Let there be no doubt. Our health care program will change under this new regime, how far it is tweaked however; may be within our finger tips. If this government sees how riled up the seniors are over this proposed piece of garbage program they may not have a choice but to change things in committee and that is where the final bill must emerge from. We must be vigilant and keep the pressure up on our Senators and Representatives in Washington and Tallahassee. We cannot and will not be warehoused!

Where "tort reform" caps to medical malpractice have been made law, nothing has changed lawsuit-wise (average number of lawsuits). Cost of health care has not decreased. "Defensive medicine" (which I call 'consumer fraud') and "battery") is still alive and thriving. The only "winner" was that medical malpractice rates went down in those jurisdictions, but as private and CBO research has shown, medical malpractice (claims and insurance) only amounts to less-than-2% of health care costs. So, reductions from 2% to 1.5% is not a consumer-gain, but has increased insurance company (and possibly medical care provider) profits.

To possibly eliminate "defensive medicine" (the big concern) will require blanket amnesty to medical malpractice lawsuits. Are folk willing to relinquish any and all claims for damages incurred?

.So, it goes back to how much "risk" does the public want to accept. Do "we" want possibly lower costs at the trade-off of no claim for error or harm?

A Hobson's Choice?
 

That's peanuts. Last time I looked, the average amount spent by lobbyists per member of Congress was $4.4 million! Until the electorate gets as up in arms about campaign finance reform as they seem to be about healthcare reform, nothing will change. The corporate types and the members of Congress are all committed to greed and self-service. That being said, it might be a heckuva lot easier to get rid of members of Congress than to oust corporate leaders.

If no one likes the idea of campaign finance reform, how about term limits?

In the meantime, we'll be left to choose between trusting Congress or the leaders of the private sector to resolve our healthcare issues. Whichever one chooses, they're left with a Hobson's choice. And doing nothing may be the worst choice of all.

Here's One or Two
 

I had major orhtopedic surgery in late April. Prior to the surgery, the surgeon required a complete physical examination from a doctor on the staff of the same hospital where the surgery was to be performed in Chicago. I had a complete physical exam three months earlier done by a doctor in The Villages. None of the results of that exam were deemed acceptable. In the new physical the internist thought it would be a good idea if I had a stress test. Forget that I have had no experience or tests that suggest a heart problem.

If ALL these tests and procedures weren't unnecessary, they were at the very least a huge abundance of caution.

Medicare paid for it all. The "old" physical and tests, as well as another three months later.

I have talked to many people about medical tests and have talked to my own doctor and I am convinced that the cost of medical care and unnecessary tests are related big time.
I won't go into details about my case except to say that after my father died of heart related illness, I had it in my head that there must be something wrong with my heart...well it took many tests and a special trip into a major hospital in Boston to convince me my heart was healthy.
Needlesss to say, I finally pulled all my medical records from my long-time primary doctor and found another. This doctor never hesitated to just throw out prescriptions and tests like they were going out of style.
My new primary doctor frowns on unnecessary medicine and is a proponent of healthy lifestyles. I now only take 10mg of a statin to keep my cholesterol in check and I power walk one hour a day.(4 1/2 miles). He is amazed at my blood pressure and I know longer fantasize about heart disease.
This overweight red-nosed doctor is still practicing and handing out medicine and costly medical tests like candy. I don't blame the doctor for the culture of looking over your shoulder to see if there is a lawyer behind him.

VK Yes it was peanuts.But he got caught. There is billions of pork that is distributed for the sole purpose of buying votes.

I guess for me the bottom line is, do you trust government?

I see them over the years making pretty much a mess out of everything they touch. They lie, they are irresponsible with our money, they are self serving and things always cost about double what they say it will.

Do I trust Congress?. NO
Do I trust them with health care. NO.
Do I trust all of BO's non elected Czars? NO.
Do I trust BO? NO
Do I trust ANY politician? Generally NO.

BO made a promise over and over. If you make less that $250k a year your taxes won't go up one dime. HE LIED.

Forest for the trees folks.

Would you trust a wife or husband that behaved like congress? There's your bottom line.

[QUOTE=gnu;219004]if these are the type of changes to be made in health care I don't want any part of it. Even with the lowest level Blue Cross HMO that I have it has been great. I certainly am not willing to take a chance on the government forcing me into less than I already have.


Under the so-called public option, it is an option.There is no forcing at all. Period!

NO!:agree:

Not sure what your money says but mine says "In God we Trust."

Put your trust in man and you will get screwed every time. But I'm sure health care will be different.

Another Side
 

And what if the stress test had revealed a problem that your other "complete" physical had not picked up? Would you have classed it as unnecessary then? My brother-in-law died needlessly at 67 of lung cancer because in all the prior "complete" physicals (every year for 3 years), not once had he had a chest x-ray. When he collapsed and was admitted to the hospital, then they did a routine chest x-ray and found it. By then it was inoperable. The explanation given to him and his wife was that if he had been a smoker, coughing, or coughing up blood then they would have done one. Like you, since he checked out healthy otherwise, they didn't deem it necessary. I do agree that it is ridiculous that most of the time the doctors won't accept what has been done by another since reputable labs come up with the results, not the doctor. All they would have to do then is do only those that had not already been done within a short timeframe, as in your case.