Some doctors are morons.

[bluee]

A bunch of you folks need to read the The Guardian and the Daily Mail in London England, every day.

Medical care over there is FREE.
Doctors work on a salary (none of that nasty profit motive)
Hospital stays are FREE
Medicine is FREE
Physical therapy is FREE
Medical devices are FREE

This should satisfy your complaints about us money grubbing, smart mouthed, american moron physicians and the greedy bastard hospitals..
I'm sure you will love it.

I lived in the UK for a number of years. It seemed to me that anyone with a good job had private health insurance, because the NHS is very slow and overburdened. Once I went with a friend to visit his relative in an NHS hospital, and it was Dickensian in a frightening way. I couldn't wait to get out of there, and I would never want to be sick in such a place. I had another friend with private insurance who needed a minor procedure and she went to a private Harley Street hospital, and it was immaculate, as new and nice as any good hospital here.

Also, if anyone is considering medical tourism, I know a friend's experience in the Czech Republic. Hospitals and clinics there are as high tech, new and modern as any place here, at a fraction of the cost.

 

[Florida Cracker]

The thing American medicine needs the most is COMPETITION, not government price fixing.

When has the government ever not screwed up a bureaucratic endeavor?

I was at the USPS today, and there were five people in line for two tellers. Not one had anything that was complicated, just the usual, buy stamps, send a box, pick up a certified envelope.

It took twenty-two minutes to get to the front of the line, and to mail a small package, with no special handling, took another six minutes.

The department of Ag has become the largest bureaucracy in history, and keeps getting more out of hand.

The VA? 'nuff said.

Now o-bow-before-me care, and people think it's a step in the right direction.

What naive children public education turns out.

 

[MAKG1]

When has the government ever not screwed up a bureaucratic endeavor?

Hmm. Let's see.

Moon landings.

Air traffic control. 25,000 daily Part 121 flights, and no crashes for years at a time.

Human genome.

Manhattan Project.

Eradication of polio and smallpox.

Panama Canal.

Is that enough?

When the government screws something up, it's often due to intentional funding starvation. Especially the VA.

What naive children public education turns out.

Indeed.

 

[upstateny]

When I was working, my dentist would accept the amount paid by our dental plan (usually 50-60% of the billed amount) as full payment. Now that I'm retired without dental, I have to pay the full billed amount! Pi$$es me off!

 

[Florida Cracker]

When the government screws something up, it's often due to intentional funding starvation. Especially the VA.
Indeed.

There's a beautiful, progressive, lie... unless you think spending over forty million tax dollars studying why lesbians are fat, is a good use of our money, by the NIH.

For the record, lesbians are fat because they eat too much, just like every other fat person, except for those with actual health problems that affect their weight.

Lesbianism is not a health problem that affects weight, unless you look at the number of fat lesbians and use it as a starting point for your study.

 

[MAKG1]

There's a beautiful, progressive, lie... unless you think spending over forty million tax dollars studying why lesbians are fat, is a good use of our money, by the NIH.

For the record, lesbians are fat because they eat too much, just like every other fat person, except for those with actual health problems that affect their weight.

Lesbianism is not a health problem that affects weight, unless you look at the number of fat lesbians and use it as a starting point for your study.

So, you're a psychology expert on the subject?

Or are you speaking out of your posterior?

Those of us who do science for a living are not allowed to draw conclusions from prejudice. Whether or not a study is worth funding is determined by what might be learned, not the conclusion. And the goal of the study is missing from your comments. Very telling.

If you are not qualified to judge the quality of science, don't. You add noise and detract from actually learning how the world works. Sound bites do not qualify. How do you know sexual preference is not a factor in weight gain? Until recently, some people thought incorrectly that same sex attraction was mental illness, and some mental illnesses do indeed correlate with weight.

And it sounds like you have an agenda if even looking to find out if something is true is objectionable.

And that $40 million figure only exists in Fox News. That's also very, very telling. The NIH budget for that was $1.5 million, a rather modest price for a moderate sized study. And the conclusion was that there was a correlation.

And be real, real careful not to claim implicitly that reality is progressive. 'Cause reality doesn't match your rant.

And what on earth does an NIH study have to do with your equally ridiculous statement that the government always fouls up everything? There is an enormous logic gap there. Of course the government fouls up some things (but the example you gave was a foul up of Fox News, not the government). But it's truly stupid to assert it always does.

You asked for one counterexample. I gave you several.

 

[poadeleted21]

Cleared Direct Spin Zone, No delay .

 

[Norman]

So, you're a psychology expert on the subject?

Or are you speaking out of your posterior?

Those of us who do science for a living are not allowed to draw conclusions from prejudice. Whether or not a study is worth funding is determined by what might be learned, not the conclusion. And the goal of the study is missing from your comments. Very telling.

If you are not qualified to judge the quality of science, don't. You add noise and detract from actually learning how the world works. Sound bites do not qualify. How do you know sexual preference is not a factor in weight gain? Until recently, some people thought incorrectly that same sex attraction was mental illness, and some mental illnesses do indeed correlate with weight.

And it sounds like you have an agenda if even looking to find out if something is true is objectionable.

And that $40 million figure only exists in Fox News. That's also very, very telling. The NIH budget for that was $1.5 million, a rather modest price for a moderate sized study. And the conclusion was that there was a correlation.

And be real, real careful not to claim implicitly that reality is progressive. 'Cause reality doesn't match your rant.

And what on earth does an NIH study have to do with your equally ridiculous statement that the government always fouls up everything? There is an enormous logic gap there. Of course the government fouls up some things (but the example you gave was a foul up of Fox News, not the government). But it's truly stupid to assert it always does.

You asked for one counterexample. I gave you several.

Global warming, climate change, the sky is falling?

Tell us more, Dr. Strangelove.

 

[Clark1961]

Tell us more, Dr. Strangelove.

He can't, he's busy "doing science"

 

[poadeleted21]

So, you're a psychology expert on the subject?

Or are you speaking out of your posterior?

Those of us who do science for a living are not allowed to draw conclusions from prejudice. Whether or not a study is worth funding is determined by what might be learned, not the conclusion. And the goal of the study is missing from your comments. Very telling.

If you are not qualified to judge the quality of science, don't. You add noise and detract from actually learning how the world works. Sound bites do not qualify. How do you know sexual preference is not a factor in weight gain? Until recently, some people thought incorrectly that same sex attraction was mental illness, and some mental illnesses do indeed correlate with weight.

And it sounds like you have an agenda if even looking to find out if something is true is objectionable.

And that $40 million figure only exists in Fox News. That's also very, very telling. The NIH budget for that was $1.5 million, a rather modest price for a moderate sized study. And the conclusion was that there was a correlation.

And be real, real careful not to claim implicitly that reality is progressive. 'Cause reality doesn't match your rant.

And what on earth does an NIH study have to do with your equally ridiculous statement that the government always fouls up everything? There is an enormous logic gap there. Of course the government fouls up some things (but the example you gave was a foul up of Fox News, not the government). But it's truly stupid to assert it always does.

You asked for one counterexample. I gave you several.

What sort of ground breaking science do you study? How much are the taxpayers on the hook for it?


Well, it was the Washington Free Beacon that reported it, not Fox News (dang it). and the $40,000,000 (It was actually $39,643,352) number included other urgent science studies, like text messaging drunks, figuring out why fat girls don't get dates, text messaging African American HIV patients, drug users, encouraging old people to join choirs, fruit and vegtable puppet shows, schizophrenic gays and bisexuals community experince in CANADA, oragami condom development, anal condom development, why gay men get syphillis in Peru, how tanswomen use Facebook... Oh hell here's the original article http://freebeacon.com/issues/396433...ng-that-could-have-gone-to-the-ebola-vaccine/

 

[Florida Cracker]

What sort of ground breaking science do you study? How much are the taxpayers on the hook for it?


Well, it was the Washington Free Beacon that reported it, not Fox News (dang it). and the $40,000,000 (It was actually $39,643,352) number included other urgent science studies, like text messaging drunks, figuring out why fat girls don't get dates, text messaging African American HIV patients, drug users, encouraging old people to join choirs, fruit and vegtable puppet shows, schizophrenic gays and bisexuals community experince in CANADA, oragami condom development, anal condom development, why gay men get syphillis in Peru, how tanswomen use Facebook... Oh hell here's the original article http://freebeacon.com/issues/396433...ng-that-could-have-gone-to-the-ebola-vaccine/

One thing about science nazis, they get their panties in an instant wad, the SECOND someone suggests their funding should be used for something credible, instead of all the bull****.

Watch the mmgw whores go ballistic every time people notice how dishonest their mantra.

 

[weilke]

Cleared Direct Spin Zone, No delay .

How did we get from boorish bedside manner to the NIH budget ?

 

[poadeleted21]

So, you're a psychology expert on the subject?

Or are you speaking out of your posterior?

Those of us who do science for a living are not allowed to draw conclusions from prejudice. Whether or not a study is worth funding is determined by what might be learned, not the conclusion. And the goal of the study is missing from your comments. Very telling.

If you are not qualified to judge the quality of science, don't. You add noise and detract from actually learning how the world works. Sound bites do not qualify. How do you know sexual preference is not a factor in weight gain? Until recently, some people thought incorrectly that same sex attraction was mental illness, and some mental illnesses do indeed correlate with weight.

And it sounds like you have an agenda if even looking to find out if something is true is objectionable.

And that $40 million figure only exists in Fox News. That's also very, very telling. The NIH budget for that was $1.5 million, a rather modest price for a moderate sized study. And the conclusion was that there was a correlation.

And be real, real careful not to claim implicitly that reality is progressive. 'Cause reality doesn't match your rant.

And what on earth does an NIH study have to do with your equally ridiculous statement that the government always fouls up everything? There is an enormous logic gap there. Of course the government fouls up some things (but the example you gave was a foul up of Fox News, not the government). But it's truly stupid to assert it always does.

You asked for one counterexample. I gave you several.

 

[poadeleted21]

How did we get from boorish bedside manner to the NIH budget ?

Oh, we didn't introduce you two. Weilke, meet Florida Cracker.

 

[Florida Cracker]

Oh, we didn't introduce you two. Weilke, meet Florida Cracker.

NICE to meet you! :wink2:

Bart, I appreciate the introduction.

 

[Jimmy cooper]

Don't forget many Doctors are on the drugs they prescribe. Alcohol too.

As pilots we must go through a medical exam...should be same for physicians at a more frequent interval.

There aren't many checks and balances for Doctors....should be more IMO.

Very true plus they, like lawyers , cover for each other. Plus, ( according to recent investigations) the doctors are involved in Medicare fraud that amounts to 60 billion a year cost to the taxpayers. Doctor here recently charged with patient rape, moved here from another state where he had served time and charged with previous rape. Never checked and allowed to practice. As for drugs, to quote geraldine Delaney, an authority, " they and the nurses have the key to the drug locker!" She delt with plenty of them.

 

[denverpilot]

I will say it until I die, our health care should not be for profit.

Currently the majority of hospitals in the U.S. are operated as non-profits. Something many are simply not aware of.

Typical profit margins for the for-profit hospitals are in the 2-4% range. They have to compete with a majority of non-profit businesses.

With as much money as it costs, it's not a high margin business. Not even close.

Location, location, location is the name of the for-profit hospital game.

Well that and amenities the others won't have, like "kindly" bringing the family of a dying person a cheese plate. Not kidding on that last one.

I ate the damn cheeses since we'd been there all day. Cost $35 for a plate of cheese and crackers.

Well, except that they completely forgot to have anyone sign to admit the patient into ICU from the ER. That little mistake cost them $30,000.

Insurance company told them to pee up a rope.

So technically it was a free cheese plate.

 

[weilke]

Very true plus they, like lawyers , cover for each other. Plus, ( according to recent investigations) the doctors are involved in Medicare fraud that amounts to 60 billion a year cost to the taxpayers.

The way medicare arrives at their 'fraud' numbers is a lot of fluffery. For example, for some hospital based services, the charges are split into technical fees (paid to the hospital) and professional fees (paid to the physician who provides the service).

Lets say the hospital bills an x-ray '3 or more views' to medicare but I only bill for '2 views' for the professional charge, the discrepancy will be kicked up in an audit a couple of months later. Medicare will flag the '2 view' charge as 'fraud and abuse' and count the amount billed towards their '60 billion' number. This ignores the fact that I am still eligible to receive payment for the '3 or more views' which is actually higher than the '2 view' charge, if anything my error saved them money.

Medicare pays companies called 'recovery audit contractors' to find fraud. Those companies get paid a percentage of all the 'fraud' they find and will report any minute technical discrepancy as fraud. Many of their determinations get overturned in medicares appeals process, but the 'RACs' still get paid and the numbers get paraded around as proof of wrongdoing.

Doctor here recently charged with patient rape, moved here from another state where he had served time and charged with previous rape. Never checked and allowed to practice.

Licensing is up to the depatment of health and mental hygiene (DMMH). If anyone dropped the ball and failed to further investigate the prior conviction he disclosed on his application, it was DMMH.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

Currently the majority of hospitals in the U.S. are operated as non-profits. Something many are simply not aware of.

Typical profit margins for the for-profit hospitals are in the 2-4% range. They have to compete with a majority of non-profit businesses.

With as much money as it costs, it's not a high margin business. Not even close.

Location, location, location is the name of the for-profit hospital game.

Well that and amenities the others won't have, like "kindly" bringing the family of a dying person a cheese plate. Not kidding on that last one.

I ate the damn cheeses since we'd been there all day. Cost $35 for a plate of cheese and crackers.

Well, except that they completely forgot to have anyone sign to admit the patient into ICU from the ER. That little mistake cost them $30,000.

Insurance company told them to pee up a rope.

So technically it was a free cheese plate.

62% of hospitals in the US are operated as non-profit. But don't for a minute think that means they're not operated as businesses. Non-profit is essentially a tax dodge, based on the premise that the institutions provide services back to the community valued in excess of the taxes they might pay. Audits show values average 7% of net, with some very dubious expenses included in the total, including recurrent training of staff, time value of doctors sitting on boards of directors. Lots of gray areas.

People conflate non-profit with altruistic. That ain't necessarily so.

 

[weilke]

62% of hospitals in the US are operated as non-profit. But don't for a minute think that means they're not operated as businesses.

Of course they are businesses, the difference to a private hospital is mainly that they dont pay dividends to stock-holders. For the most part, any profit they generate goes back into the facility, cash reserves, expansion etc. There are always ways to siphon some of that off into private pockets through consulting contracts and real-estate deals, but those are small potatoes relative to the size of these organizations.

I used to be part of a group that owned a for-profit hospital. It was converted to a non-profit about 7 years ago and has been doing a lot better since. Cheaper access to money (through bonding authority), not having to pay school-tax on the 100mil worth of real estate all make a big difference in the low-margin business of operating a community hospital. The 'profit' generated by the lower tax burden went back into hiring more providers, adding beds and equipment.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

By doing better, by what measure?
Because your tax benefit is not profit, it's subsidy.

I have no problem with the concept of non-profit, provided the organization does provide tangible benefits to the community in excess of the unpaid tax. I don't know how well the school system is funded in your example, but the taxpayers pony up to pay the difference.

Is the hospital more important than the schools to the larger community? I don't know, that's up to the local politicians. But if I lived there, your lower tax burden is my higher tax bill. It's also fact that educated kids stay healthier.

 

[PaulS]

By doing better, by what measure?
Because your tax benefit is not profit, it's subsidy.

I have no problem with the concept of non-profit, provided the organization does provide tangible benefits to the community in excess of the unpaid tax. I don't know how well the school system is funded in your example, but the taxpayers pony up to pay the difference.

Is the hospital more important than the schools to the larger community? I don't know, that's up to the local politicians. But if I lived there, your lower tax burden is my higher tax bill. It's also fact that educated kids stay healthier.

.....................

 

[1600vw]

This runs so much deeper then Hospitals. Pharmaceutical companies should be the first to go not for profit. Again its a conflict of interest to have these companies anything but.

The town I am from wanted to make this a Medical community. The two big hospitals got together and tried to buy a residential area close by both hospitals. They wanted to turn this into cancer centers and such. The home owners and association of said home owners put up a fight against this. But this is another story.

My point, they build all these Cancer centers costing 100's of millions of dollars. If they then found a cure for cancer next week what happens to all these centers they have put billions of dollars in nation wide?

There will never be a cure for diseases like cancer until we take the profits away. Its a conflict of interests.

No money " Profits " in a healthy person. You can argue this and that and say anything you want.

Its those making the big bucks from our health care system that will raise the most yeck about what I say. I threaten their nest egg with talk like this.

Those that want to help their fellow man and make a descent living without getting " Fat " will have no problem with this. For making health care Not-for-Profit helps everyone.

No money in that.



Tony

 

[weilke]

By doing better, by what measure?

As I said, by adding services, providers, beds that were not available prior to the non-profit conversion.

I have no problem with the concept of non-profit, provided the organization does provide tangible benefits to the community in excess of the unpaid tax.

The main tangible benefit to the community is that they have a hospital to go to when they get sick.
Oh, and then there is the benefit that the hospital employs a bunch of people and brings well paying jobs into the community. Only when communities loose their hospital they see what 'tangible benefit' a local ER was.

 

[comanchepilot]

well that explains why Bruce is not here anymore . . . .

not that I disagree with the OP . . .

 

[murphey]

Tim you know what, the internet and this site is full of type-os and missed spelled words. But if it makes you feel like Mr. Big stud to point out mine go for it, I am proud to help you look good.

Tony, you should have taken credit for the pun rather than admitting it was a typo (i hate having to write more than a sentence on a tablet, i want a real keyboard) being annoyed at Tim and others. Why? Because it was both accurate and a great pun.

 

[Palmpilot]

Tim you know what, the internet and this site is full of type-os and missed spelled words. But if it makes you feel like Mr. Big stud to point out mine go for it, I am proud to help you look good.

You really shouldn't make assumptions about people's motives.

 

[ralarcon]

My mom's had a rough couple of years. Dad died at 57 years old from an ascending aortic aneurysm. Prior to that she had esophageal cancer that caused her to only be able to speak in a loud whisper. Been juggling my dad's businesses from scratch ever since without having the ability to call anyone. Then she fractures a vertebrae and has a ruptured disk. To say her nerves are on edge would be an understatement. Ambulance ride to the ER. ER doctor asks her what's wrong with her voice. Keep in mind, she cannot walk, she was in so much pain a stretcher wouldn't work, they had to take her in a sort of tarp thing. She replies that she had esophageal cancer and lost 2 of her 3 vocal cords. Doc hasn't so much as taken her temperature and replies. "Oh, it looks like your cancer is back". She's in severe pain, not thinking clearly, and after hearing that pretty much went hysterical. ****ing idiot.

No profession or human endeavor is devoid of "Morons", including pilots !

Cheers

 

[JOhnH]

When the government screws something up, it's often due to intentional funding starvation. Especially the VA.

Now that's funny. As if the fat man died of starvation because the doctor cut him back to 20,000 calories a day.

I'm not saying the government can't accomplish some goals. Even goals that the private industry would not be able to accomplish. But they accomplish that by spending vast amounts of money with no ROI necessary. Sometimes, there might be an ROI, but that is not a requirement.

 

[flyingriki]

Some....SOME?!

 

[Jimmy cooper]

62% of hospitals in the US are operated as non-profit. But don't for a minute think that means they're not operated as businesses. Non-profit is essentially a tax dodge, based on the premise that the institutions provide services back to the community valued in excess of the taxes they might pay. Audits show values average 7% of net, with some very dubious expenses included in the total, including recurrent training of staff, time value of doctors sitting on boards of directors. Lots of gray areas.

People conflate non-profit with altruistic. That ain't necessarily so.

All this is true, gray areas for sure. Big tax dodges in health care. Doctors also get big pay from drug company's, trips , you name it. It's big business!

 

[flyingriki]

I LOVE this feature!

This message is hidden because Jimmy cooper is on your ignore list.

 

[denverpilot]

All this is true, gray areas for sure. Big tax dodges in health care. Doctors also get big pay from drug company's, trips , you name it. It's big business!

I'll quote him for you since amazingly for once he actually said the truth.

 

[Gary F]

Much of the problem of perceived incompetence is the result of the dysfunctional structure of the medical system. We often rely on generalists when specialists can make better decisions. Providers are often forced to perform outside of their area of competence. Does anyone here really believe that the field of medicine attracts so many total dumbasses that manage to complete rigorous training?

 

[Gary F]

All this is true, gray areas for sure. Big tax dodges in health care. Doctors also get big pay from drug company's, trips , you name it. It's big business!

Not all of us.

 

[weilke]

Not all of us.

I think I got a sandwich once.

 

[N801BH]

I think I got a sandwich once.

Like any doctor / medical professional is going to admit they got kickbacks from drug companies...........

 

[Norman]

Much of the problem of perceived incompetence is the result of the dysfunctional structure of the medical system. We often rely on generalists when specialists can make better decisions. Providers are often forced to perform outside of their area of competence. Does anyone here really believe that the field of medicine attracts so many total dumbasses that manage to complete rigorous training?

Gary,

If I ever need brain surgery I want Ben Carson.

 

[txflyer]

Doctors bury their mistakes.

Good luck to your mom.

 

[poadeleted21]

Much of the problem of perceived incompetence is the result of the dysfunctional structure of the medical system. We often rely on generalists when specialists can make better decisions. Providers are often forced to perform outside of their area of competence. Does anyone here really believe that the field of medicine attracts so many total dumbasses that manage to complete rigorous training?

All the guys at Mississippi state who went to med school were the ones who couldn't get into vet school.