It's finite resource allocation.
The Clock Starts Ticking on Jan. 1
| Get the Video Plugin |
New medical regulations are starting this January 1.
The video above will start in 2012.





It's finite resource allocation.
The Clock Starts Ticking on Jan. 1
| Get the Video Plugin |
New medical regulations are starting this January 1.
The video above will start in 2012.
The thing that freaks me out about this video isn't the guy or his misleading information, its that probably a million viewers went "A-HA!"
yes. It's special distressing that a large number of doctors will be quiting.
The minute someone throws out "Obamacare," they make it clear to me that they're not presenting their information professionally or objectively, and thus I lose interest (which happened around 0:08).
I strive to be informed, not manipulated or rallied.
i agree TaraK
TaraK wrote >>
The minute someone throws out "Obamacare," they make it clear to me that they're not presenting their information professionally or objectively, and thus I lose interest (which happened around 0:08).
I strive to be informed, not manipulated or rallied.
I like the term "Obamacare". Easily identifies the recent legislation and is less wordy than "health insurance reform".
rus wrote >>
TaraK wrote >>
The minute someone throws out "Obamacare," they make it clear to me that they're not presenting their information professionally or objectively, and thus I lose interest (which happened around 0:08).
I strive to be informed, not manipulated or rallied.I like the term "Obamacare". Easily identifies the recent legislation and is less wordy than "health insurance reform".
I like the term because it's silly, like the president.
TaraK wrote >>
The minute someone throws out "Obamacare," they make it clear to me that they're not presenting their information professionally or objectively, and thus I lose interest ......
I strive to be informed.
Did you stick your fingers in your ears and say; "nyaaaa nyaaa nyaaa, I can't hear you", when it got to something you didnt agree with?
While this is obvious propaganda against ObamaCare, Dr. Janda does make a valid point. Doctors (including mine) will be quitting in droves once this is fully implemented. My doctor has been practicing for 30-40 years, so he's seen the bureaucracy of managed care from the very beginning. He already is prisoner to the insurance companies with regards to medical decisions he can make for me. Until recently, he was part owner (with the other doctors in the practice) of the practice, but when he saw this stuff coming down the pike they sold the practice to Mt. Carmel.
Already, since the health care bill has been implemented, our costs for insurance have doubled (from ~$400/mo to almost $900 a month). Our new insurance company won't pay a single claim unless I call them and rip them a new one, because one hand doesn't know (or care) what the other hand is doing. I used to work for this particular insurer, and know their standard operating procedures inside and out. Still, at least once a week I'm on the phone for an hour plus trying to get a claim paid or their records updated to show I had creditable coverage so the pre-existing condition clause doesn't apply, etc. Their latest trick is to send me letters to have doctors fill out to show that it isn't a work injury, etc. Nevermind that these are doctors I've never met because their only function was that they were the radiologist that was reading/interpreting an x-ray.
I know that I'm aggravated by the red tape and nonsense, and I know what I'm doing and understand everything that is going on. What about your average person who has no knowledge of how insurance works or what to say/do to get the problem resolved. When I did the job, there was a sense of ownership of our calls with myself and all of my coworkers. I'd bend the rules, take charge of getting stuff done directly instead of waiting/depending on someone else to do their job in another department, and even if I was on the phone for an hour or two with a single caller, I made sure that there was always first call resolution if possible. I ignored so many of CIGNA's rules/chain of command that I should have been thrown out on my ass. But I got results, and at least to me, that's what mattered. I don't see that kind of dedication to the job from anyone I've talked to recently.
I can understand that there is a need for access to health care. But I think it's much easier to implement in the private sector - hospitals have charity care for those who can't afford it. The need for preventative care could be taken care of if more free clinics were opened. There are no easy answers, but implementing an extremely flawed health care bill definitely wasn't one. I see what happens when the government gets involved in health care (you guys have no idea how long it takes/how frustrating it is to deal with Medicare or Medicaid as a primary or secondary insurer). I just don't think we have the infrastructure in place to implement universal health care. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be a safety blanket for those who are uninsured/underinsured. Just that they should have done it right or not at all.
Sorry for rambling on, just frustrated with my insurance company and their stupid tactics for not wanting to pay claims. I'm convinced that that is SOP these days - find a reason not to pay a claim and then hope that the subscriber accepts it and pays for it out of their own pockets. And in the interest of full disclosure: yes, I'm still a little bitter 5 years later that CIGNA laid off our entire office so they could outsource our jobs to Canada to someone who is making 1/3 of what I was making with no benefits.
so they could outsource our jobs to Canada to someone who is making 1/3 of what I was making with no benefits.
The reason they can do that is in Canada they all have single payer government health care. I know that a lot of you have heard what a nightmare Canadian care is but in my line of work I speak with a lot of Canadians and although they bitch about their health care none of them want to switch with us.
Tenzo wrote >>
TaraK wrote >>
The minute someone throws out "Obamacare," they make it clear to me that they're not presenting their information professionally or objectively, and thus I lose interest ......
I strive to be informed.Did you stick your fingers in your ears and say; "nyaaaa nyaaa nyaaa, I can't hear you", when it got to something you didnt agree with?
Maybe she simply doesn't want to waste her time with people who possess little or no original thought and merely regurgitate slogans and buzzwords?
jimbach wrote >>
Tenzo wrote >>
TaraK wrote >>
The minute someone throws out "Obamacare," they make it clear to me that they're not presenting their information professionally or objectively, and thus I lose interest ......
I strive to be informed.Did you stick your fingers in your ears and say; "nyaaaa nyaaa nyaaa, I can't hear you", when it got to something you didnt agree with?
Maybe she simply doesn't want to waste her time with people who possess little or no original thought and merely regurgitate slogans and buzzwords?
That indicates operating from different initial premises.
"Obmamacare" sounds as much like a slogan or buzzword as "Romneycare". Both can be used by their opponents, sure, but they also serve to quickly identify the laws and regulations in question, yes?
Cookie wrote >>
rus wrote >>
"Obmamacare" sounds as much like a slogan or buzzword as "Romneycare". Both can be used by their opponents, sure, but they also serve to quickly identify the laws and regulations in question, yes?Yes, like death panels.
Explain to me how a deliberate distortion is the same as shorthand identification.
What a load of shit. CER (Comparative Effectiveness Research) isn't rationing, it's not paying for shit that doesn't work. Like when we used to do bone marrow transplants on women with breast cancer in the 1990s, until we found out that women who had BMTs for their breast cancer fared worse than those who did not. Oh, maybe dropping $50k on a treatment for worse outcomes doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense.
Physicians like to cry about lots of things relating to government just like every other citizen. 46% aren't going to quit just because the changes in the healthcare bill went into effect. They may not like being "told what to do by a government bureaucrat", but they're already being told what to do by an insurance company bureaucrat. Same shit, different day. If you don't like it, provide evidence why your particular treatment recommendations work and/or are better instead of hiding behind the veil that the doctor knows best because that's how he/she has been doing it for 20-40 years, and isn't interested in learning what's new or better.
Quit crying, spend your energy proving why what you do is better.
rus wrote >>
Cookie wrote >>
rus wrote >>
"Obmamacare" sounds as much like a slogan or buzzword as "Romneycare". Both can be used by their opponents, sure, but they also serve to quickly identify the laws and regulations in question, yes?Yes, like death panels.
Explain to me how a deliberate distortion is the same as shorthand identification.
+1
If Obamacare were more popular, the president would be encouraging his supporters to use that shorthand at every opportunity.
You can't say the same thing about "death panels," a deliberate pejorative.
Brent wrote >> Physicians like to cry about lots of things relating to government just like every other citizen. 46% aren't going to quit just because the changes in the healthcare bill went into effect. They may not like being "told what to do by a government bureaucrat", but they're already being told what to do by an insurance company bureaucrat.
+ 1 billion. I would much rather have the government making these calls - the government is accountable to us. Insurance companies are only accountable to their shareholders. Large numbers of doctors aren't going to leave the industry - just the few, vocal crybabies.
gramarye wrote >>
rus wrote >>
Cookie wrote >>
rus wrote >>
"Obmamacare" sounds as much like a slogan or buzzword as "Romneycare". Both can be used by their opponents, sure, but they also serve to quickly identify the laws and regulations in question, yes?Yes, like death panels.
Explain to me how a deliberate distortion is the same as shorthand identification.
+1
If Obamacare were more popular, the president would be encouraging his supporters to use that shorthand at every opportunity.
You can't say the same thing about "death panels," a deliberate pejorative.
People don't like uncertainty. All other countries where law requires healthcare, that healthcare is extremely popular. Probably the same will be true of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, once it goes into effect. Until it goes into effect, there is too much uncertainty. For example, does Columbus Foodie know that because of this law, insurers are prohibited from discriminating against or charging higher rates for any individuals based on pre-existing medical conditions - but not 'til 2014. I'd bet come 2014, she likes that?
There is certainly room to complain - mainly if you are a small business owner who currently does not offer health care, if you make over $200,000 or if you are an individual that is relatively healthy and currently don't have health care.
Read the actual bill, and ignore the hyperbole above.
Mercurius wrote >>
There is certainly room to complain - mainly if you are a small business owner who currently does not offer health care, if you make over $200,000 or if you are an individual that is relatively healthy and currently don't have health care.
Wolters Kluwer Pharma Solutions tracks prescription drugs. The company says abandoned prescriptions are up 86 percent in the second quarter of this year compared to four years ago.
As health care reform cuts into their profits, insurers may pass on more of their costs to patients, leaving more pill bottles abandoned on pharmacy shelves.
Can't say I'm a fan of the changes so far.
There haven't been any changes so far. So apparently, you're not a fan of the status quo.
You must log in to post.