HomeFairfax General ForumArrest/Ticket SearchWiki newPictures/VideosChatArticlesLinksAbout
Off-Topic :  Fairfax Underground fairfax underground logo
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Jack ()
Date: November 09, 2009 03:34PM

Unlike Democrats, I think it is unfair to expect taxpayers to foot the bill for medically unnecessary surgeries.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Registered Voter ()
Date: November 09, 2009 03:35PM

No more sex change operations for free.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: November 09, 2009 04:00PM

Lets see....nothing but life threatening surgery? No tooth extractions until they become infected...no facial disfigurement plastic surgery...no elective abortions. Im not ready to sign up for that.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Sam Skinflint ()
Date: November 09, 2009 04:04PM

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lets see....nothing but life threatening surgery?
> No tooth extractions until they become
> infected...no facial disfigurement plastic
> surgery...no elective abortions. Im not ready to
> sign up for that.


But it would keep costs down! Look, if you want a tooth looked at before it becomes infected, you pay for it yourself. If you want to wait, we'll pay for it. Could be, it won't get infected and we'll all save!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Mr Captcha ()
Date: November 09, 2009 06:28PM

There's a big difference between elective and not medically necessary. Elective just means that it's not urgently needed due to medical emergency. A compound fracture of the femur requires surgery to repair. A torn ACL requires surgery to repair. Both surgeries are medically necessary, the injuries won't heal without them. The ACL is technically elective because it's not a medical emergency. The broken femur is an urgent medical emergency because of the risk of infection of the wound and bone. Both should still be covered.

Here's an even more interesting example. Say you have breast cancer and need a lump removed. You can have a lumpectomy which removes just the tumor and leaves the breast intact, or you can have a mastectomy and remove the entire breast. The risk of recurrence is lower with the mastectomy increasing your chances of survival but is a traumatic psychological experience and is also more expensive. The lumpectomy is less invasive so is cheaper, but increases the odds of the cancer returning. Say the doctor recommends the lumpectomy, but you want the full mastectomy due to a family history of cancer. Should the mastectomy not be covered because it's only medically necessary to remove the tumor? What about the other way around, should the lumpectomy not be covered because you're going against the doctor's wishes?

It's no wonder the public option is such a hot topic. These aren't major fringe cases only happening once a year in the whole US, these are decisions that people make every day.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: pgens ()
Date: November 09, 2009 07:20PM

All sterilizations for people under 22 should be done on public dime, and forced after 40.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: RestonLass ()
Date: November 10, 2009 05:36AM

Mr Captcha Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Here's an even more interesting example. Say you
> have breast cancer and need a lump removed. You
> can have a lumpectomy which removes just the tumor
> and leaves the breast intact, or you can have a
> mastectomy and remove the entire breast. The risk
> of recurrence is lower with the mastectomy
> increasing your chances of survival but is a
> traumatic psychological experience and is also
> more expensive. The lumpectomy is less invasive
> so is cheaper, but increases the odds of the
> cancer returning. Say the doctor recommends the
> lumpectomy, but you want the full mastectomy due
> to a family history of cancer. Should the
> mastectomy not be covered because it's only
> medically necessary to remove the tumor? What
> about the other way around, should the lumpectomy
> not be covered because you're going against the
> doctor's wishes?

This is an excellent example of why US health care is better than any other in the world. Our Cancer survival rates far surpass any other country in the world because we are proactiv and preventive, rather than simply treating the syptoms with pills and a scalpel until a Hospice bed comes available.


> It's no wonder the public option is such a hot
> topic. These aren't major fringe cases only
> happening once a year in the whole US, these are
> decisions that people make every day.


As for the Public Option, when you pull off all the fluff, it's Medicaid. To the best of my knowledge, dental, abortions and cosmetic surgery were never covered by "the plan."

Perhaps this is why Dems are so opposed to Tort Reform - if a person places themselve in a position that Vince feels the taxpayers should pay for , they can sue and use the settlement to be treated by a private doctor.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/10/2009 05:38AM by RestonLass.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Kenny_Powers ()
Date: November 10, 2009 05:46AM

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lets see....nothing but life threatening surgery?
> No tooth extractions until they become
> infected...no facial disfigurement plastic
> surgery...no elective abortions. Im not ready to
> sign up for that.


theres a difference between elective surgery and preventative surgery. One prevents possible complications before they happen(like having your foot amputated because you had a minor infection), and the other is something like getting your titties done. And why the fuck should we have to pay for someone else's abortions? When a majority of the abortions are performed as a method of birth control or because its an inconvenience. I believe only about 2% of the abortions performed in this country are due to cases of rape, incest, or because the mothers life is in danger.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: November 10, 2009 09:24AM

Kenny_Powers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lets see....nothing but life threatening
> surgery?
> > No tooth extractions until they become
> > infected...no facial disfigurement plastic
> > surgery...no elective abortions. Im not ready
> to
> > sign up for that.
>
>
> theres a difference between elective surgery and
> preventative surgery. One prevents possible
> complications before they happen(like having your
> foot amputated because you had a minor infection),
> and the other is something like getting your
> titties done. And why the fuck should we have to
> pay for someone else's abortions? When a majority
> of the abortions are performed as a method of
> birth control or because its an inconvenience. I
> believe only about 2% of the abortions performed
> in this country are due to cases of rape, incest,
> or because the mothers life is in danger.

Because it's cheaper in the long run to do so...then to pick up the pieces later of an unwanted child.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: November 10, 2009 09:27AM

RestonLass..you are out of your fucking mind if you think this country heaslthcare system is preventative in any shape or form. I challenge you to find one article..other then a Fox news source, supporting such a claim.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: FairIsFair ()
Date: November 10, 2009 01:35PM

If they cover elective abortions, they should cover hair transplants.

Actually, it should be covered either was as baldness is a disfiguring disease.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: RestonLass ()
Date: November 10, 2009 06:32PM

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RestonLass..you are out of your fucking mind if
> you think this country heaslthcare system is
> preventative in any shape or form. I challenge
> you to find one article..other then a Fox news
> source, supporting such a claim.


You don't have the highest cancer survival rate in the world by handing out pills and cutting on people. The US focuses more on early detection than any other country in the world. We have state of the art testing equipment that makes socialized medicine in other countries look like turn of the century.

There's no need to go to Fox - just go to any medical center in the US, and you'll find state of the art PREVENTIVE testing equipment.


"Medical Imaging in Canada" reports that in 2007 there were 419 CT scanners and 222 MRI machines

In the US, Pittsburgh alone has more MRI Machines than ALL of Canada, and 6,000 CT Scanners.

http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2007/10/closer-look-at-cancer-survival-rates.html



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/10/2009 06:38PM by RestonLass.
Attachments:
five-year-cancer-survival-rates.JPG

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: trogdor! ()
Date: November 10, 2009 10:57PM

RestonLass Wrote:

> There's no need to go to Fox - just go to any
> medical center in the US, and you'll find state of
> the art PREVENTIVE testing equipment.

Interesting.

http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPage.jsp?cw_page=media_21aug2008_e

August 2008

"There were 103 CT exams per 1,000 people performed in Canada in 2007, less than the rate performed in both the United States (207) and Belgium (138), but higher than the rate in Sweden (89), Spain (57), England (54) and Denmark (34). In comparison, Canada’s rate of MRI exams per 1,000 population (31) was higher than that in England (25), Spain (21) and Denmark (17), and lower than in the U.S. (89), Belgium (43) and Sweden (39). Information on scans per 1,000 population was available for only six OECD countries other than Canada."


The upside, is that if you don't CT scan the people, you never find the malignant tumor that needs to be taken out. This helps keep the costs down.

This site has some interesting information related to Canadian Health Care (like this document): http://www.cihiconferences.ca/HCIC2009/index.html

About MRIs:

"About 55% of Canadians wait less than a month for a CT and MRI scan
(the data is lumped in with angiography), and 11% wait more than three months.10"

Check out these wait times. Almost 10 % of the heart patients in British Columbia don't get surgery within the 'benchmark' 6 months. Nice.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/10/2009 11:16PM by trogdor!.
Attachments:
Screenshot.png

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Kenny_Powers ()
Date: November 10, 2009 11:56PM

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kenny_Powers Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Vince(1) Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Lets see....nothing but life threatening
> > surgery?
> > > No tooth extractions until they become
> > > infected...no facial disfigurement plastic
> > > surgery...no elective abortions. Im not
> ready
> > to
> > > sign up for that.
> >
> >
> > theres a difference between elective surgery
> and
> > preventative surgery. One prevents possible
> > complications before they happen(like having
> your
> > foot amputated because you had a minor
> infection),
> > and the other is something like getting your
> > titties done. And why the fuck should we have
> to
> > pay for someone else's abortions? When a
> majority
> > of the abortions are performed as a method of
> > birth control or because its an inconvenience.
> I
> > believe only about 2% of the abortions
> performed
> > in this country are due to cases of rape,
> incest,
> > or because the mothers life is in danger.
>
> Because it's cheaper in the long run to do
> so...then to pick up the pieces later of an
> unwanted child.

wouldnt it be even cheaper to teach these fucking retards to use a condom?

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: November 11, 2009 07:22AM

Those are all very important statistics..and there are plenty that show poor medical care in the country...but the issue was preventive care..curing cancer isnt preventing cancer..and preeventive care is the issue....how long it takes to get a heart operation is important...but it has nothing to do about preventing heart problems...and that was the issue. MRIs arent preventative...you already have symptoms..preventative means taking action to stop the initial indication of a problem.

So now your insults can flow...but preventaive is preventative..not curative.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/11/2009 07:23AM by Vince(1).

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Lt. Daniel Choi ()
Date: November 11, 2009 07:32AM

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Those are all very important statistics..
i agree

and there
> are plenty that show poor medical care in the
> country..
so true

.but the issue was preventive
> care..curing cancer isnt preventing cancer..
sing it

and
> preeventive care is the issue....how long it takes
> to get a heart operation is important...
get to that heart opration. dont preevent it.

but it has
> nothing to do about preventing heart
> problems...
absolutly

and that was the issue. MRIs arent
> preventative...you already have
> symptoms..
i already have symptoms

preventative means taking action to stop
> the initial indication of a problem.
take action. stop initial indications of a problem. any problem will do. be preeventive

>
> So now your insults can flow...but preventaive is
> preventative..not curative.
preventaive = preventative.

god bless don't mess

with blisters

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Should elective surgeries be covered under the public option?
Posted by: Gravis ()
Date: November 11, 2009 08:30AM

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> but the issue was preventive
> care..curing cancer isnt preventing cancer..and
> preeventive care is the issue


how can one evaluate preventative care if it actually prevents a medical issue from occurring?


> how long it takes
> to get a heart operation is important...but it has
> nothing to do about preventing heart
> problems...and that was the issue. MRIs arent
> preventative...you already have
> symptoms..preventative means taking action to stop
> the initial indication of a problem.


i get the feeling that they were referring to getting appropriate medical treatment before a condition effects the person, like getting surgery to clear one's arteries before they have a heart attack. i also think you were arguing the same point but are now trying to change your view based on their statistical findings. additionally, the cancer survival chart is actually a decent indicator because one cannot prevent cancer, they can only detect it once it has occurred. in this case, early detection greatly increases the chances of survival.


here's a kitten:

file.php?40,file=27
"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."095042938540

Options: ReplyQuote


Your Name: 
Your Email (Optional): 
Subject: 
Attach a file
  • No file can be larger than 75 MB
  • All files together cannot be larger than 300 MB
  • 30 more file(s) can be attached to this message
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **    **  ********   ********  **    **  **     ** 
  **  **   **     **  **        ***   **  **     ** 
   ****    **     **  **        ****  **  **     ** 
    **     ********   ******    ** ** **  ********* 
    **     **     **  **        **  ****  **     ** 
    **     **     **  **        **   ***  **     ** 
    **     ********   ********  **    **  **     ** 
This forum powered by Phorum.