public system puts a politician between me and my doctor. Aside from the obvious fallacy posited in this assertion, if it was true, how would this be any different from an insurance broker being between me and my doctor now that the Canadian system has been explained a little better? Either way, there is someone between you and your doctor and this won't change until costs of medical equipment and treatment somehow plummet, which won't happen anytime soon.

I'm not trying to be argumentative but I wanted to clear the public system up and how it's run. Would you care to explain why there is such a fear that a public system, where I have never seen a medical bill in my life, is such a bad thing? I understand that some fear medicine will become bureaucratized but if I never see a bill and just show my health card when I go to the doctors, I fail to see how this is more inefficient. I also know you are going to use the "hospitals are inefficient and have long wait times". That's not true and take it from someone who has had to go to hospitals under a public system his entire life. You can't claim that the public system is flawed if you have never experienced yourself. The fact that most developed nations have some form of nationalized/public health care must mean something is right about it.

Edit: This isn't really about the money, because we have many plans of how we are going to pay this bill. IE stocks, loans from family, stepping down to a smaller home.

I can't say I relate (see above) but seeing that someone has to do the aforementioned for what had happened gets me frustrated. I'm sorry that you have to go to such great lengths to pay for this. I am glad though that nothing is seriously wrong with your father.

I will also be civil and constructive in this discussion despite my strong opinions and beliefs about this topic. You have my word.

 

[fleurya]

I think part of the reform does have to do directly with healthcare in that they would like to see more preventive measures taken to lower costs over all. Isn't it cheaper to prevent serious conditions than to treat them for a prolonged period of time, or a lifetime?

 

[vansmith]

I think part of the reform does have to do directly with healthcare in that they would like to see more preventive measures taken to lower costs over all. Isn't it cheaper to prevent serious conditions than to treat them for a prolonged period of time, or a lifetime?

Absolutely. Prevention saves medical systems quite a bit of money. I'm not a medical experts so I can't comment on the details but this is what I frequently hear.

 

[gagnerants]

I think part of the reform does have to do directly with healthcare in that they would like to see more preventive measures taken to lower costs over all. Isn't it cheaper to prevent serious conditions than to treat them for a prolonged period of time, or a lifetime?

My thoughts exactly, this is part of the reason why I really do think we need a overhauling or thought process or what ever for our medical care giving system.

 

[mdfuller]

I actually don't disagree with that. I suppose it is better for them to panic and it be nothing then to have not panicked and have someone drop dead.

Exactly what I was thinking. I would just be happy that everything is alright with Pa.

 

[harryb2448]

Ohh to be a plumber. When the doctor rings with a busted toilet, tell him to give it two Panadol and if no better ring back during business hours!

 

[alexsd123]

I am ready for a freaking change in our medical system ASAP... After hours, a CT scans, many x-rays and a EKG. To find out the pain in my fathers chest pain was just from a pulled muscle, while every doctor and nurse kept saying they would bet their cars that it was a blood clots in the lungs.

I am freaking ready for a change here and now.

I think that is a great system. You can never be so sure, you obviously described symptoms of a blood clot, maybe you over exaggerated pain and such?

I would MUCH rather have a system that makes sure that I do not have a blood clot than one that ignores it and says you will be okay, and eventually dying due to the issue.

Just my opinion I guess, but we have the best medical system in the world.

 

[iPod Nano]

I don't care how it happens, but we need a better system then we have now. At the moment, insurance companies charge way too much, and everything is about the money. A doctor doesn't want to do a procedure because he thinks it's best for the patient, but because he'll get more money for it. It should be about quality and good care, not about "How much money can I make?".

 

[vansmith]

Just my opinion I guess, but we have the best medical system in the world.

Not that I can argue with this on certain levels but I have to disagree. Care to elaborate on why you think this is the case?

I'm not anti-American (in case this is how it comes across). I'm just anti-private health care and to me, private systems don't allow for the best medical system possible. If you use technology as a measuring stick, keep in mind that this is useless if 50 million people don't have insurance and therefore can't afford health care (this is the last figure I heard; this site states that it was 46 in 2007). If you want to use life expectancy as a metric of "good health care", the public system here in Canada allows people to live 3.12 years longer (81.23 years here compared to 78.11 in the United States). Our health care system gives us the 8th highest life expectancy in the world where the private system in your country gives you the 50th highest life expectancy. On top of this, Bosnia and Herzegovina, a country with a GDP/person that is 13.83% of the United States has a higher life expectancy at 78.5 years.

Again, I'm not trying to be anti-American but I'm simply using these three countries for illustrative purposes.

 

[gagnerants]

Just a little heads, up we went down to a different doctor for a second opinion. Through this new doctor he came to the concussion that it was a cold that turned down to the lungs to cause the chest congestion, and the pain was caused by a combo of lifting to much with the weight of stress adding an increased effect to it.

 

[vansmith]

Second opinions are always a good bet if you can get them. From the sounds of it, it still sounds relatively tame. Glad to hear that the second opinion is still "good".

 

[gagnerants]

Just a little update, today we got the total cost of the ER and all that jazz the total is $3700, something that we have and is no sweat at all to pay.

 

[baggss]

I'm not quite sure why people have a fear of a health care system with government involvement. To clear something up, I need to explain something. People frequently take Canada as an example of a country with government run health care which is, to a certain extent, incorrect. While there is government involvement, the provincial governments actually provide insurance for each person. So, in other words, they provide me with health insurance just like you get it from a private company. My costs though are regulated by a ministry not motivated by profit and making money at all costs (including denying coverage). I have never been denied coverage nor have I ever heard of anyone ever being denied coverage.

I realize that some people say that a public system puts a politician between me and my doctor. Aside from the obvious fallacy posited in this assertion, if it was true, how would this be any different from an insurance broker being between me and my doctor now that the Canadian system has been explained a little better? Either way, there is someone between you and your doctor and this won't change until costs of medical equipment and treatment somehow plummet, which won't happen anytime soon.

I'm not trying to be argumentative but I wanted to clear the public system up and how it's run. Would you care to explain why there is such a fear that a public system, where I have never seen a medical bill in my life, is such a bad thing? I understand that some fear medicine will become bureaucratized but if I never see a bill and just show my health card when I go to the doctors, I fail to see how this is more inefficient. I also know you are going to use the "hospitals are inefficient and have long wait times". That's not true and take it from someone who has had to go to hospitals under a public system his entire life. You can't claim that the public system is flawed if you have never experienced yourself. The fact that most developed nations have some form of nationalized/public health care must mean something is right about it.

I can't say I relate (see above) but seeing that someone has to do the aforementioned for what had happened gets me frustrated. I'm sorry that you have to go to such great lengths to pay for this. I am glad though that nothing is seriously wrong with your father.

I will also be civil and constructive in this discussion despite my strong opinions and beliefs about this topic. You have my word.

I'm not going to comment on your long winded analysis of the Canadian health care system.

I will simply point out the the BIC (Brother-In-Chief) recently stated that the Canadian Model of Health care won't work here in the US. Even HE has rejected it. Must be darn good to garner that lack of support. I guess we should all be glad you live in Canada.

Moving along....