New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Examples please

Another thing. In December, 2010, my job was phased out at work. So I was without insurance, which I could not afford at $500+ per month with no income. The only thing I was concerned about was the cost of my prescriptions, which were several due to cardiac artery disease. Previously, while on insurance, I had been paying either a $30 or $15 co-pay per prescription.

Hallelujah! With no insurance, I found that several of my prescriptions were much cheaper out-of-pocket than with an insurance co-pay--almost 2/3 for several of them.

Now that I am back to work and have insurance again, I do not use my insurance to buy medications, because it is much cheaper to pay out-of-pocket. Looks like the provider is the winner in this one, too. I would suggest that anyone with insurance check the out-of-pocket price versus co-pay insurance price when they are buying medications.
 
If your cardiac artery disease is a cholesterol try magnesium, and a small pot of yogurt, instead of expensive chemicals - it works, been using magnesium for years, cholesterol perfect.

Drugs, like Lipitor, and other Statins, clear out the cholesterol, but, at the same time thin the artery walls, strip the heart of CO Q10, eat muscle tissue, and can cause liver damage - side effects of magnesium - zilch!
 
What we see is someone who doesn't want to be confused with facts, since EVERY responder noted costs coming down.

Of course, you want to hold people to a different standard than you award yourself.

You're demanding hospital bills, but all you provide is made up numbers.

I wonder what kind of expensive enclave you live in where a doctor's visit was $250 ten years ago. Mine is $78, in 2012 dollars.

My wife was able to get insured under the PPACA's provision for "high risk" patients (i.e. pre existing conditions) for $302 a months with at $1500 deductible for the entire year. Most insurance companies wouldnt' write her at all, and the ones who did charged more that twice as much.

When she developed complications after routine surgery, the insurance covered it ,adn we got to keep our home and our retirment savings, something that wouldn't have happened under the institutionally corrupt system we are replacing.

Several provisions have has an impact, notably the limitation of the industry to an 85% loss ratio.

Finally, your made up numbers on how much doctors' visits cost ten years ago compared to where they are now, have nothing to do with Obamacare, since the major provisions have not taken effect yet.

This is the second time in the same morning that a far right winger has made this kind of tortured false analogy. I'm beginning to think its a sign of desperation.

This
 
Charcat said:
Another thing. In December, 2010, my job was phased out at work. So I was without insurance, which I could not afford at $500+ per month with no income. The only thing I was concerned about was the cost of my prescriptions, which were several due to cardiac artery disease. Previously, while on insurance, I had been paying either a $30 or $15 co-pay per prescription.

Hallelujah! With no insurance, I found that several of my prescriptions were much cheaper out-of-pocket than with an insurance co-pay--almost 2/3 for several of them.

Now that I am back to work and have insurance again, I do not use my insurance to buy medications, because it is much cheaper to pay out-of-pocket. Looks like the provider is the winner in this one, too. I would suggest that anyone with insurance check the out-of-pocket price versus co-pay insurance price when they are buying medications.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've had that happen to me as well.

I only take two small perscriptions. Both of which are generic, and both of which are cheaper than my old insurance co pay.
 
justoffal said:
You're missing the point.....I don't bleed for the Insurance companies I am simply pointing out that you cannot fix a problem if you're not looking at the problem. The problem begins with runaway and at times even fraudulent overcharging at the provider level. It has become a culture of Carte Blanche in the name of better health....whereas the Better Health part has been marginalized as a means to an end.
Click to expand...

I think we can all agree on that.

I think the next step in health care reform is going after that fact.

Remember that the PPACA requires that insurance cover preventative care, so your regular doctor's visit will be free. They want people to go to a GP regularly, rather than go to the emergency room when it's almost too late.

But under the system we had, the practitioners were rewarded for dispensing cures, not preventing anything.

And, because the insurance industry has little meaninful regulation (no one state regulator is any match for a big national insurance company).

In the vacuum, the system operated on a cost plus basis. With little or no competition between the industry's bankers (insurance), and given the fact that health care is an inelastic commodity, the system was effectively rigged to grow costs without growing results, which it has been doing.
 
This omnibus bill passed in 1986, which included COBRA will become less important:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_and_Active_Labor_Act

This drives up the running costs of emergency room care, which in turn drives up the cost of health care,

CBO is forecasting that 1.2 million American will pay the penalty for no coverage, that means 98.8 percent will have coverage and no penalty,

It also means that the coverage that most Americans enjoy now will not change,.

It also means that doctors will have thriving businesses because less of their time will be dedicated to managing the paperwork required thru health care insurers.

When HMO's became the prevailing source of health care insurance, doctors began dedicating two days out of a six day work week to managing this part of their practice, thus the demand for physician assistances started to grow.

In fact, a lot of students who are borderline bio majors are encouraged to seek physician assistant as their choice of employment, rather than become a doctor.

Why? because the cost of bio studies also skyrockets, everyone knows who has a kid whose a bio major, (and I do) after the first semester, 50% of the class drops out.

And to pursue such a career as being a physician when physicians are being unduly taxed with administrative bullshit, surely discourages those doe eyed Hippocrates.

So take a look, you'll see that the run costs of ER's will drop, Medicare expansion is already benefiting 62 million seniors in this country.

And maybe, just maybe we can stop the import of drugs from mexico and canada for their care.

Imagine that!

Regards
Pace
 
It also means that doctors will have thriving businesses because less of their time will be dedicated to managing the paperwork required thru health care insurers.
Click to expand...

Not so...

As it is now, many doctors refuse to see Medicare or Medicaid patients due the enormous amount of paperwork that is involved. Insurance paperwork is handled through their billing services, and unless there is a question to the insurance company as to why a certain patient is denied a certain medication or treatment, the doctor is not involved in the billing process at all. The doctor codes a patient's visit by treatment, diagnosis, etc., and the billers take care of the rest.
 
Not true, doctors spend two days out of their week interacting with the insurers, and the actuarial analysts,

And you are slightly incorrect, doctors are closing their practices due to the enormous amount of paperwork that is required for medicare patients, this will become more streamlined under the Affordable health care act.

Many on the right decried the idea of a computerized medical care, I disagree with this, this is a money saver for all factions of the health care industry, some paranoia about a state run organization having everyone's health care records was the cause of this to die, if you remember, both sides of the political spectrum were for it.

And I find the arguments laughable, if people only knew the about of data mining that is gotten from their casual use of the internet, they wouldn't be so paranoid about having their health treatments and history fall into the hands of a "ghost organization"

Regards
Pace
 
Not true, doctors spend two days out of their week interacting with the insurers, and the actuarial analysts,
Click to expand...

That is definitely not true in the clinic where I work with its 50+ doctors.

We went electronic several years ago. Everything is computerized and has been since about 2005. We currently use the ECW system. Being able to access medical records instantaneously has been wonderful, but it is FAR from perfect. As the doctors tote their computer notebooks from exam room to exam room, it works wonderfully as long as there is not a problem with the system. When the system shuts down (which is does occasionally--but even once is too much) EVERYTHING shuts down. Appointments have to be canceled, etc.

Some patients dislike watching their doctor sit and type while they're in the exam room. Our clinic has the doctors dictate the medical record using Dragon voice recognition word processing. That, I feel, is a terrible mistake. The replacement of transcriptionists with a computer program simply is awful. For one thing, the program types what it hears--not what is said--and few doctors take the time to dictate and then double-check what was typed. We've had some disastrous mistakes with this, but they still feel it is more cost effective than paying transcriptionists. At least until we get presented with a major lawsuit, which is only a matter of time IMO. The part they forget is that the transcriptionists come to know their doctors very well and can catch mistakes and correct them. Computers don't do this.
 
justoffal said:
I am told that Health care costs are going down. I am told that this is as a result of the new laws coming to town....the providers are gonna get their little behinds in shape and buckle because they know damned well they'd better do it or else!

Ten years ago my average Doctor's visit was about $250.00 billed to my insurance company and usually with a co-pay from me.
Now I see that the Average Visit is well over $1,000.00 and that's without any special service like blood work or lab testing.

Ten Years ago the average Ambulance ride was about $600.00.
Now I have seen bills for a single transport that exceed $2000.00

Ten years ago the Average cost of an ICU bed was roughly $7500.00/wk
Now the cost ranges anywhere from $35,000-$50,000/wk


Sooooooo I would like to know where in the health care industry today prices are actually going down.
An Example would be:

1.) Specific as in service rendered!
2.) Specific as in actual dollar cost to the payer....not the co-pay please!
3.) Specific as in Recent...within the last year.
Click to expand...

The NEW PPACA has been in effect and fully implemented since when?

After what you pointed out, you still see no reason for an ACT entitled "Patient Protection and AFFORDABLE Health Care Act"???????

Are you taking sloooooooooowwwwwwww pills?
 
I don't think you know that I sent my "Medicare For All" proposal to Obama's Transition Team which was a wste of time because Obama was noit really concerned about ideas from the people... it was a hoax... never heard a word from his team.... several libs on here know I was one of the first proponents with a complete package plan that was the only one I have ever seen guaranteed to work.


Wulk said:
Actually, NC, a universal health service, such as the UKs' NHS, would reduce medical insurance costs for businesses, and, you wouldn't be subject to a company reneging on its obligations.

I can't understand you, and others, objections to a universal, single payer, health service. All of your Govt employees get a lifetime (??) health service, on your tax dollars, why shouldn't you?
Click to expand...
 
You comments are interesting, but mainly from the persective that your complaints about electronic recordkeeping and office management reflect how long it took the medical profession to adopt technology that the rest of us have been living with for decades.

Electronic record keeping of the type you describe was common in most business a decade before you adopted it. I am aware that many clinic and practices still struggle with this and that there are many competing software packages around, some of dubious reliablility and most of dubious compatability.

I wonder if the sort of issues you raise with the lack of transcriptionists are more than balanced out by the switch away from bulky, non portable and incompatable paper records.

Your comments make me think of the sort of struggles we had integrating back in the early 1990's.

And that says a lot about why the administrative costs of health care are so high.,
 
And that says a lot about why the administrative costs of health care are so high.,
Click to expand...

Electronic systems were late coming into the market mainly due to confidentiality and medical law. And, as you probably know, the cost of a system of this type is extremely expensive. The system we are using now is the second one after too many problems with the first. There is always the chance that it can be hacked, and for medical records it would be disaster. We have a top IT staff, but things still happen occasionally.

The transcription issues can be serious. They're also quite funny at times. One of my favorites (and it's locked in) was a doctor dictating that the "pain was on top of his left foot." Dragon typed in "penis on top of his left foot," and the doctor did not catch it. Another, not quite so funny, was a letter that a pediatrician dictated to the parents of one of his patients. He thanked the parents for the chance to "violate" their daughter, when in actuality he had thanked them for the chance to "evaluate." Unfortunately, this letter was not doubled-checked and went out to the parents.

When it comes to medical records accuracy is a MUST. Careless mistakes can lead to harm coming to patients and lawsuits, which could cost a lot more than paying a transcriptionist.
 
bdtex said:
My company's group health insurance monthly premiums went down this year for me and all of my employees. Same company,same deductibles,same coverage. Been in business for myself since 1998 and it's the first time that's happened.
Click to expand...

Not mine, our insurance has gone up three times.
 
Wulk said:
Actually, NC, a universal health service, such as the UKs' NHS, would reduce medical insurance costs for businesses, and, you wouldn't be subject to a company reneging on its obligations.

I can't understand you, and others, objections to a universal, single payer, health service. All of your Govt employees get a lifetime (??) health service, on your tax dollars, why shouldn't you?
Click to expand...

Many of us dont, its just the Wingers we live with. They like paying out the ass for health care, and they really hate it if the poor get any health care at all.
 
Charcat said:
Another thing. In December, 2010, my job was phased out at work. So I was without insurance, which I could not afford at $500+ per month with no income. The only thing I was concerned about was the cost of my prescriptions, which were several due to cardiac artery disease. Previously, while on insurance, I had been paying either a $30 or $15 co-pay per prescription.

Hallelujah! With no insurance, I found that several of my prescriptions were much cheaper out-of-pocket than with an insurance co-pay--almost 2/3 for several of them.

Now that I am back to work and have insurance again, I do not use my insurance to buy medications, because it is much cheaper to pay out-of-pocket. Looks like the provider is the winner in this one, too. I would suggest that anyone with insurance check the out-of-pocket price versus co-pay insurance price when they are buying medications.
Click to expand...

Sounds like your insurance company or someone was overcharging for drugs. Cost is usually the other way around because insurance companies will negotiate prices based on the size of their pool. The unisured usually pay full boat or as a public relations, advertising thing, some drug companies are reducing prices for those who "qualify", rather than simply offer their drugs at a reasonable price that would also gain them a reasonable profit. I think that is basically what the PPACA aims to do and what most people want, fair deals, not a few people getting filthy rich by soaking the ill for all they are worth.
 
I'm not sure where people think employer based health care grew out of and why it is now too expensive. It grew out of tax incentives to corporations who provided some portion or all of their employees health care insurance costs. So now after taking tax breaks for years, it has become too expensive, in part because of the insurance industry that grew up out of that and the fraud that grew from the growth of all industries. People and companies in the health care industry, the drug industry, the insurance industry bilking patients and one another.

Basically I think people are merely interested in fair deals and sick and tired of dealing with crooks and robbers coming at them from all angles. We all know how just a few jerks can ruin a party for everyone, if not just take away a lot of people's freedom.

For those interested in less regulation and government intervention, think of the teenage kid who's looking for their parents to offer them more personal responsibility. Is the parent more likely to do that if the teenager acts like a responsible human being or acts like a hellion?

It's not simply a matter of voting in someone who is going to be liberal with law, order and regulation so no one says NO to crooks and robbers, but a matter of Americans showing one another we are responsible, honest, fair and just human beings. So far what we seem to be proving to one another is money matter more than life itself and some only come to the realization of how crazy that attitude is when they face a situation where they're on the losing end of a choice between money and life.
 
My drug plan paid a flat $15 on generic drugs regardless of the actual cost. If the drug only cost $4, the insurance company was still charged $15. You figure it out. Who was making the profit, the pharmacy or the insurance company?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top