So What Will Federalized Healthcare Do To Hair Restoration?

[FinHairLoss]

still looking for an answer to the question about pre existing conditions in my first post

[Bill - Seemiller]

Finhairloss,

 

I find it difficult to follow your posts. Firstly, try keeping all of your thoughts on a topic to one post (or two at the most) and then wait for a reply before responding again. Secondly, if you are addressing a specific member, use their name at the top of or at least somewhere in the post. Thirdly, you have to give people time to reply. Your first post on this topic is only an hour before you beckoned members to answer it.

 

This is a popular discussion forum, but it's not a live chat room. Thus, as members read through a topic and are interested enough to reply, they will do it. Please don't continue to bump threads asking for replies, especially in such a short period of time. This is not the first time I've told you about this.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill

[Dr. Timothy Carman]

Originally posted by dr. lindsey:

I agree. Already its counter-economic to do the hardest and most complicated of surgeries.

 

As many readers know, my daughter had a brain tumor removed last May 4, in a 12 hour operation by a fantastic neurosurgeon. Initially Julia had difficulty talking and couldn't walk. Last weekend she got top scores at our regional piano recital and just yesterday her long term prognosis was put above 90% cure.

 

But the neurosurgeon, for all of his preop and postop care (during the 3 month global period) billed 15,000.00 and was actually paid by the insurance company around 3000.00. And for that 3k, he took my daughter's brain apart, removed a tumor, and put her back together so that she can ride a bike, and be a normal kid; certainly saving her life.

 

By contrast, the same amount of physician income can be achieved with 2 bottles of botox and 5 or 6 patients, with virtually no risk and in about an hour.

 

Something is wrong when the smartest are financially dis-encouraged from going in to the most challenging aspects of medicine.

 

This disparity will only worsen with time, even without the current health care bill. Altruism only goes so far with folks, there has to be a financial reward with any challenging endeavor in order to attract significant numbers of the most talented young people. This not only applies to medicine but teaching, and police work and many other professions.

 

Dr. Lindsey McLean VA

 

Very well said- And I am very happy to hear of your daughters continued progress-

[FinHairLoss]

I wasn't sure if I'd be chastised for calling out so many forum users, I edited my message so hopefully its a little bit clearer at whom each comment is directed at

[phil mascallpen]

Originally posted by FinHairLoss:

I love how everybody is telling the doctor he's wrong about his own trade.

 

 

No one told Dr. Feller he is wrong about his trade. He's a great hair transplant surgeon. Obviously you don't realize that the AMA, the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Pediatrics all supported the passage of health care reform. But you see one doctor against it and since you have not done any further research then his opinion must be gospel to you. Again no one has told Dr. Feller he is wrong about his trade. In fact he is excellent at his trade which is performing hair transplants. I don't recall reading that Dr. Feller is an economist or political scientist and while he is clearly very intelligent I respectfully disagree with his opinions on health care reform.

 

As for not wanting to contribute your tax dollars to things that help other Americans that is unfortunately what happens in a civilized society. I wasn't thrilled about my tax dollars going to the trillion plus dollar war in Iraq but since I'm a citizen I accept that as part of the deal of being an American. Just like our tax dollars go to schools, police, fire departments, the post office, roads, and a myriad of things I don't always need or use. Does the government do everything right? Of course not, but even though I respect your opinion we'll just have to agree to disagree on the value of this law.

 

As for your preexisting condition question there are very good reasons why but I'll just address the main logic that I see. Supposedly with a mandate to cover all Americans this law will eventually make it so all Americans have coverage from birth. Therefore no one will "hop" in the pool and make you upset by taking "your" coverage. Also people who had paid premiums for years have been denied coverage when insurance companies would use a very liberal definition of "preexisting condition."

 

I find it quite interesting that even after passage of this bill health care stocks are outperforming the average.

 

Hippy pacifists? lol. As a military veteran I always find it amusing when some line like that gets thrown into a debate apropos of nothing.

[FinHairLoss]

phil

 

-hey doc feller, you're not a politcal scientist or an economist, if you were you'd be smart enough to know you dont deserve market value for your services. Just because your skill is in high demand, few others hold your position(relatively) and its a hard, long, tedious process to learn your trade doesn't mean you get to go charging people market value. In fact, I may go so far as to say you're uncivilized for being against socialized medicine, you're a savage for being against socialized medicine.

 

-"As for not wanting to contribute your tax dollars to things that help other Americans that is unfortunately what happens in a civilized society." lets break down the rhetoric in this sentence for Hair Me Out..... to start phil's using a rhetorical technique or logical fallicy called false dilema in which you produce two options (when there are many options) and act as if there is one or the other and nothing else. He is saying that you either "help other americans" i.e. universal healthcare or you "do not help other americans" i.e. opposing universal healthcare. He leaves out the option of private charity and an innumerable amount legislative possibilities other than the proposed and passed healthcare bill. Next we'll go into the type of appeal he's making, which is to my emotions and my ethics. I certainly consider myself moral and civilized, i do have ethical standards, and according to phil I am not civilized otherwise, this is what civilized people do, of course I want to and consider myself a civilized person right? This could also be considered another logical fallacy called ad hominemm, in which someone attacks the person rather than an argument. So, Hair Me Out, that is just a taste of what is commonly refereed to as rhetoric, which is actually just the art of persuasion.

 

 

-if not wanting socialized healthcare makes me uncivilized, call me savage

 

-never said I was for Iraq

 

- I'm ok with taxing for infrastructure, the government is here to protect me and my property. taxing for roads and police is a little bit different than taxing me to pay for other peoples doctor visits and surgery.

 

 

 

-why wouldnt healthcare stocks shoot up with all this federal money getting thrown around and the entire united states as customers now. I think it's obvious those stocks would come out winners from this..... If doc feller had a stock, his would be plummeting

 

 

- well i was half kidding with the hippy pacifist thing, glad you got a rise out of it

 

 

-thank you for serving the country I'm one of the people who really does appreciate it and I'm not a hostile teabagger, I'm enjoying the debate

[phil mascallpen]

Originally posted by FinHairLoss:

phil

 

-hey doc feller, you're not a politcal scientist or an economist, if you were you'd be smart enough to know you dont deserve market value for your services. Just because your skill is in high demand, few others hold your position(relatively) and its a hard, long, tedious process to learn your trade doesn't mean you get to go charging people market value.

 

Tell me how Dr. Feller is not getting market value for his services? Oh that's right, he is but don't let facts get in the way.

 

If this is socialized medicine you need to learn what socialism means. The government is regulating it not taking ownership of it, huge difference. When Dr. Feller works directly for the government then I'll shed a tear that we have socialized medicine. In fact owning his own private practice and setting his own rates places Dr. Feller about as far from socialism as politically possible. But again facts are inconvenient.

 

Who said the government is here to protect you and your property in any way other than having a military? Certainly the constitution mentions the post office but says nothing about police and fire protection. I guess that's socialism too then? Not that I'm against those things it's just a flaw in your logic.

 

Thanks for your thanks and I'm glad you are not a teabagger.

[FinHairLoss]

socialized medicine: a system of medical care regulated and controlled by the government; called also state medicine.

-dorlands medical dictionary

 

 

Main Entry: socialized medicine

Function: noun

: medical and hospital services for the members of a class or population administered by an organized group (as a state agency) and paid for from funds obtained usually by assessments, philanthropy, or taxatio

-merriam webster

 

 

A system for the delivery of health care in which the expense of care is borne by a governmental agency supported by taxation rather than being paid directly by the client on a fee-forservice or contract basis.

-answers.com

 

not full on socialism, a form of it, that seems likely to grow (like every other entitlement program ever)

 

 

 

the government regulated value is not the market value, doctor feller (and doctor feller is probably a poor example as he may do more elective surgerys) may own his own practice and set his own rates, but what happens when he has to choose between either taking a state insured person and being compensated less for his work, or boycotting state insured people (which may be financially unsustainable). He may be forced into taking these people, because of the market being disrupted with false value. The chinese are supposedly keeping there dollar low, so they can keep their exports up, this in turn is ripping away businesses and jobs from the US. The united states housing market bubbled because chriss dodd and barney frank pushed to have the state regulate housing loans so that less qualified loan applicants could get loans, tons of money was getting thrown around, tons of houses were being bought, supply down, demand up and so the value of houses rose than all these people that wouldnt have had houses if a privately owned loan company was worried about their bottom line, had houses and loans they couldnt pay back and than people sold their houses and didnt pay back their loans and there were a ton of houses on the market and nobody to buy and houses went flying back down to their real value prior to the government saying what cost what

 

 

 

ok I dont wan't socialized medicine that looks like it could turn into a single payer system, so I guess I have to be against public money going towards police or fire fighters......false dilema. I do see where you're coming from, if I'm against the public paying for a doctor to save somebody else why shouldn't I be against the public paying for a policemen to save somebody else, but thats just another logical fallacy called false analogy, where someone makes an analogy between two seemingly connected things, but the items are actually different in a relevant way.

[hair_me_out]

FinHairLoss: You've mentioned "private charity" a number of times. But given that before passage of the healthcare reform 10's of millions of people were uninsured and thousands of people died every year Unnecessarily -- can't we conclude that private charity helps but is not a sufficient solution to the problem?

 

A few years ago the World Health Organization listed the U.S. healthcare system as #40 in the world. We were behind such powerhouses as Morocco and the United Arab Emerites. We had a very serious healthcare problem in this country and I'd like to ask you and Dr. Feller what your solution would be.

 

Oh, and who did the WHO rank as #1 healthcare system in the world? France. Yes, a country with socialized medicine -- something not even close to what we just passed. Go figure.

 

hair_me_out

[phil mascallpen]

Originally posted by FinHairLoss:

ok I dont wan't socialized medicine that looks like it could turn into a single payer system,

 

We can argue semantics all day long. I can find references that refer to socialism as state ownership of industry and that regulation and subsidies (which we have had for decades) do not qualify as the classic definition of socialized medicine as a single government payer would. You can find the opposite.

 

But your statement above is pretty clear about not wanting to help other citizens in this regard. So here is mine: I want the government to use my tax dollars to regulate the health care system to the extent that all citizens are sure to receive appropriate medical care and not be denied such care. I voted for the leaders who want the same thing. They won and that's what we are getting and I hope all our citizens get health care when they need it.

 

More directly I feel incredible empathy for Dr. Lindsey and his daughter. I'm very happy she was able to receive the best care possible to treat her brain tumor. And I want any child in our country to get that same chance at quality health care, regardless of their parent's financial standing.

 

So I'm done with this debate because outside of what we want for our country, which is clearly different, there's really no point.

 

Thanks fin.

[EpilepticSceptic]

Way to go Phil !!!

[FinHairLoss]

In canada a general practitioner makes about 50k less than a specialist(like the one that saved Dr Lindseys daughter). I feel like the specialist that saved Dr Lindseys daughters life should make more than the guy who grabbed my balls last week and told me to cough.....

[phil mascallpen]

Originally posted by FinHairLoss:

I feel like the specialist...should make more than the guy who grabbed my balls last week.....

 

I think if you're worried about the guy who grabs your balls maybe you should go to different bars.

[Curious]

In addition to the problem of competence with government agencies, the U.S. does not have the money for this health care program. Medicare is broke, Social Security is broke and the Federal budget is deep in the red. This program will only add to the deficit, not reduce it.

[phil mascallpen]

Originally posted by Curious:

This program will only add to the deficit, not reduce it.

 

Curious would you please post a credible link to support this assertion? Glen Beck or Hannity do not count as credible sources.

 

But hey don't take my word you're wrong. Here is the Congressional Budget Office cost estimate. This is a non-partisan assessment and it also says it will hurt our economy more if we do nothing to stop spiraling health care costs.

 

 

Congressional Budget Office cost estimate of health bills

[HTInitiate]

Having lived in Sweden (socialized country) for 6 years, I can only say that their healthcare system was good, but if you have something major (but not an emergency condition ) like a hip replacement or something, you had to wait for several months. Other than that, it is not that bad. Prescription medications for the entire year would be less than 200 Kronors or ~ 30 dollars. People in Sweden are much more healthier than US.

[FinHairLoss]

nice gay joke phil, don't bother acknowledging that a general practitioner makes 50k less than a specialist in canada....

 

and the CBO is a "non-partisan" committee not a non partisan committee

 

http://www.rollcall.com/news/44509-1.html

 

http://hotair.com/archives/201...he-cbo-got-it-wrong/

[petergibbons]

I'm going to respond to the assertion that we are broke and then proceed to debunk that rumor using reason and logic. I'll apologize ahead of time since those two things are relatively foreign to me.

 

If you look at the headlines today, at least a third of the claim that we are going broke, spending our childrens' future, bankrupt.

 

While moral bankruptcy was arguably a reason our country was founded in the first place, financial bankruptcy is not in the picture.

 

Consider if a staid firm like GE were to go bankrupt. First of all, its fixed income securities would experience a major sell-off, resulting in the yields being pushed into the double, and even triple digits, depending on the severity. At the same time, GE would not be able to raise capital by selling bonds and would have to sell equity instead or consider giving up on capital raising and contract until its yields dropped into a sensible range.

 

Like it or not, the US has been able to sell debt as easily as when we had 6, 7, and even 12% yields, yet our yields are much lower than that. Why is this good? For starters, most of the debt we have sold at very low coupon rates, in the 2-3% range, and like it or not, that money is floating around in the economy.

 

The large investment banks, private investors, Chinese and Saudi overlords, and elderly retirees have been buying our fixed income securities at the not-so-offensive coupon rates of 4% and have not demanded very high yields. We are not experiencing significant inflation as a result of offering debt.

 

Some say that hyperinflation is coming but if people like you and I could see that coming, the market would have already priced it in and we'd be seeing the federal gov't selling securities at the 12-15% coupon rate.

 

Believe me, we're not taking on more debt than we can handle.

[phil mascallpen]

Originally posted by FinHairLoss:

nice gay joke phil, don't bother acknowledging that a general practitioner makes 50k less than a specialist in canada....

 

and the CBO is a "non-partisan" committee not a non partisan committee

 

http://www.rollcall.com/news/44509-1.html

 

http://hotair.com/archives/201...he-cbo-got-it-wrong/

 

Wow Mister Previouslyalljokey is now upset at a little play on your post? It was not a jab at gay people but a jab at you and I certainly apologize to any gay person who might be offended for being compared to you.

 

And this is not Canada so your 50k difference there is completely irrelevant, although you seem to acknowledge that even there the specialist is better compensated but don't acknowledge that the average neurosurgeon in the US, you know the country we're discussing, makes well over a half a million dollars a year. Since you are fixated on Canada and also worried about cost maybe you should consider pushing for a US system that is similar to Canada's since they spend almost half per capita on health care than the US yet are ranked above the US by the WHO.

 

As for your next assertion: You use one opinion piece by a Texas professor who is a known conservative and then a notoriously right wing website to say that the CBO is partisan. And Greenspan never says the estimates are wrong or partisan, much different he says the CBO is a first rate operation and he has no reason to think the estimates were "too rosy" yet he worries WHAT MIGHT occur if they were.

 

You know, the party that cut taxes for the wealthy and for corporations while we were at war on two fronts might be a better place for you to start getting upset about America's budget problems. As I recall President Clinton left office in 2001 with a federal budget surplus of $127 billion. President Bush ran a deficit of $319 billion in 2005. And we know what happened since then.

[Curious]

I'm not sure what I can say to convince you that the country is going broke. The current Federal budget is about $1.6 trillion in deficit. Social Security, which was supposed to take in more money than it pays out until 2016 under CBO projections, has now gone into deficit and is paying out more than it receives in revenue. Medicare is currently operating at a deficit. According to CBO, the national debt will about double during President Obama's tenure. But this is not a Republican or Democratic issue, neither party is willing to take the painful steps needed to bring our fiscal house in order. We are very much like Greece but on a larger scale. Eventually we reach a point where the amount of debt is so overwhelming there will probably be a run on the currency and things will get very ugly and people will suffer.

[FinHairLoss]

curious, our country will never have trouble getting loans and we will never have interest rates raised on us.

 

 

anybody know what happened to the "death panels" ? I keep hearing that was all just republican rhetoric....but whatever they were was immediately taken out of the bill when whoever brought that up..... even though whatever they were was nothing close to a death panel, and could never even be interpreted to anything close to a panel filled with bureaucracy with the capabilities of resembling a loose definition of a death panel...right?

 

 

 

I was looking through a liberal dictionary yesterday....couldn't find the phrase "human nature" in it, or "incentive", or "bureaucracy".....infact...there were only two words.... "hope" and "change"...and neither had definitions!

[Curious]

"Our country will never have trouble getting loans and we will never have interest rates raised on us." That's probably the attitude the Greeks had, until they hit the financial wall. Your attitude is of the kind that got us in this trouble. And btw, the healtcare bill does add to the deficit. The Congress engaged in an accounting trick and kept the physician fees for Medicare out of the bill. Doctor fees will be considered separately and will add another $200 bilion to the cost of healthcare, which puts it in deficit.

[hair_me_out]

FinHairLoss: You are seriously going to argue death panels now? Wow. This has been shown again and again to be bogus.

 

Yeah, death panels aka Advance Care Planning Consultation -- requiring Medicare to pay for some end-of-life planning counseling sessions with a health care practitioner.

 

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/...-obama-death-panels/

 

Come on, man.

[FinHairLoss]

hair me out...maybe accusers didn't mean death panels literally... come on...man

 

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org...rah-palin-was-right/

 

 

 

http://michellemalkin.com/2009...-those-death-panels/

 

 

http://www.redstate.com/erick/...l-we-have-the-video/

 

 

 

They aren't actual death panels. Not literal death panels. at the core, their essence, they are death panelesque

[hair_me_out]

Finhairloss: I see you are keeping up your tradition of linking to only the most non-partisan and objective sources. Cato, Michelle Malkin, Redstate.com.

 

LOL