Doc choice

[Guest guest]

Dr Grim,

My sens and reps are reps.

My AARP rep says nothing will change in Texas in MC and supplement plans.

They will increase in cost.

HEW appears to be able to place needed HC in areas where they find a grantee

(I'll call it that of want of a better name). There are no people I know of

that don't have HC, including migrant workers.

The ER's seem to be not crowded now, and HEW places are placed near those

ER's in the areas I visit.

So If an unwed mother can get into the hospital, have full coverage for her

and her baby including welfare afterward and food and diapers for the baby,

I'd say we have pretty good HC.

A removed step gdaughter adult, working, was admitted to Kingwood hospital

for 3 - 4 days for appendicitis review, and did not have insurance, eg.

So there is money available and I think it's the HEW can get funding without

going thru this seemingly terrible process.

And I think I agree with Val, that we don't need what they're proposing but

that's just based on what I see in Texas.

I can see any Dr that will admit MC patients, and if they don't I can still

go there if I want to pay, it seems.

However, no internist I can see in Livingston as easily as in Kingwood, 40

miles south. We've aghd 2 taht could not get their practice started. I

walked in yesterday, made an appt for today and saw a new internist. I

walked into a nephro today and filled out papers and made an appt for next

week, so the system we have works for me.

BUT, I have no major illnesses.

Standing in line to receive meds today, there were 6 people with 6 different

opinions including one that said congress is not authorized to collect

taxes. That gives you an idea of the training that must happen.

There was agreement the congress could not decide when to go to lunchand

both dems and reps wer crooks.

If I was a congressman, I'd have to side with the reps (no change) as it

stands now and for specific things needing fixing allocate that to HEW.

Regards

Re: Re: Doc choice

I think sending a note to your reps cAn't hurt. Esp the Sentor.

Tiped sad Send form mi

iPhone ;-)

May your pressure be low!

CE Grim MD

Specializing in Difficult

Hypertension

[Guest guest]

I like your essay, Jack.

I don't actually believe there should be no change.  I think health insurance should be seriously reformed,

but that creating 118 new bureaucracies and making multitudes of new laws is

not the way to go about it. 

My senators and rep are all dems.  The rep doesn't listen but one of the senators

might; he's up for re-election next year.

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism

[mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of jwwright

Dr Grim,

My sens and reps are reps.

My AARP rep says nothing will change in Texas in MC and supplement plans.

They will increase in cost.

HEW appears to be able to place needed HC in areas where they find a grantee

(I'll call it that of want of a better name). There are no people I know of

that don't have HC, including migrant workers.

The ER's seem to be not crowded now, and HEW places are placed near those

ER's in the areas I visit.

So If an unwed mother can get into the hospital, have full coverage for her

and her baby including welfare afterward and food and diapers for the baby,

I'd say we have pretty good HC.

A removed step gdaughter adult, working, was admitted to Kingwood hospital

for 3 - 4 days for appendicitis review, and did not have insurance, eg.

So there is money available and I think it's the HEW can get funding without

going thru this seemingly terrible process.

And I think I agree with Val, that we don't need what they're proposing but

that's just based on what I see in Texas.

I can see any Dr that will admit MC patients, and if they don't I can still

go there if I want to pay, it seems.

However, no internist I can see in Livingston as easily as in Kingwood, 40

miles south. We've aghd 2 taht could not get their practice started. I

walked in yesterday, made an appt for today and saw a new internist. I

walked into a nephro today and filled out papers and made an appt for next

week, so the system we have works for me.

BUT, I have no major illnesses.

Standing in line to receive meds today, there were 6 people with 6 different

opinions including one that said congress is not authorized to collect

taxes. That gives you an idea of the training that must happen.

There was agreement the congress could not decide when to go to lunchand

both dems and reps wer crooks.

If I was a congressman, I'd have to side with the reps (no change) as it

stands now and for specific things needing fixing allocate that to HEW.

Regards

----- Original Message -----

From: Clarence Grim

I think sending a note to your reps cAn't hurt. Esp the Sentor.

[Guest guest]

The one agency I'd like to see is one to prevent disease, brought to mind by

a NYtimes article on the use of finasteride to prevent prostate cancer.

That article indicates a lot of confusion how the body works, and that would

be the state of the new agency as well.

I can't see how to implement providing finasteride since it's a prescription

drug. And many who get severe PCa get it before age 55. So there's a

conumdrum in applying this " good thing " if it actually works.

People don't want to take drugs for HTN, eg, as it is, and an expensive drug

is going to drive people to want that drug free, and it takes years to show

it doesn't work or has side effects.

So it steps us into another " domain " of health care and probably one that is

far more costly, IMO.

We know how to reduce/slow kidney failure by controlling BP, but we can't

control aging.

Yesterday I was told I was not near KF, but eventually it will happen (if I

live long enough). Foregone conclusion.

But I want to do that better.

A " free market " system tends to give me more " hopes " to sell their drugs

which don't work, where a limited supply system tends to fend off the new

ideas because of cost. OTOH, we need that extra population to try the new

drug to see if it works.

And if it does work, we have an even greater load on the HC system with

increased population.

Regards

RE: Re: Doc choice

I like your essay, Jack.

I don't actually believe there should be no change. I think health

insurance should be seriously reformed, but that creating 118 new

bureaucracies and making multitudes of new laws is not the way to go about

it.

My senators and rep are all dems. The rep doesn't listen but one of the

senators might; he's up for re-election next year.

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism

[mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of jwwright

Dr Grim,

My sens and reps are reps.

My AARP rep says nothing will change in Texas in MC and supplement plans.

They will increase in cost.

HEW appears to be able to place needed HC in areas where they find a grantee

(I'll call it that of want of a better name). There are no people I know of

that don't have HC, including migrant workers.

The ER's seem to be not crowded now, and HEW places are placed near those

ER's in the areas I visit.

So If an unwed mother can get into the hospital, have full coverage for her

and her baby including welfare afterward and food and diapers for the baby,

I'd say we have pretty good HC.

A removed step gdaughter adult, working, was admitted to Kingwood hospital

for 3 - 4 days for appendicitis review, and did not have insurance, eg.

So there is money available and I think it's the HEW can get funding without

going thru this seemingly terrible process.

And I think I agree with Val, that we don't need what they're proposing but

that's just based on what I see in Texas.

I can see any Dr that will admit MC patients, and if they don't I can still

go there if I want to pay, it seems.

However, no internist I can see in Livingston as easily as in Kingwood, 40

miles south. We've aghd 2 taht could not get their practice started. I

walked in yesterday, made an appt for today and saw a new internist. I

walked into a nephro today and filled out papers and made an appt for next

week, so the system we have works for me.

BUT, I have no major illnesses.

Standing in line to receive meds today, there were 6 people with 6 different

opinions including one that said congress is not authorized to collect

taxes. That gives you an idea of the training that must happen.

There was agreement the congress could not decide when to go to lunchand

both dems and reps wer crooks.

If I was a congressman, I'd have to side with the reps (no change) as it

stands now and for specific things needing fixing allocate that to HEW.

Regards

[Guest guest]

Well there will be lots of jobs in the health field at least. Tiped sad Send form miiPhone ;-)May your pressure be low!CE Grim MDSpecializing in DifficultHypertensionOn Nov 14, 2009, at 9:30 PM, jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:

Of course, she was referring to OUR plans.

The "advantage" plans, tricky name right? Those I hear are disadvantaged in

the new house bill.

I think properly so. Several of these have folded over the years here, and

new ones reappear. A popular one is late in their payments to Dr's.

In Texas, we've had a long history of insurance fraud - I'd call it the

insurance fraud capital of the world, going abck to 1953.

Your wording is funny to me on illegals/legals and Muslims - Mexicans ARE

Christian.

There is an "air" of superiority/elitism in your tone that puzzles me.

Clearly the new bill is going to spend money - something we need to get us

out of the depression and if record keeping puts a lot of people to

work -THEY"LL be paying MC taxes and the MC fund will recover and progress.

We can only advance our way out of the depression by expanding jobs - it

takes money - deficit spending that we have already with 10% unemployment.

We can choose to have 4% if we want.

Now the bill to do that the right way, I dunno. I don't find anyone so far

that likes the house bill.

But there will be one eventually, and they will spend more money than they

take in - HOPEFULLY.

Deficit this year was 1.4 T (that was Bush's last fiscal year)? What was

conservative about that?

Regards

RE: Re: Doc choice

Actually, Americans are not replacing themselves. Only with illegal + legal

immigration is our growth rate at a replacement rate. I think the only

populations in the world that are reproducing faster than replacement are

the Muslims.

I find it interesting that your AARP rep says nothing will change except an

increase in price. That's been my point. It will cost dearly to have 118

new bureaucracies to control every aspect of medicine. Already, in the

stimulus bill, we have an agency forming to create a health record on every

American.

AARP would like to see this House bill pass because it will decrease the

attractiveness of Advantage plans (if not destroy them completely) and push

people into regular supp plans. That's where AARP makes its money.

Val

[Guest guest]

I have a niece that is a speech therapists. While I don't know if the place she

works is just running scared but thought what she says is worth posting here

Working in healthcare is a lot of fun but with the new changes coming...there

is going to be much that is not good about healthcare. At the nursing center

where I work, we have 11 empty beds and I only have 5 people on my caseload.

Thankfully, there have been other facilities locally where they have been able

to send me so I have been able to maintain just about 40 hours a week. They

aren't using the layoff word yet, but they have let go all of the per diem

people, told all of us that we may not work more than 40 hours a week (something

I was told would not be a problem when they hired me in August) and streamlined

therapists down to working only one per day. I am the only SLP on staff where I

work, but the other disciplines have two or three or more, so many have been

asked to go home when they come in. I know many hospitals are beginning to do

the same thing...which is why we are beginning to see the ramifications we are

seeing in the nursing care unit of our facility. It is also scary that due to

productivity being pushed down our throats, it appears as though many simple,

inexpensive things (like a urinary tract infection test) which can kill the

elderly, and should be fairly routine are no longer being done, or are being

missed all together because of staffing and resulting limited time being spent

on patients.

Don't get me wrong--I am all for being productive at work. This is absolutely

imperative. However, I think that a throrough case review, interview with the

patient/spouse/caregiver, and documentation are all equally important and

necessary part of patient care and being a productive worker. However, these

things are not counted as a productive use of your time as a healthcare worker,

and if you spend the time doing it, then you are docked for productivity and

thus risk losing your job--or being the one asked to go home because of your

numbers. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Things are bound to get worse from

what I can see.

>

> > Of course, she was referring to OUR plans.

> >

> > The " advantage " plans, tricky name right? Those I hear are

> > disadvantaged in

> > the new house bill.

> > I think properly so. Several of these have folded over the years

> > here, and

> > new ones reappear. A popular one is late in their payments to Dr's.

> > In Texas, we've had a long history of insurance fraud - I'd call it

> > the

> > insurance fraud capital of the world, going abck to 1953.

> >

> > Your wording is funny to me on illegals/legals and Muslims -

> > Mexicans ARE

> > Christian.

> > There is an " air " of superiority/elitism in your tone that puzzles me.

> >

> > Clearly the new bill is going to spend money - something we need to

> > get us

> > out of the depression and if record keeping puts a lot of people to

> > work -THEY " LL be paying MC taxes and the MC fund will recover and

> > progress.

> >

> > We can only advance our way out of the depression by expanding jobs

> > - it

> > takes money - deficit spending that we have already with 10%

> > unemployment.

> > We can choose to have 4% if we want.

> >

> > Now the bill to do that the right way, I dunno. I don't find anyone

> > so far

> > that likes the house bill.

> > But there will be one eventually, and they will spend more money

> > than they

> > take in - HOPEFULLY.

> >

> > Deficit this year was 1.4 T (that was Bush's last fiscal year)? What

> > was

> > conservative about that?

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > RE: Re: Doc choice

> >

> > Actually, Americans are not replacing themselves. Only with illegal

> > + legal

> > immigration is our growth rate at a replacement rate. I think the only

> > populations in the world that are reproducing faster than

> > replacement are

> > the Muslims.

> >

> > I find it interesting that your AARP rep says nothing will change

> > except an

> > increase in price. That's been my point. It will cost dearly to have

> > 118

> > new bureaucracies to control every aspect of medicine. Already, in the

> > stimulus bill, we have an agency forming to create a health record

> > on every

> > American.

> >

> > AARP would like to see this House bill pass because it will decrease

> > the

> > attractiveness of Advantage plans (if not destroy them completely)

> > and push

> > people into regular supp plans. That's where AARP makes its money.

> >

> > Val

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Ah but you are assuming that all managed care is bad. Kaiser seems to do pretty good. The concept of a medical care home is an excellent one as then you have a thinking team that knows you. One just needs to have all the management guidelines in place, the Drs know them and have Drs that can think what to do when the guidelines are not working. For example proper guidelines, if followed, JNC 7, would have picked up most PAs here. Clarence Grimlowerbp2@...Seasons Greetings and On Nov 10, 2009, at 10:59 AM, Valarie wrote:, the ultimate plan is to put all old people into managed care by making them have "medical homes." For now, they are supposed to be demonstration projects. God help us if this bill ever becomes law. I had an HMO once and it nearly killed me before I escaped. Rather than be part of a managed care again, I will choose death. And if I have a choice, it will never be AARP. That organization supports the socialization of all health care. Val From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Bindner No, Medicare is entirely national and Health Care Reform won't change it, unless you are offering or using a Medicare Advantage Plan. Offering them will become less profitable - however this many not lead to a decline in care - especially since care under Medicare, especially involving prescription drugs - will improve in the general plan. Bindner

[Guest guest]

No it is civilize medicine. May your salt intake and pressure be low!Clarence Grim BS, MS, MDClinical Professor of MedicineMedical College of WisconsinBoard Certified Hypertension SpecialistSpecializing in Difficult to control high blood pressure especially the numerous forms of Primary Aldsoteronism.Training you and your health care team to get to goal.ALL advice given by me MUST be discussed with your heath care team. They know you best. Don't gamble with your life. Don't become a cyberchondriac by looking at fringe groups. We encourage members of your health care team to join our efforts to learn what new and old in the BP business. On Nov 10, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Bindner wrote:Medicare is socialized medicine. The only way around it is to provide incentives for employers to fully cover retirees and ex-employees who have retired in their own systems (either through an insurance plan or through the direct provision of care) as a way to avoid paying taxes for socialized medicine. You are correct that the current reforms will lead to socialized medicine, since the current for-profit model for health insurance is unsustainable and unreformable (meaning the planned reforms will eventually cause such firms to fail or consolidate, leading to some kind of government controlled or heavily regulated insurance). This is why the insurance industry is fighting so hard - however if they admitted it we would see single-payer sooner than later. Bindner From: Valarie <val@...>Subject: RE: Re: Doc choicehyperaldosteronism Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 11:59 AM , the ultimate plan is to put all old people into managed care by making them have "medical homes." For now, they are supposed to be demonstration projects. God help us if this bill ever becomes law. I had an HMO once and it nearly killed me before I escaped. Rather than be part of a managed care again, I will choose death. And if I have a choice, it will never be AARP. That organization supports the socialization of all health care. Val From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldost eronism@gro ups.com] On Behalf Of Bindner No, Medicare is entirely national and Health Care Reform won't change it, unless you are offering or using a Medicare Advantage Plan. Offering them will become less profitable - however this many not lead to a decline in care - especially since care under Medicare, especially involving prescription drugs - will improve in the general plan. Bindner

[Guest guest]

I hope they have improved at Kaiser. In 2010 they saw low K while on ACE inhibitors and did not put it together as PA.

Bindner

, the ultimate plan is to put all old people into managed care by making them have "medical homes." For now, they are supposed to be demonstration projects. God help us if this bill ever becomes law. I had an HMO once and it nearly killed me before I escaped. Rather than be part of a managed care again, I will choose death. And if I have a choice, it

will never be AARP. That organization supports the socialization of all health care.

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldost eronism@gro ups.com] On Behalf Of Bindner

No, Medicare is entirely national and Health Care Reform won't change it, unless you are offering or using a Medicare Advantage Plan. Offering them will become less profitable - however this many not lead to a decline in care - especially since care under Medicare, especially involving prescription drugs - will improve in the general plan.

Bindner

[Guest guest]

I agree it is much more civilized, however there should also be an out for employer provided healthcare to retiree employee-owners (rather than just health insurance).

Bindner

From: Valarie <val@...>Subject: RE: [hyperaldosteronism ] Re: Doc choicehyperaldosteronism@ groups.. comDate: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 11:59 AM

, the ultimate plan is to put all old people into managed care by making them have "medical homes." For now, they are supposed to be demonstration projects. God help us if this bill ever becomes law. I had an HMO once and it nearly killed me before I escaped. Rather than be part of a managed care again, I will choose death. And if I have a choice, it will never be AARP. That organization supports the socialization of all health care.

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldost eronism@gro ups.com] On Behalf Of Bindner

No, Medicare is entirely national and Health Care Reform won't change it, unless you are offering or using a Medicare Advantage Plan. Offering them will become less profitable - however this many not lead to a decline in care - especially since care under Medicare, especially involving prescription drugs - will improve in the general plan.

Bindner

[Guest guest]

What happnes when employer goes bankrupt?

>

>

> From: Valarie <val@...>

> Subject: RE: [hyperaldosteronism ] Re: Doc choice

> hyperaldosteronism

> Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 11:59 AM

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> , the ultimate plan is to put all old people into managed care by

making them have " medical homes. "   For now, they are supposed to be

demonstration projects.  God help us if this bill ever becomes law.  I had

an HMO once and it nearly killed me before I escaped.  Rather than be part of

a managed care again, I will choose death.  And if I have a choice, it will

never be AARP.  That organization supports the socialization of all health

care.

>  

>

>

> Val

>  

>

> From: hyperaldosteronism

[mailto:hyperaldost eronism@gro ups.com] On Behalf Of  Bindner

>  

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> No, Medicare is entirely national and Health Care Reform won't change it,

unless you are offering or using a Medicare Advantage Plan.  Offering them will

become less profitable - however this many not lead to a decline in care -

especially since care under Medicare, especially involving prescription drugs -

will improve in the general plan.

>

>

>

>

>

> Bindner

>

>  

>

[Guest guest]

I foresee a mutual insurance fund which holds a 33% share of all such employee-held companies (through shares in the mutual insurance fund held by the employees). They would pay off the employees in case of bankruptcy, or could take over and replace management if enough employees (who owned 25% of the firm) petitioned it to do so and it found that there were issues that needed to be resolved. If liquidation were necessary, instead of wiping away all debts, the health care obligations would either be inheritable or would be inherited by the mutual insurance fund, which would also sell off the assets of the bankrupt firm. If the fund received dividends that would make its share over 33%, it would use these to finance operations and to cover health care costs for the displaced.

Bindner

From: Francis Bill <georgewbill@...>Subject: Re: Doc choicehyperaldosteronism Date: Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 8:43 PM

What happnes when employer goes bankrupt? > > > From: Valarie <val@...>> Subject: RE: [hyperaldosteronism ] Re: Doc choice> hyperaldosteronism> Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 11:59 AM> > > Â > > > > , the ultimate plan is to put all old people into managed care by making them have "medical

homes."  For now, they are supposed to be demonstration projects.  God help us if this bill ever becomes law.  I had an HMO once and it nearly killed me before I escaped.  Rather than be part of a managed care again, I will choose death.  And if I have a choice, it will never be AARP.  That organization supports the socialization of all health care.>  > > > Val>  > > From: hyperaldostero nism [mailto:hyperaldost eronism@gro ups.com] On Behalf Of Bindner>  > > > > > > > > No, Medicare is entirely national and Health Care Reform won't change it, unless you are offering or using a Medicare Advantage Plan. Offering them will become less profitable - however this many not lead

to a decline in care - especially since care under Medicare, especially involving prescription drugs - will improve in the general plan.> > > > > > Bindner> > Â >

[Guest guest]

That covers employee-held companies. What about others going bankrupt from

over-regulation, over-taxation, etc.? Did you know that the U.S. has the second

highest corporate tax rate in the world? It is no wonder companies are fleeing.

Val

> What happnes when employer goes bankrupt?

[Guest guest]

My friend is a malpractice lawyer and sues Kaiser several times a year. And

that's just a small practice.

Kaiser is an HMO. I will die before ever again belonging to an HMO. The

concept of a medical care home = limits on freedom of choice.

Val

> Ah but you are assuming that all managed care is bad. 

>

> Kaiser seems to do pretty good.  The concept of a medical care home is an

excellent one as then you have a thinking team that knows you.  

[Guest guest]

The need to follow JNC guidelines out for about 10 years now and have said the same about low K since JNC 1.On Dec 9, 2009, at 6:27 PM, Bindner wrote:I hope they have improved at Kaiser. In 2010 they saw low K while on ACE inhibitors and did not put it together as PA. Bindner , the ultimate plan is to put all old people into managed care by making them have "medical homes." For now, they are supposed to be demonstration projects. God help us if this bill ever becomes law. I had an HMO once and it nearly killed me before I escaped. Rather than be part of a managed care again, I will choose death. And if I have a choice, it will never be AARP. That organization supports the socialization of all health care. Val From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldost eronism@gro ups.com] On Behalf Of Bindner No, Medicare is entirely national and Health Care Reform won't change it, unless you are offering or using a Medicare Advantage Plan. Offering them will become less profitable - however this many not lead to a decline in care - especially since care under Medicare, especially involving prescription drugs - will improve in the general plan. Bindner

[Guest guest]

Not if the concept is held up. If it is a true medical home that knows all about you and integrates your care what could be better. Not many tho. Even the great Mayo has problems?On Dec 9, 2009, at 9:41 PM, val1198 wrote:My friend is a malpractice lawyer and sues Kaiser several times a year. And that's just a small practice.Kaiser is an HMO. I will die before ever again belonging to an HMO. The concept of a medical care home = limits on freedom of choice.Val> Ah but you are assuming that all managed care is bad. > > Kaiser seems to do pretty good. The concept of a medical care home is an excellent one as then you have a thinking team that knows you.

[Guest guest]

That's not the reason. Most other countries have a VAT rather than a corporate profits tax, so that they pay taxes that their employees don't at lower wage levels. With that broader base, they have a lower rate. Also, with a VAT, you pay where the employees work. You can't "flee" without moving operations.

I suspect that employee-held companies will become more attractive in the future, especially if employee-ownership is used for FICA personal accounts by some future administration (rather than index funds which benefit mostly brokers and management). Under such a regime, most companies will become employee-owned.

Bindner

From: val1198 <val@...>Subject: Re: Doc choicehyperaldosteronism Date: Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 10:36 PM

That covers employee-held companies. What about others going bankrupt from over-regulation, over-taxation, etc.? Did you know that the U.S. has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world? It is no wonder companies are fleeing.Val> What happnes when employer goes bankrupt?

[Guest guest]

All company insurance limits freedom of choice. I would prefer a hospital based employee home. Then again, my local hospital is pretty good and all my non-government doctors practice there. Of course, of late, most of my care has been at NIH. If I had waited for a local endocrinologist, I would likely be scheduled for surgery at Washington Hospital Center instead.

In the DC area, there are actually three tracks for adrenal surgery: NIH, Washington Hospital Center and University of land's Medical School. All are superior. I did NIH because my original endo has connections there. If I had waited for an andria, VA endo, I would have done WHC.

Bindner

From: val1198 <val@...>Subject: Re: Doc choicehyperaldosteronism Date: Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 10:41 PM

My friend is a malpractice lawyer and sues Kaiser several times a year.. And that's just a small practice.Kaiser is an HMO. I will die before ever again belonging to an HMO. The concept of a medical care home = limits on freedom of choice.Val> Ah but you are assuming that all managed care is bad. > > Kaiser seems to do pretty good. The concept of a medical care home is an excellent one as then you have a thinking team

that knows you.

[Guest guest]

OOPS, meant 2003. Not all doctors look at guidelines.

Bindner

Web Directory (links to my sites and blogs):

http://www.geocities.com/mikeybdc/index.html

http://mikeybdc.blogspot.com

, the ultimate plan is to put all old people into managed care by making them have "medical homes." For now, they are supposed to be demonstration projects. God help us if this bill ever becomes law. I had an HMO once and it nearly killed me before I escaped. Rather than be part of a managed care again, I will choose death. And if I have a choice, it will never be AARP. That organization supports the socialization of all health care.

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldost eronism@gro ups.com] On Behalf Of Bindner

No, Medicare is entirely national and Health Care Reform won't change it, unless you are offering or using a Medicare Advantage Plan. Offering them will become less profitable - however this many not lead to a decline in care - especially since care under Medicare, especially involving prescription drugs - will improve in the general plan.

Bindner

[Guest guest]

Choice is wonderful, eh?

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism

[mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Bindner

 

All

company insurance limits freedom of choice. I would prefer a hospital

based employee home. Then again, my local hospital is pretty good and

all my non-government doctors practice there. Of course, of late, most

of my care has been at NIH. If I had waited for a local

endocrinologist, I would likely be scheduled for surgery at Washington

Hospital Center instead.

In the DC area, there are actually three tracks for

adrenal surgery: NIH, Washington Hospital Center and University of

land's Medical School. All are superior. I did NIH because my

original endo has connections there. If I had waited for an andria,

VA endo, I would have done WHC.

Bindner

[Guest guest]

I have no problem with a medical home if you're free to flee it. I don't want to get stuck in a situation

like my HMO where the sole object was to control costs and spread the profit at

the end of the month. My health was

of virtually no concern to the " medical home " (pod). The concept sounds wonderful but the $$

get in the way of medicine. " Capitation "

is an evil word. I learned how

Pacificare worked when my husband had lunch with the President while they were

in negotiations for the next contract.

At Mayo, I was stuck with Young who refused to discuss my symptoms,

insisting there were no symptoms other than those of low K. Had he been my gatekeeper, I would never

have gotten so far in figuring out what really is wrong with me.

Yes, I assume managed care is bad as I've not seen, heard nor

experienced anything to the contrary.

Show me an HMO where people are pleased and get good medical attention.

My niece is in Kaiser.

They had a carbon monoxide scare a while back and her young child

started twitching while sleeping. Its been going on for months. Kaiser says he's fine and it looks like

they're going to have to go outside to see and pay for a private

neurologist. In an idyllic managed

care situation, that is not supposed to happen.

Death isn't the worst thing to face. Dealing with an HMO is probably

worse.

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism

[mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Clarence Grim

Not if the concept is held up. If it is a true medical home

that knows all about you and integrates your care what could be better. Not

many tho. Even the great Mayo has problems?

On

Dec 9, 2009, at 9:41 PM, val1198 wrote:

My friend is a malpractice lawyer and

sues Kaiser several times a year. And that's just a small practice.

Kaiser is an HMO. I will die before ever again belonging to an HMO. The concept

of a medical care home = limits on freedom of choice.

Val

> Ah but you are assuming that all managed care is bad.

>

> Kaiser seems to do pretty good. The concept of a medical care home

is an excellent one as then you have a thinking team that knows you.

[Guest guest]

At this point nothing.

Another company may take over the facilities, but the gov't is responsible for the pension benefits, from which HC may have been already removed.

The new company offered no more than AARP offered in supplement, at greater cost, of course, but those not 65 have no coverage.

Regards

Re: Doc choice

What happnes when employer goes bankrupt? >> I agree it is much more civilized, however there should also be an out for employer provided healthcare to retiree employee-owners (rather than just health insurance).> > > > > > > Bindner

[Guest guest]

He was talking about those instances where employee-owned companies offer health care instead of Medicare, which was a hypothetical I threw out there.

Actually, the other answer is that non-employee-owned firms would still pay the tax to fund Medicare and these taxes would be set high enough to fund retirees of bankrupted employee-owned firms (who might also pay some residual tax, just one not as high has those who provide full retiree care).

Bindner

From: jwwright <jwwright@...>Subject: Re: Re: Doc choicehyperaldosteronism Date: Thursday, December 10, 2009, 11:28 AM

At this point nothing.

Another company may take over the facilities, but the gov't is responsible for the pension benefits, from which HC may have been already removed.

The new company offered no more than AARP offered in supplement, at greater cost, of course, but those not 65 have no coverage.

Regards

[hyperaldosteronism ] Re: Doc choice

What happnes when employer goes bankrupt? >> I agree it is much more civilized, however there should also be an out for employer provided healthcare to retiree employee-owners (rather than just health insurance).> > > > > > > Bindner

[Guest guest]

Ah that reminds me. Back in 1967 at Duke we did renins on several pts for mBethesda Naval and I went up to see surgery. Both had abenomas. This was when u could no measure blood Aldo or image adrenals. Tiped sad Send form miiPhone ;-)May your pressure be low!CE Grim MDSpecializing in DifficultHypertensionOn Dec 10, 2009, at 12:21 AM, Bindner <mikeybdc@...> wrote:

OOPS, meant 2003. Not all doctors look at guidelines.

Bindner

Web Directory (links to my sites and blogs):

http://www.geocities.com/mikeybdc/index.html

http://mikeybdc.blogspot.com

, the ultimate plan is to put all old people into managed care by making them have "medical homes." For now, they are supposed to be demonstration projects. God help us if this bill ever becomes law. I had an HMO once and it nearly killed me before I escaped. Rather than be part of a managed care again, I will choose death. And if I have a choice, it will never be AARP. That organization supports the socialization of all health care.

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism [mailto:hyperaldost eronism@gro ups.com] On Behalf Of Bindner

No, Medicare is entirely national and Health Care Reform won't change it, unless you are offering or using a Medicare Advantage Plan. Offering them will become less profitable - however this many not lead to a decline in care - especially since care under Medicare, especially involving prescription drugs - will improve in the general plan.

Bindner

[Guest guest]

I would really like to see lawsuit statistics of various

companies. 

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism

[mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Clarence Grim

Don't

hear too many complaints from Kasier.

[Guest guest]

And medical Lic. boardsReview of complaints. Tiped sad Send form miiPhone ;-)May your pressure be low!CE Grim MDSpecializing in DifficultHypertensionOn Dec 10, 2009, at 4:30 PM, Valarie <val@...> wrote:

I would really like to see lawsuit statistics of various

companies.

Val

From: hyperaldosteronism

[mailto:hyperaldosteronism ] On Behalf Of Clarence Grim

Don't

hear too many complaints from Kasier.