Our City Online

Messageboard - Everyday Chit Chat

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

It's not medical rationing

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Everyday Chit Chat It’s not medical rationing

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 102 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #410811

    gramarye
    Participant

    Roland wrote >>

    Tenzo wrote >>

    Roland wrote >>

    columbusfoodie wrote >>
    Re: pre-existing conditions, what most people don’t understand is that as long as there is no more than a 60 day gap between insurance policies, you have creditable coverage that waives any pre-existing clause in the contract. However, since this is not common knowledge, and because there are not enough people who understand the system advocating for people who don’t, many people just accept that something isn’t covered because of a pre-existing condition while in reality (and under the terms of the contract) it should be. I’ve had no gaps, so I’m not too worried about pre-existing issues.

    Underwriters know how to give you the run around to effectively delay you past this period. Even if you document everything they’ve told you, they can claim to not have the information in their records. They can say or claim anything they want. And those 60 days go by quickly when your getting the run around by a huge insurance company.
    They must have gotten rid of their nice employees for one’s more willing to say, “fuck you!” in the slowest way possible.

    Im sure a health care insurance from the people who brought you the IRS will be much better.

    It’s funny to me that you are trying to be funny with that comment. My experience with the IRS has always been straightforward and effective. And the services I required handled immediately!

    I wish I could say the same, but my own experiences with the IRS bureaucracy have not been so positive, so rus’ quip had bite from my perspective.

    #410813

    Brent
    Member

    Tenzo wrote >>
    Actually I’d prefer that the doctor who was choosen for their abilities and intellegence, spent 4 years in medical school and then 3-7 years practicing as a resident make the call than an appointed member who may not have ANY experiance in medicine.
    But that is just me

    Thanks the condescension. I wasn’t aware of what I was doing with my day for the last 8 years. Your insight into the actual day to day practice of medicine has made it all so clear now.

    All snark aside, you have apparently don’t know how medical decisions are actually made. You have no idea how hunches, preferences, biases, friendships, and here-say actually impact your care. You have no idea how what your physician has or has not read in the medical literature, and how he or she did or did not correctly interpret the study design and statistical analyses of these studies, impacts your medical care.

    Some of your specified criteria like age, sex, and marital status are as relevant to the care you receive as is whether you prefer pepsi or coke.

    You have a nice little paradigm you’ve constructed for yourself, glad to see that Andrew Hall has already so effectively skewered it with data and facts before I had a chance to return. Why don’t you open your ears and shut your mouth for a bit. It’s preferable to keep your mouth shut and have some people think you’re an idiot than to open it and prove to everyone that you are.
    </ad hominem>

    As to some of the more salient points (eg making tough choices about what’s affordable or “worthwhile” in medical care), insurance companies (life, auto, home, flood, medical) make these decisions every day and have done so for the last century. That’s the point of actuarial science. It’s irrelevant whether it’s the federal government or other large organizations doing this. We get too much medical care in the US and spend too much money on that care. Things need to change.

    #410814

    SusanB
    Participant

    Tenzo wrote >>
    Actually I’d prefer that the doctor who was choosen for their abilities and intellegence, spent 4 years in medical school and then 3-7 years practicing as a resident make the call than an appointed member who may not have ANY experiance in medicine.
    But that is just me

    I had Anthem decide that I couldn’t get Nuelasta until after my 2nd round of chemo (the 1st round left me with an anc of 200- for those of you that are not medical that means essentially no white blood cells) instead of getting the injection the day after my 1st round of AC (which some insurance companies will pay for, but not mine). While this saved Anthem $4000, it put my health at risk for 4 weeks and delayed my chemo by a week while my counts came up. Your doctor doesn’t get to decide squat, Tenzo, not where it counts.

    #410815

    TaraK
    Participant

    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?

    Internetmisinterpretationsaidwhat?

    If folks of any persuasion want to pin a badge on their shoulder that reads, “I’m with Lefty/I’m with Righty,” which is essentially what using polarizing language does, that fine. I mean, the internet is certainly the place to do it. But I’m not going to consider someone who flaunts a bias to be a credible source for objective information, whether it’s on YouTube, Fox, or MSNBC. O’Riley, Olbermann, all of them — it’s there to entertain. The guy in the YouTube video seems more of the rally-the-troops focus. I’m not really into any of that. The information isn’t bad because I don’t like it; it’s bad because it’s not credible. Holds true for plenty of folks across the red-blue spectrum.

    #410816
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    gramarye wrote >>

    Roland wrote >>

    Tenzo wrote >>

    Roland wrote >>

    columbusfoodie wrote >>
    Re: pre-existing conditions, what most people don’t understand is that as long as there is no more than a 60 day gap between insurance policies, you have creditable coverage that waives any pre-existing clause in the contract. However, since this is not common knowledge, and because there are not enough people who understand the system advocating for people who don’t, many people just accept that something isn’t covered because of a pre-existing condition while in reality (and under the terms of the contract) it should be. I’ve had no gaps, so I’m not too worried about pre-existing issues.

    Underwriters know how to give you the run around to effectively delay you past this period. Even if you document everything they’ve told you, they can claim to not have the information in their records. They can say or claim anything they want. And those 60 days go by quickly when your getting the run around by a huge insurance company.
    They must have gotten rid of their nice employees for one’s more willing to say, “fuck you!” in the slowest way possible.

    Im sure a health care insurance from the people who brought you the IRS will be much better.

    It’s funny to me that you are trying to be funny with that comment. My experience with the IRS has always been straightforward and effective. And the services I required handled immediately!

    I wish I could say the same, but my own experiences with the IRS bureaucracy have not been so positive, so rus’ quip had bite from my perspective.

    Note: Tenzo’s quip. Credit where credit is due and all.

    #410817

    Tenzo
    Participant

    Note: Tenzo’s quip. Credit where credit is due and all.

    A snarky conservative comment seems to be automatically attributed to Rus.

    I’m jealous

    You have no idea how what your physician has or has not read in the medical literature

    Sure I do. It’s on my Amazon.com bill

    #410818
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Tenzo wrote >>

    Note: Tenzo’s quip. Credit where credit is due and all.

    A snarky conservative comment seems to be automatically attributed to Rus.
    I’m jealous

    Apparently I’m just working harder at “Cranky Old Man”.

    #410819

    Brent
    Member

    You have no idea how what your physician has or has not read in the medical literature

    Sure I do. It’s on my Amazon.com bill

    I don’t think I’ve ever slapped my forehead so many times in such a short timespan.

    What books your wife buys from Amazon are literature related to medicine, but they are not “the medical literature”. I’m talking about referred journal articles, stuff you’d get free or for minimal cost (thanks to your tax dollars) from pubmed.

    #410820

    Brent
    Member

    Holy multiple posts Batman!

    #410821

    Brent
    Member

    #410822

    Brent
    Member

    #410823

    Brent
    Member

    #410824

    Tenzo
    Participant

    Wow, have I put you in a repeat loop seizure?
    It was humor. Quit beating yourself up over it.
    <snicker>

    #410825

    Andrew Hall
    Member

    Am still waiting for an answer on this reporting requirement for all medical (ie non-Medicare) information …

    A.

    #410826

    HeySquare
    Participant

    Andrew- You had cited a link to an article in The Atlantic a few months ago about the state of health care in the US. It had some examples of good and bad models around the country. It was an article that I thought was excellent. Do you remember the title or have a citation? I really wanted to re-read it.

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 102 total)

The forum ‘Everyday Chit Chat’ is closed to new topics and replies.

KEEP LOCAL JOURNALISM HEALTHY.

Local journalism is more important than ever. Please take a moment to read a bit about our mission and consider financially supporting our cause.

CLICK HERE