Bernie sanders vs Ted Cruz on CNN

[blueblood]

Surprised there isn't much discussion about this as it's a classic left vs right, capitalist vs socialist debate.  Here is the video FYI it's a long one...

imo Bernie sanders had a long night...

[Bonam]

All topics that we've discussed in depth here on MLW many times but a surprisingly deep and civil discussion for this day and age of American politics. I think they both made their respective cases well. 

[blueblood]

39 minutes ago, Bonam said:

All topics that we've discussed in depth here on MLW many times but a surprisingly deep and civil discussion for this day and age of American politics. I think they both made their respective cases well. 

They made their cases well based on who they were appealing to.  If you wanted emotional, sanders was your man.  Numbers Cruz was your man.

the debate was in the same tone as the free to choose series which was fantastic and informative as was this debate.  Cruz definitely redeemed himself to voters and was very well prepared.  IMO sanders went to his talking points.

[Bonam]

2 minutes ago, blueblood said:

They made their cases well based on who they were appealing to.  If you wanted emotional, sanders was your man.  Numbers Cruz was your man.

the debate was in the same tone as the free to choose series which was fantastic and informative as was this debate.  Cruz definitely redeemed himself to voters and was very well prepared.  IMO sanders went to his talking points.

Yeah. This was the first time I've heard Cruz speak that I wasn't repulsed by him. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

Cruz showed the usual English-speaking laziness in referring to conditions in the NHS and Canada as if they are the best alternatives to America's runaway train of healthcare costs. If you are going to bring up the NHS, ponder how little the Brits pay for healthcare compared to the US as well. BTW what's the mad rush for cataract surgery? That's a chronic condition.

[blueblood]

3 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Cruz showed the usual English-speaking laziness in referring to conditions in the NHS and Canada as if they are the best alternatives to America's runaway train of healthcare costs. If you are going to bring up the NHS, ponder how little the Brits pay for healthcare compared to the US as well. BTW what's the mad rush for cataract surgery? That's a chronic condition.

Like knee surgery and hip replacements and mri's?

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

5 hours ago, blueblood said:

Like knee surgery and hip replacements and mri's?

 

Cruz omitted to ponder whether all the MRIs done in the US are actually necessary - one more example of how a vulnerable customer can easily be exploited in the healthcare marketplace. We are beginnng to see the cost of overscreening in such things as prostrate cancer. 

The US system is great for procedures but the costs have gotten completely out of control. Nobody looks to the US as a healthcare model to follow. 

Edited February 11, 2017 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

Prostate, of course. I'm blaming the iPad. 

[bush_cheney2004]

3 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Cruz omitted to ponder whether all the MRIs done in the US are actually necessary -

 

 

MRIs are a non-invasive imaging service.   Quite popular for many situations, including vet care.   They are widely available in the U.S. without much waiting, unlike another country I will not mention.   If I want an MRI, then I shall have an MRI.

[?Impact]

24 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

If I want an MRI, then I shall have an MRI.

Wrong, if you want an MRI and can afford one then you shall have one. Canada does not discriminate health care based on wealth, unlike another country I will not mention.

[bush_cheney2004]

3 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Wrong, if you want an MRI and can afford one then you shall have one. Canada does not discriminate health care based on wealth, unlike another country I will not mention.

 

MRIs are very common in the U.S. for athletic sports injuries, elective sports medicine...even vet care.   Canada actually has imaging lab and trained personnel shortages. 

Maybe that's why some Canadians think MRIs are so special....no big deal...we even x-ray our Halloween candy !  

[SpankyMcFarland]

31 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

MRIs are a non-invasive imaging service.   Quite popular for many situations, including vet care.   They are widely available in the U.S. without much waiting, unlike another country I will not mention.   If I want an MRI, then I shall have an MRI.

Even I feel you don't need one? Even if it uncovers an abnormality that isn't there that leads to unnecessary treatment? 

[?Impact]

1 minute ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

we even x-ray our Halloween candy !  

Yes, that says a lot about the society.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, SpankyMcFarland said:

Even I feel you don't need one? Even if it uncovers an abnormality that isn't there that leads to unnecessary treatment? 

 

Yes...it is a non-invasive imaging service.   U.S rations by ability to pay, Canada rations by wait lists and capacity.

MRI labs advertise like appliance dealers in the U.S.

[SpankyMcFarland]

3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Yes...it is a non-invasive imaging service.   U.S rations by ability to pay, Canada rations by wait lists and capacity.

MRI labs advertise like appliance dealers in the U.S.

Non-invasive investigations can still be harmful. Screening MRIs and CTs often uncover 'abnormalities' that are not harmful, the further investigation of which can harm the patient. 

Healthcare is a classic example of the seller having much more knowledge of the product than the buyer. Patients can be easily intimidated into parting with their money. 

Edited February 11, 2017 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

You want your doctor to be like an investment advisor whose income does not depend on selling you particular products. 

[?Impact]

6 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

U.S rations by ability to pay, Canada rations by wait lists and capacity.

medical need. In Canada patients are prioritized the nature and severity of their disease, while in the US patients are prioritized by the size of their pocketbook.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, SpankyMcFarland said:

Non-invasive investigations can still be harmful. Screening MRIs and CTs often uncover 'abnormalities' that are not harmful, the further investigation of which can harm the patient. 

 

So what...still no reason to deny elective imaging scans to those who desire them.   There is a huge sports medicine market in the U.S., and scans are just part of the deal.  I have been electively scanned several times as a preventative measure encouraged by labs that have excess capacity.   Scans are as cheap as $100.

http://www.allinahealth.org/Minneapolis-Heart-Institute/Programs-and-services/HeartScan-Minnesota/

I can only surmise that such excess capacity is not relevant to Canada, which struggles with wait lists for even basic procedures.

[bush_cheney2004]

14 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

You want your doctor to be like an investment advisor whose income does not depend on selling you particular products. 

 

No...you don't get it...it's not my doctor making the call.   It is me...the consumer making the call.  

Why do Canadians tolerate such limited access and gatekeepers ?

Edited February 11, 2017 by bush_cheney2004

[?Impact]

7 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Yes...it is a non-invasive imaging service.

When Wilhelm Röntgen first discovered X-Rays, they were "non-invasive". The Americans started putting them up in booths in carnivals, even as late as the 50's, they could be found in shoe stores to fit a pair of shoes. 

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't understand why there isn't capacity for such basic imaging lab services in Canada.  If the market allowed open access clinics, then more capacity would be installed and staffed.   I guess some Canadians patriotically rot in long lines, while others just drive across the border to get scans in short order.

[SpankyMcFarland]

49 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

So what...still no reason to deny elective imaging scans to those who desire them.   There is a huge sports medicine market in the U.S., and scans are just part of the deal.  I have been electively scanned several times as a preventative measure encouraged by labs that have excess capacity.   Scans are as cheap as $100.

http://www.allinahealth.org/Minneapolis-Heart-Institute/Programs-and-services/HeartScan-Minnesota/

I can only surmise that such excess capacity is not relevant to Canada, which struggles with wait lists for even basic procedures.

Would you get CT scans on the same basis? That you have decided you need one? 

The labs that encourage people to have scans may have a conflict of interest. 

Edited February 11, 2017 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

BTW I am calling for a mixed system that is different from Canada's current one. Consumers will still have to be protected from unscrupulous doctors and labs, and physicians should have to compete on price as well. The market is a good servant but a bad master.

Edited February 11, 2017 by SpankyMcFarland

[bush_cheney2004]

24 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Would you get CT scans on the same basis? That you have decided you need one? 

The labs that encourage people to have scans may have a conflict of interest. 

 

Yes....the $100 heart scan service linked above is a CT scan and totally elective.  Scans are recommended based on age and other risk factors. You can have the lab send a copy to your physician if desired.   My GP actually requested that I send him a copy and wished more people were so proactive about their own health care.

The point is that the U.S. has a huge installed base of imaging labs that would otherwise sit idle part of the time.  Sports medicine is a growing business.   Health care after all...is a business like any other.  

Consumers can decide when/if they want imaging services at a retail level.   The costs are actually less because all the administrative overhead of insurance claims processing is eliminated.  

[bush_cheney2004]

31 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

BTW I am calling for a mixed system that is different from Canada's current one. Consumers will still have to be protected from unscrupulous doctors and labs, and physicians should have to compete on price as well. The market is a good servant but a bad master.

 

That's fine, just as long as consumers have more choices without government restricting funding and access to health care services.