Barry-Care Was Always A Ploy To Get Single-Payer

[Freewill]

I figured it out as to why we have the most expensive of health care systems, regardless of if the system is the best or not.

It is one reason it will never change.

The reason is, that the health care industrial complex wants it this way.

 

[Flash]

[QUOT

1. do you have health care insurance?
2. do you propose just letting people die?
3. do you propose to keep letting people go bankrupt?
4. what if all healthcare was paid for by corporate America, much like it is today?

It is not my responsibility to pay somebody else's heath care bills. It is their responsibility.

Is the concept of personal responsibility beyond your comprehension? I suspect it is because for most Liberals that is an alien concept.

 

[Freewill]

[QUOT

1. do you have health care insurance?
2. do you propose just letting people die?
3. do you propose to keep letting people go bankrupt?
4. what if all healthcare was paid for by corporate America, much like it is today?

It is not my responsibility to pay somebody else's heath care bills. It is their responsibility.

Is the concept of personal responsibility beyond your comprehension? I suspect it is because for most Liberals that is an alien concept.

Who said anything about paying someone else's bill? What's next you are going to prohibit people from using roads? Install toll booths so only those who can pay uses the roads?

Answer one question, do you have company sponsored health care? You won't answer I'll bet money.

 

[Flash]

[QUOT

1. do you have health care insurance?
2. do you propose just letting people die?
3. do you propose to keep letting people go bankrupt?
4. what if all healthcare was paid for by corporate America, much like it is today?

It is not my responsibility to pay somebody else's heath care bills. It is their responsibility.

Is the concept of personal responsibility beyond your comprehension? I suspect it is because for most Liberals that is an alien concept.

Who said anything about paying someone else's bill? What's next you are going to prohibit people from using roads? Install toll booths so only those who can pay uses the roads?

Answer one question, do you have company sponsored health care? You won't answer I'll bet money.

Youare really confused about this, aren't you?

That is what single payer is. Socialized medicine where the filthy government collects taxes from the productive people and use it to pay for medical care for everybody. If you are a sorry ass piece of shit, illegal alien, Muslim refugee or third generation welfare queen you get to have your medical pays paid for by the productive Americans.

It is wrong.

 

[Flopper]

One of main reasons healthcare spending has been going up over the last 50 years is people demand better healthcare, early diagnosis for cancer, heart and kidney transplants, treatments for Hepatitis, HIV, Macular Degenration, Asthma, Major improvements in Orthopedics and artificial limbs, Diabetes Medications and Monitoring, Noninvasive Diagnostics, Tomography, Ultrasound, Vaccines for Cancer Prevention, Cervical Cancer Screening, and thousands of other medical miracles. Couple this with the expansions in Medicare and Medicaid, life savings and life altering medical care is available to both the rich and poor and it is being used as never before. The number of procedures performed by healthcare providers has increased by 400% over the last 50 years.

Countries who do not spend what the US does on health care, do they have the same services?

Not familiar with all countries but in Britain and France, basically yes. Services are delivered a bit differently. You might have to wait a bit longer than in the US for screenings and optional procedures but if you are really ill, services are every bit as good as in the US.

One of the big differences I noted in France was the pharmacies. They are so much more than what we have in the US in regard to healthcare. First, they are 100% about healthcare, no candies, cosmetics, or cell phones. Everyone in the pharmacy is trained in pharmacology. You don't have to wait a half hour to get prescriptions filled. You go to the counter hand them your prescription and they hand you a box of pills. Everything except specialized drugs are prepackaged. The price is the same at all pharmacies, about 25% to 90% less than what we pay in the US. Another big difference in pharmacies is they are there to consult with you concerning not just the medication but your illness often giving you information the doctor didn't. Many people will go to a pharmacist before going to the doctor.

Another difference in the systems is length of hospital stays. Beginning with the day you enter the hospital they are working toward getting you out of the hospital. I think they see the hospital as a place where you are treated and recovery begins but most of your recovery will be at home.

Most people are less concerned about healthcare issues than in the US and no one is worried about whether their treatment is covered or whether they can afford it.

So strange why you can't do a little research to see how ridiculous arguments about healthcare in the USA!

Great Britain/France combined population is only 40% of USA.
Very hard to make a comparison when the population of USA is not only GREATER but more diverse.
French is the only official language of France, and is constitutionally required to be the language of government and administration"!
* France: In 2004, 85% of the population of Metropolitan France was white or of European origin, with 10% from North Africa, 3.5% Black and 1.5% Asian.
* Great Britain: White: 55,073,552 87.17% Asian: 6.92% Black: 3.01%
* USA: White 72.4% Black 12.6? Asian 4.8% Two or more races: 9.3%

So you are making a comparison with 2 countries with LESS diverse population AND less then 40% the population!
Those two factors make your argument specious at most!

Finally... How many NEW drugs do the drug companies of Great Britain and France release?

Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B
A benchmark report estimates that the cost of bringing a drug to market has more than doubled in the past 10 years
CSDD’s finding, a bellwether figure in the drug industry, is based on an average out-of-pocket cost of $1.4 billion and an estimate of $1.2 billion in returns that investors forego on that money during the 10-plus years a drug candidate spends in development. The center’s analysis drew from information provided by 10 pharmaceutical companies on 106 randomly selected drugs first tested in humans between 1995 and 2007.

The study concludes that another $312 million is spent on postapproval development—studies to test new indications, formulations, and dosage strengths—for a life-cycle cost of $2.9 billion,
Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B

B) So what country in this world has developed more Drugs then the USA???
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)
95% of the new drugs coming on the market are developed for sale in the United States.
They are paid for by American consumers, while other countries, such as Canada, Germany and France, free ride at our expense.
The United States is the last major country that allows the market to set prices high enough to compensate pharmaceutical companies for their R&D investments.
Obama Care will increasingly control pharmaceutical prices as costs rise and federal and state funds fall short.
Major pharmaceutical advances will stop (How well will government labs work?), and the rest of the world will lose along with Americans.
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)

In France, most drug prices are controlled by the government. Almost all drugs available in the US are available in France at very low prices, either as the brand name or generic. If a drug is not available, you can still purchase it but you'll pay higher prices.

In France as in most larger countries in Europe, the government is a major contributor to drug research. Briton is second to the US in introducing new drugs and France is 3rd.

Government funded research dollars go where the medical community believe the greatest need is. Drug company research is directed at where the greatest profits lie, often in maintenance drugs to treat chronic conditions or new drugs that have no therapeutic value over existing drugs. One of the greatest needs in drug development is more effective antibiotics. However drug companies prefer to put the R&D dollars into drugs that people take for a life time, not two weeks. Also, much of drug company research is not aimed at new drugs, only minor changes to existing drugs such as extended release, repackaging, changing delivery method. These all extend patents and can produce huge profits with limited healthcare benefits.

A major difference I see in the French healthcare system is the patient is not pushed into healthcare services to increase revenue. Typically, a doctor will make suggestions as to diagnostics and treatment. In the US healthcare system, we put the doctor in charge which may well be good medical practice but with a fee for service system such as ours it add billions of dollars to medical cost.

For example, a see my family doctor about a worsen cough and he says I need to see a pulmonologist who is right down the hall and he will be happy to get me an appointment. I see him and he schedules me for a CT Scan and reports that I have asthma which of course I knew already. He schedules a complete set of breathing tests which tells how bad it is, which I already told him. And just to make sure there is no cardiac involvement he recommends I see a cardiologist who is in the same building. After seeing the cardiologist, having an EKG and a stress test, I find I may have a minor problem which needs to be monitored. So after seeing three doctors, having a half dozen tests at a cost of probably $10,000, I take the same medication but now see three doctors two or three times a year so they monitor my condition. The difference in countries like France and Briton, is no one is trying to sell you medical services. It's entirely patients decision.

BTW I'm not saying the French, British, or any other country's healthcare system would work well in the US. I am saying there are huge advantages to their systems when it comes to quality of care and cost. The kind of health system a country has is unfortunately often determined by the political system in that country.

 

[Freewill]

One of main reasons healthcare spending has been going up over the last 50 years is people demand better healthcare, early diagnosis for cancer, heart and kidney transplants, treatments for Hepatitis, HIV, Macular Degenration, Asthma, Major improvements in Orthopedics and artificial limbs, Diabetes Medications and Monitoring, Noninvasive Diagnostics, Tomography, Ultrasound, Vaccines for Cancer Prevention, Cervical Cancer Screening, and thousands of other medical miracles. Couple this with the expansions in Medicare and Medicaid, life savings and life altering medical care is available to both the rich and poor and it is being used as never before. The number of procedures performed by healthcare providers has increased by 400% over the last 50 years.

Countries who do not spend what the US does on health care, do they have the same services?

Not familiar with all countries but in Britain and France, basically yes. Services are delivered a bit differently. You might have to wait a bit longer than in the US for screenings and optional procedures but if you are really ill, services are every bit as good as in the US.

One of the big differences I noted in France was the pharmacies. They are so much more than what we have in the US in regard to healthcare. First, they are 100% about healthcare, no candies, cosmetics, or cell phones. Everyone in the pharmacy is trained in pharmacology. You don't have to wait a half hour to get prescriptions filled. You go to the counter hand them your prescription and they hand you a box of pills. Everything except specialized drugs are prepackaged. The price is the same at all pharmacies, about 25% to 90% less than what we pay in the US. Another big difference in pharmacies is they are there to consult with you concerning not just the medication but your illness often giving you information the doctor didn't. Many people will go to a pharmacist before going to the doctor.

Another difference in the systems is length of hospital stays. Beginning with the day you enter the hospital they are working toward getting you out of the hospital. I think they see the hospital as a place where you are treated and recovery begins but most of your recovery will be at home.

Most people are less concerned about healthcare issues than in the US and no one is worried about whether their treatment is covered or whether they can afford it.

So strange why you can't do a little research to see how ridiculous arguments about healthcare in the USA!

Great Britain/France combined population is only 40% of USA.
Very hard to make a comparison when the population of USA is not only GREATER but more diverse.
French is the only official language of France, and is constitutionally required to be the language of government and administration"!
* France: In 2004, 85% of the population of Metropolitan France was white or of European origin, with 10% from North Africa, 3.5% Black and 1.5% Asian.
* Great Britain: White: 55,073,552 87.17% Asian: 6.92% Black: 3.01%
* USA: White 72.4% Black 12.6? Asian 4.8% Two or more races: 9.3%

So you are making a comparison with 2 countries with LESS diverse population AND less then 40% the population!
Those two factors make your argument specious at most!

Finally... How many NEW drugs do the drug companies of Great Britain and France release?

Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B
A benchmark report estimates that the cost of bringing a drug to market has more than doubled in the past 10 years
CSDD’s finding, a bellwether figure in the drug industry, is based on an average out-of-pocket cost of $1.4 billion and an estimate of $1.2 billion in returns that investors forego on that money during the 10-plus years a drug candidate spends in development. The center’s analysis drew from information provided by 10 pharmaceutical companies on 106 randomly selected drugs first tested in humans between 1995 and 2007.

The study concludes that another $312 million is spent on postapproval development—studies to test new indications, formulations, and dosage strengths—for a life-cycle cost of $2.9 billion,
Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B

B) So what country in this world has developed more Drugs then the USA???
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)
95% of the new drugs coming on the market are developed for sale in the United States.
They are paid for by American consumers, while other countries, such as Canada, Germany and France, free ride at our expense.
The United States is the last major country that allows the market to set prices high enough to compensate pharmaceutical companies for their R&D investments.
Obama Care will increasingly control pharmaceutical prices as costs rise and federal and state funds fall short.
Major pharmaceutical advances will stop (How well will government labs work?), and the rest of the world will lose along with Americans.
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)

In France, most drug prices are controlled by the government. Almost all drugs available in the US are available in France at very low prices, either as the brand name or generic. If a drug is not available, you can still purchase it but you'll pay higher prices.

In France as in most larger countries in Europe, the government is a major contributor to drug research. Briton is second to the US in introducing new drugs and France is 3rd.

Government funded research dollars go where the medical community believe the greatest need is. Drug company research is directed at where the greatest profits lie, often in maintenance drugs to treat chronic conditions or new drugs that have no therapeutic value over existing drugs. One of the greatest needs in drug development is more effective antibiotics. However drug companies prefer to put the R&D dollars into drugs that people take for a life time, not two weeks. Also, much of drug company research is not aimed at new drugs, only minor changes to existing drugs such as extended release, repackaging, changing delivery method. These all extend patents and can produce huge profits with limited healthcare benefits.

A major difference I see in the French healthcare system is the patient is not pushed into healthcare services to increase revenue. Typically, a doctor will make suggestions as to diagnostics and treatment. In the US healthcare system, we put the doctor in charge which may well be good medical practice but with a fee for service system such as ours it add billions of dollars to medical cost.

For example, a see my family doctor about a worsen cough and he says I need to see a pulmonologist who is right down the hall and he will be happy to get me an appointment. I see him and he schedules me for a CT Scan and reports that I have asthma which of course I knew already. He schedules a complete set of breathing tests which tells how bad it is, which I already told him. And just to make sure there is no cardiac involvement he recommends I see a cardiologist who is in the same building. After seeing the cardiologist, having an EKG and a stress test, I find I may have a minor problem which needs to be monitored. So after seeing three doctors, having a half dozen tests at a cost of probably $10,000, I take the same medication but now see three doctors two or three times a year so they monitor my condition. The difference in countries like France and Briton, is no one is trying to sell you medical services. It's entirely patients decision.

BTW I'm not saying the French, British, or any other country's healthcare system would work well in the US. I am saying there are huge advantages to their systems when it comes to quality of care and cost. The kind of health system a country has is unfortunately often determined by the political system in that country.

So, if the doctors had suggested any of those test to you to decide, what would you have said? BTW, they don't force you to have additional testing. If you think it a waste of time you more or less could get out of them, But it might mean not getting the prescriptions you need.

I have never had a lot of defensive medicine. I even started working out and told my sleep doctor, cardiologist, that if I was too strenuous I had some chest pain. I didn't think it a problem but he did and sent me for a stress test, which in retrospect I am not really sure what I expected. I passed the stress test, hardest thing I have done in a long while, and that was the end of it. I went back to working out and have yet to drop over.

Me thinks that a lot of the "extra" testing you talk about is a doctor being careful, everyone makes mistakes and they just want to be sure. Couple that with, I believe, the doctors make a profit from prescribing tests. When I told my PCP about the being prescribed a stress test his first comment was, "that's my job."

 

[Freewill]

[QUOT

1. do you have health care insurance?
2. do you propose just letting people die?
3. do you propose to keep letting people go bankrupt?
4. what if all healthcare was paid for by corporate America, much like it is today?

It is not my responsibility to pay somebody else's heath care bills. It is their responsibility.

Is the concept of personal responsibility beyond your comprehension? I suspect it is because for most Liberals that is an alien concept.

Who said anything about paying someone else's bill? What's next you are going to prohibit people from using roads? Install toll booths so only those who can pay uses the roads?

Answer one question, do you have company sponsored health care? You won't answer I'll bet money.

Youare really confused about this, aren't you?

That is what single payer is. Socialized medicine where the filthy government collects taxes from the productive people and use it to pay for medical care for everybody. If you are a sorry ass piece of shit, illegal alien, Muslim refugee or third generation welfare queen you get to have your medical pays paid for by the productive Americans.

It is wrong.

What about folks who lose their jobs due to automation or immigration? Lose your job, you lose your healthcare insurance. Unless you go on the government plans which are damn expensive, until you are dead broke.

I realize it is a feel good thing to keep pointing out that you work and there are some that do not. But I find it hard to believe that in this country of such wealth we need to tell people, a very small proportion of people, to go screw themselves. Besides, what we have today isn't working well they are gouging your eyes out and you don't even realize it or care.

 

[Flash]

[QU

What about folks who lose their jobs due to automation or immigration? Lose your job, you lose your healthcare insurance. Unless you go on the government plans which are damn expensive, until you are dead broke.

I realize it is a feel good thing to keep pointing out that you work and there are some that do not. But I find it hard to believe that in this country of such wealth we need to tell people, a very small proportion of people, to go screw themselves. Besides, what we have today isn't working well they are gouging your eyes out and you don't even realize it or care.

What part of "it is not my problem to pay the bills of other people" don't you understand? Go be poor someplace else.

By the way Moon Bat, the best way not to be poor (besides actually working) is to not help elect Liberals that screw up the economy with disastrous Left Wing economics that always fail.

 

[healthmyths]

One of main reasons healthcare spending has been going up over the last 50 years is people demand better healthcare, early diagnosis for cancer, heart and kidney transplants, treatments for Hepatitis, HIV, Macular Degenration, Asthma, Major improvements in Orthopedics and artificial limbs, Diabetes Medications and Monitoring, Noninvasive Diagnostics, Tomography, Ultrasound, Vaccines for Cancer Prevention, Cervical Cancer Screening, and thousands of other medical miracles. Couple this with the expansions in Medicare and Medicaid, life savings and life altering medical care is available to both the rich and poor and it is being used as never before. The number of procedures performed by healthcare providers has increased by 400% over the last 50 years.

Countries who do not spend what the US does on health care, do they have the same services?

Not familiar with all countries but in Britain and France, basically yes. Services are delivered a bit differently. You might have to wait a bit longer than in the US for screenings and optional procedures but if you are really ill, services are every bit as good as in the US.

One of the big differences I noted in France was the pharmacies. They are so much more than what we have in the US in regard to healthcare. First, they are 100% about healthcare, no candies, cosmetics, or cell phones. Everyone in the pharmacy is trained in pharmacology. You don't have to wait a half hour to get prescriptions filled. You go to the counter hand them your prescription and they hand you a box of pills. Everything except specialized drugs are prepackaged. The price is the same at all pharmacies, about 25% to 90% less than what we pay in the US. Another big difference in pharmacies is they are there to consult with you concerning not just the medication but your illness often giving you information the doctor didn't. Many people will go to a pharmacist before going to the doctor.

Another difference in the systems is length of hospital stays. Beginning with the day you enter the hospital they are working toward getting you out of the hospital. I think they see the hospital as a place where you are treated and recovery begins but most of your recovery will be at home.

Most people are less concerned about healthcare issues than in the US and no one is worried about whether their treatment is covered or whether they can afford it.

So strange why you can't do a little research to see how ridiculous arguments about healthcare in the USA!

Great Britain/France combined population is only 40% of USA.
Very hard to make a comparison when the population of USA is not only GREATER but more diverse.
French is the only official language of France, and is constitutionally required to be the language of government and administration"!
* France: In 2004, 85% of the population of Metropolitan France was white or of European origin, with 10% from North Africa, 3.5% Black and 1.5% Asian.
* Great Britain: White: 55,073,552 87.17% Asian: 6.92% Black: 3.01%
* USA: White 72.4% Black 12.6? Asian 4.8% Two or more races: 9.3%

So you are making a comparison with 2 countries with LESS diverse population AND less then 40% the population!
Those two factors make your argument specious at most!

Finally... How many NEW drugs do the drug companies of Great Britain and France release?

Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B
A benchmark report estimates that the cost of bringing a drug to market has more than doubled in the past 10 years
CSDD’s finding, a bellwether figure in the drug industry, is based on an average out-of-pocket cost of $1.4 billion and an estimate of $1.2 billion in returns that investors forego on that money during the 10-plus years a drug candidate spends in development. The center’s analysis drew from information provided by 10 pharmaceutical companies on 106 randomly selected drugs first tested in humans between 1995 and 2007.

The study concludes that another $312 million is spent on postapproval development—studies to test new indications, formulations, and dosage strengths—for a life-cycle cost of $2.9 billion,
Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B

B) So what country in this world has developed more Drugs then the USA???
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)
95% of the new drugs coming on the market are developed for sale in the United States.
They are paid for by American consumers, while other countries, such as Canada, Germany and France, free ride at our expense.
The United States is the last major country that allows the market to set prices high enough to compensate pharmaceutical companies for their R&D investments.
Obama Care will increasingly control pharmaceutical prices as costs rise and federal and state funds fall short.
Major pharmaceutical advances will stop (How well will government labs work?), and the rest of the world will lose along with Americans.
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)

In France, most drug prices are controlled by the government. Almost all drugs available in the US are available in France at very low prices, either as the brand name or generic. If a drug is not available, you can still purchase it but you'll pay higher prices.

In France as in most larger countries in Europe, the government is a major contributor to drug research. Briton is second to the US in introducing new drugs and France is 3rd.

Government funded research dollars go where the medical community believe the greatest need is. Drug company research is directed at where the greatest profits lie, often in maintenance drugs to treat chronic conditions or new drugs that have no therapeutic value over existing drugs. One of the greatest needs in drug development is more effective antibiotics. However drug companies prefer to put the R&D dollars into drugs that people take for a life time, not two weeks. Also, much of drug company research is not aimed at new drugs, only minor changes to existing drugs such as extended release, repackaging, changing delivery method. These all extend patents and can produce huge profits with limited healthcare benefits.

A major difference I see in the French healthcare system is the patient is not pushed into healthcare services to increase revenue. Typically, a doctor will make suggestions as to diagnostics and treatment. In the US healthcare system, we put the doctor in charge which may well be good medical practice but with a fee for service system such as ours it add billions of dollars to medical cost.

For example, a see my family doctor about a worsen cough and he says I need to see a pulmonologist who is right down the hall and he will be happy to get me an appointment. I see him and he schedules me for a CT Scan and reports that I have asthma which of course I knew already. He schedules a complete set of breathing tests which tells how bad it is, which I already told him. And just to make sure there is no cardiac involvement he recommends I see a cardiologist who is in the same building. After seeing the cardiologist, having an EKG and a stress test, I find I may have a minor problem which needs to be monitored. So after seeing three doctors, having a half dozen tests at a cost of probably $10,000, I take the same medication but now see three doctors two or three times a year so they monitor my condition. The difference in countries like France and Briton, is no one is trying to sell you medical services. It's entirely patients decision.

BTW I'm not saying the French, British, or any other country's healthcare system would work well in the US. I am saying there are huge advantages to their systems when it comes to quality of care and cost. The kind of health system a country has is unfortunately often determined by the political system in that country.

So, if the doctors had suggested any of those test to you to decide, what would you have said? BTW, they don't force you to have additional testing. If you think it a waste of time you more or less could get out of them, But it might mean not getting the prescriptions you need.

I have never had a lot of defensive medicine. I even started working out and told my sleep doctor, cardiologist, that if I was too strenuous I had some chest pain. I didn't think it a problem but he did and sent me for a stress test, which in retrospect I am not really sure what I expected. I passed the stress test, hardest thing I have done in a long while, and that was the end of it. I went back to working out and have yet to drop over.

Me thinks that a lot of the "extra" testing you talk about is a doctor being careful, everyone makes mistakes and they just want to be sure. Couple that with, I believe, the doctors make a profit from prescribing tests. When I told my PCP about the being prescribed a stress test his first comment was, "that's my job."

WRONG!
A) If you listen to your doctor then why are you disagreeing with the 90% of doctors in the Gallup survey?
Key Findings from Gallup Survey

• Physicians attribute 26 percent of overall healthcare costs to the practice of defensive medicine
• Of the physicians surveyed, 73 percent agreed that they had practiced some form of defensive medicine in the past 12 months
• Physicians indicating they had practiced a form of defensive medicine in the last twelve months attribute 21 percent of their practice to be defensive in nature

In December 2009, Jackson Healthcare invited 138,686 physicians to participate in a confidential online survey in an effort to quantify the costs and impact of defensive medicine.
As long as physicians are personally financially liable for medical errors or omissions, they will continue to practice defensive medicine, because they have to put their careers, reputations and personal net worth at risk every day. This is placing an unnecessary burden on patients by subjecting them to unnecessary tests and treatments, while inflating their out-of-pocket expenditures.
Fear of litigation has been cited as the driving force behind defensive medicine. Defensive medicine is especially common in the United States of America, with rates as high as 79% to 93%, particularly in emergency medicine, obstetrics, and other high-risk specialties.

https://www.jacksonhealthcare.com/media-room/surveys/defensive-medicine-study-2010/
https://www.jacksonhealthcare.com/media/1171/jh_summary_sheet_dm2010a.pdf

B) Where are YOUR substantiating links and sources countering the above statements that I Provided!
C) Finally your statement "Couple that with, I believe, the doctors make a profit from prescribing tests"
You obviously never heard of the Stark Law!
Stark Law
Stark law, actually three separate provisions, governs physician self-referral for Medicare and Medicaid patients. The law is named for United States Congressman Pete Stark, who sponsored the initial bill.

Physician self-referral is the practice of a physician referring a patient to a medical facility in which he has a financial interest, be it ownership, investment, or a structured compensation arrangement. Critics of the practice allege an inherent conflict of interest, given the physician's position to benefit from the referral. They suggest that such arrangements may encourage over-utilization of services, in turn driving up health care costs. In addition, they believe that it would create a captive referral system, which limits competition by other providers. (see physician self-referral)
Others respond to these concerns by stating that while problems exist, they are not widespread. Further, these observers contend that, in many cases, physician investors are responding to a demonstrated need which would otherwise not be met, particularly in a medically underserved area.
STARK LAW - INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, LEGAL SOLUTIONS

 

[healthmyths]

National Health Expenditure (NHE) grew 5.8% to $3.2 trillion in 2015, or $9,990 per person, and accounted for 17.8% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
NHE Fact Sheet - Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
26% of $3.2 trillion or $830 Billion all to defensive medicine practices!

Why you people defend lawyers that have caused physicians to practice this $800 billion a year waste I don't understand!
Talk about being brainwashed! In all other aspects you despise lawyers... yet when it comes to winning the malpractice lottery... you want to keep your options open!
Don't you realize this waste of $800 billion a year is paid by YOU in the form of higher insurance premiums?
Insurance companies don't care as long as they can raise the premiums! And you make them out to be the bad guys when all they are doing is
paying the claims!

 

[healthmyths]

[QUOT

1. do you have health care insurance?
2. do you propose just letting people die?
3. do you propose to keep letting people go bankrupt?
4. what if all healthcare was paid for by corporate America, much like it is today?

It is not my responsibility to pay somebody else's heath care bills. It is their responsibility.

Is the concept of personal responsibility beyond your comprehension? I suspect it is because for most Liberals that is an alien concept.

Who said anything about paying someone else's bill? What's next you are going to prohibit people from using roads? Install toll booths so only those who can pay uses the roads?

Answer one question, do you have company sponsored health care? You won't answer I'll bet money.

Youare really confused about this, aren't you?

That is what single payer is. Socialized medicine where the filthy government collects taxes from the productive people and use it to pay for medical care for everybody. If you are a sorry ass piece of shit, illegal alien, Muslim refugee or third generation welfare queen you get to have your medical pays paid for by the productive Americans.

It is wrong.

What about folks who lose their jobs due to automation or immigration? Lose your job, you lose your healthcare insurance. Unless you go on the government plans which are damn expensive, until you are dead broke.

I realize it is a feel good thing to keep pointing out that you work and there are some that do not. But I find it hard to believe that in this country of such wealth we need to tell people, a very small proportion of people, to go screw themselves. Besides, what we have today isn't working well they are gouging your eyes out and you don't even realize it or care.

So then you are in favor of messing up 98% of Americans health care for a "small proportion of people"?
Because when you TRULY read the below and comprehend that there NEVER was a health care crisis especially for 46 million Americans!
That in reality less then less then 2% of (i.e. your small proportion..!) were the real numbers.
You truly must read and follow the links provided and then maybe you'll comprehend there NEVER was a health care crisis!
A) 10 million illegals were counted as part of the 46 million.
B) 14 million has been proven by Gruber the architect of ACA should have been covered BEFORE ACA by Medicaid...they just didn't go and apply.
C) 18 million are under age 34, make over $50k, using health savings accounts instead of employers health plan and NEVER WANTED or NEEDED ACA!
D) 5 million military veterans covered by the VA...
So where are the 46 million "Americans"???

 

[The Derp]

It is not my responsibility to pay somebody else's heath care bills. It is their responsibility.

What do you think health insurance is?

Is the concept of personal responsibility beyond your comprehension? I suspect it is because for most Liberals that is an alien concept.

If you fancy yourself a libertarian, which is sounds like you do, then you should be all about mandating health insurance because you not getting insurance and getting sick would infringe on the rights of others to not get sick because of your recklessness.

 

[The Derp]

That is what single payer is. Socialized medicine where the filthy government collects taxes from the productive people and use it to pay for medical care for everybody.

As opposed to right now, where a private company unaccountable to you collects premiums from healthy people and uses them to pad their corporate profits before spending even a dime on your health care. Why do you want to preserve that system? A single payer levels the playing field for providers by reimbursing all of them at the same rate. Then it's incumbent on the providers to attract patients by improving outcomes and reducing costs. As opposed to now, when you can only go see a doctor in your insurance network, in your state. A single payer plan is 100% portable. Private insurance isn't.

 

[The Derp]

What part of "it is not my problem to pay the bills of other people" don't you understand? Go be poor someplace else.

What do you think health insurance is????? It literally is you paying for health care for other people.

By the way Moon Bat, the best way not to be poor (besides actually working) is to not help elect Liberals that screw up the economy with disastrous Left Wing economics that always fail.

Wages and employment have historically grown better under Democratic administrations than Conservative ones. Even right now, after 6 months of Trump, his job creation and wage growth rates are below what Obama's were.

 

[healthmyths]

That is what single payer is. Socialized medicine where the filthy government collects taxes from the productive people and use it to pay for medical care for everybody.

As opposed to right now, where a private company unaccountable to you collects premiums from healthy people and uses them to pad their corporate profits before spending even a dime on your health care. Why do you want to preserve that system? A single payer levels the playing field for providers by reimbursing all of them at the same rate. Then it's incumbent on the providers to attract patients by improving outcomes and reducing costs. As opposed to now, when you can only go see a doctor in your insurance network, in your state. A single payer plan is 100% portable. Private insurance isn't.

Evidently you never heard of these guys!
State-based insurance regulation[edit]
Historically, the insurance industry has been regulated almost exclusively by the individual state governments. The first state commissioner of insurance was appointed in New Hampshire in 1851 and the state-based insurance regulatory system grew as quickly as the insurance industry itself.[4] Prior to this period, insurance was primarily regulated by corporate charter, state statutory law and de facto regulation by the courts in judicial decisions.[5][6] States coordinate through a nonprofit trade association of state regulatory agencies called the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, which proposes model laws which may be adopted by the members.
Insurance regulatory law - Wikipedia
You want to start an insurance company DUMMY???
The chart below identifies the minimum capital and surplus requirement for each Uniform State
Health Stock, Mutual & Reciprocal Insurer Capital Stock $300,000 Free Surplus $150,000
Want to sell in 20 states? $9 million! And that's just Capital stock and Surplus for each!
http://www.naic.org/documents/industry_ucaa_chart_min_capital_surplus.pdf
Do you have $9 million?
NEXT... what does it take to operate in 20 states a health insurance company?
Well since a simpleton like you has such a short attention span here is a chart of operating expenses of a insurance company!
Where Does Your Premium Dollar Go? - AHIP
GEEZ you guys are so ignorant when it comes to how businesses work!
LOOK at that net margin.... 2.7¢!

 

[healthmyths]

That is what single payer is. Socialized medicine where the filthy government collects taxes from the productive people and use it to pay for medical care for everybody.

As opposed to right now, where a private company unaccountable to you collects premiums from healthy people and uses them to pad their corporate profits before spending even a dime on your health care. Why do you want to preserve that system? A single payer levels the playing field for providers by reimbursing all of them at the same rate. Then it's incumbent on the providers to attract patients by improving outcomes and reducing costs. As opposed to now, when you can only go see a doctor in your insurance network, in your state. A single payer plan is 100% portable. Private insurance isn't.

How stupid! "A single payer levels the playing field for providers by reimbursing all of them at the same rate"
Dummies like you NEVER seem to realize that the cost of living in NY City is just a little higher then your Podunk town !
And that's why idiots like you fall for this "single payer " crap!
Why not single payer for car insurance? Home insurance?
There never was a health care crisis!
And you want the doctor in Anchorage to charge just as much as the doctor in Jackson Ms?

 

[sealybobo]

Yeap. Trust me, I hate being right.

Now, the left are able to blame Trump for obamacare failing.

Makes you wonder, if it was obama that sabotaged hillary.

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
Obama's complaints about Republicans stopping his agenda are BS since he had full control for two years. He can never take responsibility.

11:11 AM - Sep 26, 2012

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible.

3:01 PM - Nov 8, 2013

 

[healthmyths]

What part of "it is not my problem to pay the bills of other people" don't you understand? Go be poor someplace else.

What do you think health insurance is????? It literally is you paying for health care for other people.

By the way Moon Bat, the best way not to be poor (besides actually working) is to not help elect Liberals that screw up the economy with disastrous Left Wing economics that always fail.

Wages and employment have historically grown better under Democratic administrations than Conservative ones. Even right now, after 6 months of Trump, his job creation and wage growth rates are below what Obama's were.

GEEZ I wonder why? Could it be for example the Dems screw up the economy... then GOP comes in and fixes it again. Remember unlike a little kid which you sound like
you are, things don't happen over night. It takes an oil tanker about 3 miles to stop and so with the economy when the screw ups like Johnson did before Nixon, and
Carter did before Reagan and Clinton did before GWB and Obama did before Trump it always takes a GOP to get the economy turned around. And when it does the
idiot Dems are in office then to screw it up again!
Classic illustration? Federal Register doesn't lie!
Dumb Dems think the government as to be more involved. So they write more rules and regulations. Stifles business growth. So GOP comes in.
Takes several years to undo the stupidity of Dems and so by time economy gets going again Dems take credit.

 

[Flopper]

One of main reasons healthcare spending has been going up over the last 50 years is people demand better healthcare, early diagnosis for cancer, heart and kidney transplants, treatments for Hepatitis, HIV, Macular Degenration, Asthma, Major improvements in Orthopedics and artificial limbs, Diabetes Medications and Monitoring, Noninvasive Diagnostics, Tomography, Ultrasound, Vaccines for Cancer Prevention, Cervical Cancer Screening, and thousands of other medical miracles. Couple this with the expansions in Medicare and Medicaid, life savings and life altering medical care is available to both the rich and poor and it is being used as never before. The number of procedures performed by healthcare providers has increased by 400% over the last 50 years.

Countries who do not spend what the US does on health care, do they have the same services?

Not familiar with all countries but in Britain and France, basically yes. Services are delivered a bit differently. You might have to wait a bit longer than in the US for screenings and optional procedures but if you are really ill, services are every bit as good as in the US.

One of the big differences I noted in France was the pharmacies. They are so much more than what we have in the US in regard to healthcare. First, they are 100% about healthcare, no candies, cosmetics, or cell phones. Everyone in the pharmacy is trained in pharmacology. You don't have to wait a half hour to get prescriptions filled. You go to the counter hand them your prescription and they hand you a box of pills. Everything except specialized drugs are prepackaged. The price is the same at all pharmacies, about 25% to 90% less than what we pay in the US. Another big difference in pharmacies is they are there to consult with you concerning not just the medication but your illness often giving you information the doctor didn't. Many people will go to a pharmacist before going to the doctor.

Another difference in the systems is length of hospital stays. Beginning with the day you enter the hospital they are working toward getting you out of the hospital. I think they see the hospital as a place where you are treated and recovery begins but most of your recovery will be at home.

Most people are less concerned about healthcare issues than in the US and no one is worried about whether their treatment is covered or whether they can afford it.

So strange why you can't do a little research to see how ridiculous arguments about healthcare in the USA!

Great Britain/France combined population is only 40% of USA.
Very hard to make a comparison when the population of USA is not only GREATER but more diverse.
French is the only official language of France, and is constitutionally required to be the language of government and administration"!
* France: In 2004, 85% of the population of Metropolitan France was white or of European origin, with 10% from North Africa, 3.5% Black and 1.5% Asian.
* Great Britain: White: 55,073,552 87.17% Asian: 6.92% Black: 3.01%
* USA: White 72.4% Black 12.6? Asian 4.8% Two or more races: 9.3%

So you are making a comparison with 2 countries with LESS diverse population AND less then 40% the population!
Those two factors make your argument specious at most!

Finally... How many NEW drugs do the drug companies of Great Britain and France release?

Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B
A benchmark report estimates that the cost of bringing a drug to market has more than doubled in the past 10 years
CSDD’s finding, a bellwether figure in the drug industry, is based on an average out-of-pocket cost of $1.4 billion and an estimate of $1.2 billion in returns that investors forego on that money during the 10-plus years a drug candidate spends in development. The center’s analysis drew from information provided by 10 pharmaceutical companies on 106 randomly selected drugs first tested in humans between 1995 and 2007.

The study concludes that another $312 million is spent on postapproval development—studies to test new indications, formulations, and dosage strengths—for a life-cycle cost of $2.9 billion,
Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B

B) So what country in this world has developed more Drugs then the USA???
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)
95% of the new drugs coming on the market are developed for sale in the United States.
They are paid for by American consumers, while other countries, such as Canada, Germany and France, free ride at our expense.
The United States is the last major country that allows the market to set prices high enough to compensate pharmaceutical companies for their R&D investments.
Obama Care will increasingly control pharmaceutical prices as costs rise and federal and state funds fall short.
Major pharmaceutical advances will stop (How well will government labs work?), and the rest of the world will lose along with Americans.
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)

In France, most drug prices are controlled by the government. Almost all drugs available in the US are available in France at very low prices, either as the brand name or generic. If a drug is not available, you can still purchase it but you'll pay higher prices.

In France as in most larger countries in Europe, the government is a major contributor to drug research. Briton is second to the US in introducing new drugs and France is 3rd.

Government funded research dollars go where the medical community believe the greatest need is. Drug company research is directed at where the greatest profits lie, often in maintenance drugs to treat chronic conditions or new drugs that have no therapeutic value over existing drugs. One of the greatest needs in drug development is more effective antibiotics. However drug companies prefer to put the R&D dollars into drugs that people take for a life time, not two weeks. Also, much of drug company research is not aimed at new drugs, only minor changes to existing drugs such as extended release, repackaging, changing delivery method. These all extend patents and can produce huge profits with limited healthcare benefits.

A major difference I see in the French healthcare system is the patient is not pushed into healthcare services to increase revenue. Typically, a doctor will make suggestions as to diagnostics and treatment. In the US healthcare system, we put the doctor in charge which may well be good medical practice but with a fee for service system such as ours it add billions of dollars to medical cost.

For example, a see my family doctor about a worsen cough and he says I need to see a pulmonologist who is right down the hall and he will be happy to get me an appointment. I see him and he schedules me for a CT Scan and reports that I have asthma which of course I knew already. He schedules a complete set of breathing tests which tells how bad it is, which I already told him. And just to make sure there is no cardiac involvement he recommends I see a cardiologist who is in the same building. After seeing the cardiologist, having an EKG and a stress test, I find I may have a minor problem which needs to be monitored. So after seeing three doctors, having a half dozen tests at a cost of probably $10,000, I take the same medication but now see three doctors two or three times a year so they monitor my condition. The difference in countries like France and Briton, is no one is trying to sell you medical services. It's entirely patients decision.

BTW I'm not saying the French, British, or any other country's healthcare system would work well in the US. I am saying there are huge advantages to their systems when it comes to quality of care and cost. The kind of health system a country has is unfortunately often determined by the political system in that country.

So, if the doctors had suggested any of those test to you to decide, what would you have said? BTW, they don't force you to have additional testing. If you think it a waste of time you more or less could get out of them, But it might mean not getting the prescriptions you need.

I have never had a lot of defensive medicine. I even started working out and told my sleep doctor, cardiologist, that if I was too strenuous I had some chest pain. I didn't think it a problem but he did and sent me for a stress test, which in retrospect I am not really sure what I expected. I passed the stress test, hardest thing I have done in a long while, and that was the end of it. I went back to working out and have yet to drop over.

Me thinks that a lot of the "extra" testing you talk about is a doctor being careful, everyone makes mistakes and they just want to be sure. Couple that with, I believe, the doctors make a profit from prescribing tests. When I told my PCP about the being prescribed a stress test his first comment was, "that's my job."

Most of what many consider unnecessary testing falls under the category of good medicine. If you have an MRI and the doctor diagnoses a cancer and it's treated doesn't it make good sense to make sure the treatment was completely effective and the disease is actually gone? Many conditions can only be effective treated by monitoring the conditions with various tests run over and over.

I think much of the defensive medicine claim comes from healthcare providers who want laws to limit medical malpractice suits in order to bring down the cost of malpractice insurance.

Even if we limited medical malpractice suits, healthcare professional will run the tests because there are sound medical reasons to do and they make money in one way or another by doing so.

 

[healthmyths]

Countries who do not spend what the US does on health care, do they have the same services?

Not familiar with all countries but in Britain and France, basically yes. Services are delivered a bit differently. You might have to wait a bit longer than in the US for screenings and optional procedures but if you are really ill, services are every bit as good as in the US.

One of the big differences I noted in France was the pharmacies. They are so much more than what we have in the US in regard to healthcare. First, they are 100% about healthcare, no candies, cosmetics, or cell phones. Everyone in the pharmacy is trained in pharmacology. You don't have to wait a half hour to get prescriptions filled. You go to the counter hand them your prescription and they hand you a box of pills. Everything except specialized drugs are prepackaged. The price is the same at all pharmacies, about 25% to 90% less than what we pay in the US. Another big difference in pharmacies is they are there to consult with you concerning not just the medication but your illness often giving you information the doctor didn't. Many people will go to a pharmacist before going to the doctor.

Another difference in the systems is length of hospital stays. Beginning with the day you enter the hospital they are working toward getting you out of the hospital. I think they see the hospital as a place where you are treated and recovery begins but most of your recovery will be at home.

Most people are less concerned about healthcare issues than in the US and no one is worried about whether their treatment is covered or whether they can afford it.

So strange why you can't do a little research to see how ridiculous arguments about healthcare in the USA!

Great Britain/France combined population is only 40% of USA.
Very hard to make a comparison when the population of USA is not only GREATER but more diverse.
French is the only official language of France, and is constitutionally required to be the language of government and administration"!
* France: In 2004, 85% of the population of Metropolitan France was white or of European origin, with 10% from North Africa, 3.5% Black and 1.5% Asian.
* Great Britain: White: 55,073,552 87.17% Asian: 6.92% Black: 3.01%
* USA: White 72.4% Black 12.6? Asian 4.8% Two or more races: 9.3%

So you are making a comparison with 2 countries with LESS diverse population AND less then 40% the population!
Those two factors make your argument specious at most!

Finally... How many NEW drugs do the drug companies of Great Britain and France release?

Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B
A benchmark report estimates that the cost of bringing a drug to market has more than doubled in the past 10 years
CSDD’s finding, a bellwether figure in the drug industry, is based on an average out-of-pocket cost of $1.4 billion and an estimate of $1.2 billion in returns that investors forego on that money during the 10-plus years a drug candidate spends in development. The center’s analysis drew from information provided by 10 pharmaceutical companies on 106 randomly selected drugs first tested in humans between 1995 and 2007.

The study concludes that another $312 million is spent on postapproval development—studies to test new indications, formulations, and dosage strengths—for a life-cycle cost of $2.9 billion,
Cost to Develop New Pharmaceutical Drug Now Exceeds $2.5B

B) So what country in this world has developed more Drugs then the USA???
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)
95% of the new drugs coming on the market are developed for sale in the United States.
They are paid for by American consumers, while other countries, such as Canada, Germany and France, free ride at our expense.
The United States is the last major country that allows the market to set prices high enough to compensate pharmaceutical companies for their R&D investments.
Obama Care will increasingly control pharmaceutical prices as costs rise and federal and state funds fall short.
Major pharmaceutical advances will stop (How well will government labs work?), and the rest of the world will lose along with Americans.
Obama Care Will End Drug Advances and Europe's Free Ride (Unless China Steps in)

In France, most drug prices are controlled by the government. Almost all drugs available in the US are available in France at very low prices, either as the brand name or generic. If a drug is not available, you can still purchase it but you'll pay higher prices.

In France as in most larger countries in Europe, the government is a major contributor to drug research. Briton is second to the US in introducing new drugs and France is 3rd.

Government funded research dollars go where the medical community believe the greatest need is. Drug company research is directed at where the greatest profits lie, often in maintenance drugs to treat chronic conditions or new drugs that have no therapeutic value over existing drugs. One of the greatest needs in drug development is more effective antibiotics. However drug companies prefer to put the R&D dollars into drugs that people take for a life time, not two weeks. Also, much of drug company research is not aimed at new drugs, only minor changes to existing drugs such as extended release, repackaging, changing delivery method. These all extend patents and can produce huge profits with limited healthcare benefits.

A major difference I see in the French healthcare system is the patient is not pushed into healthcare services to increase revenue. Typically, a doctor will make suggestions as to diagnostics and treatment. In the US healthcare system, we put the doctor in charge which may well be good medical practice but with a fee for service system such as ours it add billions of dollars to medical cost.

For example, a see my family doctor about a worsen cough and he says I need to see a pulmonologist who is right down the hall and he will be happy to get me an appointment. I see him and he schedules me for a CT Scan and reports that I have asthma which of course I knew already. He schedules a complete set of breathing tests which tells how bad it is, which I already told him. And just to make sure there is no cardiac involvement he recommends I see a cardiologist who is in the same building. After seeing the cardiologist, having an EKG and a stress test, I find I may have a minor problem which needs to be monitored. So after seeing three doctors, having a half dozen tests at a cost of probably $10,000, I take the same medication but now see three doctors two or three times a year so they monitor my condition. The difference in countries like France and Briton, is no one is trying to sell you medical services. It's entirely patients decision.

BTW I'm not saying the French, British, or any other country's healthcare system would work well in the US. I am saying there are huge advantages to their systems when it comes to quality of care and cost. The kind of health system a country has is unfortunately often determined by the political system in that country.

So, if the doctors had suggested any of those test to you to decide, what would you have said? BTW, they don't force you to have additional testing. If you think it a waste of time you more or less could get out of them, But it might mean not getting the prescriptions you need.

I have never had a lot of defensive medicine. I even started working out and told my sleep doctor, cardiologist, that if I was too strenuous I had some chest pain. I didn't think it a problem but he did and sent me for a stress test, which in retrospect I am not really sure what I expected. I passed the stress test, hardest thing I have done in a long while, and that was the end of it. I went back to working out and have yet to drop over.

Me thinks that a lot of the "extra" testing you talk about is a doctor being careful, everyone makes mistakes and they just want to be sure. Couple that with, I believe, the doctors make a profit from prescribing tests. When I told my PCP about the being prescribed a stress test his first comment was, "that's my job."

Most of what many consider unnecessary testing falls under the category of good medicine. If you have an MRI and the doctor diagnoses a cancer and it's treated doesn't it make good sense to make sure the treatment was completely effective and the disease is actually gone? Many conditions can only be effective treated by monitoring the conditions with various tests run over and over.

I think much of the defensive medicine claim comes from healthcare providers who want laws to limit medical malpractice suits in order to bring down the cost of malpractice insurance.

Even if we limited medical malpractice suits, healthcare professional will run the tests because there are sound medical reasons to do and they make money in one way or another by doing so.

Once again the stupidity of people thinking it is the cost of MALPRACTICE insurance! GEEZ how f...king DUMB!
Costs tend to vary among states. For example, malpractice costs in Minnesota could cost anywhere from $4,000 to $17,000 per year, depending on your specialty. But in California, a surgeon can expect to pay anywhere from $22,000 to $34,000 per year. Cost is also dependent on the amount of coverage you purchase.
Medical Malpractice Insurance
Do you honestly think that is the MAJOR driving reason?
Here's an overview of physicians' compensation in 2011:

Radiology: $315,000
Orthopedics: $315,000
Cardiology: $314,000
Plastic surgery: $270,000
General surgery: $265,000
Obstetrics/Gynecology: $220,000
Psychiatry: $170,000
Pediatrics: $156,000
Surgeon Salary: How Much Doctors Make
So at the WORST case $34,000 you are talking about 12%!

You didn't read this substantiated material very close did you? You think that the medical liability lottery will be your fortune!
Please TELL me WHY in the following material did only 48% of the doctors that were under Federal contract say they practiced Defensive Medicine while
90% of the rest of the doctors said they did?
WHY did more then HALF of federal doctors NOT practice defensive medicine?
Here for your research before you make dumb ass statements!
1946 Tort Claims ACT! Forbids suing doctors under government contract!
What more proof do you want and more importantly WHY are you defending lawyers??