And if I...

Post #64,637 by bepatient 11/23/02 12:21:51 PM Reply	And if I... ...break into a store and slip on a wet floor, breaking my leg...(running to evade the police, mind you)...I should be able to sue the store owner...after all..they created a dangerous condition by not posting "wet floor" signs. All stores...in order to avoid multi-million dollars suits...should sell only lukewarm coffee. I have to be told...with big annoying labels...not to use my hairdryer in the shower...because stupid people may get rich by suing. Doctors are quitting their practices in large numbers...because they can no longer afford their insurance premiums. But we don't need tort reform because Ford is bad! Jack Welch is evil and GW likes the idea. Oh well. Lemme go get rich by falling off that chair now. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #64,663 by wharris2 11/23/02 7:59:53 PM Reply	Ooooh! falling off chair The chair I'm sitting on didn't come with a warning label about falling....
Post #64,667 by Ashton 11/23/02 8:57:11 PM Reply	Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much with them strident examples. (BTW, the urban myth surrounding that woman who needed skin grafts from McD rilly Fucking-hot burns, as would have scarred her lips in any event.. is a typical one to cite. It was Waay past "hot coffee" Bzzzt.) The same attorneys would prosecute any cases after tort reform too. We can't order new ones. Confusing the mechanics with the ingrained cupidity of the populace (who merely echo the larger cupidity-example of the elite) in using the courts to obtain wealth? Gambling! Here!? I'm Shocked!! Disingenuous, that. More of, "even the rich are forbidden to steal bread and sleep under bridges", looks like. Like the lottery, the only hope for Riches at the bottom-rung is - using the techniques of the ones at the top-rung. Ya gotta problem with that? Of course the entire Utopian idea here, is fatally flawed. Nobody in power [except G Washington.. so far?] voluntarily relinquishes same without a fight - today the fight will be via the ever-so-effective one of dissembling with the language of slogans. Corrupted language guarantees no forward movement. Reform? pipe-dream that, short of actual revolution in the streets. ZZzzzz - such ideas as this screed merely evoke false hope and further the illusion of possessing / being possessed by a government of the people, by the people and for the people! Which 'people'? Ashton PS Ford Is bad (their cars suck -xmissions break at <50K repeatedly. Plastic interiors look like shit after 3 years). Oh.. you mean its Leader! He builds 'em that way. Message kinda like Windoze - fixed in the next upgrade. (Now my former 25 yo Saab..) Jack Welch isn't evul - merely unprincipled except at maximizing personal aggrandizement. ANd speaking in TLAs. His other mediocre activities are quite subordinate to that, and it shows. What GW likes.. is folks like GW (and Prescott). He feels-for the lower 25% about as much as he felt-for 100% of the Texas prisoners: "there are no undetected errors" in our System. HTH Ashton, retortically All folks are created politically equal. Some folks are much more equal than others, after adjustments are made. What's to misunderappreciate there?
Post #64,668 by boxley 11/23/02 9:08:00 PM Reply	sorry about you perception of Fords my e150 has 234k miles transmission replaced at 150k miles and the timing chain done 10k miles ago is the first time the motor has been worked on. 2 lincolns in the 200k range and at 194k the tranny fell out. A friend of mine had a whine, bi annual rebuilds, after replacing the door handle for the umph time at big bucks per hr, I grabbed it and closed the door it came off in my hand. A vehicle fit for the demolition derby was about it. He let it rust in his driveway cause he couldnt afford to keep fixing it. It was his Yuppie dream, and ended as his nightmare. Next vehicle was a ford dually crewcab. Still driving it 8 years later with no problems. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] GRAYBOAR-Strangleur Extraodinaire "Have Thumbs Will Travel" Customised Asphyxiations No Gullet Too Big, No Weasand Too small My Motto Satisfaction Garoteed, or the Chokes on Me! Eric Flint
Post #64,670 by bepatient 11/23/02 10:28:42 PM Reply	Methinks you missed the important one... ...[link\|http://www.ama-assn.org/sci-pubs/amnews/pick_02/prsb0128.htm\|but maybe you don't care?] You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #64,673 by a6l6e6x 11/23/02 10:51:51 PM Reply	No problem if the commune's infirmary is used. :) One cannot sue the State! Alex "Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these."\t-- Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18)
Post #64,677 by boxley 11/23/02 11:54:50 PM Reply	very simple solution since HMO's dont pay docs squat. Have the docs who usually have 80% HMO and medicare type patients turn over the liability of their actions to the HMO's who tell them what kind of care to give. I will accept your cheapass HMO reimbursement as long as the contract indicates any suit by a patient of YOURS is covered by YOU. Problem solved by capitalism at its best. Since HMO's cannot be sued per Federal banning of the constitution all medical increases should be lowered. Please hold your breath until this happens and we will notify any survivors of any legal decisions in your favor. thanx, bill thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] GRAYBOAR-Strangleur Extraodinaire "Have Thumbs Will Travel" Customised Asphyxiations No Gullet Too Big, No Weasand Too small My Motto Satisfaction Garoteed, or the Chokes on Me! Eric Flint
Post #64,890 by jb4 11/25/02 9:44:15 AM Reply	I LIKE it! Nicely done, Bill! jb4 "They lead. They don't manage. The carrot always wins over the stick. Ask your horse. You can lead your horse to water, but you can't manage him to drink." Richard Kerr, United Technologies Corporation, 1990
Post #64,680 by Ashton 11/24/02 1:37:00 AM Reply	Non seq.___ You mean: all and Everything ?? Could be - I didn't see that link before. Should I have? And what do you suppose is the largest point of this little vignette? Surely Not.. just about those awful lawyers !? I see YAN predictable stage, is all. Let's see: The legal system. The medical system. The educational system. The purchase of government via moneyed interests. Do you think there might be any synergy here at all? Think that, piecemeal and over a dozen years or so.. any One of these categories will receive actually honest examination and reform? A national epiphany perhaps.. The entire medical system is incestuously broken beyond any piecemeal patches IMO. Not even 100 new slogans or LBOs will suffice next. Mix-in lawsuits VS the incidence of shoddy work: guaranteed by the AMA self- nonpolicing of egregious reoffenders. Fox/Henhouse. Toss in the funding via.. the workplace? - now desperately trying to shed human 'commodity-liabilities' ?? (Then school funding via.. real estate taxes? - another whole thread.) Imagine if the intermediaries - insurance Co.s, lawyers for and against, all the other succubi - were eliminated. (Of course the unintended consequences too - many of these would have to seek honest work, in an environment preferring machine replacements wherever possible) Single-payer at very least, but how? here. Minimal health care for all, but how? here. Why should this be a by-product of the Corp employed? Have we nothing to learn from the other rich countries, who appear to be measurably less greed besotted than we? Maybe that IS the key for us - in many Problem areas we never dare to address seriously. Ah yes - Free Enterprise. Great shibboleth, and with the same level of QC / oversight as M$? And the same anti-trust enforcement as now? And via the same sloganeering - in lieu of actual debate? Today we have insur. Cos. each trying to bid for the "young, healthy, norisk" / eliminate all classes less profitable. Why not? it's what for-profit Means. What a great idea to run health care the same way as Bonnie's Bra Sales. Sheer genius, that. Babbit lives. "Socialized medicine" we shall hear by every ox being gored. Hah: VS Zero Medicine for the lowest 25%.. left to very expensive and ineffectual emergency room drop-ins, almost nonexistant basic preventive clinics for the same untouchable caste! Etc. And there are hundreds of points I've heard enumerated over decades. This isn't even a 'summary'. Too large a reorg to imagine. Leaving out those legions of well paid 10+ percenters / all those votes.. in the political eye - guarantees nothing but more band-aids until it all crashes. (state by state? hospital by hospital?) Forgive my having no solution to this $T/yr ongoing fiasco. I'm aware of some of the trade-offs which other rich countries have made. Far as I can tell - the US has the most advanced trauma centers of all time. Great for (some) car-crash mayhem. After that, and as regards infant mortality, general health care and the popular PDR nostrums surrounding that -- we vary from acceptable to much less. In many areas we pay the highest for the least overall performance. You know that. 'Med' here is broken on as large a scale as M$ source code: unfathomable by any single human. I don't think we can move far enough away from personal greed to even begin reassessment - so I don't waste energy imagining it. Where I can (mostly, so far) I avoid contact with it. I can't afford to become really sick, in America. (Hospitals are main sources of Hep-C and other resistant strains nowadays) I don't believe we have the guts to even speak plainly about just how broken the system is (even leaving aside the larger issue re "allopathic medicine" as an approach to maintaining health. But when you leave That issue aside: you guarantee more of the same at hugely unnecessary cost. The evidence is everywhere - outside of the US. Seems another religious thing, that.) Ashton Umm.. we could grow up? ..if the asteroid WERE COMING: then we'd have to, no?
Post #64,698 by Brandioch 11/24/02 3:57:01 AM Reply	I don't see any problem at all. Isn't this supposed to be what the "free market" does? You can't have "socialized medicine" because this is the "free market". If a certain state isn't treating the doctors right, then the doctors will leave to find a more agreable state. If the people in a certain state can't find any doctors, then they will leave, also. I thought this was a "good thing" under the "free market". I thought that this was how the "free market" operated. I don't believe we have the guts to even speak plainly about just how broken the system is (even leaving aside the larger issue re "allopathic medicine" as an approach to maintaining health. But when you leave That issue aside: you guarantee more of the same at hugely unnecessary cost. The evidence is everywhere - outside of the US. Seems another religious thing, that.) Some of us do. Others will just retreat to attempted pithy retorts. The simple fact of the matter is that when you apply "free market" "logic" to a situation, you get "free market" results. Those results have "good" factors and "bad" factors. One of those "good" factors in the medical situation is that we have the BEST care in the world. One of those "bad" factors in the medical situation is that we have a huge chunk of people who cannot afford ANY care. I see people are, as always, in favour of the "free market" until its brutality is turned on one of their oxen. "We, the legislature, must protect these poor, helpless DOCTORS from the rapacity of the PEOPLE!"
Post #64,730 by tuberculosis 11/24/02 7:41:36 AM Reply	But you don't have the BEST care in the world. Not really. The US produces the best health care technology in the world I think. But it doesn't make it available to its people in any meaningful way. In fact, you're being gouged. One thing I notice in France is that pharmaceuticals are about 1/4 the cost of what they are in the US - and I pay full price here. The average life expectancy of the US isn't number 1, its not even in the top 40. Its 42, behind the Cayman Islands, France, and Israel. Ditto for infant mortality. * If you want to claim to be ruled by free markets then fine - be ruled by them. But don't use the legal system to punish bad doctors. Because its inconsitent and anti-free market. If a doctor is bad, then don't spend your money there. But don't allow big money lawsuits because those interfere with the operation of the market. Source: [link\|http://www.os-connect.com/pop/\|http://www.os-connect.com/pop/] I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #64,749 by Brandioch 11/24/02 12:05:01 PM Reply	If you have the money, the best treatment is in the US. We have the cutting edge technology. We have the best research. If anyone can cure you, we can. But it will COST you. A lot. But the health care curve hits zero way before the population curve hits zero. That means that, below a certain cash level, you get WORSE care (even NO care) in the US than in many other countries. The average life expectancy of the US isn't number 1, its not even in the top 40. Its 42, behind the Cayman Islands, France, and Israel. Ditto for infant mortality. * Yep, the AVERAGE is worse than the AVERAGE in other countries. That's because the average combines the top care with those masses receiving no care. But don't use the legal system to punish bad doctors. But the legal system is also "free market". Doctors have, traditionally, had a LOT of money. So the lawyers were happy to sue them (for a percentage of the award, naturally). But don't allow big money lawsuits because those interfere with the operation of the market. How?
Post #64,754 by tuberculosis 11/24/02 12:44:31 PM Reply	How?!?! WHO MAKES THE LAWS THAT ARE USED IN THE COURTS? The court system is the gov. What part of the court system is determined by the free markets? None. Its total interference. Eliminate the courts - close em up. The ONLY consequences of incompetence should be lost business. That would be a free market principle. Government intervention (legal system) means its not really a free market - it has a degree of oversight via this artificial mechanism that has nothing to do with market driven forces. So maybe you want to explain to me - how is having laws that allow for pricey frivolous lawsuits that bankrupt suppliers related to a free market system? I'll stick with my refutation of your statement that the US has the best health care in the world. Techology is only part of health care. Frankly, its the only place the US might have an edge (not a large one) and the fail so miserably on all other counts that its criminal. (Go and interview as many rich women as you like who have had babies in both the US and France and you'll find that their money didn't buy them better care in the US - my wife has already performed this exercise and its really quite eye-opening). I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #64,771 by bepatient 11/24/02 3:14:41 PM Reply	Don't bother them with minor details... ...like that, Todd. It'll interfere with their belief in what the "free market" really is. Of course, in a "free market" there would be no laws at all about governance over business. And that really has >no impact< on frivolous lawsuits anyway. Lets say a doctor does make a mistake...sue the doctor for everything >he< is worth...that being the limit. But thats not how it works. How about, sue >the doctor< for reasonable losses and costs. Wouldn't that be nice. But its all "free market"...just ask the experts. How about, sue the doctor's insurance company, the building owner, and all of the other perceived "deep pockets" for an amout that bears no resemblance to actual loss or harm...and have the 12 people not too busy to avoid jury duty award you 75 million for pain and suffering...after all...you deserve to be reclassified into one of the top 2% of the population (until they realize now that you are rich...then they will want to penalize you for your success...but thats another story for another day). Its the never ending cycle. And they seem to miss the fact that these lawsuits are a one of the reasons why healthcare costs are so high in the first place. But its simple. Nationalize healthcare. That'll solve everything...after all...you can't sue the government...take away all of the rights...instead of just trying to intorduce a little reality into the system. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #64,776 by Brandioch 11/24/02 4:07:20 PM Reply	Whatever. I'll stick with my refutation of your statement that the US has the best health care in the world. Fine. Assume I have cancer and $10 million. The doctors in the USofA can sell me a treatment. Here is the Question: What other nation has doctors that could provide me with BETTER treatment given that I have cancer and $10 million to spend on treatment? If there isn't anyplace with BETTER treatment, then I have identified the nation with the BEST treatment. A simple question that could be answered with only the name of the nation capable of providing me with BETTER care than the USofA. Now, please provide an answer to that question. Your problem is that you don't understand the difference between "average" and "best". The "average" care in the USofA is below the "average" care received in many other countries. This does not mean that the BEST care is not to be found in the USofA. So maybe you want to explain to me - how is having laws that allow for pricey frivolous lawsuits that bankrupt suppliers related to a free market system? Okay, the first point, we do NOT have a free market system. That is why I put ->" around "free market". Don't believe me? But the legal system is also "free market". Doctors have, traditionally, had a LOT of money. So the lawyers were happy to sue them (for a percentage of the award, naturally). -and- Isn't this supposed to be what the "free market" does? -and- You can't have "socialized medicine" because this is the "free market". -and- I thought this was a "good thing" under the "free market". -and- I thought that this was how the "free market" operated. -and- The simple fact of the matter is that when you apply "free market" "logic" to a situation, you get "free market" results. I find it amazing how some people manage to miss something, no matter how many times it is repeated. We have contracts. Failure to provide the service agreed upon is legally actionable. Have I lost you yet? Point 2. We have lawyers. These lawyers are looking for ways to maximize their income. These lawyers look for the concentrations of income and evaluate their subjectability to lawsuits (lawsuits being the lawyers product). That is "free market" thinking. (Please note the use of ->") You find a need and you service it. You have a product and you sell it. etc. So, the lawyers are good at their job. They get large awards for their clients. This is a "free market" success. The doctors lose lots of money when they make mistakes. This is a "free market" success. If the doctors did not make mistakes, then the doctors would not lose money. Isn't that correct? So, the "free market" punishes those who make mistakes and rewards those who do not make mistakes. Once again, the free market does not exist. It assumes perfect knowledge on the part of all participants.
Post #64,807 by Ashton 11/24/02 7:57:28 PM Reply	Best technology - wildly variable 'medicine'. It would be another thread to explore, but - the 3 Basic Means of cancer treatment here are surgery, radiation and poisoning (hoping.. that an alrady broken immune system + liver can recover somehow: if the cancer cells are poisoned a bit faster). Often neither 'works' - but by then the immune system is incapable of benefiting from less DRASTIC and less simplistically-targetted 'solutions'. Those who survive chemo - never recover full functionality of the liver, nor complete restoration of the immune system. "5 year survival" is the norm for a 'successful cancer event' (for the stats). Restoration of "robust health!" is not even on the menu. Ask a few survivors.. There are other approaches to the big-C Question, and many of these require a change in attitude re the idea of the words "cure" and "treating of symptoms". Since this is a topic too close to 'All and Everything' I demor in trying for some simplistic summary. In my experience of the system (including working with MDs in so-called 'research') I believe we generally provide treatments which vary greatly across the range of helping - ineffectual - hurting, believe it established that many of the 'procedures' are flawed and often performed carelessly.. on through downright stupidly. Allopathy is taken as a religion in the US. Most here are ignorant of there even being useful alternatives. In other rich countries - it is only one philosophical approach of many available, for the prevention of dis-ease and for maintaining 'wellness'. We do a LOUSY job of maintaining wellness; it isn't even how US Drs. have thought of selves since the first.. though some new awareness is today slowly creeping into this dinosaur that is the AMA and its Bible, the PDR. We Love farm-chem because it's so instantly gratifying - at suppressing the symptoms of something (Else?) and we don't have to think or change any habits. Perfect! for Muricans.. no? IMhO You don't get the 'Best', most appropriate attention to your dis-ease in the US unless you know pretty Much via your own research, and you won't get much-of-that-Much! by ploppping in the waiting room and then saying, "Doctor please fix it - don't bother me with the details." Caveat emptor was INVENTED re the sordid history of 'medicine'. ER shall still remain Popular of course - whatever the mortality figures actually are: John Wayne in a smock redux. So much for the short-form, Ashton who has reliably eschewed AMA medicine since first achieving a form of sentience. (They do great stitches though, and sew arms back on Beautifully. Hit a truck? See one of the good US trauma wards == The Best Yet.) Patience and tranquility of mind contribute more to cure our distempers as the whole art of medicine. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
Post #64,813 by Brandioch 11/24/02 9:52:05 PM Reply	It's in our culture. We do a LOUSY job of maintaining wellness; it isn't even how US Drs. have thought of selves since the first.. though some new awareness is today slowly creeping into this dinosaur that is the AMA and its Bible, the PDR. We Love farm-chem because it's so instantly gratifying - at suppressing the symptoms of something (Else?) and we don't have to think or change any habits. Perfect! for Muricans.. no? Everything we (as a nation) do is instant gratification and short-term thinking. There's money in selling burgers. There's money in selling cigarettes. There's money in selling bypass surgery. There's not much money to be made in selling a healthy life. Cancer might not have been the best example above. I should have used a car wreck, instead.
Post #64,863 by ben_tilly 11/25/02 7:09:54 AM Reply	It is in our culture even more than that After you get beyond a fairly low per capita income, one of the biggest known factors on life expectancy is how little income disparity there is. The US, of course, has made a religion out of the value of allowing huge disparities to thrive... Random link from Google on this. [link\|http://depts.washington.edu/eqhlth/\|http://depts.washington.edu/eqhlth/] Cheers, Ben "Career politicians are inherently untrustworthy; if it spends its life buzzing around the outhouse, it\ufffds probably a fly." - [link\|http://www.nationalinterest.org/issues/58/Mead.html\|Walter Mead]
Post #64,856 by tuberculosis 11/25/02 4:59:02 AM Reply	Extreme case and show a US bias towards health care thinking already. Your premise begins "I'm in really bad health - time for extreme measures" is already too narrow of a definition of health care. Others have already pointed this out. But lets take a different view - you say you have $10 million. You have life threatening cancer? Probably - because the early detection system in the US is weak. So you, and many more like you need extreme treatment to compensate for your inadequate health care. Now you get to have your bank account drained - experience many terribly painful procedures, and probably have a much lower liklihood of recovery at all - just because you had crappy health care that got you into this state in the first place. Its systemic. Right now, if I wake up with the flu, I can dial a phone number and a doctor will come to my house this afternoon. I'll pay $60 for this visit and the medication will cost 1/4 what it will cost you sans insurance. If I'm not so bad, he'll meet me at my office. Can you even get this in the US - at any price? I don't think so. The US needs heroic capabilities because the US has crap health care. And even then, the success rate is lower than it would be with less amazing technology and better care. As a sailor I'd prefer to have good navigation to good salvage services available. The US only has good salvage. The navigation services are sketchy. I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #64,873 by Brandioch 11/25/02 8:29:21 AM Reply	Since you were unable to answer the question... My position that the US has the best health care seems to be sustained. Otherwise, you'd be able to name a country with better health care.
Post #64,893 by boxley 11/25/02 10:05:29 AM Reply	Mexico will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] GRAYBOAR-Strangleur Extraodinaire "Have Thumbs Will Travel" Customised Asphyxiations No Gullet Too Big, No Weasand Too small My Motto Satisfaction Garoteed, or the Chokes on Me! Eric Flint
Post #64,900 by tuberculosis 11/25/02 11:03:50 AM Reply	Nope - 97. I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #64,896 by tuberculosis 11/25/02 10:47:04 AM Reply	Did you not look at the link in my first article? The one that points to world stats on life expectancy and infant mortality gathered by the US government? Because other than that - I don't know how else you can determine what is best objectively. You can never say "if you'd had that cancer in France, you'd be dead now" or "he'd have made it if he were in the US". Because you just never know. The only objective way to tell who has the best care is to see how often the care fails. Still, since you can't be bothered to click - the longest living people in the world are in: \nAndorra\nMacau S.A.R.\nSan Marino\nJapan\nSingapore\nAustralia\nGuernsey\nSwitzerland\nSweden\nHong Kong S.A.R.\nCanada\nIceland\nItaly\nGibraltar\nCayman Islands\nMonaco\nLiechtenstein\nSpain\nFrance\nNorway \nIsrael\nJersey\nGreece\nFaroe Islands\nAruba\nNetherlands\nMartinique\nVirgin Islands\nMontserrat\nMalta\nNew Zealand\nBelgium\nGuam\nAustria\nUnited Kingdom\nSaint Pierre and Miquelon\nMan, Isle of\nGermany\nFinland\nJordan\nLuxembourg\n I'd also like to point out that Cuba is within a hundredth of a percentage point of the good ole USA. Brilliant, huh. Seems they achieve their results by making sure they provide care early rather than wait until its almost too late and then spending the big bucks. Thanks, but I'll prefer care in any of these countries over US crisis managed care every single time. Unless you have a better statistic to show how US technology keeps more people alive longer somewhere..... I thought not. I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #64,996 by Brandioch 11/25/02 7:14:51 PM Reply	I didn't say that. Unless you have a better statistic to show how US technology keeps more people alive longer somewhere..... I didn't say that. I said the US had the BEST. Not that it provided good care for the MOST PEOPLE. You keep reading "average" when I say "best". When I give an example of a single person with lots of money... You read "entire population". Let me try to chop this up into easily understood chunks for you. Two nations. Each with 100 people. Nation A has 100 coconuts. Each person has one. Nation B has 1000 coconuts. But 999 are owned by 10 of the people and the last coconut is shared between the other 90 people. I say that Nation B has more coconuts. You say that the people in Nation A have more coconuts. Welcome to the real world.
Post #65,011 by boxley 11/25/02 8:11:32 PM Reply	and he whines when I do that :0 will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] GRAYBOAR-Strangleur Extraodinaire "Have Thumbs Will Travel" Customised Asphyxiations No Gullet Too Big, No Weasand Too small My Motto Satisfaction Garoteed, or the Chokes on Me! Eric Flint
Post #65,029 by Ashton 11/25/02 10:26:15 PM Reply	Afraid I'd have to quibble with 'best' in lots of contexts re American medicine overall. (Leave trauma out of it - that is largely mechanical repair and restoration of known chemical balances, etc. It's not about "retaining good health" generally -- though it IS bloody expensive and to an unnecessary excess, having to do with middlemen. But it is unarguably: the Best trauma care ever.. in certain big city teaching hospitals) Even with your $10 M / and cancer: whether or not surgery, radiation or chemo IS the cleverest, most efficatious treatment for You, next? - that's the sole agenda. Anything not in 'preferred treatment' in the PDR - guaranteed lawsuit territory. And an arsenal of techno- is no match for a wise approach to the entire body: before problems reach a critical stage. (D'Oh) AMA operates a lot like the drones forever enshrined in infamy, via Andy's deathless observation Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way. So his incisive self-evidently True comment about our herd instinct.. proves applicable quite beyond IT. People who have other promising ideas are often forced offshore (sooner or later) via the pressure to handle all patients exactly according to the Big 3 "procedures". As most patients are even more ignorant of options than their Doctor.. it's Door A, B or C. Within this stifling milieu, much remains mediocre. Until past ~10 years AMA has been actively hostile towards even consenting to look at other countries' records (including overall mortality!) and specifically - approaches to cancer. [link\|http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/06/04/health/main511070.shtml\| Taxol] is just one example of a natural product now proving to be a promising alternative to Big3 re breast cancer (at least that). This substance's use was delayed many years and after very much FUD from the farm-chem folks, from the first. It's about bizness. It always is, here. ANd Med is a >$T/yr. BIZNESS foremost. Natural substances are on NO interst - regardless of efficacy! - in our Corporate medicine - unless there is a patentable lock. There can't be one, if the substance may be used as found and with no reconfiguaration$ to create lock-in. Our habits transcend categories, we see. Expand the topic beyond 'cancer' and there is much else far from 'best' and, the existing 'comparative' stats can hardly be compared with: ideas we won't even look at, now can they? (I think of this as the parallel with quality re software. Quality is not even on the list (beyond 'barely adequate') - the research goes towards achieving lock-in and monopoly. But please to call it 'safety'.) Short form: I'd quibble a lot with any [unqualified] overall characterization of US Medicine as "The Best". (Even for the rich - who may not receive the Best treatment for an individual case: merely very attentive and expensive administration of what is offered.) Ashton
Post #65,107 by tuberculosis 11/26/02 9:01:47 AM 11/26/02 9:04:34 AM Reply	BEST by what measurement? Please cite source. I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns. Edited by tuberculosis Nov. 26, 2002, 09:04:34 AM EST Expand All History
Post #65,128 by Brandioch 11/26/02 10:23:01 AM Reply	No source needed. "Best" as is "you couldn't name any country that offered better".
Post #65,139 by bepatient 11/26/02 10:58:46 AM Reply	France. Refute it with facts. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,147 by boxley 11/26/02 11:07:11 AM Reply	He wouldnt reply to Mexico he doesnt have any facts will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] GRAYBOAR-Strangleur Extraodinaire "Have Thumbs Will Travel" Customised Asphyxiations No Gullet Too Big, No Weasand Too small My Motto Satisfaction Garoteed, or the Chokes on Me! Eric Flint
Post #65,150 by bepatient 11/26/02 11:12:59 AM Reply	Pick pick pick :-) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,188 by Brandioch 11/26/02 2:54:04 PM Reply	One more time. Are you saying that Mexico has better health care than the US?
Post #65,196 by Another Scott 11/26/02 3:44:08 PM Reply	Definitions and Metrics. Hi Brandioch and All, Until "better" and "health care" are defined, you folks are going to go round and round. It's not (just) a matter of average versus best particular outcome for a particular person. Average pre-natal care is statistically better in many other countries than in the US. But there are only a few countries that can have septuplets or even octuplets survive (for at least a while) and the US is one of them. Also, those who have nearly infinite resources (e.g. King Hussein of Jordan) commonly come to the US for terminal cancer care, etc. (though I don't know that we'd hear about it if they went to Switzerland instead). So it the US system bad or good? You can't know until the terms are defined. Somebody needs to pick a metric or few. How about: 1) Female life expectancy at [link\|http://www.bartleby.com/151/a29.html\|birth] in 2001 US = 80.05 y, UK = 80.66 y, France = 83.01 y, Switzerland = 82.76 y, Cuba = 78.94 y, Canada = 83.13 y, Finland = 81.36 y, China = 73.59 y, Australia = 82.87 y, Japan = 84.15 y, etc. 2) Life expectancy at 85 in the [link\|http://research.aarp.org/econ/b50_life_expectancy.pdf\|US] in 1997 (PDF) - 6.60 years. (I can't find any comparable data for other countries.) 3) The US ranks 24th according to the [link\|http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthylife.html\|WHO Healthy Life Expectancy] ranking of 2000 - Japan is 1st. Comparing those three figures would give some information about 1) the general nutrition/health of the young women in the population, 2) the ability of the health care system to keep the average elderly person alive, and 3) the ability of the society to prolong the general health of its citizens. Wouldn't that be a simple metric for comparing the US to other countries? At least there'd be something concrete to argue about then! :-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #65,223 by Brandioch 11/26/02 4:57:55 PM Reply	No, I think you've phrased it correctly. Average pre-natal care is statistically better in many other countries than in the US. Yep. But there are only a few countries that can have septuplets or even octuplets survive (for at least a while) and the US is one of them. Yep. Also, those who have nearly infinite resources (e.g. King Hussein of Jordan) commonly come to the US for terminal cancer care, etc. (though I don't know that we'd hear about it if they went to Switzerland instead). When you can afford to send the very best. But your examples go back to averages. And averages aren't a measure of what is best. When something goes wrong, and you have unlimited resources, where do you go? That is BEST.
Post #65,375 by tuberculosis 11/27/02 6:16:23 AM Reply	Silly definition of BEST "When something goes wrong, and you have unlimited resources, where do you go?" Hmm. Weird definition. Certainly it is not best for me. Nor is it (I suspect) for you. Our best bet would be to go somewhere where our resources would buy more care per Euro. Which is not US for anyone with limited resources (which is practically everybody). Technology is one thing - knowledge and know how are something else again. Illustrative joke follows: Man suffers from debilitating headaches and visits doctor after doctor - nothing seems to work - pills work for a short while but he can't function. Finally one doctor tells him there is a cure - but its rather drastic. The doctor concludes that his testicles are pressing against the base of his spine and causing the headaches. Being a crack surgeon, he recommends removal of the testicles. The guy is desperate and agrees. On the way back from the hospital, his head is clear for the first time in months and he's feeling sort of optimistic. He passes a fine clothing store and decides to get a new suit to celebrate. The guy in the store sizes him up by eyeball and says - you look like a 44 long - he grabs a jacket off the rack and guy slips it on. Its perfect! Pants? Sure - inseam is about a 34 he guesses, with a 36 waist - tries em on. Amazing - like custom made! Shirt? Yeah - perfect fit first time? Shoes? Why not - you look like an 11 - exactly so! The guy never guesses wrong. Finally he says - you've gone the whole way - how about some new underwear? "Great" the guys says - "I'd guess 38s". The guy smiles and shakes his head - nope, sorry, I take a 34. The salesman says that can't be right. But the guy insists - "I've worn a 34 since high school". Finally in exasperation the salesman says - "You can't wear a 34. A 34 would press your testicles hard up against the base of your spine and give you one HELL of a headache!" Its a silly joke, but it contains a grain of truth. The technology-focused doctor never thought about a lower tech solution. I suspect, that US doctors are all overly dependent on tech. Anyhow, if I'm terminally ill - the US is about last on my list of places to get treated. I'd rather go somewhere that won't bankrupt me while they kill me. I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #65,451 by Brandioch 11/27/02 11:52:46 AM Reply	No, that is the definition of "best". Not "what you can afford" which seems to be where you're heading with this. If you can't afford the best, it is still the best. Our best bet would be to go somewhere where our resources would buy more care per Euro. So, when WHAT YOU CAN AFFORD isn't good enough.... You go somewhere where you can afford BETTER treatment. Now, if you have UNLIMITED resources, then you are NOT limited by what you can afford.
Post #65,452 by bepatient 11/27/02 11:56:50 AM Reply	Hardly. That is a definition of "best" in crisis intervention only. Wouldn't it be >better< to not allow the healthcare issues get to that crisis? You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,456 by tuberculosis 11/27/02 12:30:42 PM Reply	All parts of the elephant But I grow weary - his definitions is wacked and I can't help him apparently. I'm sure the view from his side of the argument is equally frustrating. I (and you I think) take the position that the best care would keep a scratch from turning into massive sepsis by effective use of low tech (and cheap) means (basic cleansing, clean dressings, observation). This is the best outcome and hence the best care. His view is, once you've got massive sepsis, the US doctors are more likely to pull you back from the brink of death (most likely with amputation of the affected limb, fancy blood filters, and extensive and elaborate drug regimes) than anyone else. I don't call that good care though and its only a tiny part of the picture. At one single data point, there is a spike in the graph. If you are really screwed up, certain stars might be able to do better than anyone else. I think its fallacious though. If Michael Jordan came to France to play basketball professionally, does that mean that France is now the best in basketball because he brings a million coconuts with him? Er.... you know what I mean. So I think this argument is exhausted and we just don't agree on what "best" is. Next topic. I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #65,554 by Brandioch 11/27/02 7:32:13 PM Reply	Because my definition does not agree with your opinion.... When you start calculating the AVERAGE of anything, then you're taking the AVERAGE. Average life expectency, etc. The average is not the best. You can have the highest average. But that isn't the best.
Post #65,581 by Silverlock 11/27/02 11:41:23 PM Reply	Lighten up The US's health system may have the "best" in some areas. Not all. Stop trying to infer that since we have the best in some aspect, we have the best in all. A cheap rhetorical device. Why should we ask our military to die for cheap oil when the rest of us aren't even being asked to get better mileage? -[link\|http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=14107\|Molly Ivins]
Post #65,586 by boxley 11/27/02 11:55:42 PM Reply	never let a cheap rhetorical device hold you back :-) will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] Opera was the television of the nineteenth century:loud, vulgar and garish with plots that could only be called infantile. "Pendergast"
Post #65,623 by bepatient 11/28/02 11:23:31 AM Reply	He never does ;-) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,239 by boxley 11/26/02 7:15:03 PM Reply	yes will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] GRAYBOAR-Strangleur Extraodinaire "Have Thumbs Will Travel" Customised Asphyxiations No Gullet Too Big, No Weasand Too small My Motto Satisfaction Garoteed, or the Chokes on Me! Eric Flint
Post #65,322 by Brandioch 11/27/02 12:08:22 AM Reply	And Mexico's equivalent to the Mayo Clinics is.....?
Post #65,328 by boxley 11/27/02 12:18:00 AM Reply	UNAM Mexico City where Americans go to do post grad tropical and cardiac, thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] GRAYBOAR-Strangleur Extraodinaire "Have Thumbs Will Travel" Customised Asphyxiations No Gullet Too Big, No Weasand Too small My Motto Satisfaction Garoteed, or the Chokes on Me! Eric Flint
Post #65,371 by Ashton 11/27/02 5:47:57 AM Reply	Heh - once 'made rounds' there complete with white coat, with one Dr. Sodi Pallares (isch\ufffdmic heart disease expert - met in connection with a trip with friend, to a TJ clinic). His bedside manner with an elderly patient was.. like the rumored old days here - before Corporate. I couldn't extrapolate from such little direct experience, of course - but that woman had little/no? money, and I liked what I observed elsewhere. This was over a decade ago - and ideas in his book weren't even being examined here. I checked, on return. (When you haven't money to burn - you Have to work smart. And like Mexican mechanics do, so apparently do the Doctors) Mex. mechanics actually know how to FIX things, how to improvise - not just keep putting in new parts until something sorta seems to work. (I know that too - via a Saab experience) Ashton Viva M\ufffdxico!
Post #65,555 by Brandioch 11/27/02 7:38:28 PM Reply	It looks good. But I'm not finding anything saying it is the best. Got any references?
Post #65,566 by boxley 11/27/02 8:30:01 PM Reply	Its your assertion, you support it. What country developed and did the first heart transplant? What country pioneered lasik and showed us how to do it? What nationality are most american emergency room docs? Who developed xray technology? where can I get lasik for 350USD per eye including hotel stay? who has the most money for r&d in medical technology? The US. One out of 5 aint bad. etc, thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] GRAYBOAR-Strangleur Extraodinaire "Have Thumbs Will Travel" Customised Asphyxiations No Gullet Too Big, No Weasand Too small My Motto Satisfaction Garoteed, or the Chokes on Me! Eric Flint
Post #64,905 by bluke 11/25/02 11:22:38 AM Reply	Price of drugs outside the US US customers subsidize drug research for the rest of the world. In countries like France drug prices are regulated. Drug research costs a fortune, the US market is the only one that is willing to pay for it.
Post #64,907 by bluke 11/25/02 11:30:11 AM Reply	Sure does for those who can afford it Why is it that ailing 3rd world leaders (King Hussein of Jordan comes to mind), tycoons, etc. come to the US for treatment? Because the US offers the most advanced care possible. As others have pointed out, the averages in the US are not great because you have a large percentage of the population with no health insurance and therefore substandard care.
Post #65,016 by Brandioch 11/25/02 9:01:37 PM Reply	Exactly. We have the BEST care available. Just because it is not AFFORDABLE for everyone does not make it any worse. Now, many other nations will dole out care that is LESS than the BEST, but dole it out to 100% of their population. So, the portion in the US that cannot afford ANY care would, in those other countries, get BETTER care than they would in the US. But, while that care would be BETTER than what they had, it is still below the BEST care, which is in the US. Sheesh, you'd think people could understand none-better-best.
Post #65,101 by hnick 11/26/02 7:57:19 AM Reply	It's not an abstact quality, it's a commodity Health care is a commodity. It's purpose is (theoritically) to keep the populace healthy. If the populace can not access this health care for whatever reason, it is ineffectual. If it ineffectual, it is not the best. It's not even adaquate. Just because it won best-of-show for a couple things, trauma, specific surgical proceedures, come to mind, does not mean that it is adequate as a whole. If you want to argue that the purpose of health care is NOT to keep the populace healthy, you can argue by yourself.
Post #65,132 by Brandioch 11/26/02 10:42:25 AM Reply	Interesting. Health care is a commodity. It's purpose is (theoritically) to keep the populace healthy. Commodity: 1. Something useful that can be turned to commercial or other advantage: \ufffdLeft-handed, power-hitting third basemen are a rare commodity in the big leagues\ufffd (Steve Guiremand). 2. An article of trade or commerce, especially an agricultural or mining product that can be processed and resold. 3. Advantage; benefit. Somehow, I don't see "health care" coming under definitions #1 or #2. Maybe #3, but that includes anything not detrimental. If the populace can not access this health care for whatever reason, it is ineffectual. But they can. They can buy aspirin and cough syrup at any corner store. Just because it won best-of-show for a couple things, trauma, specific surgical proceedures, come to mind, does not mean that it is adequate as a whole. Again, "best" is not "average". If you want to argue that the purpose of health care is NOT to keep the populace healthy, you can argue by yourself. Cute. Anyway, back to the coconuts. Nation B has more coconuts. Because the majority of individuals in that nation have less coconut than the individuals in Nation A does not mean that Nation B has fewer coconuts. That is the flaw in your logic. You're trying to say that unless EVERYONE in a nation has the BEST health care, that nation does NOT have the BEST health care. So, Nation B does not have the most coconuts because everyone doesn't have more coconuts than everyone in Nation A. And that is the different between BEST and AVERAGE.
Post #65,247 by Ashton 11/26/02 7:40:30 PM Reply	Ok: try 'theoretical' VS actual; potential VS performance My point(s) would remain: the PDR-mandated 'procedures' are very often NOT the most efficacious ones known to mankind. And even these are withheld from an astonishingly vast number of citizens (not to even mention the many non-citizens - without whose labours we'd all have to learn what 'a day's Hard Work' means). We have the very Best of the known techniques: in a few specialties. In that I agree with Hugh's admirably brief summation. We also have much more disinformation than useable information re Why.. (say) our cancer rates are huge and increasing at alarming rates: that is, the rate-of-increase of breast cancer is just One of these runaway areas. This apart from: "how efficacious are the Big3 ONLY-solutions" dispensed here? That is a separate question from, how artfully these procedures are usually practised and how generally available. I believe that the lack of believable and solidly relevant Information about the peculiar conditions here: our ugly junk-food habits, our earlier laissez-faire attitudes toward megatons of Corp pollution dumping into rivers and groundwater everywhere.. bad info, massaged info.. all make difficult any sane assessment overall of, "how well our med system in fact meets the peculiar needs of Muricans". Today or at any period. So I return to the one-word issue of 'BEST' and demur. I say that 'good' is a reasonable adjective for maybe almost a majority of employed population, for most problems. 'Bad to nonexistent' is reasonable depiction re the poor, the uninsured / the growing army of Corp-created 'temps' and.. certainly all the many non-citizens. Trauma alone wins unqualified Best (and only in selected big-city orgs). Even the cancer treatment selected by foreign nabobs.. can be shown to be more about propaganda and dazzlement by technology: than a clear comprehension of that person's best chances. Very few MDs will honestly present (or know of!) a comprehensive list of alternatives - especially of any outside the PDR. Think Murican law + medical Corporate care here. (Fortunately there are still a few wise practitioners about - Russian roulette finding these. Crap shoot IMhO) Rest case. Ashton I suggest that, the more you work with/around MDs, the queasier you will become (especially when you catch their repartee in unguarded moments = the only Honest talk).
Post #65,251 by Brandioch 11/26/02 8:00:50 PM Reply	I agree.
Post #64,889 by jb4 11/25/02 9:39:48 AM Reply	I don't get your snideness Your idea of tort reform and the screed are not incompatible. I would have thought that you would embrace such ideas as part of the overall tort reform you so lavishly embrace. Oh...I forgot...In BeeP's world, victims bad, corps good... Really BeeP, what's so bad about having to live with the consequences of one's actions? Isn't that the crux of all your rantings about frivolous lawsuits in the firstplace: people should take responsibility for their actions? jb4 "They lead. They don't manage. The carrot always wins over the stick. Ask your horse. You can lead your horse to water, but you can't manage him to drink." Richard Kerr, United Technologies Corporation, 1990
Post #64,978 by bepatient 11/25/02 5:50:25 PM Reply	But they don't. Those who bring frivolous lawsuits bear no consequence. They pay nothing. Their lawyers, who convince them to sue bear no consequences. They pay nothing. We do, in taxes, to support their right to bring action....which, by the way, they should continue to have. Those involved are rarely, if ever, taking responsibility for their own actions. Think the guy who broke into the Montgomery Wards store and slipped might not have slipped had he been there when the store was >open for business<? Its not the fact that the lawsuits happen. Its the >ridiculous< levels of compensation that are awarded and the absolute inability of anyone to see that "contributory negligence"...a term that used to exist...does not any longer...so if you are stupid enough to use an electrical appliance in the shower and ge electrocuted...the manufacturer of that product should be completely responsible and pay you millions. (ummm...not) Where the danger lies is in medicine. If a doctor does not acheive perfection, then our system makes that doctor liable to be sued for 10s of millions of dollars. Who does this benefit? Insurance companies. Who does it penalize, the doctors and the patients (mostly those without access to insurance). So do you want to revise who the victims are? Oh...sorry...was I being to pro-corporate for your taste?...because rewarding idiocy somehow must be the perview of all economic endeavors? Take a look at who wins and who loses with your eyes open for once. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,014 by a6l6e6x 11/25/02 8:49:34 PM Reply	A sample web link. [link\|http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/04/08/health/main505592.shtml\|Doctors' Walkout In South Texas.] Doctors in the Rio Grande Valley are blaming skyrocketing medical malpractice insurance rates on the region's litigious climate and record of large jury awards. Alex "Let others praise ancient times; I am glad I was born in these."\t-- Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18)
Post #65,039 by Ashton 11/25/02 11:00:36 PM Reply	Rather nicely covered on 60 Minutes, last night. Still...... Including - the unintended consequences: Drs. fleeing, UPS trucks won't deliver. Not the whole story but - a good vignette. One woman gave an overview, from the visceral level.. ~ "it's about the only way any poor folks around here are ever gonna see any (money?)" Sure it's a scam - tell me again how it differs from Golden Parachutes, 'cancelled' personal loans and off-shore bank accounts. Two wrongs don't make a right? They may.. in unrestrained vulture capitalism. And WE know how to 'un r e s t r a i n' better than Anyone. Them l33T have been on a roll since the '80s - already got away with a few hundred bill. via the S&L test run. It worked! That money.. wasn't returned, just evanesced ?? though a sacrificial pigeon got a few years in Golf Prison. The money is NEVER returned! (Think anyone noticed?) C'mon beep - we be inherently a corrupt bunch; can't get Rich without it! We just talk so mellifluously about Truth Decency Responsibility that.. a few get suckered into believing that CIEIO actually meant it! (Not so often of late, though..) Ashton Would you buy a used Tempo from a guy who said, "I'm as honest as the CEO of __"? Well.. wouldja?
Post #65,100 by bepatient 11/26/02 7:53:26 AM Reply	But if I were to interpret.... ...your vast body of posts on the subject... Why would you want them to get rich...and put themselves in that top 2% of those evil bastards ;) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,248 by Ashton 11/26/02 7:46:03 PM Reply	New blood, and with real-life Experience, not just an MBA.
Post #65,259 by bepatient 11/26/02 8:39:18 PM Reply	I thought those were the ball players ;-) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,044 by Silverlock 11/25/02 11:18:25 PM Reply	Is abuse of tort that widespread? I truly hadn't realized that tort cases had become so overwhemlingly tilted in favor of the consumer. My perception of the news articles I've seen/read is somewhat different. The types of cases you refer to are in the minority. Those few that make it past an initial discovery hearing are sometimes in the news, but let's get real, the record of corps is in this area is a textbook example of venality. Without a realistic punishment for proven corporate "profit beats all other considerations" practices, how can we stop them from selling cars that explode on impact from the rear? (GM case you may have heard of. The internal memo said {paraphrased} "The lawsuits will cost us less than the recall"). Why should we ask our military to die for cheap oil when the rest of us aren't even being asked to get better mileage? -[link\|http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=14107\|Molly Ivins]
Post #65,061 by boxley 11/26/02 12:56:19 AM Reply	the issue I have on tort reform is class actions In Jupiter Florida we have a lawyer who has his own personal 747 to get to cases. My thinking is more power to him until I learn that as a ford owner I am part of a class that gets a settled $300.00 discount on a new vehicle if I register for the class and the attourneys get $300 million to split(amongst a lot of attourneys I imagine) Tort reform I would like to see is that class action suits upon winning one attourney fees are davis baconed instead of a split of the award. The lawyers would be paid an hourly rate and all expended fees and the "class" would get the award. Now this might limit lawyers wanting to gamble on big cases but not as much as you might think. If the case is egregious enough, a lawyer will take it. A quick spin into federal court when a class extends across state lines would stop Jury hunting as well. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] GRAYBOAR-Strangleur Extraodinaire "Have Thumbs Will Travel" Customised Asphyxiations No Gullet Too Big, No Weasand Too small My Motto Satisfaction Garoteed, or the Chokes on Me! Eric Flint
Post #65,075 by mhuber 11/26/02 1:53:42 AM Reply	My proposal for a reform: The lawyers take their share in the same form as the plaintiffs. Got this idea when I got a "settlement" from a BlockBuster Video lawsuit. No, I didn't file for it, it appeared on my receipt when I rented a video. Anyway, the settlement was a set of coupons, identical in form and value to those that the company was in the habit of giving out for promotional purposes anyway. So I got maybe $10 worth of "buy one get one free" that cost the company (assuming the older coupon strategy was not a mistake) literaly less than nothing (net) and I realized that some law firm was getting $5 worth of liquid currency for getting me that. A few weeks earlier I got a letter to the effect that a cruise ship company had overcharged me (as a member of a class) for docking fees or some such. I got, and my wife got, $25 coupons off the cost of our next cruise. Those coupons have expired - cruises are a luxury we can only afford once in a very long time, and $25 each doesn't shorten that time by much. But I'm sure the law firm got their 30% in a form they could deposit at the bank. Now, maybe if the lawyers got what the plaintiffs got, things would work out a bit differently. And the other reform: no closed court records except for blacking out very specificaly identified trade or personal secrets that do not materialy affect the outcome. ---- Whatever
Post #65,165 by jb4 11/26/02 1:08:36 PM Reply	Hey, I LIKE it! good idea...never pass our Corporate Senate, tho.... jb4 "They lead. They don't manage. The carrot always wins over the stick. Ask your horse. You can lead your horse to water, but you can't manage him to drink." Richard Kerr, United Technologies Corporation, 1990
Post #65,102 by bepatient 11/26/02 8:23:01 AM Reply	What you don't hear is worse... ....its the hundreds of spurious lawsuits that never make the courts. Easier and cheaper to defend by giving up. Insurance pays. Then they raise rates to continue to make profits. Lawyers get rich. Insurance companies get rich. Services get more expensive...so those who don't sue get hurt. I agree its a get rich quick mentality that is spurning it on...but the system fosters it by these idiotic rulings that make all the press. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,170 by mhuber 11/26/02 1:33:27 PM Reply	Aren't they mostly between insurance companies? Lots and lots of lawsuits are not some poor schmoe trying to get rich, but two or more insurance companies deciding which has to pay a valid claim. Your health insurance contract probably has a clause in it that could force you to file a lawsuit that you wouldn't consider reasonable, one of those slip and fall kinds of things. And let's not forget that a good many suits are really caused by the defendant ignoring responsibilities. ---- Whatever
Post #65,193 by bepatient 11/26/02 3:20:19 PM Reply	I'm not saying... ...there are no valid lawsuits. Only that >abuse< of the system has caused harm to more than just big corporations. This is why I tried to focus the argument on the healthcare industry. Ford deserved to pay millions for things like Pinto, Explorer et all. There was gross negligence involved. I would not consider these spurious lawsuits. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,164 by jb4 11/26/02 1:03:35 PM Reply	So how do you handle this? A doctor fucks up. They do that, you know. Now I don't know about you BeeP, but I believe that a doctor who fucks up (the implication of that verb, BTW, implies negligence, stupidity, arrogance, and/or less than one's best effort) should be held responsible...you know responsibility for one's actions. Now, why should a doctor who fucks up be indemnified from his/her actions? Because s/he is a doctor? Not hardly. And if the result of that action is a person in a persistent vegitative state, then the doctor should be responsible for "making that good" (insofar as that is possible). It could likely cost 10s of millions of dollars over that patient's lifetime to support him/her. (Especially given the cost of medical care that is rising exponentially exclusive of the cost of your so-called frivolous lawsuits.) Now, why isn't this patient entitled to those 10s of millions? Because the doctor is a doctor? Not hardly. How would you handle this scenario in your world? jb4 "They lead. They don't manage. The carrot always wins over the stick. Ask your horse. You can lead your horse to water, but you can't manage him to drink." Richard Kerr, United Technologies Corporation, 1990
Post #65,198 by bepatient 11/26/02 3:45:33 PM Reply	Valid claim And that person is entitled to that continuing care and that lawsuit would not be spurious. In other words...a good "reform" of the system would allow these claims to still be upheld. Reform is centered around non-economic damages. The damages you described are certainly economic damages. But...it seems that you think that I'm only out to protect the big, key corporate interests. Funny...I thought it might be nice to have a family doctor...instead of one appointed by the only people left that can afford to hire them...big corporations...so I'm finding your knee-jerk reaction to your "perception" of my position to be just on the other side of hysterical...let alone completely wrong. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,254 by Ashton 11/26/02 8:14:19 PM Reply	Yup - it's about Trust. There isn't any (much) left I don't believe we (as a society) have ever meant to face the underlying conflicts.. Recall when 'nurse' and 'teacher' were 'callings'? You expected to deliver endless and meticulous attention - and to be paid peanuts. Because (mostly then) you were a woman. Etc. Now 'we' have observed that Doctors are not gods; and not-only those, either. Have gotten off our knees - and are amidst the problem of distribution of largesse from the 'Left-eye cataracts-Only' surgeon, on down to the floor scrubber after the operation (I hear that in China the MDs clean up their own OR afterwards. Maybe sometimes humility is worth the price of a little inefficiency?) Anyway.. no wonder there shall be no consensus on where and how to extricate ourselves from the omnipresent Greed-demon, usually at the seat of all turf-wars. Now if next.. Greed were to be re-recognized as a human affliction and not the Meaning of Life, why - Ashton what would a Dictator do to Fix Things? (hmmm shall we see?)
Post #65,414 by jb4 11/27/02 9:58:57 AM Reply	Hysterical...? ...you ain't seen hysterical yet, buddy!!! ;-) (BTW, have a happy Thanksgiving, BeeP!. Looking forwared to sparring with you again after the holidays...) jb4 "They lead. They don't manage. The carrot always wins over the stick. Ask your horse. You can lead your horse to water, but you can't manage him to drink." Richard Kerr, United Technologies Corporation, 1990
Post #65,453 by bepatient 11/27/02 12:02:12 PM Reply	Hee hee.... ...sure I have...maybe not from you (yet)...but certainly I have. Happy Turkey backatcha! Like any good capitalist..I like mine cooked "golden" ;-) Hoo hoo haw haw ! /me picks himself off the floor...clutching sides before splitting :-) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #65,454 by jb4 11/27/02 12:18:38 PM Reply	smartass.... jb4 "They lead. They don't manage. The carrot always wins over the stick. Ask your horse. You can lead your horse to water, but you can't manage him to drink." Richard Kerr, United Technologies Corporation, 1990
Post #65,455 by bepatient 11/27/02 12:20:49 PM Reply	:-) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]

Welcome to IWETHEY!