It is way past time for the medical quality boards to get serious about quacks and mills. Time to require them to send out "patients" to be seen to be sure that treatment is correct. Time to require retesting based on current standards to make sure skills haven't lapsed. If you want to throw money, throw money at the boards for quality of care enforcement. Right now all they check for is excessive oxycontin prescribing or false billing to medicare (government funds).

You said it:
"Right now all they check for is [over-prescribing and things paid for by government funds]"

...and what do you think would happen to quacks and mills and quality of care enforcement if it was ALL paid by government funds?

---

#theresistance, #resist

Love your straw man. Every hospital emergency room in the US must treat.

That is not health care.

It is far more expensive to wait until people get to this point rather than treating then when they start to become ill.

It is not in the best interests of the patient. It is not a good system. It is not a system that a civilised country should be proud of.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Nobody ever died because of a lack of fire insurance and from what I read, rebuilding your house is cheaper in the US than most life saving operations and the associated care.

Love your straw man. Every hospital emergency room in the US must treat.

Correct me if I'm wrong but if a patient presents at an emergency room with a heart attack or similar. Isn't all the emergency ward required to do is stabilise them and stop them from dying ? I don't think the bypass surgery that may be required is included in the "must treat" category.

Stable you say. I think that standard for discharge is able to care for themselves.

Why do you wish to run other people's lives? To tell them what they must do, e.g. buy single payer medical insurance.

If the cost of full cover medical insurance was only 1.5% of their taxable income I don't think too many would see it as "being forced".

Where does that number come from? In the USA we already pay 2.9% and don't yet have full coverage.

Malpractice costs are out the roof because malpractice is rampant.....

But is it actually Medical malpractice or Legal Malpractice that is rampant ? Are the doctors really at fault or is it the ambulance chasing lawyers, courts that award unrealistic damages and plaintiffs full of the desire for a quick, unearned buck that is the problem there ?

Do you refer to a ambulance chaser looking to recompense an accident victim? Do you mean a TV adverts like 800-BAD-DRUG? All excellent legal practice.

The issue you bring up started when SCOTUS said the Bar couldn't ban legal adverts due to the First Amendment. Continues with Citizens United. Same theory really. That government can't place a speech restriction on granting a license.

---

You said it:
"Right now all they check for is [over-prescribing and things paid for by government funds]"

...and what do you think would happen to quacks and mills and quality of care enforcement if it was ALL paid by government funds?

They would triple or quintuple in size as they find more and more loopholes to exploit. Patient quality part of the Medical Quality board would cease to exist as the sole focus would be on catching rampant billing fraud.

So sorry if you live in a utopian world where no one would ever dream of cheating.

---

Love your straw man. Every hospital emergency room in the US must treat.

That is not health care.

It is government care however.

---

You said it:
"Right now all they check for is [over-prescribing and things paid for by government funds]"

...and what do you think would happen to quacks and mills and quality of care enforcement if it was ALL paid by government funds?

They would triple or quintuple in size as they find more and more loopholes to exploit. Patient quality part of the Medical Quality board would cease to exist as the sole focus would be on catching rampant billing fraud.

So sorry if you live in a utopian world where no one would ever dream of cheating.

The government is in a position to enforce better policy, without profit being the motive, even if cost cutting is a motive... (See my comment about add-on insurance before you worry about the cost cutting)
We all know how much you do not want to see the government flex it's muscles, and I don't totally disagree with that notion. But I do think public healthcare is the one thing that the government should be stepping in and handling.

But alas we both know very well what the other believes. I wish some of our other center-right --> far right people were in here to help the conversation out.

And Gary you always mention Malpractice. There are many states with laws that make it d*mn near impossible to sue a doctor. You have to be able to prove that the doctor in charge of your care was KNOWINGLY negligent, at least in NY. I bet our healthcare system is not paying out much of anything in comparison to what they are taking in, again as profit...

---

#theresistance, #resist

You said it:
"Right now all they check for is [over-prescribing and things paid for by government funds]"

...and what do you think would happen to quacks and mills and quality of care enforcement if it was ALL paid by government funds?

They would triple or quintuple in size as they find more and more loopholes to exploit. Patient quality part of the Medical Quality board would cease to exist as the sole focus would be on catching rampant billing fraud.

So sorry if you live in a utopian world where no one would ever dream of cheating.

Simply not what happens in countries that have government healthcare.

I don't know where you are getting your information from.

Government healthcare is not some theory that hasn't been tried. It has been tried and it is very successful and much cheaper to run that private health care. It also has better outcomes in the long run because people are being treated in a way that is best for them, not the best for making money.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Simply not what happens in countries that have government healthcare.

Yes, and there are no proposals in the USA for anything at all resembling other countries systems. Obamacare is mandatory private health care.

---

Simply not what happens in countries that have government healthcare.

Yes, and there are no proposals in the USA for anything at all resembling other countries systems. ...

And why would that be?

---

Reality Internet Personality

Simply not what happens in countries that have government healthcare.

Yes, and there are no proposals in the USA for anything at all resembling other countries systems. ...

And why would that be?

Corporate Greed.

---

I Desire Peace and Justice, Jim Scott (Mod-Ret.)

Simply not what happens in countries that have government healthcare.

Yes, and there are no proposals in the USA for anything at all resembling other countries systems. ...

And why would that be?

Corporate Greed.

And politicians who have good buds in the business. And there own free spare no expense by porking the taxpayer health insurance for life.

---

[/quote]

Old James

Simply not what happens in countries that have government healthcare.

Yes, and there are no proposals in the USA for anything at all resembling other countries systems. ...

And why would that be?

Corporate Greed.

Wrong. It would put lawyers out of work, and when politicians leave office they become lawyers!

---

Simply not what happens in countries that have government healthcare.

Yes, and there are no proposals in the USA for anything at all resembling other countries systems. ...

And why would that be?

Corporate Greed.

Wrong. It would put lawyers out of work, and when politicians leave office they become lawyers!

And here I thought lawyers became politicians when they went to the dark side of life.

---

[/quote]

Old James

Simply not what happens in countries that have government healthcare.

Yes, and there are no proposals in the USA for anything at all resembling other countries systems. ...

And why would that be?

Corporate Greed.

Wrong. It would put lawyers out of work, and when politicians leave office they become lawyers!

And here I thought lawyers became politicians when they went to the dark side of life.

Term limits...

---

Regular checkups cost far less than the insurance premium.

Apparently according to this article checkups are next to useless.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/17/dont-open-wide-annual-check-ups-are-pretty-much-useless/?tid=pm_business_pop
There are links in there, which I haven't followed, to get the full story.

But there is a suggestion that the American Health Insurance industry might be requiring you to have regular checkups.

Also there has been some comments in the press recently that suggest high blood pressure readings, may be a symptom of visiting the doctor, rather than a health problem. Which if then treated can lead to side effects, like Vic's swelling feet and ankle's. Which then requires further medication.