House Passes Health Care Reform

[evanrick]

The Dem's didn't do this "to placate the republicans" but to satisfy Rep. Stupak (D) and many other pro-lifers who are Democrats.

Or maybe you just haven't been paying attention...

no, i understand that there are many conservative democrats, and if thats what it takes to get his vote, then fine.

but it was republicans who were demanding the amendment, and im just saying that their argument was irrelevant since they didnt vote for final passage.

 

[NineOfClubs]

no, i understand that there are many conservative democrats, and if thats what it takes to get his vote, then fine.

but it was republicans who were demanding the amendment, and im just saying that their argument was irrelevant since they didnt vote for final passage.

The Democrats could have told the Republicans to go to Hell.

The Dem's have a 49 vote edge.

They were only trying to bring in the pro-life Democrats, Stupak and his followers....

 

[palemale]

This bill, in its present form, will never make it through the Senate.

And, what a sad day for freedom and capitalism.....

But it's a happy day for people who so far have been denied health care by capitalism. It's a happy day for people who have been victimized by the tyranny of the health insurance industry's thirst for obscene profits and capitalism's corruption of our political system.

 

[lostnfound]

and to Lostnfound, saying doctors are in it for the money is short-sighted. 70% of physicians support a public option, and doctor quality is already a problem.

Im guessing your med student friends wouldnt support any kind of health reform, so their opinion is a minority position.

as for doctors salaries, and their competitiveness, is a moot point.

doctors really dont practice medicine anymore, they practice sick-care, and most doctors out there only do the minimum because its easier to give someone prescription drugs then to tell them they need to live a healthy life!

Okay, I looked up the poll, and yes the majority of doctors do support a system with BOTH a private and public option. But notice it's BOTH and not just a single-payer system. And you have already said that this IS going to lead to a single-payer system. So my reasoning is that they would only support the public option if it has strong restrictions on expansion. You could say that the bill picked up the endorsement from the AMA, but realize that the organization only represents 15% of practicing physicians in the US, and it's not entirely a huge union that represents all doctors. The AMA only passed the endorsement with division in the organization.

You think medical school competition is moot and debatable? I was a chemistry major (not pre-med) at a huge university and let me tell you, the 600 kids in my organic chemistry class were cut-throat. If you only knew...

And way to generalize doctors by saying they are apathetic and only "do the minimum." Tell that to the researchers at fine medical institutions working hard to find cures for HIV and infectious diseases. Sure, there are some bad doctors out there, but like I said earlier, med school is extremely competitive where only the best get in. I'm pretty sure the nation's brightest students are at least competent to be doctors.

Just curious, do you know what the difference from an MD and DO is?

 

[Kulindahr]

If the public option turns into a take-over, then it's going to put a strain on the quality and number of doctors out there. I have a few friends who are med students and I know someone who is an advisor for pre-meds and they all agree: most, not all, enter med school for the high-earning salaries. Yes, a small number are in it for altruistic reasons, but let's be real here. Anyways, that's another issue. So, if it's a single-payer system, salaries will be lowered, by how much I don't know, but you can't deny that this will impact physician salaries. This will mean in less interest in people to become doctors. If less people are interested, then there will be a shortage of practicing physicians. So, by supply and demand, to meet an increase in health care consumers (via expansion of coverage) there has to obviously be an increase in physicians. How to do that? Ease up medical school admissions significantly. Med school admissions rate are notoriously low (2%-24% of applicants get in, depending on the school); average GPAs are about 3.7. So if admission standards are lowered, the high standards of doctors will go down. On the other hand, a tougher admissions process results in a lot of hard work in students--ever meet a pre-med or med student? They are always studying their butts off because it is extremely competitive. Imagine being a student, and you know it's easy, wouldn't you just study up to the minimum to get by? Also, Med school is extremely expensive and many end up $200K -$300K in debt. Would people want to be in that kind of debt and make a slightly above average salary?

First we need to get the AMA booted out of control of the med schools -- they run the boards that accredit the schools, decide how many students a school can have, etc. The entrance is competitive because there are only so many slots.
That's why one of my suggestions for health-care reform would have been to take steps to increase the doctor supply, steps that if begun now wouldn't bring us any new doctors for a good six years or more.

We also need to break the binary paradigm that says you're either a doctor or you're not. There would be nothing wrong with certifying some for dealing with bones, others with diseases, etc.; not everyone has to know everything, and if someone excels in one area but can't cut it in others, locking him or her out altogether is a foolish waste of talent.

 

[lostnfound]

First we need to get the AMA booted out of control of the med schools -- they run the boards that accredit the schools, decide how many students a school can have, etc. The entrance is competitive because there are only so many slots.

That's why one of my suggestions for health-care reform would have been to take steps to increase the doctor supply, steps that if begun now wouldn't bring us any new doctors for a good six years or more.

We also need to break the binary paradigm that says you're either a doctor or you're not. There would be nothing wrong with certifying some for dealing with bones, others with diseases, etc.; not everyone has to know everything, and if someone excels in one area but can't cut it in others, locking him or her out altogether is a foolish waste of talent.

I believe LCME (accreditation committee) choose to set high standards of admissions to ensure higher quality of doctors. If it's easy to go to med school, wouldn't you have mostly average applicants get accepted? I think their reasoning is that since medicine is a high-risk job that requires a high-level of intelligence, they should only accept high-caliber students. I honestly think this is justified. If it's a life or death situation, we all should want the best doctors.

You are right that people should have the right to specialize in a particular of medicine, instead of everything. However, this is how med school curriculum is set up. The first two years, you study basic biomedical courses (anatomy, microbiology, biochemistry, etc.). The last two years are a rotation in medical specialities--so for 8 weeks you study general medicine, then you do a 6 week workshop in surgery, followed by infectious diseases, and so forth. The point is that 1) it allows the students to be exposed to the variety of fields that they choose to specialize and 2) it reinforces the philosophy the medicine requires a unified body approach--that symptoms and the different parts of the body are all connected.

 

[Kulindahr]

I believe LCME (accreditation committee) choose to set high standards of admissions to ensure higher quality of doctors. If it's easy to go to med school, wouldn't you have mostly average applicants get accepted? I think their reasoning is that since medicine is a high-risk job that requires a high-level of intelligence, they should only accept high-caliber students. I honestly think this is justified. If it's a life or death situation, we all should want the best doctors.

Two of my last three doctors have been from med schools in foreign countries; they would not have made it into U.S. medical schools. Except for the Kenyan's occasional references to shamanistic practices I'd never heard of, both were excellent doctors.

I'm not going to believe that if we increased the number of people admitted to medical school by, say, twenty percent, that it would change the quality of doctors we get.

You are right that people should have the right to specialize in a particular of medicine, instead of everything. However, this is how med school curriculum is set up. The first two years, you study basic biomedical courses (anatomy, microbiology, biochemistry, etc.). The last two years are a rotation in medical specialities--so for 8 weeks you study general medicine, then you do a 6 week workshop in surgery, followed by infectious diseases, and so forth. The point is that 1) it allows the students to be exposed to the variety of fields that they choose to specialize and 2) it reinforces the philosophy the medicine requires a unified body approach--that symptoms and the different parts of the body are all connected.

I'm saying that med school is set up wrong. Yes, there should be a unified body approach, but that doesn't mean that someone who is very good with bones but sucks at epidemiology shouldn't be a bone doctor, or someone who dazzles at surgery but can't keep his skin disorders straight shouldn't be allowed to advance as a surgeon. It would be like engineering: everyone gets certain basics, but you get certified in different areas. I'll venture that we could double the number of very fine doctors we graduate if they went to diplomas listing the areas they're certified in.

In some ways it works that way now: the doctors at the clinic I go to are constantly calling each other about the areas the other one is stronger in. Rather than trying to make everyone a jack-of-all-medicine, let them focus on their strengths. I would love to go to a bone doctor who crapped out in infectious diseases and so got three extra classes in bone medicine rather than being tossed out because he couldn't do it all.

 

[DBSKIsMine]

Tell that to the researchers at fine medical institutions working hard to find cures for HIV and infectious diseases. Sure, there are some bad doctors out there, but like I said earlier, med school is extremely competitive where only the best get in. I'm pretty sure the nation's brightest students are at least competent to be doctors.

Yeah, they're so busy researching they're not out there doing a general practice. And even if they develop some "cure", you know damn well the FDA and insurance companies would find some way to shoot it down. The medical industry makes WAY too much money off of cancer and HIV patients to ever let a cure actually be put to practical use.

 

[NW007]

i don't know why y'all are happy about this, being that it only takes effect in 2013. shit, we need healthcare now, SINGLE-PAYER. not this bullshit bill that will only be watered down even more once it hits the senate.

If you haven't noticed we already have a healthcare system, except for those that don't want to pay for it, aren't legally here to be eligible, and yes there are some who can't afford to have healthcare. However, helping the several million that can't afford healthcare and eliminating the "pre-esisting conditions restrictions" can be solved at much less cost that this version of healthcare reform. Hopfeully the Senate will take the time to do some "clear thinking" of their own on this issue rather than blindly following the Democratic leadership which the House did.

 

[Ambrocious]

Oh my God, I'd better hide Grandma now because Obama's death panels will be coming to take her away.

You better...oh wait, you won't do that! You'll have her waiting by the door with a happy smile! The environment is FAR more important than your dear old grandma! We all know that humans are bad for the environment...so when they come and talk with your grandma about making plans to die to reduce the carbon footprint, you will probably smile, let them talk with her and hope they lovingly tell you that you should die next.

My god man...people like you love being pimped out. A careful look into history and it's forms of tyranny will show that they encouraged the euthanasia of the elderly and the mentally retarded. Now days with more than half of the United States having some form of mental illness, under this health care reform, you would not be counted worthy enough to be given treatment! Under the new health care bill, anyone that does not serve the government (slavery) will be considered worthless and therefor will not be counted worthy enough to be taken care of.

 

[Heliostat]

I think it's a first step into "We are your government and you take what we offer or die" kind of system.

To hell with options...we can have other people make up our minds FOR us! Oh happy day! Now if I get into a really bad accident and I may want to live, if the doctor says that I should probably just die, his voice is more important!

And for anyone of you elderly out there, hope you enjoy your restrictive health care not to mention your "every 5 years of death counciling" on why you should die for a greener environment".

I love not being able to choose! So happy that I no longer can get what I want! I told them I wanted an apple but they gave me a pissed off angry cat! Now THAT'S what I call a darn great job!


Now that I'm finished with my "SCRUBS" like rant, I'd just like to say that we should all have a choice to seek treatment from wherever we want. With this bill passing we do not get all those options. But for the millions of mindless backwoods inbreeds, this bill will do WONDERS for you since you think the best way to cure syphilis is with some gun powder and a match! Oh yes...the health care bill is far better than that...but it still bites.

I'm already in this situation - it's called my Insurance Company. The Insurance Companies are the ones that make decisions now - not patients, not doctors - its the insurance industy. To hell with this for-profit bullshit. My life has had a huge negative impact as a DIRECT result of the for-profit nature of our healthcare system. I can't believe all the ignorance of people on this forum and elsewhere who defend the status-quo of the current WORST HEALTHCARE SYSTEM OF THE DEVELOPED WORLD. It's obvious to me that anyone who defends the current system has NEVER been sick, and has NEVER had to deal with the bullshit coming from the insurance industry. You claim this healthcare reform is a theft of freedom - but that freedom we don't have for the government to take away anyhow! The insurance industry - NOT THE GOVERNMENT - is the biggest threat to freedom in this country today. If it were not for my insurance company telling me "No." I would have had medical treatment SIX YEARS AGO that I still need today. Instead, I've had to ask them for permission, and the only anwswer they have is "No."

How dare any of you defend the status quo.

 

[Ambrocious]

This bill, in its present form, will never make it through the Senate.

And, what a sad day for freedom and capitalism.....

It will pass. And as long as people don't wake up and realize that both the Democrats and Republicans (behind closed doors) are both working on the same agenda TOGETHER, you will be engaged in a falsified fight!

This bill will pass. Just know that BOTH sides are absolutely corrupt. Our only hope is with "WE THE PEOPLE".

You want the right view on things, go to infowars.com.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yeah, they're so busy researching they're not out there doing a general practice. And even if they develop some "cure", you know damn well the FDA and insurance companies would find some way to shoot it down. The medical industry makes WAY too much money off of cancer and HIV patients to ever let a cure actually be put to practical use.

Don't believe it.

Every time we beat one disease or disorder, people live longer. They pay bills longer. And they run into new afflictions for doctors to play with.

I'm already in this situation - it's called my Insurance Company. The Insurance Companies are the ones that make decisions now - not patients, not doctors - its the insurance industy. To hell with this for-profit bullshit. My life has had a huge negative impact as a DIRECT result of the for-profit nature of our healthcare system. I can't believe all the ignorance of people on this forum and elsewhere who defend the status-quo of the current WORST HEALTHCARE SYSTEM OF THE DEVELOPED WORLD. It's obvious to me that anyone who defends the current system has NEVER been sick, and has NEVER had to deal with the bullshit coming from the insurance industry. You claim this healthcare reform is a theft of freedom - but that freedom we don't have for the government to take away anyhow! The insurance industry - NOT THE GOVERNMENT - is the biggest threat to freedom in this country today. If it were not for my insurance company telling me "No." I would have had medical treatment SIX YEARS AGO that I still need today. Instead, I've had to ask them for permission, and the only anwswer they have is "No."

How dare any of you defend the status quo.

Oh, but don't you remember that this was the system urged on by government in order to keep costs down?


As for this being the worst system...

the quality of care itself is at the top. The quality of access to care varies from excellent to random to pitiful, depending on your situation.

 

[01solara]

Wire coat hanger amendment would be a reference to the abortion restriction... not good for women's rights.

Women can have all the abortions they want just don't ask us to pay for them. If you believe in giving them money for this purpose why don't you pay for it out of your pocket.

 

[Kulindahr]

HA!

Yeah, it's the classic fear of the unknown. Americans are notoriously against any kind of change. Got to maintain the status quo, you know.

The only people who will be hurt by this is the health insurance companies executives checking and savings accounts. They're been using all the scare tactics they can to stop any kind of change. Profits, profits.

After this passes and the dust settles and everyone is on the "socialist" and "government run health care" you'll want it and like it. Medicare? Social Security? Ask soneone who is on it and if they want to get rid of it.

Heliostat, you da man! That's exactly right. It's the INSURANCE companies that are making medical decisions based on their profit potential.

Let's say it passes. Then it will go like all the other bureaucracies we've got to "help" us:

The people setting it up will want experts, people familiar with how these things work. They'll turn to people with experience already -- and that means people who are past of the current system. So how will things get run? The same way they do in the current system: to keep costs down, they'll ration care, apply triage, decide which tests you need or don't (my dad almost died once waiting for some damned government bureaucrat to decide if he needed a test, and that was before all this), and all the rest.

I think the only thing that I might like about it would be if it says the insurance company can't keep a lid on my disability based on a 1985 standard of living -- well, that and the fact that at present I effectively have five different medical insurance companies, and they all argue over who isn't going to pay, which means I'm denied services on needed blood tests and such until they settle it, which means instead of getting tests quarterly as is needed, I get them annually and my doctor and I do a lot of guessing and crossing fingers.

 

[01solara]

It will pass. And as long as people don't wake up and realize that both the Democrats and Republicans (behind closed doors) are both working on the same agenda TOGETHER, you will be engaged in a falsified fight!

This bill will pass. Just know that BOTH sides are absolutely corrupt. Our only hope is with "WE THE PEOPLE".

You want the right view on things, go to infowars.com.

You are correct the corruption is rampant on both sides of the isle. We need a non violent revolution and to kick all the bastards out and start over.

 

[Kulindahr]

Women can have all the abortions they want just don't ask us to pay for them. If you believe in giving them money for this purpose why don't you pay for it out of your pocket.

Yep -- put your money where your mouth is. All the abortion supporters should get together and set up Abortion Available America, your triple-A service for dispensing of [STRIKE]responsibility[/STRIKE] unwanted [STRIKE]offspring[/STRIKE] tissues.

Seriously, is there anything more evil and tyrannical than coercing people into paying for something they regard as immoral?

 

[naked gent]

I can't believe all the ignorance of people on this forum and elsewhere who defend the status-quo

When you ask basically healthy people their opinion of our healthcare system and get a reply that 85% of them are happy with it bells should start to go off in your head.

If you wish an accurate opinion concerning our healthcare system you should be asking those who use it the most which excludes the healthy.

Old people and the chronically sick are soaking up most of our healthcare dollars why not poll them to see what their opinion is.......its the only valid one out there.

 

[Kulindahr]

You are correct the corruption is rampant on both sides of the isle. We need a non violent revolution and to kick all the bastards out and start over.

Right, but how?

 

[Kulindahr]

When you ask basically healthy people their opinion of our healthcare system and get a reply that 85% of them are happy with it bells should start to go off in your head.

If you wish an accurate opinion concerning our healthcare system you should be asking those who use it the most which excludes the healthy.

Old people and the chronically sick are soaking up most of our healthcare dollars why not poll them to see what their opinion is.......its the only valid one out there.

I think ti was KATU in Portland (OR) that sent reporters with staged injuries to local emergency rooms to assess the quality of care. A few ERs shone -- anyone bleeding or in pain got to skip the paperwork until they were settled and at least pain free. In others -- and I've dealt with this to the point of passing out once after a little mishap with a chain saw -- patients had to sit and answer question after question about everything from where they grew up to what they had for breakfast to when they last saw a doctor to have they ever been rejected for coverage to.....

My dad got that once, and rebelled: he stood up, walked in to where the doctors were, called out to one and said to get the leech off him and give him some modern medicine.

Best I ever did was to tell the lady, Look, we can keep on with this, and I'll pass out and bleed all over your forms, or you can get me to a doctor and I'll fill them out myself when there isn't blood in my eyes and my head doesn't feel like a soccer ball in passing practice. Then I let a muscle shudder run over me and shook my head just enough to fling some blood her way.
I got my doc.