I think you're right.

BUT....if it happens, the health insurance industry goes belly up overnight.

And there is way too much money involved for that and too many politicians in Washington D.C. lining their pockets with that money.

Fuck it...the best thing is to vote EVERYBODY out after one term and reset this thing. The President and every member of Congress and the Senate. One and DONE.

Right, because it's much better to waive doctors responsibility from any malpractice. Do you have any proof of this bullshit you spew?

Or even two and done. Career politicians are a problem, but you only exacerbate it with citizens united, special interests, lobbyists, etc... and you keep preaching in their favor instead of trying to cut them out at least, a little by little.

One of the reasons I voted for Obama was he swore once he was President that lobbyists would be OUT of Washington.

Instead he did a complete flip-flop and there are more lobbyists and special interest money in Washington, DC than EVER.
It's very, very disappointing to me.

I don't know that he even tried either, but I know a vote for Romney is in the wrong direction if that's what you're looking for. A spiteful vote against Obama for not getting it done already, isn't going to make it happen.

You need to tone that shit down a fucking notch and not act like a jackass toward me during a discussion.

If you want "proof" just ask your doctor if he is required by his very, very expensive malpractice insurance to run unnecessary tests that you don't really need.

And in case you haven't paid attention to past political debates on this subject...yes tort laws for medical malpractice needs to be reformed.

I never said that a doctor shouldn't have responsibility...but like so many things in our society, it went too far and drives up medical costs.

If you want to convince me, then show me some proof. Otherwise, I'm left to believe that you're making it all up. If you don't want to back up your statements, don't bother making them in the first place.

Maybe the insurance companies require certain tests or not, before they'll pay for procedures, etc... but that's something different.

The last time I applied for it, I was denied insurance. I have nothing wrong with me to my knowledge, and I can afford to pay for the health insurance. I had an undiagnosed issue when I saw the doctor, and he didn't know for sure if I had diverticulitis or not. My attorney had the same issue, because in the past X years he had taken statins briefly to lower his cholesterol. He no longer does, and doesn't have a cholesterol problem. The system is bullshit.

I have no way to convince you.

This has been a subject of debate for a long time in politics concerning health care costs. I could only assume that you would have heard that before. If not, then I can't convince you of it.

Believe what you want. I'm not trying to force you to think what I think. I'm just discussing what my experiences have told me.

I have a couple of buddies who are doctors and I listen to them as well on the subject. But again, I'm kinda shocked that anybody who keeps up with the news wouldn't be aware of the debate over tort reform that has went on for years.

So just disregard what I'm saying and if you want to think I'm just making it up (why I would make up shit like that I have no idea lol) that's your prerogative. :)

That doesn't have to be true. A single payer system that provides basic care for everyone... But that leaves plenty of room for supplemental insurance beyond the basics, it allows high end patients to hire the best doctors for cash if they choose, it leaves open a wide market for amenities and extras if people choose to purchase them. If a person has a heart attack they should get absolutely 'free' care paid for by government revenue. That doesn't mean they get a private room at the hospital, a fancy rehab facility, etc... Those things would all be extras covered by supplemental insurance or cash if people choose to pay for them. That's a very large market for private industry.. It just doesn't include billing people for necessary medical care, basic wellness, prenatal care, etc...

Wouldn't it be easy to find facts to support your statement? You made it as if it were a simple fact, easily proven.

Just use some common sense... if something goes wrong, the doctor could get sued, and if he does, he needs to be able to prove that he did everything "by the book", even though some test may have not really been required in this particular case...

It's called defensive medicine. If a doctor orders three times the number tests that are really necessary to diagnose a problem prior to choosing a course of treatment, he's far less likely to get sued in the event that something goes wrong.

Providing, of course, that the treatment he renders is consistent with what the tests indicate.

Think of those additional tests as additional witnesses testifying on behalf of the doctor in a court of law.

I don't want to make assumptions. I want factual studies that prove this is a recognized effect and the most important reason for higher medical costs.

use google for yourself. I'm not your slave. :pimp

"A total of 824 physicians (65%) completed the survey. Nearly all (93%) reported practicing defensive medicine. ?Assurance behavior? such as ordering tests, performing diagnostic procedures, and referring patients for consultation, was very common (92%). Among practitioners of defensive medicine who detailed their most recent defensive act, 43% reported using imaging technology in clinically unnecessary circumstances."

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article....ticleid=200994

India, Germany, England, Wales, etc..
"Malpractice lawsuits do not affect the delivery of health care in the countries included in this report, and are not a subject of controversy."
http://www.loc.gov/law/help/medical-...omparative.php

Sweet, I'll make all kinds of bullshit statements from now on and just use that statement as proof. "Google it, pimp!"

Remember I said it was a "debate" over tort reform. And like EVERY subject...insurance companies will subsidize studies to prove whatever point will make them the most money.

I said...it needs to be examined and reformed. Not completely stopped.

But every politician seems to be in the pocket of insurance companies...I hope you don't want me to "prove" that too, I can't.

" 79 percent said they had ordered more tests than they would have based only on professional judgment of what was medically needed, and 91 percent had noticed other physicians ordering more tests

74 percent had referred patients to specialists more often than they believed was medically necessary

51 percent had recommended invasive procedures such as biopsies to confirm diagnoses more often than they believed were medically necessary

41 percent said they had prescribed more medications, such as antibiotics, than they would have based only on their professional judgment, and 73 percent had noticed other doctors prescribing medications similarly"

http://www.aaos.org/news/bulletin/ja.../clinical2.asp

Public Citizen, a consumer group, used available data from the National Practitioner Data Bank (obtainable from the federal government) and reports that in 2011 medical malpractice claims reached a new low, in contrast to the continued rise in health care costs.
http://www.smillaw.com/blog/2012/08/...re-costs.shtml

So just google it for yourself then "pimp"

It's not my job to educate you. I'm just having a discussion with you. It's your job to get yourself up to speed.

No, and it's already off-topic as-is but if you think this Romney joker is the answer you're dead wrong. The lesser evil in this race is still Obama, unfortunately because none of the other candidates has a shot at it, neither Gary Johnson nor Jill Stein.

wtf does that report have to do with anything? We are discussing how doctors treat patients in the US, not in India or Canada....

"This report analyzes physicians? liability laws in Canada, England and Wales, Germany, and India, and reviews relevant national procedures and judicial rulings."

I'm still making my mind up over it and want to see the debates to make my decision. But if I don't see something that really makes me a believer...I think I'm going to vote for Johnson.

Tort reform is an essential part of any real health care reform. Right now if a doctor makes bad mistakes we charge him a financial penalty and then he goes right back to treating people. What should happen is real impartial review by a panel of experts... And unsafe doctors should lose their ability to practice medicine. The present system allows bad doctors to keep working and makes good doctors fear good lawyers. That drives up medical costs and helps nobody. Medical mistakes and medical incompetence are not the same thing. A four inch scar shouldn't be a lottery ticket, and a horrible doctor shouldn't be able to get back to work by paying off his last victim while stumbling toward the next one in their waiting room.

It analyzes medial malpractice suits vs healthcare costs, and not only that if our healthcare is supposedly anything like theirs or heading that way it is relevant.

Mazel tov.

I'm gonna need it. (if that's the meaning of that "Good luck")

Off to catch a film, back later.

toodles :)

Nah, Clinton was never unpopular; Gore blew that one big time. Because of Monica he wanted to distance himself. Worst decision ever. :2 cents:

How long should each debate last? 12 hours?

I didn't know that about Clinton. I guess it was just Gore and the DNC who made the mistake of distancing themselves because it looks like Clinton had the highest end of term approval rating of any president in history! I just looked it up and it surprised me because I remember how Gore and the Dems threw him under the bus in that election (and yeah, it was a HUGE mistake)

The debates should last as long as it takes. Why not? Most people don't even KNOW there are more than two candidates. I say let 'em all in! Let the American people decide.

That blowjob cost this country more than a trillion dollars.

The Dems totally mishandled it, and the Republicans stuck us with W as a result.

It was fucking shameful what the Republicans in Congress did to Clinton. :(

It was even more shameful what the Dems did. The republicans used it to their advantage as you'd expect, the Dems just laid there in the fetal position and took a beating by simply having no backbone.

I almost think the Dems did that on purpose because at the time they just didn't like Clinton anymore (maybe he wasn't "liberal" enough or something at the time?)

But the Republicans were just totally out of line. Especially Ken Starr throwing people in jail and not letting them out unless they would testify against the Clintons in the WhiteWater "investigation" (that went on for years)

It is the american way ... the freedom way ...

If you get hit by a car , you do not call first 911 , or your iinsurrance ...

You call a lawyer to sue ...

< hit in car ??? Call William Mattar : 444-444-4444 >

That medical malpractice tort reform has been debated for years and years is a "simple fact". That medical malpractice law suits has forced Doctors to order procedures that they may not have been ordered other than for fear of a medical malpractice law suit is "simple fact" That the prohibitive cost of insurance for doctors to protect themselves against a law suit has driven many doctors to give up their practice their chosen profession is a "simple fact". I am satisfied that you are aware of this.

There are well over two hundred candidates from the many political parties that are running for President.

Your lack of knowledge/stereotyping does nothing for you. :2 cents:

*sigh* but what do we hear from the right every time Single Payer is mentioned? (Limbaugh Voice) "It's SOCIALISM!!!!" dun dun dun.
FFS, of course it's the money...The "health" care industry spent over $500 Million lobbying last year:disgust

I don't care what you call it. It works well and costs a ton less. You know, a pragmatic solution. Imagine that. Unfortunately, the words "pragmatic" and "US Government" rarely appear in the same sentence these days.

No, it will change. And frankly, seeing how they (and Big "Health" in general) have been fucking us over, I doubt many people would shed a tear at seeing them knocked down a peg or five.

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...99339347_n.jpg

ADG

Doctors may use that excuse to order more tests but in reality its just a way to run up the bill. My mother was in the hospital for what she thought was pneumonia a few months ago and every 15 minutes someone else was coming into the room running a different test, shit that had nothing to do with why she was there. This went on pretty much all day. There was a lady in the room next to her who was also had pneumonia and I noticed no one had gone in her room all day, then around 2PM the ladies daughter stood in front of her door yelling at the nurses for ignoring her mom. Turned out this lady had no health insurance whereas my mother had medicare and supplemental insurance. They obviously werent worried about a lawsuit from that lady and they were obviously running every test that my mothers insurance would pay for.

Medical malpractice insurance and claims costs represent, at most, only 2 percent of overall health care spending in this country, according to both the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting Office.
http://makethemaccountable.com/myth/...eInsurance.htm

Why would my doctor order tests from a facility that does the tests in order to "run up the bill"?
My doctor doesn't make any money from some lab running a test.

Come on man...use your brains. If your doctor orders a test he doesn't make a dime off of it. He has no reason to order any tests other than he has to practice defensive medicine.

I thought he said he wasn't going to take lobbyist money. Either way, no president has the legal authority to shut down the lobbying industry single-handedly. Congress (and ultimately the supreme court) would have to go along with it too. In other words, no chance in hell.

Yea keep thinking that......

http://patients.about.com/od/followt...octortests.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/26/he...essa.html?_r=0

That first one is talking about tests a doctor does himself in his own office.

You aren't even talking about the same thing I am talking about. I'm referring to doctors sending you to a lab to have tests done (whether it's blood work, cat scans, etc.) that he does NOT do in his office.

My doctor here in Vegas is a friend of mine...and he's VERY good (saved Claudia's life twice in the last 3 years because he's so good at diagnosis). I know exactly why he does what he does with testing because he told me so. He doesn't make a penny off of the tests he has had us go to other facilities to have done. (he doesn't have a blood lab or cat scan machines,etc. in his offices)

The second story is a writer theorizing about how doctors send patients to their friends when testing facilities are needed. Duh. Of course they do.
Everybody sends business to the people they know and trust. Would you rather your doctor send you to someone he doesn't know and trust?

You're joking, right? Hospitals are there to make money, why the hell wouldn't they run as many tests as possible if they knew they were going to get paid? You think doctors are not greedy and honest? :1orglaugh

No I'm not joking. I thought we were talking about your doctor. Not a hospital visit.