Posted by Dr. Juice on December 1st, 2009
1 Comment »
Today I passed yet another gurney (of the ten we got today) filled with another refugee from the BMW plant. So I ask the forum – how can we deal with the influx of our most difficult of uninsurable patients. We’ve all seen them and considered that their life style is sometimes difficult to justifiy. Of course I am referring to the Crash Testers. (I will not use the D-word here).
My more liberal mores make me inclined to help everyone – regardless of their construction –- but how can we offer services to a population with such an egregious pre-existing condition worked right into their physical make-up?
To be fair, CT’s use the regulation safety precautions – straps and airbags etc. Perhaps the system is to blame. But how that helps us with their constant trips to emergency care I don’t know. So I put it to the forum. How can we make sure that everyone gets the care they need and “deserve?”
Frankly, I have to admit – I do find mythbusters hilarious… sorry to CT’s who might find it offensive.
Posted by The Feld on December 1st, 2009
1 Comment »
Three words why the public option will be a disaster for health care: crash test dummies. Most of us seek to keep ourselves in the best possible physical condition. We exercise, watch our diets, and do our best to use sleeping pills that aren’t all that addictive. By contrast, crash test dummies drive into brick walls at top speeds. Then they do it again. Then they do it again. You get the idea. Studies show they are also prone to engage in other risky behaviors (did you know a crash test dummy is 58% more likely to go on a meth related crime spree than a member of the general public?). Yet under universal health care, we would be expected to subsidize this self-destructive lifestyle. In a world of finite resources, universal health care for crash test dummies ensures there will be shortages of medicine, money, and medical practitioners for other potential patients (i.e., us). Let’s stop this from happening, before Barack Obama can strap us into the driver’s seat, rev the car up to 120, and smash us all into the concrete embankment of socialism. – Feld.
—–
Posted by brasstacks on December 1st, 2009
No Comments »
In response to your inquiry on the hospitals political stand on the public option support, we have none. We only have a medical point of view. Medically speaking, the public option would ensure the health of our society’s most vulnerable. Furthermore, a public option would benefit even those who opt for private insurance. Consider how epidemics tend to originate, gestate, and profligate from low income demographics (aka the
Pine Flu of ‘06). This is the very same demographic that the PO would cover
the majority of. By securing affordable medical care for these communities,
medical institutions we be able to more quickly diagnose and contain carriers who would otherwise avoid costly medical visits.
Or something along those lines.. we should write these and other similar
arguments into concise talking points, and pass them onto the politicians on
our board.
On a side note, has anyone in the accounting office projected how much of
the cost for crash test dummy care we could externalize by charging them
through a public insurer? They tend to always be high care, high expense
patients that always show up at our ER. It could be a real help in getting
us back in the black.
~Administrator>>
Posted by smileonsmilodon on December 1st, 2009
No Comments »
The amount of insensitivity displayed here is outrageous. Did you not take an oath to help people in need? The CT life is not something these people can avoid – they are constructed for this and we try to punish them for it? I teach my sons to be accepting of others and then the government doesn’t back me up! Just yesterday my boy came to me asking about the (D-word) child in his third grade class! I could have died!
Consider the poor CT kid, in the back seat– no airbag protection even. How can we turn that child away when he or she cracks his or her skull on a passenger seat DVD player? Can we just pretend it’s not happening just because he or she is uninsurable under the current restrictions? Leave her or him with the kind of injury she or he is bound to incur there or here in this case? I say is this or is this not something that is or is not possible to do? well!?
With all the injuries to pay for, of course the CT population is impoverished and turns to crime! Only proper health care can stop the downward spiral of the CT life – and give them a fighting chance to rise up from their car seats.
So in solidarity with the CT’s I sing their most inspirational song:
Mmm mmm mmm mmmm
The words mean even more today than they did in 1993 – the year of the riot in Winnipeg – do people want to see that kind of civil unrest again?!
P.S. Feld, your use of the D-word here is completely unacceptable and only demonstrates the kind of blind ignorance that leads to discrimination and hate crime. Maybe you are the one who is a dummy. Huh? Ever think of that? And Mythbusters is a travesty…
P.P.S. does any one else LOVE those new Old Navy commercials?
