Topic: Socialized medicine...I say, GOOD LETS DOIT
jamescase20
Unregistered
posted
The for profit market dont give a hoot for the sick.
IP: Logged |
jamescase20
Unregistered
posted
Maybe the the govt has to pay for the sick, the for profit market will finally CARE and start figuring out how to TREAT illnesses like multi-drug resistent bacteria.
IP: Logged |
seekhelp
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 15067
posted
Doctors won't give a hoot about anyone then. You'll be no more important than Joe Blow with the common cold. You lose brilliant people when not compensated. This is the U.S. It's all about greed here unfortunately.
Posts: 7545 | From The 5th Dimension - The Twilight Zone | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
adamm
Unregistered
posted
I'd be all for it- - - - - - if there were a way of ensuring that those administering it wouldn't be the same psychopaths who gave us chronic Lyme disease.
IP: Logged |
seekhelp
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 15067
posted
The LLMDs are essentially a 'profit' market today when you think about it due to non-network affiliation, high fees, etc. Only the well-off can afford $1,000 visits. They are smart, but not nearly smart enough. You need brilliant researchers looking into this and a govenrment that cares, willing to shell out millions for research (if cure is not alresdy out there) and elimination of the IDSA mentality. Money needs to be for curing people, not BSing people, running useless tests, etc.
The problem is doctors are not paid for performance. Being an idiot and saying I don't know is fine and still gets you a consultation fee. ONLY for docs.
Posts: 7545 | From The 5th Dimension - The Twilight Zone | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
jamescase20
Unregistered
posted
Believe me...doctors wouldnt turn into careless trash under a govt paid for industy...they would however, I believe turn into "honest doctors" rather then the corupt system we have today.
IP: Logged |
jamescase20
Unregistered
posted
Maybe if the govt wound up paying for the sick the industy would be forced to be in your best interest.
Social medicine is needed, most nations have socalized medicine. Why? Because it should be a right, not a privledge. Even our birth rate death is higher then any industialized nation, that should send alarm bells in minds of the know.
IP: Logged |
lymeladyinNY
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 10235
posted
Hmm, I doubt it. I imagine it would all be similar to an HMO if we have socialized medical care. The government is just as interested in saving a buck and denying coverage as insurance companies are.
I think health insurance companies should compete with one another for customers, like car insurance companies have to. They'd have to provide very good service for lower rates to keep their customers happy.
They wouldn't want to alienate customers who are free to shop from company to company so they'd bend over backward with accommodations. This includes not intimidating doctors.
Maybe I'm missing something, but this makes sense to me. Anyone with some thoughts?
-------------------- I want to be free Posts: 1170 | From Endicott, NY | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Under socialized medicine get ready to wait 2 years for a MRI or other medically necessary test
Also, making any doctor's appt might mean waiting 6 months or longer.
There will be some important disadvantages!
-------------------- My comments on this site are not intended to be taken as medical advice as I'm not a physician. Posts: 206 | From Georgia | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
seekhelp
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 15067
posted
Yep, I worked in the insurance industry and heard nothing good from those people who had socialized medicine in another lifetime. Exactly what ugagal says. However, if you're uninsured today, any option is better than none. It's relative. There are no good solutions. Americans want everything all the time and someone has to pay for it.
Posts: 7545 | From The 5th Dimension - The Twilight Zone | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
A nationalized system WILL make things worse here. Some doctors do care, some don't. That's just human nature. Financial triage IS INDEED a way of life for Canada and U.K. patients. PLEASE talk to people who live there, and don't always rely on major media news sources. Lyme is time extensive to treat, and it all comes down to money. Many doctors DO care, but the regulations and restrictions on them are incredible. Lyme is also not a "glamour" disease, and is a political hot spud in the medical community. I personally know a harried neurologist who has to see 40 patients a day to just make ends meet. Work the math on that 8-5 day, folks. His office has 2 doctors, one office staff gal, and one nurse. They all must be paid. Rent must be paid. Insurance must be paid. Trust me when I tell you that he's NOT driving a BMW. Many doctors WILL get out of medicine when patient requirements increase, and government mandated quotas increase. Where will all of those new MDs come from? They going to draft them? Government paid medical school? It still takes YEARS to school a skilled doctor. You can't fast forward the experience clock and punch out MDs in one year. I for one don't want more poorly educated doctors thrown into the mix to solve the problem. That's not solving anything.
Posts: 135 | From Orlando, Florida | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
Lymeorsomething
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 16359
posted
Socialism is not the way to go. Most docs lack any investigative curiosity now without the added specter of a govt. driven system.
However, I'd be willing to treat myself if the govt. loosened restrictions on meds and made them more available to the general public.
People are more exposed to information now than in the "old days." Why not let them research and treat on their own? Mis-use and overdosage may be a boon to hospitals but the docs would get screwed if people could try their own protocols. Hell, it's done already at times...
-------------------- "Whatever can go wrong will go wrong." Posts: 2062 | From CT | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
Geneal
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 10375
posted
My Grandmother lives in Germany.
She is 85.
Was diagnosed with breast cancer a year ago.
They did a mastectomy and that is it.
She is no longer a contributing member to the society,
So she doesn't get radiation or chemo.
My Mom remembers sitting in a doctor's office all day long
When she was little living in Germany.
Those with "private" insurance were seen immediately.
If you didn't get seen on the day you sat all day long,
You had to come back the next day...and the next.
I do not want socialized medicine.
I want to pick my doctors.
I don't want my "health" history on the internet either.
Just think if you went into surgery and they accidentally
Removed the wrong part. What would your recourse be?
There would not be one.
My "winter" neighbors are from Canada.
The waiting list for a MRI is 19 months.
Just look at how well "socialized" medicine is when dealing with Lyme.
Canada is a prime example of that.
Hugs,
Geneal
Posts: 6250 | From Louisiana | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by jamescase20: [QB] Believe me...doctors wouldnt turn into careless trash under a govt paid for industy...they would however, I believe turn into "honest doctors" rather then the corupt system we have today.
Dream on.
-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96222 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you think it's tough to get treatment and recover from lyme now, just imagine what it would be like when the socialized-medicine doctors tell you its all in your head, and if you don't like that diagnosis you can take it up with the government.
Posts: 727 | From USA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most physicians I know would have no problem with a single-payer universal system, and in the long run it would be better for both doctors and patients. I could go into a long explanation medically and financially why this is preferable, and even cost effective!
Suffice it to say, instituted CORRECTLY it would be a better, cheaper solution for patients, doctors, and taxpayers.
Posts: 690 | From East coast, USA | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I live in Canada and can't even get an appointment with an infection disease specialist! As soon as my primary care doctor sends off a letter for a referral and mentions lyme, they won't even see me. Trust me, we are no better off here in Canada.
Diana
Posts: 202 | From vancouver, canada | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
omgwtfbbq
Unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by ugagal: Under socialized medicine get ready to wait 2 years for a MRI or other medically necessary test
Also, making any doctor's appt might mean waiting 6 months or longer.
There will be some important disadvantages!
People forget this.
If I had to wait 6 months every time I needed to see a doc, I'd be dead by now. If we get socialized medicine in the US, I'll switch to self treating with meds ordered from developing countries over waiting months and months to be told I need to try a different doctor because my problems are too complex or not something they want to treat.
IP: Logged |
jamescase20
Unregistered
posted
not like you can find a llmd with ease even now!!!
you CANT hardly find one, and you can barely if you can..at all afford them.
IP: Logged |
jamescase20
Unregistered
posted
well, clearly this system in this country is corrupt. And personally I dont want any part of it. I would welcome anything that would explode it. I have found I can only help myself. And except for like s heart attack or stroke, I want no part of doctors today. I dont even see the need frankly, just a waste of my time. I mean that too. They waste my time is all they do.
IP: Logged |
Beverly
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 1271
posted
Interesting thread.
-------------------- God Bless You! Everything..is just my opinion. Posts: 6638 | From Michigan | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I strongly believe that basic hospital care and *basic* healthcare needs to be socialized by the government. Also Prescription coverage needs to be socialized. All this would mean is that we would be taxed so every citizen of this country (and visitors) would get basic hospital care and affordable prescriptions no matter who you are or what medication it is.
This is done in many other countries and it works. I have personally lived through the NHS in the UK and I was treated like gold even though I wasn't even a citizen. I got tons of presctriptions for �7.15 regardless of my insurance or what medication it was. 10 pills or 1000 pills. It was the same price all the time.
I feel it is a human right to have basic affordable health coverage. Period. This isn't a socialist issue it is a human rights issue. We need to step back and look at the big picture instead of only looking at only Lyme coverage.
Now -- when we take ourselves away from the big picture and look specifically into specialists and chronic illnesses -- we would have the ability to have private health insurance on top of the basic government healthcare we would all be getting. This is also how it is done in many other countries. Many jobs also offer supplemental health insurance plans.
This way --�at least people have the basic human right to seek a hospital for emergency care without financial question and will also get private specialist care (just like we do now)
This is 100% necessary for our society. 100%. I can not budge on this belief.
We really need to step back and look at the big picture.
Rocephin / Zithromax / Supps Posts: 107 | From Plainview, New York | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
I hope to give an objective view as I've lived with, and still do, with both systems. It's got pro's and con's, IMO, and is not black and white, cut and dried. I am American and living in the UK for the last 12 years. Here we have the National Health Service; socialized medicine. (though you CAN buy insurance and 'go private' as an option if you want to).
Let me start with the PRO's:
I can always get a same-day emergency appointment with my doc if I need it.
If I'm really sick, he will make a house call (same day).
I needed an ultrasound for a pelvic problem I have; I had to wait 10 days for it, that's not bad. It cost me nothing and was done by a surgeon so I could get my answers/ask my questions then and there.
If it was an emergency; I would have gone to the ER and had it done right then. Whatever your real emergency it's always investigated or treated on the spot: insurance is not a factor.
All medical care is free in that it's free 'at the point of entry'. Meaning, it's not entirely "Free" - we pay our National Insurance fees, which is same for each person from 17-65. But we never pay at the docs/hospital/getting tests, etc. If you're employed, your employer pays it for you. If you're self-employed, which I am, I pay it myself, but it is 'negligible' in comparison to private medical insurance fees. For people on government assistance, they do not pay their NI fees or rx fees. (though of course, there are some who take advantage of that system, human nature, unfortunately).
All tests are free, surgery, chemo, etc etc...free. My friend got Stage 3 breast cancer, she was immediately biopsied on finding a lump (3 lumps actually) and chemo was started after about 10 days, then radiation, then mastectomy. Free. She got an infected hickman line during the chemo and was very sick - I rushed her to the hospital where she was immediately rushed in and given abx, no questions no forms....free.
If you are old or too sick to get to the hospital for an appointment or surgery, the hospital/regional health service will send a taxi to take you there and bring you back.
If you need an ambulance, it comes very fast and is free. However, again some idiots call the emergecy service, as it's free, for stupid stuff which are not emergencies and sometimes not even medical so that drains the system's resources.
Prescriptions are free for under 16's and over 65's and pregnant women and diabetics. Everyone else pays a set price no matter what the drug, which is about $10 per rx, right now. If the rx is worth less than $10, my doctor will write a private rx for me so that I pay the lesser cost rather than the standard rx cost.
So, one pays nothing, ever, for any doctor's or hospital visit, testing, x-rays, MRI's, ER visits, casts, operations, during or after a visit etc.
Now the CON's:
There's a National Health Service BUDGET and, I believe, each doctor's (doctor's are contractors for the NHS) clinic also gets a budget from the National Health Service, which means that the doctor WILL consider whether he or she feels a test or procedure is NECESSARY because it comes out of the budget.
So, it has taken me some getting used to and I still *****, when I go to the doctor with a problem,that they usually do not routinely run all kinds of tests right off the bat. They take a 'let's wait and see - most things are self-limiting' attitude mostly as a first line of 'defense', and advise that you come back in X weeks if the problem is still there, for further testing. Of course, if it is something that rings alarm bells, you get any tests right away.
So, from my perspective there have been many times when I felt upset/angry that I wasn't immediately sent off for blood or other tests when I was anxious about something and wanted 'instant comfort/reassurance'.
They do NOT do things like colonoscopy's for the over 45's or 50's as a matter of course as it costs them money (rather than MAKES them money). If you have suspicious sx, then of course you get it but you do not get it automatically because you've hit a certain age.
Yearly physicals on the same level as in America are not done, unless there is cause for concern, other than your basic BP. My NHS GP argues that the private system does lots of tests because labs/docs make money from them even if they are not necessary...........the flip side is, to me, what if they are necessary and you miss something because you were watching the numbers....
The doctor will usually prescribe GENERIC meds rather than brand name (unless you REQUEST brand name - they will not advertise that to you but if you take it upon yourself you can fight budget-based decisions), due to cost of the drug to the system. Though I requested brand name Ceftin and got it because the generic made me so naseous.
Some areas of the country, with higher budgets or areas/departments that have not spent their budgets and have more money to 'play with' may give better and faster and more 'frivolous' care to the patients in their catchment area. They call it the "Post-code/zipcode lottery".... So, that is not fair and needs to be corrected. If you're young and smart, you can fight decisions made by the system but the elderly and not-so-smart may not be clued up enough to know to, or that they are entitled to, challenge decisions, etc......
I believe there IS age-discrimination. My father in law was denied a second heart bypass at 75 on the grounds he wasn't well enough. He's 86 now and has made it this far without a second bypass BUT perhaps he would have had a better quality of life for the last 11 years if they had given him the second bypass rather than living with angina this long. He'd had a bypass when he was 68 and was fine for 7 years. We then found out that a bypass usually has a lifespan of 7 years anyway, then you need it redone in many cases...but if you're 'too old' that might take a fight. (and the British often don't like to make waves, especially the older generation).
In pregnancy, ultrasounds are not routine until the 13th week. That caused me a lot of anxiety. Miscarriages are not investigated until you've met the criteria of having 3 in a row. I met this criteria now, but I'm 40 and feel it's too late. I begged them to investigate years ago and they would not because of 'the rules'........so I lost out. Now, I COULD have gone private in that case, and paid for that part to get it done, but I did not. I was also sick with what I did not know what Lyme at the time, so I did not fight.
So, in cases where you feel you're waiting too long or want a test they tell you is not (yet) necessary, then you can opt out if you want, and pay for that part and 'bypass' the lines, etc.... You have to find out and learn how to work the system to get out of it what you hope to get.
On the one hand you are assigned to clinics and GP's within your local catchment area - you can choose your doc from within that area, but you can't go to the next city or county, etc....just because you want to, within the NHS. On the other hand, and most people aren't aware of this, if you need a referral to a specialist, like a Neuro, Rheumy or whatever you CAN request to see someone of YOUR CHOICE, ANYWHERE in the country. It's called Choose and Book. I did just that and got funded to go see a Rheumy at the other end of the country who confirmed my LLMD's Lyme dx, rather than having to be cornered into seeing an ID specialist or a local Rheumy who likely would have looked at the NHS guidelines, which for Lyme = IDSA guidelines and DENIED my dx and tx.
It has been publicized in the media that some women with certain cancers have been denied expensive drugs that may be life-extending, due to high cost.
The NHS system relies on another system, NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence) to advice them on what are good and effective medicines and what is not and when and how to prescribe them - COOKBOOK medicine. As we know, with LYME this does NOT work. NICE follows IDSA GUIDANCE. NOT GOOD FOR US. I had to FIGHT.
For the first couple of years the NHS refused to pay for my American LLMD's prescribed treatment/prescriptions.....BUT I persisted and after a couple of years I finally did get my Lyme treatment free. A lot of extra fighting a sick person does not need (though in America we have the same problem for Lyme patients fighting with insurance companies, so it's about the same from that perspective). I was denied IV on the grounds of risk and cost though. Whereas my LLMD had recommended IV if I could get it.....I could not get it here nor afford it privately if I bypassed the system.
I had to wait several months for an MRI when I had very bad sciatica. At the time I did not know it, but I could have have paid for my MRI and had it quickly. So, it's unfair, but possible to cut the lines if you pay privately.
I've had 2 laparoscopies here. For each one I had to wait about 2-3 months.
Pap smears are done every 3 years (unless you pay for more frequent or FIGHT for yearly ones).
There is also unfairness in that some countries within the UK, such as Scotland, the NHS provides, I believe, free nursing home care, whereas in England (separate country within the UK) you have to pay for a nursing home. If you go for a NHS nursing home it will be cheaper but not as nice as a private one that you pay quite a lot for.
I had a heck of a fight getting my GP to help me with anything Lyme related for half of my treatment for Lyme.....but when he saw that my LLMD was onto something and I was getting better, he DID help me and give me my rx's and for much of that time I was also exempt from the rx fee.
Now, I am relapsing after a year off abx and this time he offered to talk to my LLMD himself in order to save me a LLMD consult fee; so for me that is progress and NOW the system is working for ME here. If I was still in NY now, I would have to really think about whether I could afford to go back and seek help again from my LLMD and if I could afford tx and/or insurance, etc.etc...
So, there are PROS AND CONS. It's not all bad and it's not all good. But, on the whole, for the masses it is at best great, at worst poor yet adequate (i.e. you're not left on the street or without ANY treatment if you have no insurance). On the other hand, the system that holds the purse strings are not going to offer you the most expensive, experimental treatment, etc without you putting up a fight for it. Things are not as INSTANT here as they will be more reluctant to send a patient off immediately for a LOT of investigations before seeing if the symptoms are going to be something that will be gone in a couple of weeks without any investigations..........
I think there could be improvements to both the American profit based system, AND the UK (and most of Europe's socialized or subsidized) systems.........there should be a happy medium.
I do not believe health care should be a privilege for the privileged only, I do believe like education it should be a right and a 'given'. The thing is balance - how to make sure the profit based system does not produce too much greed and that the budget based system does not produce too many calloused or stingy 'carers'.......
In America, I can get whatever I want and fast, even if it is medically not necessary and even if it is very expensive and the test or treatment's risk outweigh's it's benefit.....I can get it if I can pay up for either the best insurance package or pay outright.... If I can't it's tough luck.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
Like I said, there's pros and cons and I'm actually living with and using both systems at the same time as a dual national travelling back and forth.
Neither is great. In the UK there's the option of opting in (default) to the NHS, or opt out, get private insurance/medical care (and even then you still have a right to your free healthcare if you want it). In the US, there's no such choice. If there was a 'socialized' system of some kind, I would still feel there should be a CHOICE to opt out of it and buy your insurance and go private, if you want to. Why HAVE TO be BOXED into either system. Aren't most of us believers in choice?
Perhaps I should mention that I have also spent about a decade living in Sweden. I survived that too as have all my relatives there. They have a very good standard of living and low rates of MRSA, etc, just for instance. Let's try to include the positive too.
BUT, let me just point out that I would not give much 'weight' to anything written in the Daily Mail any more than I would the National Enquirer or the Star. It's a tabloid paper that is not comparable to say The New York Times or Wall Street Journal.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nice take on things, Dontlikeliver. Something I didn't pick up
from your post but experienced from many years living in
France, was the care substandard to that in the US. No
comparison, really. Adequate care was available through a
system somewhat less impressive than our own Veteran's
Administration medical system. (A socialized medical care
offering of our country's largest socialized institution.)
By substandard I mean procedures were left undone or
completed to a standard reflecting ours decades earlier. Actual
techniques and treatments for many conditions, common and
otherwise, were ones we had abandoned long before in lieu of
modern, newer medical practice. (Not always a good thing.)
Ironically, half way through your pros my head voice was saying
what about the seriously higher post-treatment infection rates
under socialized medicine. (Once again like the VA.) Your very
next sentence was about your friend's infected Hickman line.
It is said a country's health care can be judged by the condition
of its people's teeth. All who've been abroad can establish their
own affinity to this observation. Personally, my girlfriend at the
time had work completed in France that her dentist in the States
said was only half-finished. (He "completed" the work.) This was
typical, and why most French who could afford to chose
american-trained dentists.
Another way to judge a society is how the elderly are treated. In
2003 15,00 +/- elderly died in France due to conditions
substandard to the US during a heat wave. 80% of nursing
homes (and many hospitals) had no air-conditioning. Today, the
government - working with the health care system - has passed
a law that every nursing home and hospital must have at least
one air-conditioned "area of refuge" for elderly to gather.
Anecdotally, I know far more horror stories out of the socialized
system then ours in the US. This needs to be considered through
the understanding that I have much more experience with the
American system than any other.
James, ironically for you, France's socialized medical system
influenced that government's decision to ban Fipronil use in part
because of concerns for human health. And they invented it.
Posts: 76 | From tolland county, ct | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
lymemomtooo
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 5396
posted
Our family has many friends in a choir in Wales. One had some type of throat cancer and could no longer speak. He was told if he could get some type of voice box, he would be able to speak. But he was not eligable in Wales to do that even if he could pay for it.
We were contacted and asked to order it in the US and ship it to him. WE did it for him.
Also another friend had cancer and could not, even after begging and her US DR brother in law demanding for her, get an appointment in time to get life saving help..
Our system is broken but don't expect the socialized one to be better. Expecially if you are older. lmt
Posts: 2360 | From SE PA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
Lymeric,
I definitely agree with some of those things - such as cheaper procedures being done due to budget issues when it comes to NHS. It's not the lack of existence of technology, as you can choose private medical care and get 'all the bells and whistles', if you can afford that. But, the British on principle feel resentful or adverse to paying for something, which for the last sixty years has been free- and PREVIOUSLY in decades past, was of the highest standard....now more people using it (including medical tourists from all over the world who come to abuse the system) so the funds are not there to provide EXCELLENT levels of care at ALL LEVELS.
I have no experience of health care in France, so I cannot comment on that - though I have noted not great teeth on many occasions while there (most people still also smoke there it seems).
But, I can say with confidence that dental care in Sweden and people's teeth are excellent - I visit there regularly also ...you won't see gaps there (in their mouths). Whereas you will see gaps in the UK because the dental care is mostly not NHS funded and the UK population has a mentality - and I am GENERALIZING here, sadly, often of if it ain't free, we ain't payin' 'cause it's our 'right'......and therefore they neglect their teeth because they 'feel' they can't afford it or won't pay 'extra' on principle. I disagree with myself and I consider dental health (not to mention, presentation) VERY important and never squabble about paying for it or cut corners on what I buy/what care etc. (BTW, braces are free for kids as is dental care. My child currently has such 'free' braces and they work just like same braces her cousin has in New York).
Yes, my friend got an infected Hickman line months into her chemo, but that was not the fault of any other person...or system. It just happened, as it can happen in the USA or any other place - it's the risk of having a Hickman. (she herself is an ex-intensive care nurse and now a lawyer, so it wasn't ignorance or lack of knowledge, etc on her part), but cr*p sometimes happens, anywhere and when a linen gets infected it can happen QUICKLY. As Lyme patients especially, we know that there are such risks with lines anyway. My point about mentioning the Hickman was not that "in the UK it got infected" it was that immediate treatment did not depend on her ability to pay.
Norway is another country where the system is not like the American system, yet they have, I believe the WORLD's lowest rate of hospital acquired infection rates. So, that can't be due to the system, but the individuals within that system....
So, I'm not saying everyone has to be forced into one system or another, but why not have the choice to go 'national' or 'private'. At least then those who cannot afford private insurance, or whose employers do not offer it are not left without care, even if they have accept that tests and procedures may not be as instant or comprehensive at the first hurdle? At least if they fell and broke their leg, they could still get that done and receive no bill for it.
I am not trying to, nor am I going to, argue about anything. Like I said, I am just giving a perspective from a user/receiver of both systems....and, ironically also in the past of the Swedish socialized system (which is now partly private anyway).
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Geneal
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 10375
posted
I do think that health care costs are super inflated.
I do believe the same for prescription medicines.
While I think there needs to be a type of standard
To keep prices from being artificially inflated,
I also want to choose my doctor when and where I want to.
My private health insurance doesn't even pay for my LLMD.
He takes insurance.
Still, it is my choice whether to go to the LLMD and pay for the appointment.
That is the point of living in America.
Choices and freedom.
The government is already too involved playing "big brother".
While I think we need health care cost standards,
I certainly don't believe we need "big brother"
Mandating when, where and how illness should be treated.
I saw a bumper sticker on a car the other day that said
"I work....so you don't have to."
While this is not always possible with Lyme (I didn't work for 2 years)
The point is still valid.
Too many people wanting someone else to "take care of them."
It's the something for nothing mentality.
It is extremely pervasive here in the South.
Afte Obama was elected I could go to Target and hear the workers
Stating how he was going to "pay for their gas and food."
I kid you not.
I think that my health is just that. Mine.
I want to make the decisions that involve my care.
If I were a part of "socialized" medicine,
I would never (and I mean never) been diagnosed with Lyme.
How much do you think a Western Blot by Quest or Labcorp costs?
Plus the results of the tests are too often the basis of
Whether you get diagnosed or not.
Just think of where we would all be given the standard 21 days of treatment.
This is looking at the big picture.
My grandmother will probably die from a cancer
That most often goes into remission with chemo and radiation.
So, in effect, the government is making decisions that
Directly affect her life......and death.
Even if you have no insurance here in the US,
There are hospitals that cannot turn you away.
Think of the multitudes of people who already believe
Their docs to be all knowing.
Please don't mistake that I am targeting those of us
For whom health care is too expensive.
The healthcare for my family costs more a month
Than my mortgage on my brand new house.
Yikes!
By the Grace of God we have managed to financially survive
During the time that I was too ill to work.
I just think that socializing health care takes my freedom of choice
Completely out of the picture.
My family immigrated to the US just for that freedom.
Hugs,
Geneal
Posts: 6250 | From Louisiana | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
Geneal,
I agree, it's about freedom of choice. So, why should that not include the freedom to choose, for Americans, a middle ground. National health care for those who cannot afford or have access through their employer to have private medical insurance? The other option American's are left with as it is right now is 'nothing'. So, we (in the USA) have an all or nothing system right now. Why not have a Best, Adequate and 'nothing' system instead. That is still consdering FREEDOM OF CHOICE. Nobody would be forced to choose National, and nobody would be forced to be left with 'Nothing' (such as sell your house if you have cancer to pay for chemo), etc...But, there would be a choice two health care systems, or if you wish, the 'nothing' system, which is pay it all yourself, or suffer or lose your house/posessions, etc.
The misconception here is also that, for instance, the NHS "socialized system" is free. It is not FREE. Every person pays their insurance dues for it - it's called National Insurance. So, again, like in America, this is either paid by the employer (but is a legal requirement for an employer to pay), or if you work for youself, you pay your own National Insurance contributions. When I have used the word free, as I explained above, it means "free at the point of entry", which means you do not have to pay up front/on the spot and you do nto get an invoice, because it's pre-paid through the National Insurance payments you already make or your employer makes for you.
Now, with a recession, on both sides of the pond, statements such as "I work so you don't have to" may not be an option for many people who up till now have been very privileged as equally those who were not very privileged......whether they were privileged or not, more and more people are losing their jobs, and insurance = medical care = assets, etc through no fault of their own. They're not quitting their jobs to take advantage of someone else working 'for' them so they can have something free..... but everyone's losing.
So, even those who've had it all 'cause they worked hard and had good insurance through their job, or could afford it privately, may no longer have that 'privilege'.... so, is it wrong then to have a third option for the growing number of people in this 'box'? (National care option). Or do we accept as good enough that you either are privileged and 'get' or too bad if you lost your job, lost everything and then do not even have a "national" option to fall back on??
I'm sure we'd all pick the best private and expensive care as first choice, so that we have the most choice and the most testing and most expensive meds, etc.... but if we're not in a position to get that for whatever reason, why be left with a choice of "too bad", rather than a middle ground?
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's also not forget the hugely important correlation between
countries' successful socialized medical efforts and their lack of
paying for their own (or other's) defense.
Posts: 76 | From tolland county, ct | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
P.S. My ancestors also immigrated to America because conditions where they were, were terrible. However, there are so many levels of terrible to compare between the 1800's or early 1900's and now; it just doesn't compare. i.e. many things in America at that time of mass immigration, such as the hope of finding gold and riches and to just be able to eat, were a GREAT draw and reason to emigrate from places they were starving and struggling.
Now, many parts of the world from where such immigrants came, are rich and successful nations where perhaps our distant relatives have a quality of life comparable or even better than many descendants of immigrants to the USA.
Anyway, nothing's perfect and I am certainly not saying socialized is perfect.....but 100% private is not perfect ($$$$ can be tooooo motivational and leaves less privileged with nothing)...... with so many smart people out there I hope they can work out another alternative that helps more people, and makes more people more productive.....
And yes, probably the number of inhabitants in the USA make this all a more difficult task than a smaller nation. In fact, that may be part of the problem with the NHS in the UK "cracking"...it is a tiny island nation that could fit into the size of New York State, yet there are over 60million people using the system, plus thousands of visitors who come to the UK and then 'conveniently' get sick while here visiting..... hey ho.. I wish I was still 15 when I knew the answers to everything!
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
quote:Originally posted by lymeric: Let's also not forget the hugely important correlation between
countries successful socialized medical efforts and their lack of
paying for their own (or others) defense.
Or choosing neutrality, in the case of Sweden. (opting out) - another choice whether for better or for worse.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
heiwalove
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6467
posted
i agree with amanda one hundred percent. couldn't have worded it better or more succinctly myself. everyone - and that means EVERYONE - working poor, middle class, wealthy, homeless, on welfare, anywhere and everywhere in between -- deserves access to basic and emergency healthcare. it's a human right. bottom line.
quote:Originally posted by AmandaM: I strongly believe that basic hospital care and *basic* healthcare needs to be socialized by the government. Also Prescription coverage needs to be socialized. All this would mean is that we would be taxed so every citizen of this country (and visitors) would get basic hospital care and affordable prescriptions no matter who you are or what medication it is.
This is done in many other countries and it works. I have personally lived through the NHS in the UK and I was treated like gold even though I wasn't even a citizen. I got tons of presctriptions for �7.15 regardless of my insurance or what medication it was. 10 pills or 1000 pills. It was the same price all the time.
I feel it is a human right to have basic affordable health coverage. Period. This isn't a socialist issue it is a human rights issue. We need to step back and look at the big picture instead of only looking at only Lyme coverage.
Now -- when we take ourselves away from the big picture and look specifically into specialists and chronic illnesses -- we would have the ability to have private health insurance on top of the basic government healthcare we would all be getting. This is also how it is done in many other countries. Many jobs also offer supplemental health insurance plans.
This way --�at least people have the basic human right to seek a hospital for emergency care without financial question and will also get private specialist care (just like we do now)
This is 100% necessary for our society. 100%. I can not budge on this belief.
We really need to step back and look at the big picture.
posted
I don't agree with the automatic "we deserve" notion. It's just too idealistic. Why should everyone else be forced to supply what some individual believes he or she is automatically entitled to? IMO, before making an entitlement demand on our society, a person should be sure they have already sufficiently contributed to it, else they seem spoiled and their demand seems selfish.
I feel that to be true even if the government's money well were overflowing with profits, something far from being the case at the moment. IMO, to demand even more handouts and entitlements, such as socialized medicine, during a time of fiscal trouble comes across as hubris.
Posts: 727 | From USA | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Geneal
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 10375
posted
Please don't misunderstand that what I was using
As an example, unfortunately is the pervading attitude in the South for many.
I agree that times are very hard.
I agree that there may need to be a "type" of emergency insurance
That can cover you like unemployment can.
I know socialized medicine isn't free.
However, in my utopian world , I wouldn't mind
Having a "middle" ground, so long as it wasn't dictated by the government.
Look at our economy. Look at the stimulus package.
No earmarks. Yeah, that's because all of the pork was added in
Prior to the passage of the bill.
If it is added after the bill gets introduced it is an "ear mark".
It burns me to think that our monies being used to study the swamp mouse in San Francisco.
How many jobs will that create?
How many people could have been covered for insurance
For the 1.5 million that was designated for just that one study?
I too have benefitted from state run insurance.
Both of my children had medicaid after Katrina.
I also received 3 months of food stamps.
It was a God Send.
However, other than not being able to buy non-perishable items,
No one could dictate whether I spent the money on steak or hamburger.
Please don't believe that I am not a victim too of the economic times.
We are barely making ends meet.
Health care costs are a major part of our issues.
That and paying for food.
I mean I'd be rich if I didn't have to eat.
My mother has Medicaire (government run insurance, yes?)
She cannot get the medicine she needs.
She has to pay for it out of pocket.
So while she has paid into it all of her life,
The benefits are dictated.
Not as severe as social medicine, but still there.
I am for a change. Just not one run by our government.
Can you imagine what the ID ducks would put in their "national" data base
In regards to "chronic Lyme"?
"patient continues to believe he/she has Lyme symptoms.
Non-compliant with diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Patient is argumentative insisting on additional medication.
Patient clearly has issues regarding authority."
While this is just made up stuff, would you like any of these comments
To be accessed by any MD in the country?
I wish there were a really good answer.
Times are tough. Supposed to get tougher.
I guess we all just have to do what we have to in order to get by.
I hope you realize that the reference to the bumper sticker
I made was not about sitting in judgement for those who are truly
Suffering due to losing their jobs and having no other recourse.
It was not meant to be offensive or judgemental.
It is just an example of the prevailing mentality that exists in the South.
I apologize profusely if it came across in that way.
Sorry if I offended anyone.
It wasn't intended.
Maybe a flat tax program that allowed freedom in our health care.
Just paid all the premiums for us.
Socialized medicine just doesn't work that way....unfortunately.
Hugs,
Geneal
Posts: 6250 | From Louisiana | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
When talking about nationalizing healthcare in the U.S. I ofter hear the terms "privileged" or "not privileged." I find these labels confusing.
I grew up in what many would consider a poor environment. My parents could not afford to pay for me to go to college. However, I studied hard in school, earned scholarships, and worked while attending college. These endeavors allowed me the opportunities to have a career which offered healthcare insurance as one of the benefits. Does this somehow make me "privileged?"
I thought it made me an AMERICAN! I thought it meant I was pursuing the American dream.
-------------------- My comments on this site are not intended to be taken as medical advice as I'm not a physician. Posts: 206 | From Georgia | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
METALLlC BLUE
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6628
posted
I agree with Obama's plans thus far. I support Universal Coverage and the goal he's gradually trying to reach.
It is peculiar to me that when someone with financial resources "lives" because they could afford appropriate medical care, while someone who doesn't have the financial means, dies or continues suffering onward until they expire as a direct result of lacking financial support.
I just performed a song called American Dream that involves the same concepts. Living it up while driving by homeless vetrans sleeping on the streets. Faces stare back at me while people live out of their cars because they sold their home for medical care, or because some other tragic event occurred. It gives new meaning to "Consumer" economy, when lives are consumed as those with more, take at the expense of those with less, and exploit them, displace them, outsource, insource -- whatever direction you want to take it.
It is quite obvious to me that our system is not only far from perfect, but(Capitalism) it inherently flawed and will inevitably collapse. There are better ways, but when those better ways are presented, everyone throws their arms up, because people don't like change, because those types of changes only come with revolutions in thought and action. Those who are comfortable in the upper class see no reason to change, those at the bottom throw their arms up because they say "I'm just one person, no one will listen to me." -- the middle class throws their arms up and says "I don't care about anyone else, I just want to feed my family." This is why things are the way they are, because "we" chose it. We're the ammunition to change it.
As long as technology continues to advance, machines will eventually displace most jobs that humans currently. do. Even Taxi drives will be a thing of the past soon. Building cars, almost exclusively machine built -- with far few people employed on the lines. The population is expanding, jobs are not, at least not fast enough. Yet all the while costs keep rising because of the inherent debt built into our system. None of our money is real. We just keep printing more when things aren't looking good, but you can't keep adjusting interest rates and printing money -- it will eventually snap beneath the pressure. We're seeing the consequences of my concept in action right now.
That's not my American Dream, and it doesn't feel like Freedom.
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
Regarding my using the word privileged: I was using it in the context only of privileged enough to have private medical care whether provided through work or paying for it yourself.
Other than that, of course, the word can be interpreted many different ways because someone poor in America with running water would still be considered very privileged when compared to a "slumdog" kid in the slums of Mumbai who's having to scavenge garbage dumps to survive.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
map1131
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 2022
posted
No thank you. Anything government run is not where I want to be. Look at public housing. Having they done a wonderful job of housing people for lower rent.
I think everyone wants to live in these gov run public projects (in progress) housing?????
Healthcare is in need of overhaul, but IMO the government is not able to whip themselves out of a mess dealing with situations for years.
NO THANK YOU. Next idea?
Pam
-------------------- "Never, never, never, never, never give up" Winston Churchill Posts: 6478 | From Louisville, Ky | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
dmc
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 5102
posted
We (the US) have three universal type health care
Medicare...Medicaid & the Veteran's Admin.
Has any of them helped you without a fight? These are example's why government run health programs do not work here.
Now just look the CDC "adopting" the IDSA guidlines for lyme treatment. You're gonna see that type of procedure with EVERY disease.
The government deciding what is "appropiate" treatment.
The FDA is hassling herbal companies. (I can see it if they make dubious claims)
Quackwatch will be the standard guide for government treatment ideas.
Look how doctors don't want to treat medicare patients...they do not get a decent compensation and they have to wait long periods of time to get the meager amount.
In the VA (I am in that system) you don't EVER get your lab results or reports even to give to another MD outside the VA system.
If you bring them reports showing positive for something, you still have to go through their channels to get the treatment. If their MDs say it's not so (such as Lyme).... you don't get the treatment.
People, we need to fix the health care but accusing the LLMDs or any patient seeing MD as being profit hungry is pure ignorant. (lack of knowledge not stupid)
I think the ones who work for insurance companies and those looking for patents are the profit hungry ones.
I wonder, how many insurance company MDs get bonuses for denying treatments? Look how many of their CEOs get bonuses when they lay-off hundreds.
Posts: 2675 | From ct, usa | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
groovy2
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6304
posted
Hi All--
Watch this PBS special called--
Sick Around the World --
The show compares 5 different countries Health care systems --
Watching This one hour show will almost make you a Expert on what needs to be done --
You can watch complete show Online -Free-
After clicking the On Link below - on the PBS page Click on Picture of the IV bag = --( Yellow type)--Jay--
daystar1952
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 3255
posted
My take on all this is that I wish we all had decent health care. The drug companies and insurance companies definitly rule the roost and that is not good. HOWEVER, people all over the world are experiencing the same scenerio with Lyme/ CFS, FM.....yada yada.
No one is getting effective treatmnet because as one poster mentioned...the drug companies make more profits on symptomatic treatments , rather than ones that cure.Most drug companies are international. So....what could this possibly mean?
If one looks at the medical industry and it's relation to the government, we notice that the drug companies are intimately intertwined with the government. A drug rep also told me that the insurance companies are in bed with the drug companies. This may explain why most preventative treatments, including even just oral antibiotics (cheap, compared to IV) are being kept from us.
It seems to me that what the insurance companies loose on one end , they make up for in symptomatic drug sales. I've heard that the insurance companies own vested interests in the drug companies. i've always wondered why there isn't an all out war between the two industries. Of course this is just speculation but it makes sense to me.
So....my main point is...if the drug companies are intertwined with the insurance companies.....why on earth would we want more govt control of our health? I'm not sure what the answer would be but i feel we are being coerced into accepting or clamoring for total control of govt. over our health.
I just think we need to think about all this more before we think there are no other solutions and that we have to accept the idea that it is the government's role to take care of us. The government is not a person. It is an entity and I don't think an entity loves us or has our best interests at heart.
What do you guys think?
Posts: 1176 | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged |
luvs2ride
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8090
posted
I want the government to stay out of my business.
dontlikeliver said: "I believe there IS age-discrimination. My father in law was denied a second heart bypass at 75 on the grounds he wasn't well enough. He's 86 now and has made it this far without a second bypass BUT perhaps he would have had a better quality of life for the last 11 years if they had given him the second bypass rather than living with angina this long. He'd had a bypass when he was 68 and was fine for 7 years. We then found out that a bypass usually has a lifespan of 7 years anyway, then you need it redone in many cases...but if you're 'too old' that might take a fight. (and the British often don't like to make waves, especially the older generation)."
This is a grave danger,not only for elderly but also for the disabled. If you are not productive, the government may decide you are not worth the investment. Get it?
When you hand your life over to someone else to manage, you become a slave to that entity and you are counting 100% on the said entity to be fair, just, merciful and generous in its care of you.
Personally, I don't want it.
Medicaid already exists for the poor. Medicare for the elderly.
Who is missing out on insurance? I guess someone earning a living but lacking insurance as part of their employment benefit, right?
When employers first offered health insurance as a benefit, it was a good deal for everyone. Insuring a large group of people kept the costs low as most of the insured group were healthy and could carry the sick.
Then we began wellness care and people started running to the doctors for every little thing. After all, insurance was paying for it so why not? Now, no one is well and everyone is running up medical costs.
Doctors and drug companies hiked up their prices because, afterall, insurance companies were paying for it.
And lets talk about the out and out cases of fraud.
Socialized medicine will cut this out, oh you can bet it will. Along with so many treatments we have available to us now.
Susan
-------------------- When the Power of Love overcomes the Love of Power, there will be Peace. Posts: 3038 | From america | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
And respectfully, for those of you that seem to think that healthcare is a "right", I'm just curious as to if you also think that food, water, and housing, are a "right" as well ?
After all...they're all 100% essential to the uniquely human process of staying alive. And, they've all gotten a lot more expensive, as well.
Posts: 135 | From Orlando, Florida | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
heiwalove
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6467
posted
gridmonster, absolutely, food, water, and housing are fundamental rights as well. every human being deserves the basic amenities necessary to sustain health and life. i'm sure that anyone who advocates for universal health care also advocates for housing rights, food justice, environmental protection, safe & clean water.
'the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness,' remember? none of these are possible without adequate healthcare, housing, nutrition, and necessary support systems for those who need them.
certainly, universal healthcare isn't perfect. obviously it won't do a damn thing to help those of us with lyme. however, look outside yourselves & your own circumstances for a moment. i know how difficult that is when you're suffering, but it's also vital, i think, if we hope to forge a functioning and compassionate society.
we're taught in this country (US) that the individual is the most important component, the one aspect around which everything else should be organized. i submit that that notion is false and dangerous, that instead the COMMUNITY, our society as a whole, is what makes us who we are. if people are left to die because they don't have insurance, or because their insurance package is less than ideal (and if you don't think this happens, trust me, it does. even if you despise michael moore i think it would behoove everyone on this site to watch 'sicko'), then clearly we are failing miserably as a society and a nation.
some people are able to successfully pursue the so-called 'american dream'; others are not so lucky. there are manifold factors at play: race, class, poverty, culture, language, health, disability, the list goes on. i live in new york city, where i'm slammed with the ugly disparity daily: the poorest of the poor, folks who sleep outside on the sidewalk in frigid winter temperatures because there is no other option, coexist next to some of the wealthiest corporations & CEOs in the nation. in the same city, often within mere blocks of each other.
i hope with everything in me that obama begins the process of instituting some sort of universal care. if my beliefs make me a socialist, then so be it; i think they make me a humanist, someone who cares deeply about the suffering of her fellow citizens (and human beings across the globe, wherever they happen to reside).
posted
Our currently leaders are driving us into bankrupcy. They have failed to manage fannie, freddy, social security and virtually every government program is a web of inefficiency and waste.
Regardless of the pro/cons of socialized medicine in other countries, our current leaders are incabable of making a system that will be better than our current system.
Until, we clean house, eliminate all of the self-serving elite minded shmucks that are currently in DC, we are better off dealing with the health care system the way it is.
Here is an idea...we could drastically reduce health care costs in the US by capping medical malpratice lawsuits. If you win your case you can have $250,000 or an amount equal to your life insurance coverage at the time of the malpractice, whichever is greater. If you valued your life at $500,000 and purchased that much in coverage why should you get any more in a lawsuit?!?!? Malpractice insurance is a real problem here and costs the doctors a fortune. That would be an easy way to start and wouldn't involve the federal government.
My 2 cents.
Linda
Posts: 23 | From East Coast | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
Is education a 'right'? It seems to be more than a right. Parents are prosecuted for NOT educating their kids. But, it's Ok for poor families without access or funds for healthcare to let their kids 'die off' instead as long as they get/got their right to education? (perhaps slightly exaggerated case, but I don't see the logic personally in valuing the 'right' to education before life itself/health).
Without your health, what does education mean?
This could become a circular discussion that has no end, unfortunately. No, running water, electricity, etc is not a right either. Perhaps we should just go back to living in caves, foraging and letting the fittest survive, which would probably mean that most of us "Lymies" would die out pretty quickly.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
As I said, I don't want this discussion to escalate beyond a certain point, which it has a tendency to do on Lymenet and it may get taken out of context (which is already is starting to) and get pulled; taking members with it. It would be nice to remain just as a discussion, bringing in all different people's different experiences around the world, using different systems.
I seem more or less alone on this thread, having the 'right' to and using both systems at the moment, which currently give me the best of both worlds IMO. My LLMD in the US and treatment in the UK on the 'socialized' system. My Malarone was $10/box. Would I prefer to pay the US price for it? Not really. It was a case of educating my GP; I was lucky he's 'seen the light'. But, if he was an American GP he would not necessarily be more likely to see the ILADS light.
There's good and bad to everything and everyone.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
METALLlC BLUE
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6628
posted
dontlikeliver. Who is your GP over seas? PM me?
-------------------- I am not a physician, so do your own research to confirm any ideas given and then speak with a health care provider you trust.
luvs2ride
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8090
posted
Dontlikeliver,
I love choices. But clearly you are having to come to America for your lyme treatment. Where will you go if America socializes their medicine?
Heiwalove, America is one of the most charitable countries on this earth. Absolutely, everyone is entitled to the basic needs of life and everyone who can get those needs on their own power is obligated to do so and God directed to never forget the poor, the widows and the orphans.
But when that becomes a Government Mandated practice, don't be shocked when the disabled are shuffled to the bottom of the heap. Afterall, you are a drain on society and Society must survive at the cost of some unlucky individuals. That is socialism! Hardly charitable.
LindainRhodeIsland,
I agree with you 100%. People want to say the pharmacutical companies and the insurance companies are greedy but they are in bed with the politians. Yes folks, the very same people you want to hand all our money and our healthcare choices over to.
Democrats are supposed to be for the little guy but they were the first to line up right alongside our "so called republican" president to hand a fortune over to corporations who had mismanaged and even swindled their way into the financial fiasco we are now in. Those corporations had plenty of help from our polititians both democratic and republican who paved the legislative way for them and pressured them into providing loans for people who could never pay it back. Capitalism has not been at work for a long time now, but greed has been operating without anyone to oversee and prevent it.
Right now, after so many Obama appointees have been found remiss in paying their own taxes, I would like to see an audit of every single polititian. Who else isn't paying their fair share?
You want equity and justice from our government?
GOOD LUCK!
Susan
-------------------- When the Power of Love overcomes the Love of Power, there will be Peace. Posts: 3038 | From america | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Abxnomore
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 18936
posted
METALLlC BLUE I like your way of thinking. No system is perfect but the one we have is clearly
a diaster. If we put our minds to it, America could provide healthcare for everyone and perfect
the problems that other countries may have.
Healthcare should be an individual RIGHT and it
is disgraceful that we are the only industrialized nation that does not take care of our sick. When
I go to Europe I can buy (not now with the demise of the dollar) American made drugs for pennies and in the U.S. the very same drugs cost a fortune.
Now that our country is failing apart, many are reaccessing the urgent need for health care reform. How much longer can we burden industry with this cost and
expect them to be competitive when in every other country industry does not have this burden??
Is there any wonder we can't compete. A country that provides health care for some and not ALL
is not AMERICA! Also we must look at this not only from a Lyme perspective as we have a unique set of
issues but why should some one in their older years lose every thing they have worked for their entire life when they become old and ill before
the government will help them? You have to be broke before you can get medicaid. Medicare pays for a fractions of your medical costs and the
drug plan is a joke. Is this what America is really about. I don't think so.
WE CAN DO BETTER and government does not always have to be the enemy. The country voted for change because we need it.
If we don't change we will sink even further than we have already.
Posts: 5191 | From Lyme Zone | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
Luvs2ride
I come to NY to see an LLMD for the same reason people all over the US travel out of state for an experienced LLMD who has the guts to rx long-term abx. It's not that I couldn't get the abx here, I can now on the NHS, BUT there are no LLMD's with 20+ years experience in tickborne diseases here. So, my choice is based on the experience of he doctor himself, nothing else.
What my LLMD recommends, I then take back to the UK and my gp gives the meds to me 'free'.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ugagal: Under socialized medicine get ready to wait 2 years for a MRI or other medically necessary test
Also, making any doctor's appt might mean waiting 6 months or longer.
There will be some important disadvantages!
I'm sorry, but that is bullcrap. I am in Canada and have had 2 MRIs in the past 2 years. It took 1 week of waiting for the first one, 2 weeks for the second one. The longest I have ever had to wait for a dr appt. is 5-6 weeks.
I'm not saying the Canadian system is perfect - it isn't. We definitely do not have enough LLMDs to go around here and that is a big problem.
Abxnomore
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 18936
posted
What are you talking about:
"But when that becomes a Government Mandated practice, don't be shocked when the disabled are shuffled to the bottom of the heap. Afterall, you are a drain on society and Society must survive at the cost of some unlucky individuals. That is socialism! Hardly charitable."
American is already there without socialized medicine. There are millions who have no health care, no dental care and lose all of their teeth and those who die because of lack of access to it in AMERICA.
Not to mention all the people who have Lyme and lose medical care and cannot afford to get help or buy medications and suffer as we do.
Your argument does not hold water.
What do you think an HMO is anyway. It's socialized medicine with all the bad aspects and none of the good. They tell you what doctor you can go to, the insurance company overrules your doctor's determination as to what procedures and medications you can have and you are paying for it to boot!
Congress has socialized health care but they have the good kind and its FREE. They get all the benefits because their system is run well. The veteran's administration has socialized medicine.
In the past it worked relatively well, until the system got so over loaded and underfunded.
When there is a will there is a way. If America could figure out how to put a man on the moon it certainly can figure out how to provide affordable health care for all
that works and meets everyone's needs. But the population needs to wake up and demand what they are rightfully entitled too. We have been asleep
for too long and now you see the mess we are in.
No system is perfect but what we have not is a laughing stock, a disgrace, except for those who still have good coverage thru corporations and they are rapidly losing that. It will soon be a thing of the past as companies cannot afford it any more and know its cost is a heavy burden keeping them from being competitive across the globe.
America can improve upon the flaws that are inherent in the systems of other countries if the commitment is there. Medicare is run by the
government and except for the fact that you have to pay for a gap policy to pick up the 20% it doesn't cover and the fact that drug coverage is a joke, Medicare works VERY well and it's a government run program, also know as socialized medicine.
It can be done and government don't forget is us, we are the people, that make up the government.
If Americans stayed involved, educated themselves on the issues like they do in other countries we could have a government that served our needs.
NOT ALL GOVERNMENT IS BAD. Certain groups want you to believe that.
[ 03-07-2009, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: Abxnomore ]
Posts: 5191 | From Lyme Zone | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
Abxnomore
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 18936
posted
Don'tlikelive you are not alone. I agree with you and am happy that you have found a way to get
treatment for your Lyme disease. I'd do the same thing, if I were you.
No system is perfect but the argument that Europeans have had long waits and can't get prompt care has long been an argument used to
scare Americans away from Universal health care and they have bought into it like a flock of scared sheep for years.
The time is ripe in America because we have the largest amount ever of uninsured and the numbers are rising every month and with the recession and
industry and government know that they can never be competitive again shouldering the cost of health care while competing against companies in nations that don't have that additional cost burden.
Posts: 5191 | From Lyme Zone | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
kelmo
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8797
posted
Meg, member #22, been around and seen it all. Good for you, Meg!
Actually, Geneal is correct, Obama's plan will make health care available for all, but the blueprint for treatment will be even tougher than the IDSA's.
Like her grandmother in Germany, the same policy will be applied here. If two people get cancer, or need an organ transplant, the decision will alway be made in favor of the younger, more productive member of society.
You have got to read his proposal. The universal healthcare he proposes is not what we want.
There HAS to be a way for medical coverage to be available for all, but not cut back on the quality of care we have now.
Our hospitals are no longer non-profit due to the amount of illegal citizens clogging up our ERs.
Do you remember the days of early HMOs. You never saw the same doctor twice in a clinic. If you had an illness that required a specialist, you had to wait weeks to get a referral.
With Lyme, you may not ever see a lyme literate physician, or have a choice to see one.
I am not worried for myself, I could die tomorrow and be fine with it. But, I'm fighting tooth and nail for my daughter to get into remission before Obama's medical plan goes into affect.
Posts: 2903 | From AZ | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
Meg,
There aren't many of us on Lymenet who are speaking from experience of using both systems. Most are speaking from one perspective - the angle of their own interpretations of what they've read or heard, which is usually 'just' someone else's opinion. Most reactions are not based on FIRST-HAND experience; they're based on assumptions that are usually based on someone else's interpretations and assumptions......kind of like Chinese whispers.
Again, yes Canadians and people in Europe and in the UK will come to Seeking a Doctor forum to seek an LLMD; but it is not unique to those outside of the USA.. Most seekers on there are in the USA - they are domestic! The seeking, from wherever it's being sought, has nothing to do with whether the medical system is a private-for-profit-driven or social-provided by taxes one......it is a whole different matter; like comparing apples and pears.
As it happens, at this moment MOST of the ILADS LLMD's are in the USA because (particularly on the East Coast) is where tickborne disease is rampant and known about and it's agreed by both IDSA and ILADS that that is a geographical problem area. But, they are not completely exclusive. There are other ILADS docs in other countries. Dr. M is one, but she's no longer taking on new patients but doing research. Then there's Dr. O in Wales.
So, in countries where Lyme is not quite as rampant/prominent, it is natural that there are hardly any doctors specializing in it, when there are hardly any in the USA either when you consider the huge population and KNOWN cases of Lyme. There are a few LLMDs in the UK, and many people here do see them. Though none exceed the number of YEARS experience of Dr H or Dr B (retired) ,etc. So, if I was still living in NY a this time, I would still choose an LLMD with the most number of years experience, as I am doing from here, with that particular disease than whatever system operates within.
Let's not kid ourselves that America is the land of abundance of LLMD's and easy access to long-term abx any more than anywhere else in the world. It is not, we know that; wherever we are we all face that same common thread and it is not system related, it's lyme-war related.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
quote:Originally posted by kelmo: There HAS to be a way for medical coverage to be available for all, but not cut back on the quality of care we have now.
That is IT. Short, sweet and to the point.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Geneal
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 10375
posted
Following Katrina, we lost our house, our jobs, our way of living.
We lost our health insurance. Still had to pay a house note
On a house we couldn't even live in.
Why my plight wasn't exactly like someone who had been laid off,
I am not without sympathy/empathy for those facing hardship.
We lived without electricity for 37 days outside.
I often thought that this was what it was like to live in a 3rd world country.
Until we found out where the MRE's were being given out,
We lived on what we had. It wasn't much since the tornado did so much damage.
No couch. No furniture. No washing maching, no dryer.
It was really bad.
I immediately applied for state run Medicaid for my children.
They had to be covered.
My husband and I went without. Couldn't afford it.
The poor and those without can do the exact same thing I did.
Apply for Medicaid. The government already provides this.
When I was young, owning a home was an American Dream.
Not a right.
Driving is a privelige, not a right.
You have to earn that driver's license.
You had to work to earn that house.
I've paid for private insurance for the whole family
As soon as my husband got a job.
We still owed monies on a house that was gone.
We were threatened with foreclosure unless we paid the balance in full!
Uh.....yeah, okay, sure.
I didn't see anybody coming in to "save" our family from financial devestation.
All proceeds from insurance went to pay the house off.
We didn't get anything "extra".
Wait,they did give me a deferrment on my Student Loan for my Graduate degree.
Every little bit counted. Then and now.
I think we mistake priveliges for rights here in the US.
Since we pay specific taxes for school, medicaid, and medicare,
Those are by right to be provided to us.
While I may not like the fact my health insurance costs'
Exceed my mortgage every month,
I still would pay that to have the right to see any doc.
In my very humble opinion, it is the health care system
That works for profit is what needs to be looked at.
Maybe capping numbers for a family of 3, 4 or 5.
I still want the freedom to pick and choose whom I go to
When I go and how often I want to do it.
I guess I think we have too much government already.
Remember Governor Jendal's republican response to the Obama speech.
We here in Louisiana have seen first hand how the government works.
(And doesn't).
We received no extra help here. I didn't live in the right zip code,
So I didn't get a FEMA trailer.
It is one thing to speculate about how the government will do things,
It is another to be on the receiving end for the
"Worst Natural Disaster" to hit the US.
I will forever be grateful for Medicaid.
I would also never willingly depend on our government to "fix" anything.
Just my very humble opinion.
Hugs,
Geneal
Posts: 6250 | From Louisiana | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
dontlikeliver -- You bring up many many good points and it is good to hear from someone that understands (and is living through) the pros and cons of both systems.
Thank you for bringing your insight! It is much much appreciated!
Rocephin / Zithromax / Supps Posts: 107 | From Plainview, New York | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
Abxnomore
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 18936
posted
I don't think you can compare the situation with Lyme disease, which is unique in and of itself, with health care in general. I don't see large numbers of people from
other countries coming here for care for other illnesses (with the exception of rare surgeries from third world countries), in fact, I see many American's going
abroad for alternative Cancer treatment and other cutting edge types of medical treatments, Germany and Switzerland come to mind. Germany is noted
to have a very superior medical system incorporating many homeopathic modalities. Looking at the the birth and death rates of other countries we rate way down. Doesn't say much for our system.
Let's stay on course, the subject is whether Universal coverage is right for America keeping in mind that Lyme disease does not exist in the minds of the present medical scheme. Most of us
now have to pay out of pocket even if we are lucky to have good medical coverage. I sure have spend more than my life savings with excellent health coverage.
And keep in mind that if people from Europe or else where are coming here for treatment it is because of the nature of lyme disease (for our LLMD's), not because, they have socialized medicine.
nd I know many others as Don'tlikeliver from other countries who have in the end fared better than us getting the knowledge of our LLMD's and using the free services of their own medical system and cheap medications. I say more power to them.
I also know many who have come here and have spend a dear sum and are still very ill. And there are more and more LLMD's in Europe, they are just hard to find and not as many as in the
U.S. and in reality we really don't have that many. Most Americas cannot afford to see them either.
I have two good friends in Holland, one in Switzerland an one in Germany with Lyme and they have many friends with the illness and they have managed to find doctors to treat them but just like here it was not easy.
Posts: 5191 | From Lyme Zone | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
dontlikeliver
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 4749
posted
The misconception here, or one of them, is that because a country has a socialized medical sysstem - meaning every citizen pays into the 'same insurance pot' (rather than various ones) and draws from the same medical resources/system that it is controlled in a big brother-ish way in which you have no say whatsoever. It really is not that "1984-ish" for those that remember that movie. Yes, it means if you want to use the social system, you have to pick a doc in your area (not 500 miles down the road, though now you can for a specialist, do just that through "choose and book"). If you live in a SMALL place though, like I do, that limits your choice of docs you can see in your area on the NHS....BUT THERE IS STILL THE CHOICE THEN OF GOING PRIVATE AND GETTING YOUR OWN INSURANCE AND GOING WHEREVER YOU WANT FOR WHATEVER TREATMENT/TESTING/ETC YOU WANT. So, it's not like you're forced into one or the other.
YES, the one big drawback is that there is a budget and often decisions are based in accordance with the budget, BUT the American PRIVATE INSURANCE system is not really different - they ALSO DO NOT WANT TO FORK OUT. The difference is that they're not ONE POT, they are many pots.
The difference is, in America if you have top of the range insurance you're free to get whatever you want pretty much, and instantly, which is GREAT...........if you can afford the premiums. I was that lucky once, I had 100% coverage, no copayments, no deductible etc..... Though even with that 'great' insurance I had, those more expensive things I got and got whenI wanted, STILL MISSED the fact I had Lyme disease for many years. In fact, it was discovered here in the UK after I'd moved here....almost by a fluke. I then decided I wanted the most experienced doc to do with Lyme and he could only be found back home, in the USA.
If, however, you're not that lucky then you can either get good with moderate insurance for a lesser premium, which would compare to the National health service, or you can get adequage or poor............or you can get nothing. Whiever one you choose, if you have Lyme, it really makes no difference........you're not likely to get what you need for more than five minutes.
It seems to me that there's quite a number of people who would rather have the 'nothing' choice out of a misconceived fear that 'the government' is going to be telling you what you can and can't do with your health, rather than for ALL to have something that is over all good enough for each individual yet for those that it does not suit THEY CAN STILL BUY PRIVATE INSURANCE WITH ALL THE BEST OPTIONS, THE QUICKEST OPTIONS, etc etc. Still, as we all know in this community, when you have Lyme though, it doesn't matter if you have insurance with all the bells and whistles as they will still not be handing you your indefinite antibiotics on a silver platter. The politics of that/Lyme wars get in the way of WHATEVER system any of us are under or choose to have.
I guess the only way in which I am going to sound less crazy to some is that if you're able to get on a plane and live in different places and TRY the different ways/systems, your perception may alter slightly......and in either direction. But, I guess there is some truth in the British saying which goes "suck it and see" - meaning you can't really tell until you've actually TRIED it.
Posts: 2824 | From The Back of Beyond | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Abxnomore
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 18936
posted
WELL SAID, and right on point! The myth of America is just that a myth and long gone.
And fewer and fewer people will have those great insurance policies. Industry is siding with
government to get the cost of heath care off their back as they can't afford it any more and cannot be globally competitive.
If you are ultra rich in any country you can get what ever you want.
But with a disease like ours what does it matter when we pay for most of what makes us better out of pocket?? We have an out dated mind set long
entrenched in he minds of Americans that government should keep out of our lives. That is
why until our economic crisis under the great leadership of the last administration caused a global financial collapse other major
industrialized countries had a much better standard of living than we do, a higher birth
survival rate than we do and less poverty.I've spent much time abroad and I have seen and experienced the difference.
We can continue to live in the 19th century or we can enter the 21st century like most of the industrialized world has done under our new leadership.
Amazing their is so much resistance, but then again in those other countries the populace is
informed and speaks out on issues when they are not being represented properly. Going to the mall isn't where they get their information.
Posts: 5191 | From Lyme Zone | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
You might find this appropriate, it comes from Off-Topic LN, circa 2007.....has it changed? http://flash.lymenet.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/4/6401#000000 ******************************************** Neil M Martin LymeNet Contributor Member # 2357 posted 18 October, 2007 03:12 PM a-canadian-universal-health-care
Hey Guys; I've seen on the news up here in Canada where Hillary Clinton introduced her new health care plan. Something similar to what we have in Canada. I also heard that Michael Moore was raving about the health care up here in Canada in his latest movie. As your friend and someone who lives with the Canada health care plan I thought I would give you some facts about this great medical plan that we have in Canada.
First of all: 1) The health care plan in Canada is not free. We pay a premium every month of $96. for Shirley and I to be covered. Sounds great eh. What they don't tell you is how much we pay in taxes to keep the health care system afloat. I am personally in the 55% tax bracket. Yes 55% of my earnings go to taxes. A large portion of that and I am not sure of the exact amount goes directly to health care our #1 expense.
2) I would not classify what we have as health care plan, it is more like a health diagnosis system. You can get into to see a doctor quick enough so he can tell you "yes indeed you are sick or you need an operation" but now the challenge becomes getting treated or operated on. We have waiting lists out the ying yang some as much as 2 years down the road.
3) Rather than fix what is wrong with you the usual tactic in Canada is to prescribe drugs. Have a pain here is a drug to take- not what is causing the pain and why. No time for checking you out because it is more important to move as many patients thru as possible each hour for Government re-imbursement
4) Many Canadians do not have a family Doctor.
5) Don't require emergency treatment as you may wait for hours in the emergency room waiting for treatment.
6) Shirley's dad cut his hand on a power saw a few weeks back and it required that his hand be put in a splint - to our surprise we had to pay $125. for a splint because it is not covered under health care plus we have to pay $60. for each visit for him to check it out each week.
7) Shirley's cousin was diagnosed with a heart blockage. Put on a waiting list . Died before he could get treatment.
8) Government allots so many operations per year. When that is done no more operations, unless you go to your local newspaper and plead your case and embarrass the government then money suddenly appears.
9)The Government takes great pride in telling us how much more they are increasing the funding for health care but waiting lists never get shorter. Government just keeps throwing money at the problem but it never goes away. But they are good at finding new ways to tax us, but they don't call it a tax anymore it is now a user fee.
10) My mother needs an operation for a blockage in her leg but because she is a smoker they will not do it. Despite her and my father pay ing into the health care system all these years. My Mom is 80 years of age. Now there is talk that maybe we should not treat fat and obese people either because they are a drain on the health care system. Let me see now, what we want in Canada is a health care system for healthy people only. That should reduce our health care costs.
11) Forget getting a second opinion, what you see is what you get.
12) I can spend what money I have left after taxes on booze, cigarettes, junk food and anything else that could kill me but I am not allowed by law to spend my money on getting an operation I need because that would be jumping the queue. I must wait my turn except if I am a hockey player or athlete then I can get looked at right away. Go figger. Where else in the world can you spend money to kill yourself but not allowed to spend money to get healthy. 13) Oh did I mention that immigrants are covered automatically at tax payer expense having never contributed a dollar to the system and pay no premiums.
14) Oh yeah we now give free needles to drug users to try and keep them healthy. Wouldn't want a sickly druggie breaking into your house and stealing your things. But people with diabetes who pay into the health care system have to pay for their needles because it is not covered under the health care system.
I send this out not looking for sympathy but as the election looms in the states you will be hearing more and more about universal health care down there and the advocates will be pointing to Canada. I just want to make sure that you hear the truth about health care up here and have some food for thought and informed questions to ask when b roached with this subject.
Step wisely and don't make the same mistakes we have.
Abxnomore
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 18936
posted
It sounds a lot like our health system, especially
for those on the lower end of the economic ladder.
And who is to say that if we do adopt Universal
Health Care that our plan will be the same as
theirs??? Looks like needless scare tactics to me.
We are in 2009 and this is a different country.
My friend fell and broke her nose a while back while being out of town. She was bleeding, her nose was terribly mishapen
and we waited in an emergency room from 5:00 pm until 6:00 am to be seen while she sat in pain
and her nose continued to swell. Why, because all of the nations poor, who are uninsured use the ER for their primary health care. Is that a better system?? I'm not so sure.
Posts: 5191 | From Lyme Zone | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
heiwalove
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 6467
posted
well said, abxnomore and dontlikeliver. i've had many similar ER experiences here in nyc: waiting for hours and hours and hours (i think 10 or 11 hours was the worst) because the ER was full to bursting with poor folks who are uninsured and have no choice but to wait until the last possible minute to access care. and what did i receive after waiting all those hours? an enormous bill i couldn't pay, of course.
certainly, no system is perfect, but does anyone wonder why we're the ONLY industrialized nation in the entire world without some sort of universal health care?
number 37?! saudi arabia and the united arab emirates are both doing significantly better than the USA when it comes to health care. that is a disgrace.
though i don't know anyone using the french system, it is no surprise to me after seeing 'sicko' that france is ranked number 1.
also, check out our awesome infant mortality rates (yes, that was sarcasm):
again, we need to look beyond lyme here. lyme is a special case -- every nation is, sadly, equally ignorant when it comes to our illness. that has nothing to do with whether or not universal care is a healthy and viable option for the united states.
geneal, i am so so sorry to hear all you've gone through during and post-katrina. i can't imagine. the government's response to that disaster was abysmal. but please remember who was in office then, who had been in office for five years previous. it is my contention that bush and his administration ignored katrina because a large percentage of its victims were poor and black, and he could've cared less whether they survived or not. our administration is different now, we have new and different possibilities on the horizon.
luvs2ride
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8090
posted
Hey,
I just went to Barrack Obama's website to see exactly what he has in mind for our healthcare and if his website is telling the truth, then I am 100% onboard with his program.
If you will read it, you will see he is AGAINST universal healthcare.
The only thing I don't find on here is an explanation how people without jobs or with low incomes and no healthcare will get healthcare.
Isn't that the only people missing out on healthcare right now?
Otherwise, I stand 100% beside him on the things he states on this website and I don't think you guys have read it. At least, he is not offering what you seem to be expecting.
-------------------- When the Power of Love overcomes the Love of Power, there will be Peace. Posts: 3038 | From america | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Luvs2ride you are 100% correct! My wise grandfather always told me "If it looks too good to be true...then it probably is." I'm afraid there is going to be a very large group of Americans who will be greatly disappointed in the "FREE" government insurance.
Also, I was not raised to believe I was entitled to anything in this ole life and if I wanted better then I would have to work for it. Whatever happened to that belief?
-------------------- My comments on this site are not intended to be taken as medical advice as I'm not a physician. Posts: 206 | From Georgia | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[bonk]](graemlins/bonk.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic