What we,are really talking about is rationing of health care.

[Guest guest]

well....re: "What

we are really talking about is rationing of health care."

haven't we ALWAYS had that?

In that

1) some kind of provider has to be available;

Variations [patient-->provider cash] or [patient-->3rd

party-->provider];

2) the proposed model:

[authorized enrolled patient] + [properly documented Dx'd condition

(eg Oregon Health Plan)] + [preauthorized service] + [authorized

providers] doing [authorized procedures] + [typical paperwork billing

nighmare] +[software links] + [new SECURE programs] + [electronic

system versatility/availability/relevancy to practice] + ["underfunded

program" excuses] + [inefficiency of new guideline installation] +

[extra electronic-file- shufflers at each stage] + [inevitable

glitches] + [hacking/fraud/mistakes]--> eventual partial payment

How do we consider all the exclusions, deductions, 'not medically

necessary', out-of-network, pre-existing conditions etc/etc/etc

anything BUT 'rationed availability of care' already in place?

How is such limited availability of any commodity any different from

food or housing programs?

How is limiting legal services so only those licensed to do such can

provide such not 'rationing'?

Lacking a successful functioning model for comparison that doesn't rely

on yearly repetitive infusions of tax payer funding, what would a 'not

for profit' non-rationed model actually look like?

Further, how can any system of limited resources pretend to endlessly

expand to include logarithmically expanding 'need'?

J. Pedersen DC