Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Forum > Open Discussion
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Open Discussion Discuss Evidence of impending healthcare rationing at the General Forum; Originally Posted by saltwn I hear ya. That's what they want us to believe anyway. Don't worry be happy. So ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 11-21-2010, 12:05 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,071
Thanks: 1,599
Thanked 3,068 Times in 2,073 Posts
Default Re: Evidence of impending healthcare rationing

Quote:
Originally Posted by saltwn View Post
I hear ya. That's what they want us to believe anyway. Don't worry be happy.
So what countries health care plan are you shooting for? The USA has the best in the world yet you want to change it to some other model. We seem to be going for the failed EU or Canadian system and not really making ours any better. Is that what you were hoping for?
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 11-22-2010, 04:57 PM
Coyote's Avatar
Vole deMorte (the snack)
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 14,492
Thanks: 11,549
Thanked 8,279 Times in 5,306 Posts
Default Re: Evidence of impending healthcare rationing

Quote:
Originally Posted by saltwn View Post
History has shown companies will kill people-employees, consumers to make a profit. Drug companies are no different. It would be worth the legal fees and they would do some feel good campaign to cover up the abuse. I do not want an unregulated market.
The way a lot of companies - like drug companies - work to deal with adverse effects is with a cost/risk sort of ratio (I'm not sure if that is the right term).

Fen-Fen is a perfect example of this. If the risk of serious adverse effects can be kept hidden or manipulated to seem minimal, then they can circumvent certain labeling requirements and/or keep the drug on the market. It costs less to simply quietly pay off lawsuits without ever going to court then it would cost in loss of revenue, to pull the drug.

I absolutely do not want an unregulated food and drug market. I wonder if people have a clue what it used to be like before? You never knew what you were getting. Plaster of paris could be mixed with flour for example. Or, in another example I'm more familiar with - dog food. Dog food manufacturers used to be able to put anything in dog food that was remotely "protein" and label it as such, even if it had zero digestability (no nutritive value to the animal).
__________________

DISCLAIMER: Extreme amounts of sarcasm can possibly result in inflammatory situations. Not responsible for keyboard violence, spittle on the monitor, irrational responses mistaken for momentary brilliance, one-sided rages against hypocrisy or individual members or unintended consequences such as poor personal hygiene and bad spelling. Please fasten your seatbelts and put your trays in an upright position.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Coyote For This Useful Post:
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 11-22-2010, 04:59 PM
Coyote's Avatar
Vole deMorte (the snack)
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 14,492
Thanks: 11,549
Thanked 8,279 Times in 5,306 Posts
Default Re: Evidence of impending healthcare rationing

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
I'd love to see proof of that. I'd love to see proof that a company can successfully sell a drug for a long period of time that does nothing positive and kills most everyone who takes it.
That's an extreme example and not what you originally said. A company would not likely get away with something like that. But what about a drug that does some good, but causes damage in enough people to warrant FDA pulling it? People will still buy it - because the risk may still seem relatively low or, worse, they might not even be aware of it. Fen Fen is one example. Or Thalidomide. Copper salts in canned peas to make them bright green?

Ever read Upton Sinclair's books?
__________________

DISCLAIMER: Extreme amounts of sarcasm can possibly result in inflammatory situations. Not responsible for keyboard violence, spittle on the monitor, irrational responses mistaken for momentary brilliance, one-sided rages against hypocrisy or individual members or unintended consequences such as poor personal hygiene and bad spelling. Please fasten your seatbelts and put your trays in an upright position.

Last edited by Coyote; 11-22-2010 at 05:08 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Coyote For This Useful Post:
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 11-22-2010, 05:05 PM
Coyote's Avatar
Vole deMorte (the snack)
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 14,492
Thanks: 11,549
Thanked 8,279 Times in 5,306 Posts
Default Re: Evidence of impending healthcare rationing

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
As long as the patient knows the risks, that is THEIR choice, and not the choice of the government to say it's "too dangerous".
Not everyone is well educated in understanding risks, especially buried in fine print and obtuse language, and not every company is forthright about the level of risk.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: Extreme amounts of sarcasm can possibly result in inflammatory situations. Not responsible for keyboard violence, spittle on the monitor, irrational responses mistaken for momentary brilliance, one-sided rages against hypocrisy or individual members or unintended consequences such as poor personal hygiene and bad spelling. Please fasten your seatbelts and put your trays in an upright position.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Coyote For This Useful Post:
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 11-22-2010, 05:06 PM
Coyote's Avatar
Vole deMorte (the snack)
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 14,492
Thanks: 11,549
Thanked 8,279 Times in 5,306 Posts
Default Re: Evidence of impending healthcare rationing

Quote:
Originally Posted by AzMike View Post
So what countries health care plan are you shooting for? The USA has the best in the world yet you want to change it to some other model. We seem to be going for the failed EU or Canadian system and not really making ours any better. Is that what you were hoping for?
The USA does NOT have the best in the world.

Why do we have to copy another country? Every country is unique. We should be able to put together a health care plan that suits us and is better than what we had.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: Extreme amounts of sarcasm can possibly result in inflammatory situations. Not responsible for keyboard violence, spittle on the monitor, irrational responses mistaken for momentary brilliance, one-sided rages against hypocrisy or individual members or unintended consequences such as poor personal hygiene and bad spelling. Please fasten your seatbelts and put your trays in an upright position.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Coyote For This Useful Post:
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 11-22-2010, 07:11 PM
rivrrat's Avatar
Queen of Awesomeness
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Virginia
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,833
Thanks: 3,272
Thanked 10,473 Times in 6,022 Posts
Default Re: Evidence of impending healthcare rationing

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coyote View Post
That's an extreme example and not what you originally said. A company would not likely get away with something like that. But what about a drug that does some good, but causes damage in enough people to warrant FDA pulling it? People will still buy it - because the risk may still seem relatively low or, worse, they might not even be aware of it. Fen Fen is one example. Or Thalidomide. Copper salts in canned peas to make them bright green?
Yes, people WILL still buy it, as well they should if they are told the risks and are willing to accept them. It's not up to the government to remove medication that will give me a better quality of life just because THEY think it's too dangerous for someone else. It should be MY decision. It should be everyone's decision.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Coyote View Post
Not everyone is well educated in understanding risks, especially buried in fine print and obtuse language, and not every company is forthright about the level of risk.
I have no issue with requiring side effects and risks be put on medications as they currently are now. The issue I have is with the government just up and deciding that my medicine isn't worth the risk when that should be MY decision.

On top of that, they cost the lives of thousands while they delay and postpone drug approvals. Just do some reading on how retarded they are.
__________________


Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
My YouTube Channel
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 11-22-2010, 07:21 PM
Coyote's Avatar
Vole deMorte (the snack)
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 14,492
Thanks: 11,549
Thanked 8,279 Times in 5,306 Posts
Default Re: Evidence of impending healthcare rationing

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
Yes, people WILL still buy it, as well they should if they are told the risks and are willing to accept them. It's not up to the government to remove medication that will give me a better quality of life just because THEY think it's too dangerous for someone else. It should be MY decision. It should be everyone's decision.



I have no issue with requiring side effects and risks be put on medications as they currently are now. The issue I have is with the government just up and deciding that my medicine isn't worth the risk when that should be MY decision.

On top of that, they cost the lives of thousands while they delay and postpone drug approvals. Just do some reading on how retarded they are.
I've done a lot of reading on it and quite frankley agree with their delay. I'm also familiar with the history leading up to the formation of the FDA.

There are numerous cases where drugs have been rushed to the market and some of the serious side effects don't become evident until AFTER it is on the market. It is also not uncommon that they eventually find that the newer medications aren't necessarily better then the older ones, and the older ones have milder side effects. There are cases where the treatment value of the medication is questionable. Pharmaceutical companies aren't going to willingly tell you all these things - not in the way that an average - or desperate person would understand. Is a cancer treatment worth it if it destroys your liver? Maybe - if all other options are exhausted - and there are ways to get that treatment. But those aren't the lucrative drugs - the lucrative drugs are obesity treatments, cholesteral lowering drugs, blood pressure drugs and psychiatric meds.

There are some categories where I can understand pushing to hurry drugs through and one of those would be AIDs treatments.
__________________

DISCLAIMER: Extreme amounts of sarcasm can possibly result in inflammatory situations. Not responsible for keyboard violence, spittle on the monitor, irrational responses mistaken for momentary brilliance, one-sided rages against hypocrisy or individual members or unintended consequences such as poor personal hygiene and bad spelling. Please fasten your seatbelts and put your trays in an upright position.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 11-22-2010, 07:27 PM
lizzie's Avatar
Zen Warrior
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: a state of being
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,976
Thanks: 4,658
Thanked 3,794 Times in 2,310 Posts
Default Re: Evidence of impending healthcare rationing

Quote:
Originally Posted by sunwestdog View Post
Our medical and insurance sytem is perfect as is. Everyone is happy and it is wrong to try and mess it up with these insane progressive pipe dream ideas. Why try to fix what isn't broken.
As I and others have stated repeatedly on this forum, health care needs reform- reform that will work, and not what we got from the idiots in DC.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 11-22-2010, 07:28 PM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Esto perpetua
Posts: 82,287
Thanks: 55,779
Thanked 26,398 Times in 18,903 Posts
Send a message via AIM to saltwn Send a message via MSN to saltwn Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: Evidence of impending healthcare rationing

Quote:
Originally Posted by AzMike View Post
So what countries health care plan are you shooting for? The USA has the best in the world yet you want to change it to some other model. We seem to be going for the failed EU or Canadian system and not really making ours any better. Is that what you were hoping for?
I don't think the people of those countries see them as failure. One thing that would not cost a dime that I can see is just quit licensing insurers to pay for anything but a catastrophic event. Include surgery and birth and let the real market reduce what you pay for an average doctor visit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coyote View Post
The way a lot of companies - like drug companies - work to deal with adverse effects is with a cost/risk sort of ratio (I'm not sure if that is the right term).

Fen-Fen is a perfect example of this. If the risk of serious adverse effects can be kept hidden or manipulated to seem minimal, then they can circumvent certain labeling requirements and/or keep the drug on the market. It costs less to simply quietly pay off lawsuits without ever going to court then it would cost in loss of revenue, to pull the drug.

I absolutely do not want an unregulated food and drug market. I wonder if people have a clue what it used to be like before? You never knew what you were getting. Plaster of paris could be mixed with flour for example. Or, in another example I'm more familiar with - dog food. Dog food manufacturers used to be able to put anything in dog food that was remotely "protein" and label it as such, even if it had zero digestability (no nutritive value to the animal).
Exactly. And abuse is hidden when a facility is a chain. The percentage of questionable cases are part of a percentage of the entire company's businesses, not one at a time like a one owner operation. That's not right. And that regulation needs to be changed if it's still in effect that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
Yes, people WILL still buy it, as well they should if they are told the risks and are willing to accept them. It's not up to the government to remove medication that will give me a better quality of life just because THEY think it's too dangerous for someone else. It should be MY decision. It should be everyone's decision.



I have no issue with requiring side effects and risks be put on medications as they currently are now. The issue I have is with the government just up and deciding that my medicine isn't worth the risk when that should be MY decision.

On top of that, they cost the lives of thousands while they delay and postpone drug approvals. Just do some reading on how retarded they are.
I'm with you on most of what you say here. As long as the side effects and dangers are reported I'd like to see a lot of things back on the market.
There still needs to be oversight of putting those warnings out there though.
__________________
Dear fundamentalist Christian Trump supporters: If Obama had held the Bible backwards and upside down, you would immediately have called him the Antichrist.
Stephen King (tweet)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
evidence, healthcare, impending, rationing

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0