• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obamacare is helping patients get to the doctor and pay their medical bills

Similar.. similar in what? That most care is paid for by the government? That most hospitals are all public and most providers are public employees (80% of the hospital beds are government hospital beds) I sus.. or that the government has rigid price controls? Or do you want that similar system to FORCE people to put a percentage of their earnings into a medical savings plan.. AND THEN rigidly control what they can spend that money on?

I suggested you do more reading on Singapores system before you say you want a similar system.

You should not respond when you don't understand words.
Similar is a very simple word to understand.

If you can ever point out where I said any of that. It will not be possible.

Yes you should do the same.
Their medisave system is rock solid.

It is one of the big reason their system is successful.
They actually have competition in their healthcare system.

A national has plan would cost the government far less provide better coverage and
Better insurance for everyone.

You handle all of your typical medical expenses from your hsa. Your insurance only kicks in when you require
A hospital or some other catastrophic event occurs. Similar to how car insurance works.

Whether it is cancer heart problems etc...
You are able to pay for a plan like this out of your hsa account along with any medical costs.

All the governemnt does is deposit a yearly rebate. 5k for individuals and 10k for families.
Done. You and your employer can add to it and businesses that put 10k or more into it get a bonus deduction.

Simple easy and everyone is covered.
 
Yeah... nope. Just look at quality of care. Timeliness of care etc. We are in the top 5.

Lifeexpectancy has to do with many things that are outside healthcare.

Same with infant mortality.

Same with asthma

same with diabetes.

So why aren't Europeans, Aussies, Kiwis, etc., out in the streets demanding the pre ACA US system and abolition of what torments them? How can we liberate them from the health care oppression they live under? And can we count on them to deliver us from Medicare and Medicaid?

Get serious. Even Mexico, for all its troubles, has a form of national healthcare that did well by my friend with cancer.
 
You should not respond when you don't understand words.
Similar is a very simple word to understand.

If you can ever point out where I said any of that. It will not be possible.

Yes you should do the same.
Their medisave system is rock solid.

It is one of the big reason their system is successful.
They actually have competition in their healthcare system.

A national has plan would cost the government far less provide better coverage and
Better insurance for everyone.

You handle all of your typical medical expenses from your hsa. Your insurance only kicks in when you require
A hospital or some other catastrophic event occurs. Similar to how car insurance works.

Whether it is cancer heart problems etc...
You are able to pay for a plan like this out of your hsa account along with any medical costs.

All the governemnt does is deposit a yearly rebate. 5k for individuals and 10k for families.
Done. You and your employer can add to it and businesses that put 10k or more into it get a bonus deduction.

Simple easy and everyone is covered.

Ahhh... I wish YOU would do some reading.

They DO NOT have competition in their healthcare system. You don't seem to understand WHY their "Medisave system" appears "rock solid".

You don't understand that the government heavily subsidizes the HEALTHCARE. THEY OWN the hospitals and the providers. Do you understand what that means?

Its not as simple as "there is competition".. because there is LITTLE competition in their healthcare market.. because they government OWNS the healthcare market. And as such it controls what you may purchase and what things cost.

Let me try to give you an example of how their system actually works.

Say your town decides they want a Singapore system (since Singapore is basically a city).

So.. your town raises your taxes by 1000 a year to pay for a new hospital system. those taxes pay for the building of the new hospital and all its outpatient facilities, its MRI etc , its maintenance, keeping the lights on, its heating and cooling and all the equipment inside.

So each year you pay 1000 in taxes to pay for that hospital system.

On top of that.. the city government institutes a Medisave insurance that you have to pay into.. say another 200 dollars a month or 2400 a year

On top of that you have to put 7% of your salary into an HSA...

10 years go by and one day you cut your finger while cutting up some onions and you need stitches.

now you go down to the GOVERNMENT outpatient clinic where they tell you that this isn;t covered by your medisave insurance. But the cost of the stitches in the government clinic is only 200 dollars which you easily pay out of your HSA.

Now.. do you REALLY think that your healthcare ONLY COST 200 dollars?

now.. to an outsider.. that only sees that you had to pay 200 dollars for those stitches?.. it looks like that's awesome.

Except.. the outsider doesn't see all the taxes that you paid to BUILD, MAINTAIN AND STAFF.. that hospital system.. nor the taxes you paid into your medisave insurance as well.

the outsider doesn't realize that the REASON that you paid only 200 for those stitches is NOT because there is competition in the market.. there isn't. the reason that you paid only 200 for those stitches is because the government OWNS that healthcare service (80% of singapores hospital beds are public)
 
So why aren't Europeans, Aussies, Kiwis, etc., out in the streets demanding the pre ACA US system and abolition of what torments them? How can we liberate them from the health care oppression they live under? And can we count on them to deliver us from Medicare and Medicaid?

Get serious. Even Mexico, for all its troubles, has a form of national healthcare that did well by my friend with cancer.
\
You need to get serious.

Lets see.. lets start with... "if americans system is so terrible.. so awful compared to the European and Canadian systems"... why aren't americans out in the streets demanding Canadian healthcare. How come they are not liberating themselves from the oppressive capitalistic system that they liver under. And can we count on them to delivers us from Medicaid and Medicare which are far and away better insurance than government provided insurance in Canada and Europe?

To answer your question.. why don't Europeans want US healthcare? The same reason they don't live in the US, don't eat the same foods as the US, don't have the same houses as the US, don't have the same lifestyles as the us. Because they value different things.

Its not a value judgement on my part.. its simply that there is a difference in European, and Canadian cultures and Asian cultures and the US.

In America for example.. we value timeliness of care. When we think we need an MRI.. we want one now.. not 6 months from now because the government protocol puts us 6 months out.
When we need surgery.. we don't trust the government to pick our surgeon.. we want to have choice of surgeons..
And when we want healthcare.. we want what we perceive as the best healthcare. And when we are poor we want our child born in the same hospital with the same staff, the same bedroom, the same everything as the rich person in the room next to us.
 
Ahhh... I wish YOU would do some reading.

They DO NOT have competition in their healthcare system. You don't seem to understand WHY their "Medisave system" appears "rock solid".
I have done reading. From their own websites. They do have competition in their system. Heir are at least 5 or 6 different medical providers that operate within their system. You should do some research.

You don't understand that the government heavily subsidizes the HEALTHCARE. THEY OWN the hospitals and the providers. Do you understand what that means?
Still don't understand the word similar do you I guess not. Ol well. I can't get any plainer than the basic definition.

Its not as simple as "there is competition".. because there is LITTLE competition in their healthcare market.. because they government OWNS the healthcare market. And as such it controls what you may purchase and what things cost.

I will go with the Singapore medical websites that say otherwise

Let me try to give you an example of how their system actually works.

Say your town decides they want a Singapore system (since Singapore is basically a city).

So.. your town raises your taxes by 1000 a year to pay for a new hospital system. those taxes pay for the building of the new hospital and all its outpatient facilities, its MRI etc , its maintenance, keeping the lights on, its heating and cooling and all the equipment inside.
Not really. But you can continue going with that if you wish. Again you don't understand the word similar.

So each year you pay 1000 in taxes to pay for that hospital system.

On top of that.. the city government institutes a Medisave insurance that you have to pay into.. say another 200 dollars a month or 2400 a year

On top of that you have to put 7% of your salary into an HSA...

Not quite how their taxes work.
Their income taxes are quite low in fact way lower than the US by a good margin. Their top marginal rate is 22%. The average American would pay about 4% in income tax. Most would pay 0 after deduction on 56k dollars.
Yes they do have a mandatory hsa tax, but then again I said similar not exact something you keep ignoring because it pretty much destroys your argument.

10 years go by and one day you cut your finger while cutting up some onions and you need stitches.
now you go down to the GOVERNMENT outpatient clinic where they tell you that this isn;t covered by your medisave insurance. But the cost of the stitches in the government clinic is only 200 dollars which you easily pay out of your HSA.

2/3rds of their medical expense is private care not public.

Now.. do you REALLY think that your healthcare ONLY COST 200 dollars?
now.. to an outsider.. that only sees that you had to pay 200 dollars for those stitches?.. it looks like that's awesome.

That is about the right cost for stitches from doctors I have talked to. Stitches are cheap. Insurance jacks the price up.
 
\
You need to get serious.

Lets see.. lets start with... "if americans system is so terrible.. so awful compared to the European and Canadian systems"... why aren't americans out in the streets demanding Canadian healthcare. How come they are not liberating themselves from the oppressive capitalistic system that they liver under. And can we count on them to delivers us from Medicaid and Medicare which are far and away better insurance than government provided insurance in Canada and Europe?

To answer your question.. why don't Europeans want US healthcare? The same reason they don't live in the US, don't eat the same foods as the US, don't have the same houses as the US, don't have the same lifestyles as the us. Because they value different things.

Its not a value judgement on my part.. its simply that there is a difference in European, and Canadian cultures and Asian cultures and the US.

In America for example.. we value timeliness of care. When we think we need an MRI.. we want one now.. not 6 months from now because the government protocol puts us 6 months out.
When we need surgery.. we don't trust the government to pick our surgeon.. we want to have choice of surgeons..
And when we want healthcare.. we want what we perceive as the best healthcare. And when we are poor we want our child born in the same hospital with the same staff, the same bedroom, the same everything as the rich person in the room next to us.

And the nightmare you describe is in place in all the other countries that have government healthcare? We already have national healthcare, with presumably, some stuff imitating aspects of the European system in the VA, Medicare and Medicaid. My preference would have been something like Medicare for all instead of the ACA. We could have learned from the Europeans, what to imitate and what doesn't work, (and presumably did a bit during the months when the ACA was being considered.) But republicans have gotten with the program too, as their plans to repeal and *replace*, not just repeal Obamacare suggests we are a long way from when Reagan said Medicare would make doctors slaves and more recently, when the GOP said there was no problem to fix. When I lost my job I was told I was uninsurable, tho I found a slot in a government program that carried me to Medicare. My wife will be able to get insurance despite having cancer, thanks to the ACA. Cost us more, but less than being without it. And, as noted, Medicare has worked fine for over 50 years.

Face it, we are zig-zagging in a generally progressive direction as Obama suggested, with conservatives performing a useful service by checking our more impractical ideas and making the product better. Been that way since FDR.
 
I have done reading. From their own websites. They do have competition in their system. Heir are at least 5 or 6 different medical providers that operate within their system. You should do some research.


.

Nope./ . 5 or 6 different medical providers? Sure.. who are all government employees. Again.. most of their healthcare is government OWNED. So yes there might be competition whether you want to go to this doc or that one.. but they are likely on the government payroll. For some things they aren;t but since the government owns 80% of the hospital coverage.. the government can and does control the price.

Price is not controlled by competition.

Still don't understand the word similar do you I guess not. Ol well. I can't get any plainer than the basic definition

its seems you can't understand what the word "similar" is. There medical savings plan.. ONLY works because the heavily subsidize their healthcare . the government decides what services you can pay for, and the government controls prices.

So unless your plan includes government owning 80% of hospital beds and having severe price controls, and limiting what you can purchases... well then it won't be "similar".

I will go with the Singapore medical websites that say otherwise

Provide a link.. I have already provided you links on Singapore healthcare that prove you wrong. but you go ahead and give me some links to Singapore websites.

Their income taxes are quite low in fact way lower than the US by a good margin. Their top marginal rate is 22%. The average American would pay about 4% in income tax. Most would pay 0 after deduction on 56k dollars.
Yes they do have a mandatory hsa tax, but then again I said similar not exact something you keep ignoring because it pretty much destroys your argument.

No.. I am exactly right in how their taxes work.

you realize that Singapore does not have the costs that the US government does right?

2/3rds of their medical expense is private care not public

exactly.. as I pointed out.. their expense of having hospitals, hospital beds doctors etc.. is borne by their taxes.

And the since the government owns the hospital and the doctors are employees.. when their government medical insurance is used.. its a very low price.. since the government is not charging its own insurance a ton of money. Thus it looks like the medical expense is low.

Just like in my example, you paid all sorts of taxes.. but ended up only having to pay 200 dollars from your HSA.. which would qualify as a private cost. BUT you forgot all that government taxes and subsidy.

That is about the right cost for stitches from doctors I have talked to. Stitches are cheap. Insurance jacks the price up.

Wrong about that.....

Tell me.. why do you think insurance companies are paying MORE for stitches and hurting their profits when they could be paying less? Please explain that.
 
And the nightmare you describe is in place in all the other countries that have government healthcare? We already have national healthcare, with presumably, some stuff imitating aspects of the European system in the VA, Medicare and Medicaid. My preference would have been something like Medicare for all instead of the ACA. We could have learned from the Europeans, what to imitate and what doesn't work, (and presumably did a bit during the months when the ACA was being considered.) But republicans have gotten with the program too, as their plans to repeal and *replace*, not just repeal Obamacare suggests we are a long way from when Reagan said Medicare would make doctors slaves and more recently, when the GOP said there was no problem to fix. When I lost my job I was told I was uninsurable, tho I found a slot in a government program that carried me to Medicare. My wife will be able to get insurance despite having cancer, thanks to the ACA. Cost us more, but less than being without it. And, as noted, Medicare has worked fine for over 50 years.

Face it, we are zig-zagging in a generally progressive direction as Obama suggested, with conservatives performing a useful service by checking our more impractical ideas and making the product better. Been that way since FDR.

Yawn.... listen.. can you turn down the hyperbole? Its not going to work on me.

1. I never said that other countries were a "nightmare". EVER EVER EVER.. so stop lying and claiming I did. I get tired of you liberals making crap up.

2. If we want to have a HONEST.. and productive discussion about healthcare and healthcare insurance... then we need to be USING FACTS. And the fact is.. Canadian government insurance, and Australian government insurance... PAYS FOR FAR LESS THAN MOST AMERICAN INSURANCES... that's a fact.. in fact our MEDICAID.. which is considered to be the worst insurance in general to have.. (except perhaps VA) is far superior to Canadian and Australian government insurance.

So when rabidALPACA is saying.. we pay more for far less.. he is NOT CORRECT.

3. IF we went to a Medicare for all plan.. well then.. we would either have to decide to spend MORE of our GDP on healthcare. OR decide to reduce Medicare services to our elderly and the rest of the population. Our Medicare is AWESOME.. compared to what occurs in other countries. Our Medicare is far and away better than almost any other countries government system. Now.. the reason we can do it.. is because we pay for our medicare by paying medicare taxes in our whole working life.. and then only getting care when we turn 65. the minute you start adding tons of people on medicare.. yet they haven't paid in for years.... you make the system collapse. Unless you dramatically reduce benefits.. or dramatically increase taxes on the working class. or gut your economy by drastically reducing payments for medical providers when Medicare is already the lowest payer ..Or all three
4. Well.. we may be heading to a more government controlled healthcare plan that's true. If you are happy with Trump or someone similar (perhaps a Mike Pence) being able to control your healthcare and your wifes.. well I guess that's on you. Personally I would not trust the man to clean the cow crap off my boots.
 
Nope./ . 5 or 6 different medical providers? Sure.. who are all government employees. Again.. most of their healthcare is government OWNED. So yes there might be competition whether you want to go to this doc or that one.. but they are likely on the government payroll. For some things they aren;t but since the government owns 80% of the hospital coverage.. the government can and does control the price.

Price is not controlled by competition.



its seems you can't understand what the word "similar" is. There medical savings plan.. ONLY works because the heavily subsidize their healthcare . the government decides what services you can pay for, and the government controls prices.

So unless your plan includes government owning 80% of hospital beds and having severe price controls, and limiting what you can purchases... well then it won't be "similar".
.

Similar means like but not exact so all your nonsense of government owned and run this or that is irrelevant.
It has nothing to do with what we are discussing.

it is a strawman because my plan basically makes insurance companies out of date.
They are only needed now for critical care.

People would be responsible for their day to day medical care.
With the hsa setup with yearly contributions from the government people and businesses there would be more than enough money.

There are no deductibles anymore people now buy and pay for percentage coverage.

70-100%. Prices are neogiated out at hospital and doctor cash prices. No need for insurance companies crappy negotiating skills.

Yes you guys are horrible at negotiating. Why? Because you take the difference.

What Happens When Doctors Only Take Cash | Time.com

You tell me why a CT will cost 4K you guys charge 2k but the cash price is 450 bucks.
You tell me why blood work for tests is 275 but only 18 cash price.

Someone is getting the gouge and it isn't the insurance companies.
This makes you take a back seat.
 
I was kicked off of Obamacare and between that and the new tac reform, I will get another $100 in refunds and I have to pay $4k more on prescriptions alone. I have to participate in auto immune disorder medication studies or half of my income would go to medical care.

America is great again! Except for me, whose needs help and is being completely screwed over because I chose to get a better job. I went to see my tax guy the other day and had to wait 10 minutes before the receptionist had time between calls from rich people scrambling to get their property taxes in early to exploit the new tax plan. Trump's real message: kill the poor. It's pretty accurate.
 
]
Similar means like but not exact so all your nonsense of government owned and run this or that is irrelevant.
It has nothing to do with what we are discussing.
.

Seriously.. how can you not see the huge intellectual disconnect you are making? You say "similar" to Singapore.. then declare that the WHOLE ECONOMIC BASIS upon which singapores system works.. i.e. the heavily subsidized and public healthcare system and price controls by the government,.. is "irrelevant"!!..

it is a strawman because my plan basically makes insurance companies out of date.
They are only needed now for critical care.

Great.. define "critical care".

Bet you can't.

People would be responsible for their day to day medical care.
With the hsa setup with yearly contributions from the government people and businesses there would be more than enough money.

There are no deductibles anymore people now buy and pay for percentage coverage.

70-100%. Prices are neogiated out at hospital and doctor cash prices. No need for insurance companies crappy negotiating skills.

Yes you guys are horrible at negotiating. Why? Because you take the difference.

Hmm.. well how do you suppose this is going to work? SINGAPORE.. does it by massively subsidizing their healthcare.. the government owns 80% of the hospital beds. But you think that this is magically going to work.

Yes you guys are horrible at negotiating. Why? Because you take the difference.

Hmm... well for one I am a medical provider. And I know that the insurance company with the ability to give me preferred status and has thousands of clients.. is in a way better bargaining position than you are when it comes to prices.

You tell me why a CT will cost 4K you guys charge 2k but the cash price is 450 bucks.
You tell me why blood work for tests is 275 but only 18 cash price.

Well.. for a variety reasons.

First the charge really doesn't matter since what gets reimbursed is decided by the insurance company for the most part.

Second. the difference in reimbursements allowed.. vary from insurance to insurance.. and that's because there are differences between bundled payments in a hospital and fee for service in an outpatient setting.

Third there are variations because of price/cost shifting. There is not enough volume say of critical care patients to pay for all those beds, or equipment when it sits idle.. but ready when you need it... so those costs are shifted over to things like MRI that have more volume.

Another facility that is a stand alone MRI doesn;t have those costs and thus can be cheaper.

Someone is getting the gouge and it isn't the insurance companies.
This makes you take a back seat.

Hmmm.. you will have to explain how I as a medical provider and an owner of medical facilities.. will "take a backseat".
 
]

Seriously.. how can you not see the huge intellectual disconnect you are making? You say "similar" to Singapore.. then declare that the WHOLE ECONOMIC BASIS upon which singapores system works.. i.e. the heavily subsidized and public healthcare system and price controls by the government,.. is "irrelevant"!!..

it is irrelevant because it has nothing to do with my plan. you keep ranting about being inside the box instead of looking outside the box.
it doesn't help you in anyway.


Great.. define "critical care".

I already have plenty of times all you do is plug your ears.
it covers anything from cancer to other major health impact to you.

Hmm.. well how do you suppose this is going to work? SINGAPORE.. does it by massively subsidizing their healthcare.. the government owns 80% of the hospital beds. But you think that this is magically going to work.

Nope it will work because people are free to shop around for the best price. I have already posted you an article that singapore makes hospitals compete with each other.
that drives cost down further. you ignored it but that is typical.

Hmm... well for one I am a medical provider. And I know that the insurance company with the ability to give me preferred status and has thousands of clients.. is in a way better bargaining position than you are when it comes to prices.

Yet doctors and hospitals charge 80% less if i pay cash interesting.


First the charge really doesn't matter since what gets reimbursed is decided by the insurance company for the most part.
Second. the difference in reimbursements allowed.. vary from insurance to insurance.. and that's because there are differences between bundled payments in a hospital and fee for service in an outpatient setting.
Third there are variations because of price/cost shifting. There is not enough volume say of critical care patients to pay for all those beds, or equipment when it sits idle.. but ready when you need it... so those costs are shifted over to things like MRI that have more volume.

again a hospital cash price for a CT is around 400 or less in some places. the insurance will charge you 2000.
so neogiating skills are horrible. they are not getting you the best price. they have inflated the price 500% or so.

Hmmm.. you will have to explain how I as a medical provider and an owner of medical facilities.. will "take a backseat".

i said insurance companies will take a back seat.
 
it is irrelevant because it has nothing to do with my plan. you keep ranting about being inside the box instead of looking outside the box.
it doesn't help you in anyway.
.

Okay.. so now its not similar at all to Singapore.. Ranting about being in the box? What are you talking about? I understand the US healthcare system/.. I understand the Singapore system, Canada , Australia, Germany and frances system..

already have plenty of times all you do is plug your ears.
it covers anything from cancer to other major health impact to you.

No.. I don't plug my ears. You have no CLEAR definition of what critical care is.

Okay.. lets just take one cancer. What is "critical" cancer care?

the initial testing? MRI, CT, biopsy? Or does the patient have to pay out of pocket for these things?

A biopsy finds cancer. Does the insurance pay for a full radical mastectomy? Or just a lumpectomy. Procedures done on an outpatient basis.

Chemotherapy for how long? What kinds of chemotherapy. ..How about radiation? What about reconstructive surgery?

Realize that a lot of that is not considered "critical" care. and its done outside a hospital. and on an outpatient basis.

Nope it will work because people are free to shop around for the best price. I have already posted you an article that singapore makes hospitals compete with each other.

Wrong.. Singapore does not make hospitals compete with one another on price. Price is rigidly controlled.

Yet doctors and hospitals charge 80% less if i pay cash interesting.

Sure.. because the insurance company is paying us 16% of that charge.. and your 20% is actually GREATER in cash then what we get from the insurance company.

In all likelihood you are paying MORE than you would if you had insurance.

again a hospital cash price for a CT is around 400 or less in some places. the insurance will charge you 2000.

Well.. that may be because while the hospital gets 1500 from the insurance company for the CT.. they LOSE money on another procedure from the insurance.. and thus they are willing to accept that loss on the other procedure because they get it back and a bit more whenever they do a CT.

Of course..if you have to pay cash for that "other procedure".. now you are paying WAY WAY WAY more than what the insurance pays.

i said insurance companies will take a back seat.

hmmm
ludin said:
Someone is getting the gouge and it isn't the insurance companies.
This makes you take a back seat.
 
Hmm... well for one I am a medical provider.

:lamo

Are you STILL trying to make people believe that you are a doctor or nurse with some kind of direct expertise in healing people and saving lives, Jaeger?

No wonder you ran from the other thread. LOL.

You are not a "medical provider". You are not a doctor. You are not a nurse. You've never treated a patient in your life. You are just an ideologue who sells widgets (perhaps to REAL medical professionals???) and likes to present himself (anonymously, of course) as a "medical provider" on message boards like this one. Selling your widgets to real doctors....or perhaps selling insurance.....does NOT make you a medical provider in the eyes of ANY real medical provider.

And stop talking about "critical care" until you can define it yourself.

If you'd like, as always, I am available to help you understand these kinds of issues. Just ask for help, and then leave the "medical provider" talk to real medical providers, ok?
 
:lamo

Are you STILL trying to make people believe that you are a doctor or nurse with some kind of direct expertise in healing people and saving lives, Jaeger?

No wonder you ran from the other thread. LOL.

You are not a "medical provider". You are not a doctor. You are not a nurse. You've never treated a patient in your life. You are just an ideologue who sells widgets (perhaps to REAL medical professionals???) and likes to present himself (anonymously, of course) as a "medical provider" on message boards like this one. Selling your widgets to real doctors....or perhaps selling insurance.....does NOT make you a medical provider in the eyes of ANY real medical provider.

And stop talking about "critical care" until you can define it yourself.

If you'd like, as always, I am available to help you understand these kinds of issues. Just ask for help, and then leave the "medical provider" talk to real medical providers, ok?

You are funny.

Yes.. I think you should leave "medical provider" to real medical providers.. like myself.

By the way.. I have demonstrated a greater knowledge of medicine.. and the business of medicine... in one post...

than you have EVER demonstrated. ... (of course that's a pretty low bar... since a CNA could demonstrate more medical knowledge than you have demonstrated so far)..

ultMD? Really.. "ultimate MD"?

Too funny.
 
No, you're a wannabe. That's all. And that's not name-calling. It's truth-calling.

You use the term "medical provider" on this "anonymous" message board because it's sufficiently ambiguous enough for you to pretend to be a healthcare provider (i.e. MD, DO, RN, etc.) when in reality you are in sales (as you stated yourself in another thread that I read...without responding...a few months ago). You really mean that you are a medical equipment or insurance provider, perhaps. That's fine. No shame in that. Own it. Just don't pretend to be something you aren't.

You sell stuff. That's it. You sell widgets which (apparently) allows you to associate with real medical professionals. And (apparently) you think that calling yourself a "medical provider" is not deceptive. But you don't have a medical degree (as you have implied). You're not a published researcher (as you claimed in another thread). We've hashed that out in a previous thread, and you were made the fool because you're just a partisan wannabe who (apparently) wishes he was something that he is not and had the misfortune of being challenged by a actual "medical provider" who happened to read (with horror) some of the lies and half-truths you were posting about a public health issue under a "trust me, I'm a medical provider" ruse.

But here we are again. So....I see we have ANOTHER opportunity for you. What exactly is critical care, my fake "doctor" friend? What in the world is this "Critical Cancer Care" you spoke about? How is "critical care" different than this "critical cancer care" term that you just (hilariously) invented while attempting to present yourself as a medical profession in your most recent response to ludin.

Be specific.

[And the deflection, ducking and dodging from Jaeger begins in 3............2..............1..........:lamo ]

Look, I'll stop (essentially) calling you out for being a fraud and a liar, if you stop (effectively) lying about yourself. Selling products related to, or used by, REAL doctors does NOT make you a "medical provider". Real, actual, degreed, trained health professionals (i.e. M.D's, D.O's, RN's, etc) can see through the clumsy rhetoric (i.e. in this latest instance: "Cancer Critical Care") of a faker, with ease, Jaeger. Don't be that guy. Deal?
 
Last edited:
No, you're a wannabe. That's all. And that's not name-calling. It's truth-calling.

You use the term "medical provider" on this "anonymous" message board because it's sufficiently ambiguous enough for you to pretend to be a healthcare provider (i.e. MD, DO, RN, etc.) when in reality you are in sales (as you stated yourself in another thread that I read...without responding...a few months ago). You really mean that you are a medical equipment or insurance provider, perhaps. That's fine. No shame in that. Own it. Just don't pretend to be something you aren't.

You sell stuff. That's it. You sell widgets which (apparently) allows you to associate with real medical professionals. And (apparently) you think that calling yourself a "medical provider" is not deceptive. But you don't have a medical degree (as you have implied). You're not a published researcher (as you claimed in another thread). We've hashed that out in a previous thread, and you were made the fool because you're just a partisan wannabe who (apparently) wishes he was something that he is not and had the misfortune of being challenged by a actual "medical provider" who happened to read (with horror) some of the lies and half-truths you were posting about a public health issue under a "trust me, I'm a medical provider" ruse.

But here we are again. So....I see we have ANOTHER opportunity for you. What exactly is critical care, my fake "doctor" friend? What in the world is this "Critical Cancer Care" you spoke about? How is "critical care" different than this "critical cancer care" term that you just (hilariously) invented while attempting to present yourself as a medical profession in your most recent response to ludin.

Be specific.

[And the deflection, ducking and dodging from Jaeger begins in 3............2..............1..........:lamo ]

Look, I'll stop (essentially) calling you out for being a fraud and a liar, if you stop (effectively) lying about yourself. Selling products related to, or used by, REAL doctors does NOT make you a "medical provider". Real, actual, degreed, trained health professionals (i.e. M.D's, D.O's, RN's, etc) can see through the clumsy rhetoric (i.e. in this latest instance: "Cancer Critical Care") of a faker, with ease, Jaeger. Don't be that guy. Deal?

You sir are so funny.

Lets fact facts.. you are the one that's the wannabe.. .its sad that you call yourself "ultmd". Clear sign of a fraud. Well that an all your responses. And lack of response.

See.. if you WERE a physician.. as you claim.. you would understand my point regarding the definition of critical care and Ludin's proposed plan. I have no need to defend or prove anything here. My veracity is well established. However.. I will answer you as its relevant to the discussion on this thread.

That's because what insurance/medical community.. defines as "critical care".. and the public (such as Ludin) defines as critical care are usually quite different.

This is very important when discussing proposals for a government healthcare plan that covers "critical care".

Now.. Ludin defined critical care as :
it covers anything from cancer to other major health impact to you

but the actual definition of critical care is:

Is providing immediate care and close monitoring and assessment of a patient that has an illness or injury that acutely impairs the function of one or more vital organ systems in a way that causes a life threatening condition or can cause a high likelihood of an imminent deterioration to a life threatening condition.

So.. as I pointed out to Ludin.. most of cancer care.. would not fit into this definition. Much less things like blowing an ACL, or your rotator cuff.. etc..

Oh.. by the way... PLEASE.. keep "calling me out for being a fraud and a liar"... I get a kick out of your posts. Its amusing for me to read your posts during a long day treating patients or better when in an administrative meeting.

Okay there "Ultmd"... :lamo
 
See.. if you WERE a physician.. as you claim.. you would understand my point regarding the definition of critical care and Ludin's proposed plan.

LOL, "if I were a physician", huh? Well...I'm sorry, but fake, wannabe, anonymous message board "doctors" don't get to question real ones. You're just upset and embarrassed because I keep calling you out for the fake terms you're using in order to portray yourself as a "medical provider". Most recently, I just asked you to tell us all how you define "critical care", and what exactly is "Cancer Critical Care" term you just invented. But, true to form, you couldn't answer ANY simple question, so you responded with personal remarks directed at me, in order to change the subject. Dodge, Deflect and Dissemble. That's all you can do, I guess. You're a widget salesman, Jaeger. Accept it, and move on.

I have no need to defend or prove anything here. My veracity is well established. However.. I will answer you as its relevant to the discussion on this thread.

:lamo Isn't it funny that you keep talking about your "credibility". You have no credibility "here", for sure. You won't even answer simple questions based upon your own previous bloviations, Jaeger.

That's because what insurance/medical community.. defines as "critical care".. and the public (such as Ludin) defines as critical care are usually quite different.

:lamo:lamo
This might be your weakest dodge, yet. Only a widget salesman with no respect for science or the medical profession would say something this ridiculous. You've got it very much twisted. Medical terms and definition, like the term "critical care", are not defined by "the public". Medical professionals define medical terms, and it's the responsibility of "the public" (like you) to use them as defined. What separates you from Ludin doesn't PRETEND to be something he's not. I guess it must really suck for you that I happened to come along and read your fake-medical provider drivel, huh?

This is very important when discussing proposals for a government healthcare plan that covers "critical care".
...the actual definition of critical care is
Is providing immediate care and close monitoring and assessment of a patient that has an illness or injury that acutely impairs the function of one or more vital organ systems in a way that causes a life threatening condition or can cause a high likelihood of an imminent deterioration to a life threatening condition.

OMG!.....well, let me just say that, as a man who has spent the last 25+ years in emergency rooms and ICU's, it was very pleasing to me that you just quoted-almost VERBATIM-the CPT definition of "critical illness" which is quoted on the website of the American College of Emergency Physicians. Isn't that what "we" academic physicians call "plagiarism", Jaeger? Here's the direct quote from ACEP's FAQ page (which, you CLEARLY just Googled, :lamo):

...a critical illness or injury as an illness or injury that acutely impairs one or more vital organ systems such that there is a high probability of imminent or life threatening deterioration in the patient's condition. Critical care services are defined as a physician's direct delivery of medical care for a critically ill or critically injured patient.

So, basically, you just googled "critical illness" and then added "providing care for a patient that has..." as a prefix to that definition. That's too funny! But since you went to such lengths to protect your ego, let me help you out a bit. For us REAL doctors, Critical Care is defined much more succinctly as simply ANY thing requiring ICU care. THAT is what Critical Care is. That said, contrary to your previous remarks, there is NO such thing as "Cancer Critical Care". Critical care is critical care, regardless of the patient's medical diagnosis. If they require ICU care, of any kind, it's "Critical Care".

So.. as I pointed out to Ludin.. most of cancer care.. would not fit into this definition. Much less things like blowing an ACL, or your rotator cuff.. etc..

Oh, stop lying. You told Ludin that "Cancer critical care" is not the same as critical care.......which was pure nonsense. There is no such thing as "cancer critical care". Critical care is critical care. Period. And the examples you raised in responding to Ludin were equally ridiculous. You REALLY need to stop playing doctor on the internet. You've already made a fool of yourself several times over.
 
LOL, "if I were a physician", huh? Well...I'm sorry, but fake, wannabe, anonymous message board "doctors" don't get to question real ones. You're just upset and embarrassed because I keep calling you out for the fake terms you're using in order to portray yourself as a "medical provider". Most recently, I just asked you to tell us all how you define "critical care", and what exactly is "Cancer Critical Care" term you just invented. But, true to form, you couldn't answer ANY simple question, so you responded with personal remarks directed at me, in order to change the subject. Dodge, Deflect and Dissemble. That's all you can do, I guess. You're a widget salesman, Jaeger. Accept it, and move on.
.

You know.. your ability to project your failings onto me is pretty extraordinary "ULT"md.. :lamo

Hmm.. I do recall you asked what critical care was and I defined it. Oh wait.. so now you are mad because since you did not know the definition of critical care.. and when I responded you went and GOOGLED it.. and you found out... "gee.. jaeger19 DOES know what critical care means".

And now you are criticizing me for defining critical care.. as its defined by the medical community and insurances!!! And you claim that's proof I am not a doctor!!! Your intellectual disconnect is ASTOUNDING!

Anyway.. Guess what you seemed to have missed there "Utimate MD"?

You don't even realize that in my post to Ludin... I was making the point that cancer care... for the most part... DOES NOT FIT THE DEFINITION OF "critical care".

Ludin was under the impression that critical care included :
it covers anything from cancer to other major health impact to you

AND I POINTED OUT THAT LUDIN WAS INCORRECT!

and yet you missed that!!! :lamo
 
You know.. your ability to project your failings onto me is pretty extraordinary "ULT"md.. :lamo

.......says the anonymous, fake, wannabe "doctor" who got caught lying about himself on a message board. :lamo:lamo

Hmm.. I do recall you asked what critical care was and I defined it.

Yes, you got exposed as a fraud again. :lamo I said define it, not google it. Critical Care is simple to understand, if you understand anything about the practice of medicine. But not you. You googled it, plagiarized it (verbatim), and tried to claim it as your own words. Funny part about it was that anyone familiar with your previous posts on this board would read the definition you posted would immediately recognize it for being drastically different (i.e. more articulate) than anything you've ever posted around here. You can't post every day sounding like a guy who sells tee-shirts or vacuums out of his car.......and then suddenly post a such a complex, detailed definition of common medical term.........without expecting someone to notice the difference, Jaeger. LOL.:lamo Heck, I doubt you understood most of the terms in that definition you copied. Would you like for me to help you with those, too?

Oh wait.. so now you are mad because since you did not know the definition of critical care.. and when I responded you went and GOOGLED it.. and you found out... "gee.. jaeger19 DOES know what critical care means".

LOL, as a matter of fact, I'm consulting on two ICU patients right now. It's what I do. Just like what YOU DO is sell widgets and act like a fanboy around people like me, lol. And when I arrive, later this afternoon, I'm pretty sure they'll show more respect for me than you. So trust me (my wannabe "doctor" friend) when I tell you that you didn't need to google (and then plagiarize) a 100 word definition from the interwebs. You could have just asked me (or any other medical professional who doesn't just play "doctor" on anonymous message boards) and we would tell you that, simply put, "Critical Care" in basically ANY medical care that requires ICU monitoring. It's really not that complicated a term to understand, is it? And, again, I just can't stop laughing at the way you LITERALLY copied and pasted that definition and tried to claim it as your own words. That was so shady of you....the ends justify the means, right? Just like a widget salesman.


And now you are criticizing me for defining critical care.. as its defined by the medical community and insurances!!!

LOL, no I'm laughing at you because you had to GOOGLE it.....and then PLAGIARIZE it......because you couldn't define it yourself (just as I predicted). But that's what I'd expect from a fake doctor on an anonymous message board. You've consistently shown that you can't defend your views. When challenged, you lie. And I'm just the guy who happened to catch you and call you out for it. That's what you really don't like; but that's your problem, not mine.

And you claim that's proof I am not a doctor!!! Your intellectual disconnect is ASTOUNDING!

LOL, once again, the richness of have my credentials and intellect challenged by wannabe likes of you...never escapes me. Did you, perhaps, always want to go to medical school (but couldn't quite get there), or something? Remember, I'm perfectly ok with you preening on about how I'm not a doctor, etc. I understand that, for all of your brashness and false bravado, if/when a loved one needs emergent medical care. you'd want me (and not you) to be there for them. On the other hand, it's been you, who for reasons of ego and insecurity, feels compelled to lie about your credentials.... keeps making a fool out of himself in the process.
 
Anyway.. Guess what you seemed to have missed there "Utimate MD"?You don't even realize that in my post to Ludin... I was making the point that cancer care... for the most part... DOES NOT FIT THE DEFINITION OF "critical care". Ludin was under the impression that critical care included : AND I POINTED OUT THAT LUDIN WAS INCORRECT! and yet you missed that!!! :lamo

Oh, don't be confused. Ludin was/is just as clueless as you about this. He's just not willing to LIE about it in order to win his point. That's what makes you "special", Jaeger. Ignorance is forgivable. Ignorance and obstinance, coupled with dishonesty arrogance...leads to smack downs by people who see you for what you are.

And just for the record (and your further edification)....we (i.e. ACTUAL surgeons) haven't been performing radical mastectomies in about 35 years now. MRM replaced it as the extensive surgery of choice way back in the late 70's, man. You might as well have listing "leaching" in your example. But of course, you knew that, didn't you "doctor"?? :lamo:lamo:lamo

Last point...you told Ludin "a lot of that is not considered critical care".....but the truth is, NONE of it is, in-and-of-itself, "critical care". So again, every time you engage in your "doctor riffing" you reveal yourself to be the fraud that you are. You can't help it. You're like a gringo pretending to speak spanish, and unfortunately for you, you happened to run into someone who is fluent in the language and calls you out when you start babbling nonsense. :lamo

It's funny to see you squirming and getting angry, though.
 
Oh, don't be confused. Ludin was/is just as clueless as you about this. He's just not willing to LIE about it in order to win his point. That's what makes you "special", Jaeger. Ignorance is forgivable. Ignorance and obstinance, coupled with dishonesty arrogance...leads to smack downs by people who see you for what you are.

And just for the record (and your further edification)....we (i.e. ACTUAL surgeons) haven't been performing radical mastectomies in about 35 years now. MRM replaced it as the extensive surgery of choice way back in the late 70's, man. You might as well have listing "leaching" in your example. But of course, you knew that, didn't you "doctor"?? :lamo:lamo:lamo

Last point...you told Ludin "a lot of that is not considered critical care".....but the truth is, NONE of it is, in-and-of-itself, "critical care". So again, every time you engage in your "doctor riffing" you reveal yourself to be the fraud that you are. You can't help it. You're like a gringo pretending to speak spanish, and unfortunately for you, you happened to run into someone who is fluent in the language and calls you out when you start babbling nonsense. :lamo

It's funny to see you squirming and getting angry, though.

Another good one.

Keep them coming. Its clear that you didn't even understand what the conversation was about.. Heck.. Ludin.. who doesn't profess to be a doctor as YOU DO.. was capable of understanding the discussion. And yet you were not.

And to cover up that fact.. you now are making a baseless, irrelevant post..

Nice try there "doctor".. :lamo

Oh by the way.. though rare.. radical mastectomies are still performed in the US. However.. I think its important to point out your BS.

So you made a big deal about me stating "radical mastectomy". Hmmmm.. and then you went on to say... "MRM replaced it as the extensive surgery of choice"..

Gee... and WHY do you suppose you chose to state "MRM:... without actually stating what MRM stands for?

oh... do you suppose that its because MRM stands for Modified Radical Mastectomy?


Sorry sir.. but once again.. you reveal your lack of medical knowledge. not to mention your lack of civility.

But keep it coming. I need the diversion.
 
Oh by the way.. though rare.. radical mastectomies are still performed in the US. However.. I think its important to point out your BS.

So you made a big deal about me stating "radical mastectomy". Hmmmm.. and then you went on to say... "MRM replaced it as the extensive surgery of choice"..

Gee... and WHY do you suppose you chose to state "MRM:... without actually stating what MRM stands for?

oh... do you suppose that its because MRM stands for Modified Radical Mastectomy?

Did you think I was trying to trick you? Geez, don't be so sensitive. It's just a common abbreviation. That's a silly choice for deflection from the rest of my remarks, but about as as much as I can expect from you, I suppose. You get caught (again) being a fraud, and your response is to deflect and attack. You just cannot/will not explain your "Cancer Critical Care" remarks, obviously. This is what you do when cornered. You deflect and attack.

Quite possibly your weakest deflection effort to date, though.

And, just for your continued edification (perhaps you'll learn a few things from this game of charades you've been playing)....Radical Mastectomy is to Modified Radical Mastectomy........as Truth is to Partial Truth.

Two very different things. Get it? So you were grasping for straws (i.e. trying too hard to sound like something you are not) when you mentioned RM's as a potential example of "Cancer Critical Care"....for multiple reasons. Primarily, the procedure itself does not necessarily require ICU care post-operatively. But also because....there is NO SUCH THING as "Cancer Critical Care". Critical Care is Critical Care, my fake doctor friend.

The indications for a RM for breast cancer are practically zero these days because chest wall involvement responds as well to conservative therapies as to resection. Outcomes are not changed. Actually, we do more MR's for reason OTHER than breast cancer, than for breast cancer. The number of MR's each year for primary breast cancer is in the single digits. If you want to get into the weeds with me on this issue, the truth is that RM's are used for reconstructive/plastics cases, not for breast cancer cases. No one gets a RM for breast cancer anymore. No one. Any surgeon performing a RM for breast cancer these days can expect a very "interesting" grand rounds in the near future (not that you have any idea what that means, of course). But again, I get it. Anything to change the subject after being caught plagiarizing a basic term of medicine, right?
 
Last edited:
Did you think I was trying to trick you? Geez, don't be so sensitive. It's just a common abbreviation. That's a silly choice for deflection from the rest of my remarks, but about as as much as I can expect from you, I suppose.

BWAAAAHHH...that's funny. Look we know why you did it. You tried to make a big point about the fact I used the term radical mastectomy... .. and you didn;t want people to know that MRM.. stands for modified RADICAL MASTECTOMY.

And for the purpose of the discussion that I was in... whether its a full radical mastectomy in which the muscle is taken... or its a modified radical mastectomy where the chest muscle is left... it was irrelevant.

What you seem to MISS AGAIN...

Is that the whole point I was making to Ludin was that most of cancer care.. is NOT CRITICAL CARE.

You keep arguing with me that "there is no such thing as CANCER CRITICAL CARE"...

Which is the point I was making to ludin when I posted and you apparently don't have enough reading comprehension to understand.


But hey... keep making yourself look foolish.. MR. "ultimate MD"..

You have proven that you are anything but ultimate.. and certainly not a doctor.
 
BWAAAAHHH...that's funny. Look we know why you did it. You tried to make a big point about the fact I used the term radical mastectomy... .. and you didn;t want people to know that MRM.. stands for modified RADICAL MASTECTOMY.

:lamo You're silly. You got caught (again) using terms that you didn't understand....and (as always) now you're trying to protect your ego. And btw....What "we"? There is no "we". Why do you keep pretending that there is anyone siding with your ignorant rantings in this thread? Is the insecurity you feel really that severe? Regardless, it just makes you look pathetically weak.
.

You have proven that you are anything but ultimate.. and certainly not a doctor.

Wow, this is really a pressure point for you, isn't it? Don't you find that a bit creepy? I do. And I would almost bet that your invisible supporters ("we") would agree, if they existed, LOL. But again, wannabe, fake, anonymous message board "doctors" don't get to challenge real ones on issue of medicine. That's just the way it goes. Sorry if that bothers you as much as it seems to.

Lastly, let's note that your last two posts have completely deflected from the topic of this thread. This is what you seem to do when you cannot answer basic questions. Deflect, dodge, dissemble............wash, rinse and repeat.............deflect, dodge and dissemble. That is your go-to move on this board. :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom