Page 35 of 35 FirstFirst ... 25333435
Results 341 to 348 of 348

Thread: Single payer, higher wait times, more suffering. The Democrats want this for America.

  1. #341
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:07 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,320

    Re: Single payer, higher wait times, more suffering. The Democrats want this for America.

    Quote Originally Posted by bave View Post
    If this went according to plan, I agree. However in reality people don't take the basic steps first. I have told you a hundred times now, people would be 10x healthier if they did the basic things they know to do, but don't want to do. Instead, surgery, medication becomes the easy solution.
    And I would agree with you.. MR obtuse.. yes.. we would be much healthier as a population if we had less stress.. took more vacations, worked less, ate less and exercised more.

    BUT.. that's not the benefit from healthcare. Healthcare.. benefits you from things like when you hurt your back.. the medication, the therapy, the injection and even the surgery.. get you back to working.
    Healthcare benefits you when you have diabetes.. and now you have a medication that helps you.. so you don't end up in a diabetic coma.
    Healthcare benefits you from by giving inoculations against polio.. measles.. etc.

    That's where healthcare benefits you.. not from a doctor saying "your fat.. lose weight"...

    You are purposely being obtuse about this....

    Uncontrolled diabetics grow on trees, especially with medicare/medicaid.
    Actually no,, it doesn't.. because they ARE controlled with medications.

    SURE.. a few of them could be controlled without medication if they lost weight and exercised. But my 80 year old patient who is 5 foot 4 and weighs 110 pounds is not diabetic because of her lifestyle.. you ridiculous dude.
    And the ones that could be controlled without meds.. but choose not to lose weight and exercise etc? Well..its still cheaper to medicate them.. than to say.. "oh well.. to bad for them".. and then have to deal with an hospital stay for a diabetic coma.

    Fair enough. Let them pay cash then. Solved?
    No.. not solved.

    You have taken away their healthcare insurance.. for the governments and then you have taken away the healthcare from them because the government doesn't approve of their lifestyle.

    How far you willing to go? No treatments for venereal diseases because it due to "lifestyle?"
    No treatments for heart problems because you smoked for 20 years ago?
    I bet I could find a lot of medical issues that you have or will have do to your lifestyle.

    Right. A "physician" here suggesting that a report suggesting "limited evidence" somehow draws a link. In publication land, limited evidence means to say "unlikely caused".
    Actually no.. in medical literature.. limited and suggestive evidence indicates that there is as distinct possibility of a link.

    NO evidence.. would suggest just that.

    Its why the VA accepts it.

    Further, diabetes has been show to be linked to cancer, but not the other way around
    Not true since many cancer treatments can lead to changes in sugar levels and diabetes.

    Again, spend less time on the internet and more time running your imaginary business, acting as CEO for a major health system, and getting your obese kids some exercise.
    You seem to have severe cognitive dissonance here sir. OR tremendous problems with reading comprehension. My children are NOT obese. They are extremely fit actually.

    The problem is that they are PRONE to obesity and it takes considerable lengths to prevent them from becoming obese.

    Something that I made extremely clear.. but you seem to miss it.

    Like I said..anytime you want to spar with my kids... you are welcome to do it. I even suggest you call them fatties.. so then you can see just how out of shape they are..

    Better yet.. if they dislocate your shoulder or elbow,.. you can then go without healthcare and return to work.. because of course healthcare has no value.


  2. #342
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    356

    Re: Single payer, higher wait times, more suffering. The Democrats want this for America.

    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    Actually no. you ridiculous dude..its not that simple. Because number one.. if you burn more than you take in.. and you happen to be genetically prone to gain weight.. your metabolism can slow down so that yet again your weight stabilizes or worse you begin to "yo yo"..with losing weight..then gaining the weight back and more.
    Show me one picture of an Auschwitz occupant that gained weight, just one.

  3. #343
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:34 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    356

    Re: Single payer, higher wait times, more suffering. The Democrats want this for America.

    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    And I would agree with you.. MR obtuse.. yes.. we would be much healthier as a population if we had less stress.. took more vacations, worked less, ate less and exercised more.

    BUT.. that's not the benefit from healthcare. Healthcare.. benefits you from things like when you hurt your back.. the medication, the therapy, the injection and even the surgery.. get you back to working.
    Healthcare benefits you when you have diabetes.. and now you have a medication that helps you.. so you don't end up in a diabetic coma.
    Healthcare benefits you from by giving inoculations against polio.. measles.. etc.

    That's where healthcare benefits you.. not from a doctor saying "your fat.. lose weight"...

    You are purposely being obtuse about this....
    Oh, I am not saying losing weight solves everything, but it solves a hell of a lot. For instance, the morbidly obese patient who loses 150 pounds is going to have a much easier time managing T2 diabetes. Their back is going to have a far easier time etc. More importantly, they are going to have less complications in everything. Just look at the correlations between obesity and complications/readmission. Fat people are less healthy, full stop. Less healthy people are much more expensive to treat. It really is that simple at a point.

    Vaccinations? I am happy to pay for that as a nation, no beef there. I am just not ok with paying for other people's healthcare when they are not actively involved in taking care of themselves. If you want to eat, drink, smoke, or stupid yourself to death that's fine just don't ask me to pay for it. I am 100% fine with letting the unmanaged diabetic suffer the consequences.

    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    Actually no,, it doesn't.. because they ARE controlled with medications.
    Sure, in theory. The problem is you still need compliance. You need to check your blood sugars, you need to watch what you eat, you need to lose weight etc. None of those things happen with a huge segment of the population. The Oregon study shows *exactly* this. The diabetics in that 5 year study all showed no better control of diabetic management in that period, despite 100% free care and insulin.

    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    SURE.. a few of them could be controlled without medication if they lost weight and exercised. But my 80 year old patient who is 5 foot 4 and weighs 110 pounds is not diabetic because of her lifestyle.. you ridiculous dude.
    And she represents ~2% of the diabetic population. The vast majority of diabetics are diabetics because of decisions they made, not because of randomly bad genes.

    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    You have taken away their healthcare insurance.. for the governments and then you have taken away the healthcare from them because the government doesn't approve of their lifestyle.

    How far you willing to go? No treatments for venereal diseases because it due to "lifestyle?"
    No treatments for heart problems because you smoked for 20 years ago?
    I bet I could find a lot of medical issues that you have or will have do to your lifestyle.
    Venereal disease: cheap, don't really care.
    If you are an active smoker, drinker, drug addict, or obese and you don't show progress to improvement then you are off the program. It is not our responsibility to waste scarce public resources on those who will not help themselves.
    As for me? I doubt that.

    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    Actually no.. in medical literature.. limited and suggestive evidence indicates that there is as distinct possibility of a link.
    Haha, that's hilarious for someone who pretends to be a physician to not understand how to read a publication. Yes, it means there is a possibility, but it is remote and highly unlikely and certainly not supported by any evidence to date.

  4. #344
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:07 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,320

    Re: Single payer, higher wait times, more suffering. The Democrats want this for America.

    Quote Originally Posted by bave View Post
    Show me one picture of an Auschwitz occupant that gained weight, just one.
    Actually..probably if you were to find the ones that SURVIVED Aushwitz.. you would find out that it was the ones that were clinically obese or were prone to be obese.. before going in to Auschwitz that were more likely to survive.

    You sir are just to funny. Do you ever think before you post.

  5. #345
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:07 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,320

    Re: Single payer, higher wait times, more suffering. The Democrats want this for America.

    Quote Originally Posted by bave View Post
    Oh, I am not saying losing weight solves everything, but it solves a hell of a lot. For instance, the morbidly obese patient who loses 150 pounds is going to have a much easier time managing T2 diabetes. Their back is going to have a far easier time etc. More importantly, they are going to have less complications in everything. Just look at the correlations between obesity and complications/readmission. Fat people are less healthy, full stop. Less healthy people are much more expensive to treat. It really is that simple at a point.

    .
    And who is arguing that? Mr obtuse? Cuz it certainly is not me.

    However.. you claim that healthcare has no benefit. And getting that obese patient his back treatments.. or controlling his diabetes.. or his knee surgery.. not only helps return that patient to work but it also cuts down on the cost of treating the diabetic coma.

    I am 100% fine with letting the unmanaged diabetic suffer the consequences.
    Define exactly "unmanaged diabetic and define exactly how you determine whether they should die or not".

    Please give your definitely criteria.. so that when that person comes into the emergency room.. a provider can make the determination on whether they should die or not.

    The Oregon study shows *exactly* this. The diabetics in that 5 year study all showed no better control of diabetic management in that period, despite 100% free care and insulin.
    No it actually doesn't. It doesn't show that the person coming in without any medication on board.. was just as out of control after receiving medication.

    What it showed was that the person who came in and had diabetes.. did not improve enough to get off medication.. etc.

    And she represents ~2% of the diabetic population. The vast majority of diabetics are diabetics because of decisions they made, not because of randomly bad genes.
    That's patently false.

    Venereal disease: cheap, don't really care.
    Why not.. and no venereal disease care is not cheap.. especially if you are talking about something like HIV or hepatitis.

    If you are an active smoker, drinker, drug addict, or obese and you don't show progress to improvement then you are off the program. It is not our responsibility to waste scarce public resources on those who will not help themselves.
    Hmmm.. please give the criteria you would use.. so that when the person who has obesity. or overdoses on medication, or uses alcohol.. or smokes or smoked.. comes into the the ER with a heart attack, or other emergency.. the physician can make a determination on whether they should let them die or save their life.

    Haha, that's hilarious for someone who pretends to be a physician to not understand how to read a publication. Yes, it means there is a possibility, but it is remote and highly unlikely and certainly not supported by any evidence to date.
    Too funny.. yes.. you don't understand how to read the publication. It means there there is ENOUGH EVIDENCE.. to suggest a causational link...

    Which is why the VA is willing to cover it..

    OR are you contending that the VA gives its veterans any care they think they need? Hmmm..is that it.. that the VA gives care willy nilly to veterans without even a shred of evidence that they have a condition caused by service?

    Gee.. maybe you contend that the VA is the best healthcare in America with the most comprehensive coverage?

  6. #346
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    65,395

    Re: Single payer, higher wait times, more suffering. The Democrats want this for America.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseye View Post
    There were several proposals floating before Dems took the House. Trump has done some work allowing group plans not bound by ACA requirements.
    Show me a bill.
    “personal attorney” to Individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I don't know who [Individual-1] is and neither do you.

  7. #347
    Conservatarian Guru
    Bullseye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    San Diego
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    16,610

    Re: Single payer, higher wait times, more suffering. The Democrats want this for America.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Show me a bill.
    Do your own research. I don't care if you believe it or not.
    Peace is not the absence of war
    Peace is the absence of the threat of war

  8. #348
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    65,395

    Re: Single payer, higher wait times, more suffering. The Democrats want this for America.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseye View Post
    Do your own research. I don't care if you believe it or not.
    That's what I thought.

    Numerous bills to repeal the ACA, none that provided real protections for pre-existing conditions. (they did have a bill or two that provided *optional* protections for pre-existing conditions, which is the same thing as not protecting pre-existing condiitions...)
    “personal attorney” to Individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I don't know who [Individual-1] is and neither do you.

Page 35 of 35 FirstFirst ... 25333435

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •