Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Great ObamaCare Debate, Part 237: Back to Court The Great ObamaCare Debate, Part 237: Back to Court

03-09-2014 , 06:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Malpractice lawsuits and insurance are a negligible reason .....
Two lies in one sentence.

Trial lawyers say claims only add 2% to medical costs. Ignoring the fact that doctors and hospitals pay lawyers even when they win. Many cases are still pending. Extra unnecessary tests to protect from lawsuits. Consent forms which must be signed before every surgery.

20-5% administrative costs for health insurance isn't negligible.
03-09-2014 , 06:17 PM
Quote:
Consent forms which must be signed before every surgery.
....
03-09-2014 , 06:20 PM
Get real Fly. You can't imagine the unnecessary expense of doctors obtaining informed consent before they go doctoring. If we cut out that step, it could literally save minutes per visit.
03-09-2014 , 06:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by [Phill]
Regulating drugs isnt the problem.
It definitely is a problem. Addressing it will definitely improve things.
03-09-2014 , 06:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
It definitely is a problem. Addressing it will definitely improve things.
So I'm putting this together and the new better alternative to Obamacare involves:

1) Unregulated drugs
2) Surgeries without consent
3) Tort reform!

What could possibly go wrong?
03-09-2014 , 06:41 PM
Listening to doctors talk about health care policy has been eye opening. With exceptions, they have no ****ing idea what they are talking about and generally oppose even the most common sense reforms because something Obama.

Basically, Ike sadly is representative.
03-09-2014 , 06:45 PM
Possibly drug regulation is a problem, or at least can be improved, but spending any time even trying is like the band playing on while the Titanic sunk.

If you found the problems and ranked them, in basically any possible methodology, the operation of the FDA is somewhere near the bottom.
03-09-2014 , 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
So I'm putting this together and the new better alternative to Obamacare involves:

1) Unregulated drugs
2) Surgeries without consent
3) Tort reform!

What could possibly go wrong?
wheeee another strawman!
03-09-2014 , 08:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
If only we could look at states that have passed tort reform and see if costs were reduced. I wonder if, say, Texas has considered legislation.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/l...h-care-/nRpcp/
This study only looks at costs among the medicare population.
03-09-2014 , 08:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
Intuitively that is what you would expect. But again, we have real world data points and tort caps do not actually reduce costs, probably because people still sue a ton, the big winners just win less. And big winners have always been a small percentage of med mal cases.
The article you cited supports literally 0 of this.
03-09-2014 , 08:58 PM
The rules for suing are the same for medicare patients as everyone else. The article I cited supports exactly what I claimed. Bonus hilarity, for Ike, for the study confirming a lack of doctors fleeing other jursidictions to practice in Texas.
03-09-2014 , 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
Listening to doctors talk about health care policy has been eye opening. With exceptions, they have no ****ing idea what they are talking about and generally oppose even the most common sense reforms because something Obama.

Basically, Ike sadly is representative.
I don't know why we would expect doctors to be policy experts, generally. Doctors are rent-seekers like most other professionals. That Obamacare has some negative consequences for doctors (and some positive ones as well) should not be overly concerning to us.
03-09-2014 , 09:56 PM
Quote:
The rules for suing are the same for medicare patients as everyone else. The article I cited supports exactly what I claimed.
Medicare patients utilize very differently from the rest of the population.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
But again, we have real world data points and tort caps do not actually reduce costs
Article is one data point that's based on Medicare patients.

Quote:
, probably because people still sue a ton

, the big winners just win less.

And big winners have always been a small percentage of med mal cases.
Maybe I missed it but I saw nothing in the article regarding frequency or severity of med malpractice awards.
03-09-2014 , 10:13 PM
Oh look, riverman thinks he knows more about health care than MDs. Cute.
03-09-2014 , 10:34 PM
yeah im gonna trust a lawyer more than a medical school student on this one
03-09-2014 , 10:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
Listening to doctors talk about health care policy has been eye opening. With exceptions, they have no ****ing idea what they are talking about and generally oppose even the most common sense reforms because something Obama.

Basically, Ike sadly is representative.
Have you considered the possibility that the shoe is actually on the other foot?
03-09-2014 , 11:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
Oh look, riverman thinks he knows more about health care than MDs. Cute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by schu_22
yeah im gonna trust a lawyer more than a medical school student on this one
Yeah, on the subject of health care law and policy, I'll take the lawyers and law students. I won't argue with ikes about preferred dosing for prescription drugs or options for surgery.
03-09-2014 , 11:13 PM
don't get me wrong ikes if my nose won't stop running or my dick hurts when i pee i'll hit you up for the answers
03-10-2014 , 12:06 AM
ikes the only MD to ever post in this thread literally reposted chain emails and tried to crowdsource his paperwork to 2p2ers. Yes, Riverman knows more about health care policy than many, many MDs.
03-10-2014 , 12:08 AM
Like do you guys remember the doctor who put up a sign refusing service to Obama voters:
http://www.alan.com/2010/04/03/docto...ontent=Twitter

Quote:
Cassell: Well you know, I can’t tell you exactly what the deal is.
Colmes: If you can’t tell us exactly what the deal is, why are you opposing it and fighting against it?
Cassell: I’m not the guy who wrote the plan.
Colmes: But if you don’t know what the deal is why are you speaking out against something you don’t know what the deal is?
Cassell: What I get online, just like any other American. What I’m supposed to understand about the bill should be available to me.
Colmes: It is; it’s been online for a long time; it’s also been all over the media…
03-10-2014 , 12:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
ikes the only MD to ever post in this thread literally reposted chain emails and tried to crowdsource his paperwork to 2p2ers. Yes, Riverman knows more about health care policy than many, many MDs.
lol look fly is making **** up again.
03-10-2014 , 12:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turn Prophet
Yeah, on the subject of health care law and policy, I'll take the lawyers and law students. I won't argue with ikes about preferred dosing for prescription drugs or options for surgery.
Yeah just think of all the training lawyers get about the health care system compared to doctors!
03-10-2014 , 06:29 AM
ikes remember when you totally definitely 100% were aware of what changes Obamacare made to large group insurance but you weren't allowed to tell the thread because of... reasons? How much training does it take to read a ****ing press release?
03-10-2014 , 10:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Get real Fly. You can't imagine the unnecessary expense of doctors obtaining informed consent before they go doctoring. If we cut out that step, it could literally save minutes per visit.
It requires a half hour consultation by specialists. More extra costs.
03-10-2014 , 10:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
IIRC they don't count any infants who died soon after being born.

Feel free to go to cuba for your health care.
Didn't Michael Moore go to Cuba for healthcare on one of his documentaries?

      
m