1. We've addressed a number of the issues raised in the previous survey. Please help us make sure we're aware of all issues by completing this new, short, confidential survey. Thank you!
  2. Need help finding a board? Read this post for help

Healthcare - Back to the Good OLD Days.

Discussion in 'Healthcare Reform Discussions' started by Anonymous, Feb 21, 2011 at 12:15 PM.

  1. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    In 1959, the average life expectancy was about 70 years old. Today, depending on where you look, life-expectancy is shown to be 75-77 years. This is a significant yet not a dramatic difference… wouldn’t you agree? After billions of dollars spent, there have not been any major breakthroughs that have dramatically increased American life-expectancy. America could easily go back to 1950’s medical technology and still help Americans achieve a relatively long life-expectancy. Additionally, imagine how much money we could save. The money saved could more than pay for every American to receive medical treatment. With lifestyle changes, this 1950’s medical technology could lead many Americans to live into their 70’s. Isn’t that great… every American receiving affordable, 1950’s-quality healthcare? However, as I have argued before, there is something more to consider than just life-expectancy. There is a quality of life issue. I don’t know about all of you, but not only do I want to live a long life, I want to have a great quality of life also. It is only through the CURRENT American-Style healthcare system which encourages competition and innovation that this balance can be achieved. Who wants to go back to the barbaric medical technology of the 1950’s? The emphasis on cheap, socialized-healthcare for all will lead precisely to that end. It will stifle innovation. One needs look no further than our friends in Cuba.
     
  2. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    You are right on. Would you want a joint replacement using 1950's techniques - I don't think so. We need to bring transparency and competition to the health care market. Increased use of health savings accounts would be a good first step.
     
  3. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    You act as though "America" is the only country with advances in pharmaecuticals and devices. Not true. Germany, France, England, Switzerland, Denmark and many other countries have provided in Advances in Medicine.
     
  4. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Sure.... good luck getting them while waiting in your socialist healthcare line.
     
  5. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    You wait in line here too. At least with socialized medicine, one doesn't have to go bankrupt because of medical expenses. There is a lot of piece of mind knowing your healthcare needs will be taken care of from cradle to grave.
     
  6. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    this is beginning to sound so 1950's at this point...seriously, update your argument, as the whole "socialist" thing is played out, especially when comparing our healthcare to that of Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, etc. Socialist is simply the new "emotional hot button" word for the weak of mind, since we can't really claim that Communism is the satanic threat anymore.
     
  7. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Call your office Karl.
     
  8. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Yet we live longer.... go figure.
     
  9. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    As an ICU nurse for most of my career I will agree that modern medicine has indeed enabled the US to prolong life, a mere 7% according to a previous poster. On the flip side of that I see more prolonging death these days. There are many days that I go to work to literally take care of the breathing (vent) dead. This is a huge well documented issue, the amount of money spent on end of life care. Mostly due to misinformed, emotionally distraught family members. There needs to be a better effort to educate the American people the difference between living long and living well. Unfortunately both the medical and political communities will not touch it with a ten foot pole
     
  10. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Obama touched on this subject matter during a town-hall meeting where he told a woman that her elderly mother would be better off taking a pain pill and dying rather than giving her the option to receive a pacemaker or other implant device to extend her life and quality of life. I don't know about you but I would rather not empower someone like Obama with end-of-life decisions.... especially when you consider his position on infantacide. He apparently does not value life as many in America do.
     
  11. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Hey Einstein,that would be "peace" of mind.....and with socialized medicine a huge "piece" of our freedom to choose goes away as well.
     
  12. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    BS! Facts required. When and where did he supposedly say this? While you might be stupid enough to fling crap like this around, Obama certainly is not.
     
  13. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    I love how UNINFORMED MOST LIBERALS ARE.... LOL
    Watch the video and judge for yourself.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-dQfb8WQvo
     
  14. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    The "Waits" you hear so much about, are people waiting for Elective surgeries like Joint Replacements. So many Americans wait anyway, because they aren't ready for surgery; so they take pain medications and get joint fluid injections to relieve the pain.
    Then when they are psychologically ready or have Medicare to pay for it, they usually have to wait a few months to get on the surgical schedule if it's with a good orthopaedic surgeon.
    I have needed healthcare while traveling abroad to France and England. I didn't have to wait any longer in the ER than I do here in America. Any life threatening emergencies were handled with urgency.

    American's just hate to WAIT, period. Hate to wait for Food, hate to wait for Gas, hate to wait for movie tickets, hate to wait for everything.

    Personally, I'd rather WAIT than have to pay a huge bill.
     
  15. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest


    he is saying, it should be a family decision. In some situations it may be that the patient would be better off taking a pain medication or antiarrythmic medication.

    My Uncle was denied a pacemaker, because he was 86, diabetic and overall in poor condition for surgery. He is still with us after the four year decision.
     
  16. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest


    I think our current administration has made an attempt to educate people on the importance of good health and importance of drafting a Healthcare Directive. However, you are right, it does anger many people who think the Government is interfereing with our business. But when it's all said and done, the government pays the Healthcare Costs (Medicare, etc) so they ARE entitiled to a say, in my opinion.

    It's a shame that the Medical Community does not do a better job with health education, but we know that the Drs. are afraid they will lose the patient if they try to get them to quit smoking or lose weight. And of course the Drs. make more money off patients with co-morbidities.
     
  17. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Government pays for medicare? Government pays for NOTHING. Tax-Payers pay for medicare. Medicare is a sham, just like most government programs. Medicare should be overhauled, and the power to make medical choices should be returned to individuals. The underlying problem with medicine is cost.... government intervention has only helped to increase cost times 10. We need competition and choice.... not more government ponzi schemes.
     
  18. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    Explain to me how it is a family decision when the President of the United States recommends that your grandma take a pill rather than getting a pace-maker... Especially after his death-panels forbid people of a certain age to get one???
     

Share This Page