Pre-existing conditions coverage

[Andylusion]

Which healthcare programs in the US have the highest patient satisfaction? The government ones.

VA Posts Annual Medical Quality Report Quality of Care Better than Private-Sector Health Plans

Medicare Beats Private Plans for Patient Satisfaction: Survey

So, yes, I do want the government to "take over healthcare" and give us our Public Option if we can't have single payer. Just put Medicare on the exchanges for ANYONE to purchase...problem solved.

That's nice. Now go fuck yourself.
Because gov't programs have high levels of incompetence and lack of accountability. You want your healthcare overseen by someone who can't be fired, go right ahead. The rest of us understand the free market is what accounts for innovation and advances in medicine.

The VA medical system is viewed by the experts as the best overall medical system in the country. The rest of our society would do well to have a system like the VA.

BTW, the federal government does not oversee Medicare and Medicaid. The federal government hires civilian contractors to monitor Medicare and the States run Medicaid.

First, Medicare rates higher than private insurance to patients...... Really? There's a shock. As I have proven numerous times now, with clear citations making my case, Medicare is vastly cheaper than private insurance, because A: You tax everyone else, so that you can have a lower cost. And B: You under pay for care, forcing hospitals to over charge private patients.

Socialism is GREAT to the people who are benefiting. Kinda sucks for everyone else, until the money runs out, and this it sucks for absolutely everyone.

But back to VA system being the best in the country.

I've talk to a ton of Veterans, and I have veterans in my family, and there are veterans where I work. I have yet to meet a single veteran anywhere, that said the VA system was great.

Now, no doubt there are some somewhere.... but it never fails that the utopian world described by the left, never seems to match up with reality.

It's like Cuba showing off their resort hospitals, that look wonderful and great, until you realize those resort hospitals are only available exclusively to tourists at those resorts. Cuban Citizens are prohibited from those hospitals, and instead go to the crummy domestic hospitals, which are lucky to have windows installed.

So here you are posting a link to how great and amazing the VA system is.
News Releases - Office of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs

And you read the link, and shockingly beyond all expectation.... [/sarcasm] The VA Department says the VA Health Care system, is better than private health care.

Really.... a government agency saying the government agency is better than private contemporaries......... *I* for one.... am shocked..... SHOCKED I SAY!

This just like Chavez saying:
Government Policies See Venezuelans Eating Well | venezuelanalysis.com

Malnutrition has diminished from 21% eleven years ago to 6% currently, owing to the government’s agriculture and food distribution policies, Di Luca said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/21/w...s-in-grocery-staples.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

And then you see reality....

Empty shelves complete with "made with socialism" sign.

So what's the reality about the VA system?

Veterans dying because of health care delays - CNN.com

Barry Coates is one of the veterans who has suffered from a delay in care. Coates was having excruciating pain and rectal bleeding in 2011. For a year the Army veteran went to several VA clinics and hospitals in South Carolina, trying to get help. But the VA's diagnosis was hemorrhoids, and aside from simple pain medication he was told he might need a colonoscopy.

"The problem was getting worse and I was having more pain," Coates said, talking about one specific VA doctor who he saw every few months. "She again examined me and gave me some prescriptions for other things as far as pain and stuff like that and I noticed again she made another comment -- 'may need colonoscopy.'

"I told her that something needed to be done," said Coates. "But nothing was ever set up ... a consult was never set up."

"I had already been in pain and suffering from this problem for over six months and it wasn't getting better," Coates said. "I told her that if you were in as much pain as I was and had been going through you wouldn't wait another two months to see what's going on. You would probably do it this week."

Coates waited months, even begging for an appointment to have his colonoscopy. But he only found himself on a growing list of veterans also waiting for appointments and procedures. He was finally told he could have a colonoscopy, many months later.

"I took it upon my own self to call the department that scheduled that and ask them about it. And they said this was the earliest appointment that I could get. And I explained to the lady what I had already been through and how much pain I had, and I said if I wait this long there might not be ... (anything) we can do about it then. I could be even dead by then. And the only thing she could tell me was 'I understand that, sir, but I don't have any control over that.' "

Finally about a year after first complaining to his doctors of the pain, Coates got a colonoscopy and doctors discovered a cancerous tumor the size of a baseball.

Isolated incident?

The veterans were part of 82 vets who have died or are dying or have suffered serious injuries as a result of delayed diagnosis or treatment for colonoscopies or endoscopies.

And delays are normal in a socialized system.

In a capitalist system, funds for treatment are dynamic. The more people you treat, the more who pay, thus the more you can afford to provide.

In a Socialized system, the amount of funds is finite. There is a set amount of money. Thus since you can't just serve unlimited numbers of people, because the money doesn't grow with the number of patients you help..... the result is you have to ration care.

So a guy has severe pain, and bleeding, and everyone knows he needs help right away, but instead "I understand that, sir, but I don't have any control over that.".

And they don't. The amount of money is static. So when they have used up all the money they have on hand to treat people, everyone else goes on the waiting list.

This is why people in Canada wait 3 years, for simple surgeries. This is why people in the UK, wait 18 weeks to see a doctor. This is why people in both countries, come to the US for care, and other capitalist free-market hospitals around the world.

 

[Andylusion]

Heartland Institute, now AHIP?

If you can actually prove problems with the data they collected, do so.



When people who have proven themselves ignorant of the links they themselves posts, call you ignorant.... you know you are on the right track.

Here is a guy who spent 20 years as an executive in the wealthcare cartel network...

EDUCATE yourself...

The health care industry's campaign of fear, uncertainty and doubt

This picture... came from *YOUR* link.
Medical Malpractice Articles

It clearly shows that Medicare payouts have dropped, relative to the cost of living, and note.... that's just the generic cost of living, not the increases in the cost of running a medical practice, such as the cost of malpractice insurance, which you see there going up.

When you are so undeniably ignorant, that you can post a link, proving MY POINT, and yet be so immature, that you can't admit your own mistake, to the point that you are now trying to post another link to try and contradict what you yourself just posted..................

Grow up. Be adult for once in your life. You are making yourself out like a clown. You are becoming a joke.

Funny, you STILL haven't proven your 50% claim...

*I* did not make the claim. The Mayo Clinic, who Obama said was a model of health care for the nation, said that the payouts were 50%. Take up with them! They are the ones that canceled Medicare and Medicaid. Not me.

Pretty funny, you claim to have read the link I provided. All you did was ignore what the author SAID...and instead relied on lobbyists and front groups who have ZERO concern for your health or mine. They are only concerned with protecting their profit.

Coming from someone who didn't read his own link. When someone who has proven himself ignorant over and over, accuses me of ignoring stuff, I know I'm on the right track.

Bottom line dude.... you have disqualified yourself from making arrogant pronouncements on me or anyone else. You need to rebuild your credibility by admitting your failure, and from here on knowing the materially you cite in and out, before posting it.

The whole basis of a 'free market' is the buyer has leverage, i.e. he/she can take his/her business elsewhere. That works perfectly fine when the stakes are 'things' (cars or TV sets etc). But a person's health is not a 'thing', and the consumer's stake is their very life. An unhappy consumer can go buys a different car or TV. If a person has a life threatening illness and is denied coverage for treatment, WHAT leverage does that person have...take their business elsewhere IN ANOTHER LIFE?

Being denied coverage, doesn't prevent you from getting health care. Health care, and insurance, are too different things. If I walk into a hospital with money, there is nothing an insurance company can do, to stop me from getting care. And indeed, people do this all the time.

What do you think medical tourism is? People fly to a hospital somewhere else, and give them cash, for treatment. You think we're all carrying insurance in India?

And people fly to the US, and payout cash for treatment. Happens ALL THE TIME. They don't have insurance in the US. The insurance company can deny them all day long. They shell out money, and there is nothing the insurance company can do.

This is obvious to the rest of the industrialized world and why they have government run healthcare for ALL.

And they come here, and India, and Singapore, to avoid their awful awful systems.

If you have cancer.... you have better chance of surviving it here in the US, with or without insurance, than anywhere else in the world.

Are you really saying you would rather save a buck, and possibly die?

[ame=http://youtu.be/6T6yqFWXRXI]A Short Course in Brain Surgery - Free Market Cure Film - YouTube[/ame]

So you start having massive headaches and seizures. You need an MRI, and right away. Thankfully you have "free" health care (never mind the massive taxes Canadians pay).

They say you have to wait.... oh.... four months. Seizures and headaches.... who cares? It's free!

Feb 2nd, contact Timely Medical, which is a company that helps Canadians escape their "Free" health care. And on Feb 3rd, you get your MRI...... in the US. That darn evil Capitalist system 'strikes' again.

You find out you have a tumor the size of a golf ball in your head.

No problem! Let's go back to Canada and setup a biopsy. Hrm... 4 more months... while you know you have a tumor the size of a golf ball, and you still have seizures and headaches.

Contact Timely Medical again, go back to the US, and have the Biopsy done in a week. Good thing too... Stage 2 Cancer.

If this guy had waited around in the Socialist health care utopia for 8 months, there's a very real chance he'd have been dead.

That's your socialized care in action.

You are pining for the poor doctors and hospitals. So you want Medicare to pay more. You want to INCREASE health care costs in America...

No. I want a free-market system of competition that drives down market prices naturally.

You are the one who wants to increase health care costs. Doesn't matter what your intentions are, the net effects of your belief system will drive up costs (which is happening as we speak), and / or lower the quality of care.

As I have already proven, Medicare and Medicaid, drive up costs on the rest of us, both through taxes, and cost shifting. THAT is your system at work.

 

[Bfgrn]

That's nice. Now go fuck yourself.
Because gov't programs have high levels of incompetence and lack of accountability. You want your healthcare overseen by someone who can't be fired, go right ahead. The rest of us understand the free market is what accounts for innovation and advances in medicine.

The VA medical system is viewed by the experts as the best overall medical system in the country. The rest of our society would do well to have a system like the VA.

BTW, the federal government does not oversee Medicare and Medicaid. The federal government hires civilian contractors to monitor Medicare and the States run Medicaid.

First, Medicare rates higher than private insurance to patients...... Really? There's a shock. As I have proven numerous times now, with clear citations making my case, Medicare is vastly cheaper than private insurance, because A: You tax everyone else, so that you can have a lower cost. And B: You under pay for care, forcing hospitals to over charge private patients.

Socialism is GREAT to the people who are benefiting. Kinda sucks for everyone else, until the money runs out, and this it sucks for absolutely everyone.

But back to VA system being the best in the country.

I've talk to a ton of Veterans, and I have veterans in my family, and there are veterans where I work. I have yet to meet a single veteran anywhere, that said the VA system was great.

Now, no doubt there are some somewhere.... but it never fails that the utopian world described by the left, never seems to match up with reality.

It's like Cuba showing off their resort hospitals, that look wonderful and great, until you realize those resort hospitals are only available exclusively to tourists at those resorts. Cuban Citizens are prohibited from those hospitals, and instead go to the crummy domestic hospitals, which are lucky to have windows installed.

So here you are posting a link to how great and amazing the VA system is.
News Releases - Office of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs

And you read the link, and shockingly beyond all expectation.... [/sarcasm] The VA Department says the VA Health Care system, is better than private health care.

Really.... a government agency saying the government agency is better than private contemporaries......... *I* for one.... am shocked..... SHOCKED I SAY!

This just like Chavez saying:
Government Policies See Venezuelans Eating Well | venezuelanalysis.com


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/21/w...s-in-grocery-staples.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

And then you see reality....

Empty shelves complete with "made with socialism" sign.

So what's the reality about the VA system?

Veterans dying because of health care delays - CNN.com

Barry Coates is one of the veterans who has suffered from a delay in care. Coates was having excruciating pain and rectal bleeding in 2011. For a year the Army veteran went to several VA clinics and hospitals in South Carolina, trying to get help. But the VA's diagnosis was hemorrhoids, and aside from simple pain medication he was told he might need a colonoscopy.

"The problem was getting worse and I was having more pain," Coates said, talking about one specific VA doctor who he saw every few months. "She again examined me and gave me some prescriptions for other things as far as pain and stuff like that and I noticed again she made another comment -- 'may need colonoscopy.'

"I told her that something needed to be done," said Coates. "But nothing was ever set up ... a consult was never set up."

"I had already been in pain and suffering from this problem for over six months and it wasn't getting better," Coates said. "I told her that if you were in as much pain as I was and had been going through you wouldn't wait another two months to see what's going on. You would probably do it this week."

Coates waited months, even begging for an appointment to have his colonoscopy. But he only found himself on a growing list of veterans also waiting for appointments and procedures. He was finally told he could have a colonoscopy, many months later.

"I took it upon my own self to call the department that scheduled that and ask them about it. And they said this was the earliest appointment that I could get. And I explained to the lady what I had already been through and how much pain I had, and I said if I wait this long there might not be ... (anything) we can do about it then. I could be even dead by then. And the only thing she could tell me was 'I understand that, sir, but I don't have any control over that.' "

Finally about a year after first complaining to his doctors of the pain, Coates got a colonoscopy and doctors discovered a cancerous tumor the size of a baseball.

Isolated incident?

The veterans were part of 82 vets who have died or are dying or have suffered serious injuries as a result of delayed diagnosis or treatment for colonoscopies or endoscopies.

And delays are normal in a socialized system.

In a capitalist system, funds for treatment are dynamic. The more people you treat, the more who pay, thus the more you can afford to provide.

In a Socialized system, the amount of funds is finite. There is a set amount of money. Thus since you can't just serve unlimited numbers of people, because the money doesn't grow with the number of patients you help..... the result is you have to ration care.

So a guy has severe pain, and bleeding, and everyone knows he needs help right away, but instead "I understand that, sir, but I don't have any control over that.".

And they don't. The amount of money is static. So when they have used up all the money they have on hand to treat people, everyone else goes on the waiting list.

This is why people in Canada wait 3 years, for simple surgeries. This is why people in the UK, wait 18 weeks to see a doctor. This is why people in both countries, come to the US for care, and other capitalist free-market hospitals around the world.

The Best Care Anywhere

Ten years ago, veterans hospitals were dangerous, dirty, and scandal-ridden. Today, they're producing the highest quality care in the country. Their turnaround points the way toward solving America's health-care crisis.

Quick. When you read "veterans hospital," what comes to mind? Maybe you recall the headlines from a dozen years ago about the three decomposed bodies found near a veterans medical center in Salem, Va. Two turned out to be the remains of patients who had wandered months before. The other body had been resting in place for more than 15 years. The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) admitted that its search for the missing patients had been "cursory."

Or maybe you recall images from movies like Born on the Fourth of July, in which Tom Cruise plays a wounded Vietnam vet who becomes radicalized by his shabby treatment in a crumbling, rat-infested veterans hospital in the Bronx. Sample dialogue: "This place is a fuckin' slum!"

By the mid-1990s, the reputation of veterans hospitals had sunk so low that conservatives routinely used their example as a kind of reductio ad absurdum critique of any move toward "socialized medicine." Here, for instance, is Jarret B. Wollstein, a right-wing activist/author, railing against the Clinton health-care plan in 1994: "To see the future of health care in America for you and your children under Clinton's plan," Wollstein warned, "just visit any Veterans Administration hospital. You'll find filthy conditions, shortages of everything, and treatment bordering on barbarism."

And so it goes today. If the debate is over health-care reform, it won't be long before some free-market conservative will jump up and say that the sorry shape of the nation's veterans hospitals just proves what happens when government gets into the health-care business. And if he's a true believer, he'll then probably go on to suggest, quoting William Safire and other free marketers, that the government should just shut down the whole miserable system and provide veterans with health-care vouchers.

Yet here's a curious fact that few conservatives or liberals know. Who do you think receives higher-quality health care. Medicare patients who are free to pick their own doctors and specialists? Or aging veterans stuck in those presumably filthy VA hospitals with their antiquated equipment, uncaring administrators, and incompetent staff? An answer came in 2003, when the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a study that compared veterans health facilities on 11 measures of quality with fee-for-service Medicare. On all 11 measures, the quality of care in veterans facilities proved to be "significantly better."

Here's another curious fact. The Annals of Internal Medicine recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.

It gets stranger. Pushed by large employers who are eager to know what they are buying when they purchase health care for their employees, an outfit called the National Committee for Quality Assurance today ranks health-care plans on 17 different performance measures. These include how well the plans manage high blood pressure or how precisely they adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine such as prescribing beta blockers for patients recovering from a heart attack. Winning NCQA's seal of approval is the gold standard in the health-care industry. And who do you suppose this year's winner is: Johns Hopkins? Mayo Clinic? Massachusetts General? Nope. In every single category, the VHA system outperforms the highest rated non-VHA hospitals.

Not convinced? Consider what vets themselves think. Sure, it's not hard to find vets who complain about difficulties in establishing eligibility. Many are outraged that the Bush administration has decided to deny previously promised health-care benefits to veterans who don't have service-related illnesses or who can't meet a strict means test. Yet these grievances are about access to the system, not about the quality of care received by those who get in. Veterans groups tenaciously defend the VHA and applaud its turnaround. "The quality of care is outstanding," says Peter Gayton, deputy director for veterans affairs and rehabilitation at the American Legion. In the latest independent survey, 81 percent of VHA hospital patients express satisfaction with the care they receive, compared to 77 percent of Medicare and Medicaid patients.

Outside experts agree that the VHA has become an industry leader in its safety and quality measures. Dr. Donald M. Berwick, president of the Institute for Health Care Improvement and one of the nation's top health-care quality experts, praises the VHA's information technology as "spectacular." The venerable Institute of Medicine notes that the VHA's "integrated health information system, including its framework for using performance measures to improve quality, is considered one of the best in the nation."

If this gives you cognitive dissonance, it should. The story of how and why the VHA became the benchmark for quality medicine in the United States suggests that much of what we think we know about health care and medical economics is just wrong. It's natural to believe that more competition and consumer choice in health care would lead to greater quality and lower costs, because in almost every other realm, it does. That's why the Bush administration—which has been promoting greater use of information technology and other quality improvement in health care—also wants to give individuals new tax-free "health savings accounts" and high-deductible insurance plans. Together, these measures are supposed to encourage patients to do more comparison shopping and haggling with their doctors; therefore, they create more market discipline in the system.

But when it comes to health care, it's a government bureaucracy that's setting the standard for maintaining best practices while reducing costs, and it's the private sector that's lagging in quality. That unexpected reality needs examining if we're to have any hope of understanding what's wrong with America's health-care system and how to fix it. It turns out that precisely because the VHA is a big, government-run system that has nearly a lifetime relationship with its patients, it has incentives for investing in quality and keeping its patients well—incentives that are lacking in for-profit medicine.

more

 

[dnsmith35]

That's nice. Now go fuck yourself.
Because gov't programs have high levels of incompetence and lack of accountability. You want your healthcare overseen by someone who can't be fired, go right ahead. The rest of us understand the free market is what accounts for innovation and advances in medicine.

The VA medical system is viewed by the experts as the best overall medical system in the country. The rest of our society would do well to have a system like the VA.

BTW, the federal government does not oversee Medicare and Medicaid. The federal government hires civilian contractors to monitor Medicare and the States run Medicaid.

What?
Health care costs for vets to soar, report says | Army Times | armytimes.com

the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a study that compared veterans health facilities on 11 measures of quality with fee-for-service Medicare. On all 11 measures, the quality of care in veterans facilities proved to be "significantly better."

Here's another curious fact. The Annals of Internal Medicine recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.

It gets stranger. Pushed by large employers who are eager to know what they are buying when they purchase health care for their employees, an outfit called the National Committee for Quality Assurance today ranks health-care plans on 17 different performance measures. These include how well the plans manage high blood pressure or how precisely they adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine such as prescribing beta blockers for patients recovering from a heart attack. Winning NCQA's seal of approval is the gold standard in the health-care industry. And who do you suppose this year's winner is: Johns Hopkins? Mayo Clinic? Massachusetts General? Nope. In every single category, the VHA system outperforms the highest rated non-VHA hospitals.
The Best Care Anywhere - Phillip Longman

But you are correct, it is expected that VA health care costs will rise by 40% to 70% over the next 10 years, but that cost will not come from the veterans themselves, especially those who are significantly disabled.

 

[Bfgrn]

If you can actually prove problems with the data they collected, do so.



When people who have proven themselves ignorant of the links they themselves posts, call you ignorant.... you know you are on the right track.

This picture... came from *YOUR* link.
Medical Malpractice Articles

It clearly shows that Medicare payouts have dropped, relative to the cost of living, and note.... that's just the generic cost of living, not the increases in the cost of running a medical practice, such as the cost of malpractice insurance, which you see there going up.

When you are so undeniably ignorant, that you can post a link, proving MY POINT, and yet be so immature, that you can't admit your own mistake, to the point that you are now trying to post another link to try and contradict what you yourself just posted..................

Grow up. Be adult for once in your life. You are making yourself out like a clown. You are becoming a joke.

Funny, you STILL haven't proven your 50% claim...

*I* did not make the claim. The Mayo Clinic, who Obama said was a model of health care for the nation, said that the payouts were 50%. Take up with them! They are the ones that canceled Medicare and Medicaid. Not me.



Coming from someone who didn't read his own link. When someone who has proven himself ignorant over and over, accuses me of ignoring stuff, I know I'm on the right track.

Bottom line dude.... you have disqualified yourself from making arrogant pronouncements on me or anyone else. You need to rebuild your credibility by admitting your failure, and from here on knowing the materially you cite in and out, before posting it.



Being denied coverage, doesn't prevent you from getting health care. Health care, and insurance, are too different things. If I walk into a hospital with money, there is nothing an insurance company can do, to stop me from getting care. And indeed, people do this all the time.

What do you think medical tourism is? People fly to a hospital somewhere else, and give them cash, for treatment. You think we're all carrying insurance in India?

And people fly to the US, and payout cash for treatment. Happens ALL THE TIME. They don't have insurance in the US. The insurance company can deny them all day long. They shell out money, and there is nothing the insurance company can do.

This is obvious to the rest of the industrialized world and why they have government run healthcare for ALL.

And they come here, and India, and Singapore, to avoid their awful awful systems.

If you have cancer.... you have better chance of surviving it here in the US, with or without insurance, than anywhere else in the world.

Are you really saying you would rather save a buck, and possibly die?

[ame=http://youtu.be/6T6yqFWXRXI]A Short Course in Brain Surgery - Free Market Cure Film - YouTube[/ame]

So you start having massive headaches and seizures. You need an MRI, and right away. Thankfully you have "free" health care (never mind the massive taxes Canadians pay).

They say you have to wait.... oh.... four months. Seizures and headaches.... who cares? It's free!

Feb 2nd, contact Timely Medical, which is a company that helps Canadians escape their "Free" health care. And on Feb 3rd, you get your MRI...... in the US. That darn evil Capitalist system 'strikes' again.

You find out you have a tumor the size of a golf ball in your head.

No problem! Let's go back to Canada and setup a biopsy. Hrm... 4 more months... while you know you have a tumor the size of a golf ball, and you still have seizures and headaches.

Contact Timely Medical again, go back to the US, and have the Biopsy done in a week. Good thing too... Stage 2 Cancer.

If this guy had waited around in the Socialist health care utopia for 8 months, there's a very real chance he'd have been dead.

That's your socialized care in action.

You are pining for the poor doctors and hospitals. So you want Medicare to pay more. You want to INCREASE health care costs in America...

No. I want a free-market system of competition that drives down market prices naturally.

You are the one who wants to increase health care costs. Doesn't matter what your intentions are, the net effects of your belief system will drive up costs (which is happening as we speak), and / or lower the quality of care.

As I have already proven, Medicare and Medicaid, drive up costs on the rest of us, both through taxes, and cost shifting. THAT is your system at work.

You CONTINUE to parrot the propaganda of lobbyists and front groups...WHY don't you educate yourself pea brain?

 

[Andylusion]

You CONTINUE to parrot the propaganda of lobbyists and front groups...WHY don't you educate yourself pea brain?

Pea brain lol. You are a clown. If this right here, is the maximum level you can debate at, then you are too plain stupid for me to continue talking too. Forest Gump needs to go home to momma.

I only talk to adults. If you are not one, please leave the forum. You are lowering the average intelligence of the discussion. Time to grow up or get out!

 

[Andylusion]

The VA medical system is viewed by the experts as the best overall medical system in the country. The rest of our society would do well to have a system like the VA.

BTW, the federal government does not oversee Medicare and Medicaid. The federal government hires civilian contractors to monitor Medicare and the States run Medicaid.

What?
Health care costs for vets to soar, report says | Army Times | armytimes.com

the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a study that compared veterans health facilities on 11 measures of quality with fee-for-service Medicare. On all 11 measures, the quality of care in veterans facilities proved to be "significantly better."

Here's another curious fact. The Annals of Internal Medicine recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.

It gets stranger. Pushed by large employers who are eager to know what they are buying when they purchase health care for their employees, an outfit called the National Committee for Quality Assurance today ranks health-care plans on 17 different performance measures. These include how well the plans manage high blood pressure or how precisely they adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine such as prescribing beta blockers for patients recovering from a heart attack. Winning NCQA's seal of approval is the gold standard in the health-care industry. And who do you suppose this year's winner is: Johns Hopkins? Mayo Clinic? Massachusetts General? Nope. In every single category, the VHA system outperforms the highest rated non-VHA hospitals.
The Best Care Anywhere - Phillip Longman

But you are correct, it is expected that VA health care costs will rise by 40% to 70% over the next 10 years, but that cost will not come from the veterans themselves, especially those who are significantly disabled.

Ok, I hear you.

You just posted a link to an interview about an article made in 2005.

So why do we have links like this.... TODAY...

Veterans' wait time for benefits is 'too long,' VA official concedes ? CNN Security Clearance - CNN.com Blogs

2013. Wait times way too long....

The VA states the average wait time after a veteran files a claim is 273 days. But for veterans filing their first claim, including Iraq and Afghanistan vets, the wait is up to 327 days, nearly two months longer.

What am I missing? If I waited 273 days for a claim, I'd be switching insurance companies, let alone 327 days.

Phoenix VA hospital under fire for alleged delayed medical care | azfamily.com Phoenix

In congressional hearing, Florida Rep. Jeff Miller questioned a report that found 27 veterans across the country died because of long wait times for health care at the VA.

Miller chairs the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs and during the hearing he dropped a bombshell allegation that the VA may be misleading the public about the delay-related death toll at the Phoenix VA.

"It appears as though there could be as many as 40 veterans whose deaths could be related to delays in care," Miller said.

Miller accused the Phoenix VA of keeping a secret waiting list that didn't show how long veterans were really waiting for potentially life-saving medical treatment.

"I've been made aware of internal e-mails from within the VA that suggest that Phoenix VA may have been using an unofficial electronic waiting list where veterans were placed on that unofficial list until an appointment became available," he said.

So let's recap. In order to keep the official waitlist for health care down at VA hospitals, patients were placed on an 'unofficial' wait list to hide how long patients were really waiting.

Haven't we heard this one before somewhere?

Widespread fiddling of NHS waiting lists revealed - Telegraph

Another method was not to count patients waiting more than 18 months and keep them on an unofficial list.

The report identifies nine trusts in which "inappropriate adjustment" of waiting lists took place.

From back in 2001, NHS in the UK, did the same thing.

NHS waiting times data 'riddled with errors' | Society | The Guardian

Oop... I guess nothing has changed.

Now I still get what you are saying. VA Hospitals have indeed come a long way from where they were. The problem there is, that they were really really really bad. Now they are only 'bad'.

It's also telling in specifically what evidence he used to measure VA Hospitals to Private care.

"adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine"

Is that what I care about? Is that what Veterans care about?

Here's what I want to know.... how quickly and effectively, does the system identify and treat, an illness? What I want to know is, what is the survival rate of the patient, compared to other systems?

That's what makes the difference. Sure you can save money, and have people waiting 300+ plus days on a waiting list, getting no treatment.... and then IF THEY ARE STILL ALIVE... get absolute by the book "adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine", and get treated.

But when people are dying on waiting lists that are a year long.... I don't give a crap about how they got a gold star A+ rating for "adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine".

 

[The Rabbi]

The VA medical system is viewed by the experts as the best overall medical system in the country. The rest of our society would do well to have a system like the VA.

BTW, the federal government does not oversee Medicare and Medicaid. The federal government hires civilian contractors to monitor Medicare and the States run Medicaid.

What?
Health care costs for vets to soar, report says | Army Times | armytimes.com

the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a study that compared veterans health facilities on 11 measures of quality with fee-for-service Medicare. On all 11 measures, the quality of care in veterans facilities proved to be "significantly better."

Here's another curious fact. The Annals of Internal Medicine recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.

It gets stranger. Pushed by large employers who are eager to know what they are buying when they purchase health care for their employees, an outfit called the National Committee for Quality Assurance today ranks health-care plans on 17 different performance measures. These include how well the plans manage high blood pressure or how precisely they adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine such as prescribing beta blockers for patients recovering from a heart attack. Winning NCQA's seal of approval is the gold standard in the health-care industry. And who do you suppose this year's winner is: Johns Hopkins? Mayo Clinic? Massachusetts General? Nope. In every single category, the VHA system outperforms the highest rated non-VHA hospitals.
The Best Care Anywhere - Phillip Longman

But you are correct, it is expected that VA health care costs will rise by 40% to 70% over the next 10 years, but that cost will not come from the veterans themselves, especially those who are significantly disabled.

So if you keep throwing money into an unsustainable system you do get some kind of result. Yeah, that's what you've just shown. It isn't only a question of delivering health care (and VA isnt so wonderful--ask a vet). It's also a question of cost. And VA's costs are skyrocketing. Spread that to the general population and you will bankrupt the country in short order.
Which is the Democrat plan.

 

[dnsmith35]

What?
Health care costs for vets to soar, report says | Army Times | armytimes.com

the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a study that compared veterans health facilities on 11 measures of quality with fee-for-service Medicare. On all 11 measures, the quality of care in veterans facilities proved to be "significantly better."

Here's another curious fact. The Annals of Internal Medicine recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.

It gets stranger. Pushed by large employers who are eager to know what they are buying when they purchase health care for their employees, an outfit called the National Committee for Quality Assurance today ranks health-care plans on 17 different performance measures. These include how well the plans manage high blood pressure or how precisely they adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine such as prescribing beta blockers for patients recovering from a heart attack. Winning NCQA's seal of approval is the gold standard in the health-care industry. And who do you suppose this year's winner is: Johns Hopkins? Mayo Clinic? Massachusetts General? Nope. In every single category, the VHA system outperforms the highest rated non-VHA hospitals.
The Best Care Anywhere - Phillip Longman

But you are correct, it is expected that VA health care costs will rise by 40% to 70% over the next 10 years, but that cost will not come from the veterans themselves, especially those who are significantly disabled.

Ok, I hear you.

You just posted a link to an interview about an article made in 2005.

So why do we have links like this.... TODAY...

Veterans' wait time for benefits is 'too long,' VA official concedes ? CNN Security Clearance - CNN.com Blogs

2013. Wait times way too long....

There are some wait times, but seldom for really needed services.

What am I missing? If I waited 273 days for a claim, I'd be switching insurance companies, let alone 327 days.

That wait is for disability determination, not medical care.

Phoenix VA hospital under fire for alleged delayed medical care | azfamily.com Phoenix

In congressional hearing, Florida Rep. Jeff Miller questioned a report that found 27 veterans across the country died because of long wait times for health care at the VA.

Wow, 27 out of millions. Most of the time I have to wait longer to get an appointment with my civilian doctor than the VA. There are exceptions in everything, but over all the VA system is a great system.

Miller chairs the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs and during the hearing he dropped a bombshell allegation that the VA may be misleading the public about the delay-related death toll at the Phoenix VA.

Gee, a politician "dropping a bombshell."

"It appears as though there could be as many as 40 veterans whose deaths could be related to delays in care," Miller said.

Miller accused the Phoenix VA of keeping a secret waiting list that didn't show how long veterans were really waiting for potentially life-saving medical treatment.

And you believe that crap?

"I've been made aware of internal e-mails from within the VA that suggest that Phoenix VA may have been using an unofficial electronic waiting list where veterans were placed on that unofficial list until an appointment became available," he said.

Or this?

So let's recap. In order to keep the official waitlist for health care down at VA hospitals, patients were placed on an 'unofficial' wait list to hide how long patients were really waiting.

Haven't we heard this one before somewhere?

Not for many years.

Widespread fiddling of NHS waiting lists revealed - Telegraph

Another method was not to count patients waiting more than 18 months and keep them on an unofficial list.

The report identifies nine trusts in which "inappropriate adjustment" of waiting lists took place.

I don't put that past the British NHS.

From back in 2001, NHS in the UK, did the same thing.

NHS waiting times data 'riddled with errors' | Society | The Guardian

Oop... I guess nothing has changed.

Lots have changed and mostly for the better. The VA system is still more efficient and effective than most civilian systems. Are there some screw ups? Of course, but not as a rule.

Now I still get what you are saying. VA Hospitals have indeed come a long way from where they were. The problem there is, that they were really really really bad. Now they are only 'bad'.

Nope, now they are very very good.

It's also telling in specifically what evidence he used to measure VA Hospitals to Private care.

"adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine"

Is that what I care about? Is that what Veterans care about?

Here's what I want to know.... how quickly and effectively, does the system identify and treat, an illness? What I want to know is, what is the survival rate of the patient, compared to other systems?

From the studies, very good. From my personal experience excellent.

That's what makes the difference. Sure you can save money, and have people waiting 300+ plus days on a waiting list, getting no treatment.... and then IF THEY ARE STILL ALIVE... get absolute by the book "adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine", and get treated.

Long waiting periods are for determination of disability. I can call today to see my VA doctor tomorrow. I can't do the same for a typical private practice doctor. When I have a general follow up need I see my Medicare physician. When I have an acute problem I call the VA.

But when people are dying on waiting lists that are a year long.... I don't give a crap about how they got a gold star A+ rating for "adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine".

If you want to believe that crap, I have a bridge for sale over the Atchafalaya Swamp. You got snookered by a politician wanting to make a name for himself.

What waiting time in making disability determination or in non-urgent care can be 100% attributed to a reduction in funding over the last 5 years relative to increased costs of operation.

 

[Bfgrn]

You CONTINUE to parrot the propaganda of lobbyists and front groups...WHY don't you educate yourself pea brain?

Pea brain lol. You are a clown. If this right here, is the maximum level you can debate at, then you are too plain stupid for me to continue talking too. Forest Gump needs to go home to momma.

I only talk to adults. If you are not one, please leave the forum. You are lowering the average intelligence of the discussion. Time to grow up or get out!

Adults think, they don't mimic the propaganda of lobbyists and front groups.

You can continue to ignore the facts. America has the most expensive health care system in the world. It is not because of Medicare, or because of government. It is because of the private sector. Educate yourself about medical loss ratio and how Wall Street investors force insurance companies to either deny coverages or be severely punished.

Start HERE... invest a half hour of time to find out how insurance cartels screws this nation.

 

[Andylusion]

There are some wait times, but seldom for really needed services.

VA wait times mean some die before getting care | Army Times | armytimes.com

Internal Veterans Affairs Department documents show that at least two veterans died last year waiting to see a doctor while others couldn’t get primary care appointments for up to eight months, members of a House oversight and investigations panel said Thursday.

Addressing the ongoing problem of vets who suffer through long waits for appointments at VA hospitals and clinics, House lawmakers joined federal investigators and veterans service organizations in castigating VA on an issue that has endured for more than a decade.

“Evidence shows that many VA facilities, when faced with a backlog of thousands of outstanding or unresolved consultations, decided to administratively close out these requests. Some reasons given included that the request was years old, too much time had elapsed, or the veteran had died,” said Rep. Mike Coffman, R-Colo., chairman of the House Veterans Oversight and Investigations panel.

The evidence doesn't support your claim.

That wait is for disability determination, not medical care.

Which changes what? If I had to wait THREE HUNDRED DAYS.... for my insurance company to determine if I was disabled, I would... SUE THEM AND GET A DIFFERENT INSURANCE COMPANY.

That doesn't change ANYTHING I said. That's a bad system.

Wow, 27 out of millions.

Isn't it funny how when it's private care, if 5 people die, the left screams. But when it's a socialized leftist system, suddenly 27 people dying of completely treatable conditions, while left on a waiting list, is no big deal, and their deaths should be mocked as such.

Most of the time I have to wait longer to get an appointment with my civilian doctor than the VA. There are exceptions in everything, but over all the VA system is a great system.

Great. Prove it.

Gee, a politician "dropping a bombshell."And you believe that crap? Or this?

When enough people are screaming at politicians that they actually open a Federal investigation into it, and come up with actual evidence showing what people are screaming about..... yeah generally I think there's some credibility to it. I assume you don't care about Veterans screaming about the VA?

The VA system is still more efficient and effective than most civilian systems. Are there some screw ups? Of course, but not as a rule.Nope, now they are very very good.From the studies, very good. From my personal experience excellent.

Great. Where is the evidence of this?

Veterans Affairs purged thousands of medical tests to 'game' its backlog stats | WashingtonExaminer.com

Long delays in receiving medical screenings can have dire consequences. At least six preventable patient deaths have been linked to delayed colonoscopies in Columbia, S.C. The VA Office of Inspector General exposed the unacceptable waits there in September.

In addition, VA made 19 “institutional disclosures” between September 2012 and March 2013 related to patient deaths because of delayed endoscopy procedures at veterans hospitals nationwide, according to documents obtained by the Examiner and first reported by CNN.

Oliver Mitchell, a former scheduling clerk at the VA Greater Los Angeles Medical Center, said he suffered years of retaliation that eventually drove him out of the department after he filed a whistleblower complaint about the appointments purge in 2009.

Mitchell, an ex-Marine, was in charge of scheduling the appointments in the radiology department of the Los Angeles facility.

In November 2008, he was told to purge backlogged appointments for diagnostic tests in violation of VA policies in place at the time, Mitchell said in separate whistleblower reports filed with the VA inspector general and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.

Dr. Suzie El-Saden, then interim service chief in the hospital’s radiology department, told Mitchell and other schedulers she was under pressure from VA headquarters to reduce the backlog.

El Saden stated that “her job was on the line and that this would be the death of her if we didn’t delete and/or cancel any of the pending backlog,” Mitchell alleged. “She stated that central office had ordered her not to purge the system.”

At the same meeting, Mitchell said he was ordered by a different supervisor to begin deleting appointments.

“In order to show favorable results, we needed to delete as many orders as possible,” Mitchell said he was told by the supervisor. “He went on to say that it was all a numbers game and we had to play the system. He then directed me to begin deleting all orders pertaining to MRI [at] the clinic in which I work. I refused.”

When Mitchell and others in the department would not delete the backlogged appointments, a new employee was hired to do the work, he said.

In order to show they had reduced the backlog of waiting patients..... they deleted their orders. I wonder how many died not knowing their diagnostic tests had been systematically deleted from the system? I wonder how many others waiting in pain for weeks, if not months, only to find out they had to reschedule?

The facts are not on your side.

I can call today to see my VA doctor tomorrow. I can't do the same for a typical private practice doctor. When I have a general follow up need I see my Medicare physician. When I have an acute problem I call the VA.

If you want to believe that crap, I have a bridge for sale over the Atchafalaya Swamp. You got snookered by a politician wanting to make a name for himself.

Veterans dying because of health care delays - CNN.com

Barry Coates is one of the veterans who has suffered from a delay in care. Coates was having excruciating pain and rectal bleeding in 2011. For a year the Army veteran went to several VA clinics and hospitals in South Carolina, trying to get help. But the VA's diagnosis was hemorrhoids, and aside from simple pain medication he was told he might need a colonoscopy.

"The problem was getting worse and I was having more pain," Coates said, talking about one specific VA doctor who he saw every few months. "She again examined me and gave me some prescriptions for other things as far as pain and stuff like that and I noticed again she made another comment -- 'may need colonoscopy.'

"I told her that something needed to be done," said Coates. "But nothing was ever set up ... a consult was never set up."

"I had already been in pain and suffering from this problem for over six months and it wasn't getting better," Coates said. "I told her that if you were in as much pain as I was and had been going through you wouldn't wait another two months to see what's going on. You would probably do it this week."

Coates waited months, even begging for an appointment to have his colonoscopy. But he only found himself on a growing list of veterans also waiting for appointments and procedures. He was finally told he could have a colonoscopy, many months later.

"I took it upon my own self to call the department that scheduled that and ask them about it. And they said this was the earliest appointment that I could get. And I explained to the lady what I had already been through and how much pain I had, and I said if I wait this long there might not be ... (anything) we can do about it then. I could be even dead by then. And the only thing she could tell me was 'I understand that, sir, but I don't have any control over that.' "

Finally about a year after first complaining to his doctors of the pain, Coates got a colonoscopy and doctors discovered a cancerous tumor the size of a baseball.

Ya, I got snookered by a American Veteran wanting to make a name for himself. What a wuss he was, waiting only a year, to find out he had a cancerous tumor the size of a baseball, up his butt.

What a wimp. Why would anyone believe the crap spewed by a US Veteran!

Bottom line.... yeah, I do believe it, because these are real stories by real US Veterans. If you don't.... well.... that's really sad, sir.

 

[Bfgrn]

Insurance companies were originally run by doctors. Their idea was to spread the risk. They had a sense that getting sick usually wasn't fair, so going bankrupt because you were sick probably also wasn't fair. They had the idea that pooling people in advance made it easier on everyone, and improved access to healthcare.

It's a great irony that only a few years later, some business people (people who are very good with money, but not so interested in medicine) realized that they could make a lot of money on health insurance if they created a special insurance plan that excluded the sickest people. In other words, insurance for people who probably didn't need it, which was very different from the original idea of health insurance for everyone, but far more profitable. The idea of preexisting conditions is almost as old as health insurance itself.

Here's one way to look at how the system came to be: People usually try to find occupations that follow what they love, at least in the beginning. Hospitals can be callous in their billing, as we've seen, and doctors like money as much as anyone else, but fundamentally there was a point in their lives when they (doctors and people who run hospitals) decided to get into the profession of helping sick people. Some are genuinely compassionate. Some are biology wonks or technology wonks, or just like the action. But most of them lose interest pretty quickly when they have to start dealing with complicated financial matters like insurance payments.

The first insurance companies were started by doctors, but they couldn't stay in the game when the money professionals started showing. They couldn't compete financially, and they didn't have the mindset to try. So they did what most of us do: focus on the details that interested them (medicine), and left the tedious stuff (finances) to someone who was interested in it (insurance companies). Now the insurance companies could start building a system in their image.

As the system grew and healthcare became more complex, more people came into the health insurance industry who had a good understanding of money but little interest in healthcare. It’s no secret that confused people are easier to take advantage of, so layers of confusion were slowly piled on and profits soared. Insurance companies sell nothing more than security against financial risk. If no one really understands what that risk is (because all prices are hidden or deceptive) then the price of the security (insurance) can be grossly inflated.

Doctors, hospitals, and other healthcare providers didn’t protest as the process slowly grew away from them because, as this started to happen, they too, were making money, and didn't think they needed to worry about it. As the system became less and less transparent, insurance companies were careful to make sure that all of the major players were kept very happy. But you can't keep everyone happy forever, and when things get tight, that's when you start to learn who's running the system. Now, after 30 to 40 years of slowly allowing all of our understanding of the financial transactions to erode, we are left seeing more and more money dumped into a black hole with little understanding of what happens to it.

It’s rare to see a discussion about healthcare costs that isn’t centered on co-pays, premiums, and deductibles. These are all indirect costs. They tell you almost nothing about the cost of the final product (the medical services that you might need). If the cost of individual components of healthcare are mentioned at all in these conversations, the price given is usually the billing charge. But the billing charge has little to do with what health care costs either. You've seen in almost every section of this discussion that the billing charge is a hugely inflated price that almost no one ever pays.

Why would anyone want us to focus on a price that's almost never paid (unless you don't have insurance, of course)? Well, one reason might be that it makes it look like all that money is really going into paying for our health care. We all know how important an MRI can be, or an Emergency Room visit, and as long as people think an MRI really costs $4,000, and an ER visit costs $4,500, maybe they'll resign themselves to paying big insurance premiums, and we can all tell ourselves that it's the only way we can continue to have "the best health care in the world."

But if these charges have nothing to do with reality, then neither do any of the discussions. MRI's and ER visits cost hundreds of dollars, not thousands! This is all a very effective diversion because, if no one ever addresses the real problem, it’s unlikely a real solution will ever be proposed. And if you don't want people to find out where their money is going, it helps to have them looking in the wrong place.

Healthcare - Conclusion: Is Healthcare Really so Expensive? By David Belk MD

 

[dnsmith35]

There are some wait times, but seldom for really needed services.

VA wait times mean some die before getting care | Army Times | armytimes.com

Internal Veterans Affairs Department documents show that at least two veterans died last year waiting to see a doctor while others couldn’t get primary care appointments for up to eight months, members of a House oversight and investigations panel said Thursday..

C&P maybe. Primary care I don't buy..

Addressing the ongoing problem of vets who suffer through long waits for appointments at VA hospitals and clinics, House lawmakers joined federal investigators and veterans service organizations in castigating VA on an issue that has endured for more than a decade.

“Evidence shows that many VA facilities, when faced with a backlog of thousands of outstanding or unresolved consultations, decided to administratively close out these requests. Some reasons given included that the request was years old, too much time had elapsed, or the veteran had died,” said Rep. Mike Coffman, R-Colo., chairman of the House Veterans Oversight and Investigations panel

The evidence doesn't support your claim..

I agreed there are some exceptions, but by and large the system is still the best in the country. People die waiting for doctors in civilian life. I didn't say it was perfect, just the best overall system in the US.

Which changes what? If I had to wait THREE HUNDRED DAYS.... for my insurance company to determine if I was disabled, I would... SUE THEM AND GET A DIFFERENT INSURANCE COMPANY.

You still do not understand disability determination. It is not waiting for treatment. It is to determine how much compensation they will get.

That doesn't change ANYTHING I said. That's a bad system.

Yet it is better than the others.

Isn't it funny how when it's private care, if 5 people die, the left screams. But when it's a socialized leftist system, suddenly 27 people dying of completely treatable conditions, while left on a waiting list, is no big deal, and their deaths should be mocked as such.

No one is mocking the system or the deaths, that is your claim.

Great. Prove it.

Shortly after I posted my post this afternoon I called my community clinic and got an appointment for a routine visit on Monday. No way can I do the same with my private doctor.

When enough people are screaming at politicians that they actually open a Federal investigation into it, and come up with actual evidence showing what people are screaming about..... yeah generally I think there's some credibility to it. I assume you don't care about Veterans screaming about the VA?

Baloney! I am a disabled veteran. The system is good and I don't believe the crap you are throwing is a major issue. Some people complain, but most of the complaints I am aware of are from people who don't live close enough to conveniently use the facilities. I think you are listening to a politician who wants to make a name.

Great. Where is the evidence of this?

Veterans Affairs purged thousands of medical tests to 'game' its backlog stats | WashingtonExaminer.com



In order to show they had reduced the backlog of waiting patients..... they deleted their orders. I wonder how many died not knowing their diagnostic tests had been systematically deleted from the system? I wonder how many others waiting in pain for weeks, if not months, only to find out they had to reschedule?

The facts are not on your side.

You are making allegations. You have no proof of any of your claims.

I can call today to see my VA doctor tomorrow. I can't do the same for a typical private practice doctor. When I have a general follow up need I see my Medicare physician. When I have an acute problem I call the VA.

If you want to believe that crap, I have a bridge for sale over the Atchafalaya Swamp. You got snookered by a politician wanting to make a name for himself.

Veterans dying because of health care delays - CNN.com

Barry Coates is one of the veterans who has suffered from a delay in care. Coates was having excruciating pain and rectal bleeding in 2011. For a year the Army veteran went to several VA clinics and hospitals in South Carolina, trying to get help. But the VA's diagnosis was hemorrhoids, and aside from simple pain medication he was told he might need a colonoscopy.

"The problem was getting worse and I was having more pain," Coates said, talking about one specific VA doctor who he saw every few months. "She again examined me and gave me some prescriptions for other things as far as pain and stuff like that and I noticed again she made another comment -- 'may need colonoscopy.'

"I told her that something needed to be done," said Coates. "But nothing was ever set up ... a consult was never set up."

"I had already been in pain and suffering from this problem for over six months and it wasn't getting better," Coates said. "I told her that if you were in as much pain as I was and had been going through you wouldn't wait another two months to see what's going on. You would probably do it this week."

Coates waited months, even begging for an appointment to have his colonoscopy. But he only found himself on a growing list of veterans also waiting for appointments and procedures. He was finally told he could have a colonoscopy, many months later.

"I took it upon my own self to call the department that scheduled that and ask them about it. And they said this was the earliest appointment that I could get. And I explained to the lady what I had already been through and how much pain I had, and I said if I wait this long there might not be ... (anything) we can do about it then. I could be even dead by then. And the only thing she could tell me was 'I understand that, sir, but I don't have any control over that.' "

Finally about a year after first complaining to his doctors of the pain, Coates got a colonoscopy and doctors discovered a cancerous tumor the size of a baseball.

Ya, I got snookered by a American Veteran wanting to make a name for himself. What a wuss he was, waiting only a year, to find out he had a cancerous tumor the size of a baseball, up his butt.

What a wimp. Why would anyone believe the crap spewed by a US Veteran!

Bottom line.... yeah, I do believe it, because these are real stories by real US Veterans. If you don't.... well.... that's really sad, sir.

His experience is not borne out by personal experience. I would not take that story as gospel. My grandson's father is a 3 year vet from the cold war era. He experienced problems with his right shoulder. He called, made an appointment and had a shoulder replacement from first call to the end of therapy in a Colorado VA facility it took less than a month. My experience and that of my youngest son with the Central Alabama Hospital in Montgomery and Tuskegee facility is similar. My brother uses the Baton Rouge outpatient clinic.

I believe some people are just never satisfied, and I would have to see the records of the guy you talked about before I believe your story. I don't think you are lying, I just think you are taking a few sad stories without evaluating the veracity of the story teller.

BTW, are you even aware that most VA Community Care Clinics are contracted out and run by local hospitals? Or that many of those near military facilities frequently run a clinic in the military facility? Two local examples are the Dothan Clinic run by SEAlabama Medical Center and there is another clinic at Ft Rucker's Lyster Army Health Clinic.

 

[Andylusion]

C&P maybe. Primary care I don't buy.. I agreed there are some exceptions, but by and large the system is still the best in the country. People die waiting for doctors in civilian life. I didn't say it was perfect, just the best overall system in the US.

You don't have to buy it. You can believe whatever you want. I'm not seeing this utopia, OR "best in the country" that you claim. Might be the best in your state. Might be the best in your region.

I can believe that. Because inherently in a socialized system, the allocation of capital is arbitrary and dependent on the whims of politics. If you happen to have influential senators and representatives, they can push for more VA money being spent in their state.

This exact problem was identified in the UK, as the 'zip code lottery'. Where if you happen to be in zip code X, you would get faster, better treatment, but if you were in zip code Y, you would get slower, and more limited treatment.

Now of there, it was very obvious, because two patients would go to the same hospital, and be treated differently based on their zip code. In the US, it's more by state and district.

So yeah, it's entirely possible that *YOU* are getting really great care. Fact is, not everyone is getting that. Some people are waiting months and months on end, to get basic treatment.

You still do not understand disability determination. It is not waiting for treatment. It is to determine how much compensation they will get.Yet it is better than the others.

No, sir. You are still not understanding. For the last time, IF MY INSURANCE COMPANY TAKES AN ENTIRE YEAR TO DETERMINE IF I QUALIFY FOR BENEFITS...... I WOULD SUE THE HELL OUT OF THEM, AND THEN CANCEL MY INSURANCE.

I don't care.... that it is simply for "disability determination". If I have short term, or long term disability insurance, and they take an entire YEAR..... to determine if I qualify...... I WOULD SUE THEM. This would never happen in a private insurance company, at least not without consequences. Yet you guys put up with it, with the VA, because you can't do jack to the VA.

His experience is not borne out by personal experience. I would not take that story as gospel. My grandson's father is a 3 year vet from the cold war era. He experienced problems with his right shoulder. He called, made an appointment and had a shoulder replacement from first call to the end of therapy in a Colorado VA facility it took less than a month. My experience and that of my youngest son with the Central Alabama Hospital in Montgomery and Tuskegee facility is similar. My brother uses the Baton Rouge outpatient clinic.

Great! Wonderful! What about all these other stories from people just like you and your family, that show the opposite experience? Why are VA workers being fired for refusing to delete veterans waiting for care? Hell, what about the stories of bad care, from my own family? My uncles wouldn't set foot in a VA hospital. Or my brother in law. Or the people where I work. All complained of terrible care.

I believe some people are just never satisfied, and I would have to see the records of the guy you talked about before I believe your story. I don't think you are lying, I just think you are taking a few sad stories without evaluating the veracity of the story teller.

And no doubt there is some good service provided in some cases. Like I said, some places are very well funded, and in those places, you would think if the entire system is like this, then the system is awesome. Just like if you went to the resort hospitals in Cuba, you would think the entire Cuban health care system is wonderful. The problem is, all the rest of the system isn't wonderful.

BTW, are you even aware that most VA Community Care Clinics are contracted out and run by local hospitals? Or that many of those near military facilities frequently run a clinic in the military facility? Two local examples are the Dothan Clinic run by SEAlabama Medical Center and there is another clinic at Ft Rucker's Lyster Army Health Clinic.

And sometimes that can improve things. Often though, the problems are just passed alone.

Again, the beauty of the free-market system, is that when the demand for service goes up.... when more patients show up, those patients pay money for service. That money feeds back into the system, to provide more service.

As there is more patients, there is more money, which provides for more nurses and doctors, to provide service to more patients.

In a socialized system, the money available is set by government, regardless of the number of patients. Thus you go to a VA hospital in a low cost-of-living area, or an area with fewer VA patients (low-demand), and you walk right in, get instant treatment, everything you need, and wow what an amazing system!

Then you go to a place with high cost of living, and high demand, and suddenly it sucks, and you end up waiting for months for basic services.

 

[dnsmith35]

C&P maybe. Primary care I don't buy.. I agreed there are some exceptions, but by and large the system is still the best in the country. People die waiting for doctors in civilian life. I didn't say it was perfect, just the best overall system in the US.

You don't have to buy it. You can believe whatever you want. I'm not seeing this utopia, OR "best in the country" that you claim. Might be the best in your state. Might be the best in your region.

I can believe that. Because inherently in a socialized system, the allocation of capital is arbitrary and dependent on the whims of politics. If you happen to have influential senators and representatives, they can push for more VA money being spent in their state.

This exact problem was identified in the UK, as the 'zip code lottery'. Where if you happen to be in zip code X, you would get faster, better treatment, but if you were in zip code Y, you would get slower, and more limited treatment.

Now of there, it was very obvious, because two patients would go to the same hospital, and be treated differently based on their zip code. In the US, it's more by state and district.

So yeah, it's entirely possible that *YOU* are getting really great care. Fact is, not everyone is getting that. Some people are waiting months and months on end, to get basic treatment.

You still do not understand disability determination. It is not waiting for treatment. It is to determine how much compensation they will get.Yet it is better than the others.

No, sir. You are still not understanding. For the last time, IF MY INSURANCE COMPANY TAKES AN ENTIRE YEAR TO DETERMINE IF I QUALIFY FOR BENEFITS...... I WOULD SUE THE HELL OUT OF THEM, AND THEN CANCEL MY INSURANCE.

I don't care.... that it is simply for "disability determination". If I have short term, or long term disability insurance, and they take an entire YEAR..... to determine if I qualify...... I WOULD SUE THEM. This would never happen in a private insurance company, at least not without consequences. Yet you guys put up with it, with the VA, because you can't do jack to the VA.



Great! Wonderful! What about all these other stories from people just like you and your family, that show the opposite experience? Why are VA workers being fired for refusing to delete veterans waiting for care? Hell, what about the stories of bad care, from my own family? My uncles wouldn't set foot in a VA hospital. Or my brother in law. Or the people where I work. All complained of terrible care.

I believe some people are just never satisfied, and I would have to see the records of the guy you talked about before I believe your story. I don't think you are lying, I just think you are taking a few sad stories without evaluating the veracity of the story teller.

And no doubt there is some good service provided in some cases. Like I said, some places are very well funded, and in those places, you would think if the entire system is like this, then the system is awesome. Just like if you went to the resort hospitals in Cuba, you would think the entire Cuban health care system is wonderful. The problem is, all the rest of the system isn't wonderful.

BTW, are you even aware that most VA Community Care Clinics are contracted out and run by local hospitals? Or that many of those near military facilities frequently run a clinic in the military facility? Two local examples are the Dothan Clinic run by SEAlabama Medical Center and there is another clinic at Ft Rucker's Lyster Army Health Clinic.

And sometimes that can improve things. Often though, the problems are just passed alone.

Again, the beauty of the free-market system, is that when the demand for service goes up.... when more patients show up, those patients pay money for service. That money feeds back into the system, to provide more service.

As there is more patients, there is more money, which provides for more nurses and doctors, to provide service to more patients.

In a socialized system, the money available is set by government, regardless of the number of patients. Thus you go to a VA hospital in a low cost-of-living area, or an area with fewer VA patients (low-demand), and you walk right in, get instant treatment, everything you need, and wow what an amazing system!

Then you go to a place with high cost of living, and high demand, and suddenly it sucks, and you end up waiting for months for basic services.

You have been citing isolated bad luck stories which may or may not be accurate, and I have been countering with a link from the New England journal and personal experience of my own family. you do realize I hope that there are horror stories from all health care systems as nothing is perfect.

Whether you want to admit it or not, most veterans get great care. And that is a fact.The Best Health Care System in America
Actually it's not that VA is such a marvelous system since any large-scale organization employing over 200,000 people is bound to have its inefficiencies. VA simply comes closer to the mark of providing excellent care than the rest of the health-care providers in the country. One big reason is the veteran system does not rely on insurance reimbursements so money saved through efficient operation remains in the system and does not transfer to insurance companies. This type of operational structure encourages innovation and change.

However, being a single-payer health plan alone would not necessarily result in a better system. The outstanding reawakening of VA health care is largely a result of the vision and leadership of Doctor Kizer and his successor. Here are some of the operational advantages that make VA health care so successful.

As a government entity, the agency cannot be sued by patients who have been mistreated. This obviously saves the time and money involved in lawsuits. However, in order to be responsive to medical errors, doctor Kizer instituted the "Sorry Now" program that holds staff accountable for their actions and provides damage awards to patients.

Veterans who are part of the system have the opportunity to remain with the system throughout their lives. This allows VA to practice preventative medicine by scheduling regular checkups, performing regular lab tests and intervening before a medical condition becomes too advanced. The provider/contractor insurance reimbursement model used in the United States typically does not allow for this type of preventative medicine.

An electronic records system provides the opportunity to practice outcome based medicine which has become the Holy Grail of all health-care systems. The computerized records allow tracking outcomes for various medical conditions and finding those that work best. This weeds out expensive procedures that are no more effective than other less expensive ones. Prescriptions for medications are also tracked on the computer and potential drug interactions are avoided. According to studies, VA has the lowest drug interaction incidents and deaths in the country
The Best Care Anywhere - Phillip Longman

Veterans Affairs Healthcare System No. 1 - ABC News

 

[Bfgrn]

Doctors say VA care is a model of efficiency
Aug 18, 2009

One argument against a public insurance option in the current debate over health care is that government typically isn't as efficient or proficient as the private sector. But some say that the Department of Veteran Affairs medical care is actually an excellent example of how the government is leading on health care quality and cost.

...

In fact, the VA is used to stretching a buck. It has to deliver all the care that its patients need without exceeding its annual budget set by Congress.

It's a challenge, but Drucker said the VA has figured out a way to do things economically. Like doctors at the Mayo Clinic, most VA doctors receive a salary, so they have no incentive to order unnecessary tests and procedures to make more money. That saves the VA huge sums of money that can be reinvested in necessary care.

Also, the VA has an electronic medical record system that's the envy of many. Drucker said doctors can get detailed information about patients even if they were treated at a VA clinic across the country.

"Staff do not have to transport records," he said. "They don't have to look for them; they're just available on the computer screen in front of the provider who can use that information immediately to make a medical decision about a patient."

The electronic records have allowed them to improve patient quality and eliminate a lot of wasteful spending.

Compared to the average Medicare patient in the private market, the VA spent substantially less on its patients in 2004. That year, Medicare paid an average of $6,800 dollars per patient, while the VA was able to deliver care for approximately $5,000 per patient. That's 35 percent less than Medicare, which is the baseline widely used in measuring the cost of health care.

Measuring for quality care

The VA measures everything it does. Its doctors examine the case records of every person who dies in the medical center to see whether there were quality issues that contributed to death. They also review cases when a patient returns to the hospital with a medical problem within a week of being discharged.

They even measure access to the VA. Doctors must see 95 percent of their patients within 30 days of that patient's initial request for an appointment. Mental health patients must be seen within 14 days; and if it's a crisis, they need to be seen immediately.

more

 

[dnsmith35]

What is Galbraith saying? Stripped of the veneer of pseudo-scientific disinterestedness, he is blatantly arguing for the institution of a modern brand of Prussian feudalism! It is possible that he himself is unaware of this. For he imagines that somewhere, off in the stratosphere as it were, there are private individuals, “public authority," “increasing income," and “relative need." In his eyes, it is a question of mere technical expediency whether “increasing income" is to accrue to private individuals or to “public authority"; in either case, it will be distributed in accordance with “relative need." Affluence now dictates that a pro rata share of “increasing income" accrue to “public authority."

Thus, Galbraith is not for one moment bothered by such mundane questions as to whom does the "increasing income" belong, and whose “relative need" is to determine its distribution? There is simply "increasing income” and “relative need.” The fact that private individuals have produced the goods which constitute the “increasing income" is not considered a valid reason for them to determine its disposal. As was the case with the feudal lords of the pre-capitalist era, “public authority" is to have an unquestioned claim to a regular share of the fruits of others' industry; it will distribute the products of others in accordance with what it, and not they, deems to be in “relative need." And, just as in old Prussia or Czarist Russia, the servants of public authority—the government officials and their intellectual flunkies in the tax supported schools and universities—will have prestige, while the businessman, who supports them, if not considered vulgar, will be regarded as unimportant.

George Reisman http://georgereismansblog.blogspot.com/2006/05/galbraiths-neo-feudalism.html

 

[Bfgrn]

What is Galbraith saying? Stripped of the veneer of pseudo-scientific disinterestedness, he is blatantly arguing for the institution of a modern brand of Prussian feudalism! It is possible that he himself is unaware of this. For he imagines that somewhere, off in the stratosphere as it were, there are private individuals, “public authority," “increasing income," and “relative need." In his eyes, it is a question of mere technical expediency whether “increasing income" is to accrue to private individuals or to “public authority"; in either case, it will be distributed in accordance with “relative need." Affluence now dictates that a pro rata share of “increasing income" accrue to “public authority."

Thus, Galbraith is not for one moment bothered by such mundane questions as to whom does the "increasing income" belong, and whose “relative need" is to determine its distribution? There is simply "increasing income” and “relative need.” The fact that private individuals have produced the goods which constitute the “increasing income" is not considered a valid reason for them to determine its disposal. As was the case with the feudal lords of the pre-capitalist era, “public authority" is to have an unquestioned claim to a regular share of the fruits of others' industry; it will distribute the products of others in accordance with what it, and not they, deems to be in “relative need." And, just as in old Prussia or Czarist Russia, the servants of public authority—the government officials and their intellectual flunkies in the tax supported schools and universities—will have prestige, while the businessman, who supports them, if not considered vulgar, will be regarded as unimportant.

George Reisman George Reisman's Blog on Economics, Politics, Society, and Culture: Galbraith's Neo-Feudalism

The opinion of George Reisman is absolutely meaningless. He embraced the BIGGEST economic failure in American history...Reaganomics...and defends the failed 'trickle-down' theory...

John Kenneth Galbraith noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory." He wrote, "Mr. David Stockman has said that supply-side economics was merely a cover for the trickle-down approach to economic policy—what an older and less elegant generation called the horse-and-sparrow theory: 'If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.'" Galbraith claimed that the horse and sparrow theory was partly to blame for the Panic of 1896.


America THRIVED under liberals and Keynesian economics. And Galbraith turns out to be the most astute and profound figures of the last half of the 20th century.

To Galbraith, a trusted adviser with unique back-channel access to the President Kennedy, a potential US war in Vietnam represented more than a disastrous misadventure in foreign policy--it risked derailing the New Frontier's domestic plans for Keynesian-led full employment, and for massive new spending on education, the environment and what would become the War on Poverty. Worse, he feared, it might ultimately tear not only the Democratic Party but the nation apart--and usher in a new conservative era in American politics.

Had Kennedy lived, he would have withdrawn all troops by the End of 1965. There would be no riots at the 1968 Democratic convention, no Presidents Nixon, Reagan or Bush.

And America would not be drowning in debt.



"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

“Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. Reagan was an ideological inflection point, ending a 50-year liberal ascendancy and beginning a 30-year conservative ascendancy."
Charles Krauthammer

 

[dnsmith35]

What is Galbraith saying? Stripped of the veneer of pseudo-scientific disinterestedness, he is blatantly arguing for the institution of a modern brand of Prussian feudalism! It is possible that he himself is unaware of this. For he imagines that somewhere, off in the stratosphere as it were, there are private individuals, “public authority," “increasing income," and “relative need." In his eyes, it is a question of mere technical expediency whether “increasing income" is to accrue to private individuals or to “public authority"; in either case, it will be distributed in accordance with “relative need." Affluence now dictates that a pro rata share of “increasing income" accrue to “public authority."

Thus, Galbraith is not for one moment bothered by such mundane questions as to whom does the "increasing income" belong, and whose “relative need" is to determine its distribution? There is simply "increasing income” and “relative need.” The fact that private individuals have produced the goods which constitute the “increasing income" is not considered a valid reason for them to determine its disposal. As was the case with the feudal lords of the pre-capitalist era, “public authority" is to have an unquestioned claim to a regular share of the fruits of others' industry; it will distribute the products of others in accordance with what it, and not they, deems to be in “relative need." And, just as in old Prussia or Czarist Russia, the servants of public authority—the government officials and their intellectual flunkies in the tax supported schools and universities—will have prestige, while the businessman, who supports them, if not considered vulgar, will be regarded as unimportant.

George Reisman George Reisman's Blog on Economics, Politics, Society, and Culture: Galbraith's Neo-Feudalism

The opinion of George Reisman is absolutely meaningless. He embraced the BIGGEST economic failure in American history...Reaganomics...and defends the failed 'trickle-down' theory...

John Kenneth Galbraith noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory." He wrote, "Mr. David Stockman has said that supply-side economics was merely a cover for the trickle-down approach to economic policy—what an older and less elegant generation called the horse-and-sparrow theory: 'If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.'" Galbraith claimed that the horse and sparrow theory was partly to blame for the Panic of 1896.


America THRIVED under liberals and Keynesian economics. And Galbraith turns out to be the most astute and profound figures of the last half of the 20th century.

To Galbraith, a trusted adviser with unique back-channel access to the President Kennedy, a potential US war in Vietnam represented more than a disastrous misadventure in foreign policy--it risked derailing the New Frontier's domestic plans for Keynesian-led full employment, and for massive new spending on education, the environment and what would become the War on Poverty. Worse, he feared, it might ultimately tear not only the Democratic Party but the nation apart--and usher in a new conservative era in American politics.

Had Kennedy lived, he would have withdrawn all troops by the End of 1965. There would be no riots at the 1968 Democratic convention, no Presidents Nixon, Reagan or Bush.

And America would not be drowning in debt.



"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

“Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. Reagan was an ideological inflection point, ending a 50-year liberal ascendancy and beginning a 30-year conservative ascendancy."
Charles Krauthammer

Typical response from a left wing extremist. Reisman was a great economist and teacher and Galbraith was a nut. As a classic liberal of the JFK mold I refuse to accept the Marxist concepts of Galbraith or any other left winger. Time for you to try to think for yourself instead of fooling yourself with leftist propaganda.

I knew Galbraith was a fool the first time he tried to convince people that no matter what, the marginal utility of wealth decreased even as wealth increased. He overlooked the fact that as wealth increases so do the marginal sizes of wealth such that so long as the chunk of money the next marginal unit is the individual will be increasingly satisfied and the utility will go up. He build his tax and redistribute theories around a fallacy.

 

[Listening]

You CONTINUE to parrot the propaganda of lobbyists and front groups...WHY don't you educate yourself pea brain?

Pea brain lol. You are a clown. If this right here, is the maximum level you can debate at, then you are too plain stupid for me to continue talking too. Forest Gump needs to go home to momma.

I only talk to adults. If you are not one, please leave the forum. You are lowering the average intelligence of the discussion. Time to grow up or get out!

Adults think, they don't mimic the propaganda of lobbyists and front groups.

You can continue to ignore the facts. America has the most expensive health care system in the world. It is not because of Medicare, or because of government. It is because of the private sector. Educate yourself about medical loss ratio and how Wall Street investors force insurance companies to either deny coverages or be severely punished.

Start HERE... invest a half hour of time to find out how insurance cartels screws this nation.

this is the same W. Potter who continually spouts out the party line horsecrap such as the bogus Harvard study.

He was a PR guy. He knows nothing about how the insurance industry works.