Breast Cancer Diagnostic Rationing

[pocketfullofshells]

If I have an insurance company who is telling me I can not get a certian medical treatment, I can buy another policy or change my policy right?

If we all ended up on government health care (and that is the fear for some) and then they said you cant have this pill, like what is currently going on in the UK with woman having breast cancer but being denied the pill that could save their lives due to $$

where would we go?

Its not an issue today but it is something to be concerned about down the road.

most can't ...most you go threw who your work pays for...and by the time you found out your medical plan did not cover what you needed.. no other plan with take you and cover it. I have blue cross...why? not becuse I picked it, or wanted them...but becuse that is who my work goes threw...I don't have the funds to just say screw it and by a plan on my own...with no help from work who pays for part of the cost, and gets a large group discount...And if you don't like the govement plan...then keep your private one...Its not that hard. I use to work 60-70 hours a week, 2 jobs, and none of them gave me health care ...and the main reason I worked 2 was becuse both would not make me full time...becuse then they paid for health care costs....Go and call a major health care provider and find out what it cost for a good policy , just for you, not threw work.. I have seen the low cost plans advertised....one of my works even tried to push some for part timers....fact was even if you maxed out the realy realy low amount of coverage you got....you actuly payed more in a year for the plan itself.

 

[Dr.Who]

I believe that I've already stated that she doesn't have ANY INSURANCE and is only ON MEDICARE and as we adults all know; MEDICARE doesn't pay all of any surgery {that's why elderly usually have a supplemental if they can afford the premiums...IF}

Medicare is insurance. She can't both have no insurance and also be on medicare at the same time. The correct answer is that she has crappy government run health insurance that only covers some of her expenses.

And that was supposed to be a 'JOKE' about a casserole...WOW, and I've been called RUDE for cracking jokes about people and their self inflicted stupidity...You just bypassed me and are on a level all of your own making! That was really, really pathetic...but so telling of your ILK!

It was said with a serious point. When she has difficulty making her payments are you going to help or are you going to complain falsely that she does not have any insurance? I would expect you to help far more than by making a casserole. I left it up to you to object to the minimalist approach of only providing a meal and I left it up to you to say that you would rise to the occasion. You failed.

MY POINT, OH SO INEPT ONE...WAS THAT SHE DIDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS DOG & PONY SHOW A YEAR AND ½ AGO...SHE WAS THE ONE DECIDING WHAT SHE WANTED DONE: SURGERY, CHEMO, RADIATION, OR A COMBO CHEMO/RADIATION...OR SURGICALLY REMOVE THE PART THAT IS CANCEROUS AND SOME CHEMO TREATMENT TOO! But that was to much for your itty-bitty brain to assimilate so it was just a waste of bandwidth

You are saying that she has to take her case before a review panel to get treatment.

Who runs the death panel? Is it medicare or is it the hospital?

If the hospital then perhaps beggars can't be choosers. The one giving the free service should decide if they would be better off giving free care to another person who actually has a chance to live. But if the death panel is run by medicare then she has paid her premiums into the system for a long time and she should expect that they live up to the contract and provide service.

 

[Dr.Who]

Also why is it that people talk about medical Rationing...as if thats not a fact of life? Guess what people, private, Goverment, or what ever else you have....there is no Unlimited Health care is there?

Does anyone here have a Unlimited Health care plane? Please let me know...if not...you are RATIONED....

For the purposes of our discussion "rationing' implies that it is imposed on one from an outside source. If one decides for oneself that oe does not want service it is not rationing.

When one chooses an insurance carrier full well knowing that there will be limits that is self imposed. When the gov imposes the limits then it is rationing.

 

[Dr.Who]

most can't ...most you go threw who your work pays for...and by the time you found out your medical plan did not cover what you needed.. no other plan with take you and cover it.

When you first signed up they sent you a copy of the contract for you to read. You could know right away what the limits were and you could buy additional insurance.

 

[TheFranklinParty]

Re: Breast Cancer Disagnostic Rationing

well then go look up what the word means....there is zero rationing...if you want one, its still your choice ( unless your health care coverage "rations" it of course.....of course you will not note that the reason for it was that for woman in the age 40 age group it made a very small difference in finding anything wrong...but at same time there was a very large amount of misdiagnosis of problems due to it being harder to judge in younger womans breast.....But of course you don't debate any of the findings with stats of facts, no you just yell rationing!

I'm not sure where you're going with this argument? This is a panel of government appointed officials that used data, in part provided by WHO, to suggest new guidelines that will reduce the amount of diagnostic care provided to the most important part of our family units.

They are suggesting less care to a specific group without any statistically valid data and offer no alternative diagnostic process. Then the White House comes out this morning and defends it, even in the face of oncologists and the American Cancer Assco. screaming bloody murder.

Let me try using an example: What if this was a expert government panel for Sickle Cell Anemia that suggested the HbSS screening panel wasn't really effective enough and the children should just wait for full on pneumonia before being diagnosed. Do you think anyone would have a problem with this? It would be called racially motivated rationing of healthcare. Well guess what, women are a specific group who are now being shown a great deal of prejudice with this government recommendation.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Re: Breast Cancer Disagnostic Rationing

I'm not sure where you're going with this argument? This is a panel of government appointed officials that used data, in part provided by WHO, to suggest new guidelines that will reduce the amount of diagnostic care provided to the most important part of our family units.

They are suggesting less care to a specific group without any statistically valid data and offer no alternative diagnostic process. Then the White House comes out this morning and defends it, even in the face of oncologists and the American Cancer Assco. screaming bloody murder.

Let me try using an example: What if this was a expert government panel for Sickle Cell Anemia that suggested the HbSS screening panel wasn't really effective enough and the children should just wait for full on pneumonia before being diagnosed. Do you think anyone would have a problem with this? It would be called racially motivated rationing of healthcare. Well guess what, women are a specific group who are now being shown a great deal of prejudice with this government recommendation.

why 30'? why not 28? you do notice that not once have you actuly pointed out anything wrong the the stats and resons why they came out with this "Recomendation" have you? I am sure you have actuly read the report to knoww how they made this bases correct? the hole point behind all this, is the small amount of cases it was effective vs a very large amount of times in was not able to be diagnosed correctly and the large amount of stress and work put into each case ...and in the end they felt the ends large amount of false positives due to the womans breast tissue being more dense and harded to make good readings ...was not worth the cost and what it puts people threw.....unless of chorse you have a family history or other issues that would cause to to be more likey, then they still recomend the normal checking at 30. fact is the panal made a judgement call based on the numbers....just like how you must have made one if you say 30...but not 29 28 or 27....why no 16? I have not even said I agree with there choice...but fact is they did not just say it to say it, and there is no Rationing ...none. my freind, a nurse who had this issue in her own life well called me asking about it last night...even she agress that there is some logic to what they said, though based on what she knows so far about what they said she does not agree ...but she at least did say there is reason for it.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

When you first signed up they sent you a copy of the contract for you to read. You could know right away what the limits were and you could buy additional insurance.

because most people are lawyers and know what the hell half that stuff is talking about. The fine print and all that , that you never see...the loopholes...and of course we all just have endless money to buy more insurance....

 

[top gun]

The report is about potential rationing so the answer would be that "no" it is not being rationed right now.

Unless we listen to ASPC4ever who just told us that part of his neighbors medical care is being rationed by medicare.

The report is just a study.

It's one groups take on what they saw when they examined a certain group or procedure. It's not talking about rationing or future rationing. It's one groups recommendation from their findings.

This is my whole bone to pick with the whole fearing it up on this thread like it has some correlation to Health Insurance Reform.

The insurance companies right now as we speak DO THIS ALL THE TIME... thousands of times every day. Just happened to my bosses wife. They would approve one kind of chemotherapy but then not the next type because their studies showed the second type had limited effect. They simply called it experimental so they could avoid paying for it even though it had worked in some cases extremely well. My boss had to pay 100% out of pocket if they wanted it. It cost them an extra 10 grand up front.

All one has to do is get a serious disease and you'll learn real quick the illusion of our current healthcare system.

 

[chestnut]

Re: Breast Cancer Disagnostic Rationing

The health care bills will use information from this panel to help guide the rules of care.

 

[Dr.Who]

because most people are lawyers and know what the hell half that stuff is talking about. The fine print and all that , that you never see...the loopholes...and of course we all just have endless money to buy more insurance....

Everybody can talk to their Human Resources dept for answers.

And if you don't have the money to buy extra insurance then you accept the limits that are set. It is basic math, you can't buy 100 million dollars worth of coverage for a $100 dollar a month premium. In the same way that you can't fill your shopping cart at Walmart and pay only $2. That does not mean that Wal-mart is rationing your purchase when they don't give you a full cart of $2. They are just making a fair trade.

 

[asur]

It's a very bad policy coming out from an Obama government, if that's where it originated. But it doesn't matter since Obama is in charge and hasn't challenged it.

No doctor except for the Obama acorn-type would agree with this rationing.
Everyone knows women can develop breast cancer in their forties.

It sounds like we are gonna have some higher cancer death rates under Obamacare.

 

[top gun]

Re: Breast Cancer Disagnostic Rationing

The health care bills will use information from this panel to help guide the rules of care.

The administration has already come forward and said that is not the case.

Just heard our Secretary of Health Kathleen Sebelius talk about it a few minutes ago on the news. It's just one study and one recommendation.

Y'all can turn the fear super soakers off now. JEZZ!

 

[top gun]

It's a very bad policy coming out from an Obama government, if that's where it originated. But it doesn't matter since Obama is in charge and hasn't challenged it.

No doctor except for the Obama acorn-type would agree with this rationing.
Everyone knows women can develop breast cancer in their forties.

It sounds like we are gonna have some higher cancer death rates under Obamacare.

While Republicans just want 36 million Americans to have NO... ZERO Healthcare at all.

You see it's simple when they're not out TORTURING somebody they're out looking for ways to keep the insurance companies between you and your doctor.

Despicable!

 

[Pandora]

most can't ...most you go threw who your work pays for...and by the time you found out your medical plan did not cover what you needed.. no other plan with take you and cover it. I have blue cross...why? not becuse I picked it, or wanted them...but becuse that is who my work goes threw...I don't have the funds to just say screw it and by a plan on my own...with no help from work who pays for part of the cost, and gets a large group discount...And if you don't like the govement plan...then keep your private one...Its not that hard. I use to work 60-70 hours a week, 2 jobs, and none of them gave me health care ...and the main reason I worked 2 was becuse both would not make me full time...becuse then they paid for health care costs....Go and call a major health care provider and find out what it cost for a good policy , just for you, not threw work.. I have seen the low cost plans advertised....one of my works even tried to push some for part timers....fact was even if you maxed out the realy realy low amount of coverage you got....you actuly payed more in a year for the plan itself.

I understand what you are saying but I know you can get extra insurance. Catastrophic (spelling) is not expensive and a good supliment insurance. I am betting its about the monthly cost of a cell phone. There are things people can do if they have a mind to do it without expecting others to pay for it for them.

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

I stated: And that was supposed to be a 'JOKE' about a casserole...WOW, and I've been called RUDE for cracking jokes about people and their self inflicted stupidity...You just bypassed me and are on a level all of your own making! That was really, really pathetic...but so telling of your ILK!

DR. WHO replied: It was said with a serious point. When she has difficulty making her payments are you going to help or are you going to complain falsely that she does not have any insurance? I would expect you to help far more than by making a casserole. I left it up to you to object to the minimalist approach of only providing a meal and I left it up to you to say that you would rise to the occasion. You failed.

WOW...you just blew me off of that #1 position for all around
RUDE-A$$hole...and it accomplished so quickly and so efficiently too...