Healthcare Reform

[Archy1221]

6 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

It's not like I work with these people and talk to them about stuff like the current healthcare system because we work at a healthcare company. The results don't match your preconceived beliefs, so I must be lying.

No comparison is ever going to be perfect. But throwing up your hands and saying we can't compare at all is ridiculous, especially given you previously posted that single-payer will have worse outcomes.

Maybe you work in Canada I guess, I don’t know.  
 

I said single-payer will have worse wait times, and as you know with working in medicine like you do, longer wait times can lead to worse outcomes.

[DevoHusker]

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

 

 

I've tried your experiment: I work with doctors, nurses, and clinicians. Every single one of them says a single-payer system would be better.

 

 

 Much like the Canadian surgery procedure from yesterday, it seems weird that your anecdotal experience is much different than mine. 

 

My wife, a nurse, works in the largest clinic in our area. She has been there 20 years, so we know a lot of doctors and other medical related positions. Our longtime close family friend, (stood up with my brother in his wedding) is an ER/Trauma doc, and is a leading force in our new hospital. While I may have forgotten an exchange or two, all of them say a single payer Government run system will be a disaster. 

[RedDenver]

59 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Maybe you work in Canada I guess, I don’t know.  

Maybe your beliefs aren't universally true or even true at all.

 

59 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

I said single-payer will have worse wait times, and as you know with working in medicine like you do, longer wait times can lead to worse outcomes.

Longer wait times can definitely lead to worse outcomes in medically necessary procedures. But that's not true in any elective procedures or quality of life procedures that I'm aware of, which is what most of the wait times argument is based around.

 

But what's MUCH worse for outcomes than wait times is not getting care at all.

[RedDenver]

20 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 Much like the Canadian surgery procedure from yesterday, it seems weird that your anecdotal experience is much different than mine. 

 

My wife, a nurse, works in the largest clinic in our area. She has been there 20 years, so we know a lot of doctors and other medical related positions. Our longtime close family friend, (stood up with my brother in his wedding) is an ER/Trauma doc, and is a leading force in our new hospital. While I may have forgotten an exchange or two, all of them say a single payer Government run system will be a disaster. 

Yes, it's why we should be careful of our anecdotal experience because it's a tiny, tiny fraction of the reality. But we're heavily influenced by our personal experiences, which is why it's so difficult to separate.

[RedDenver]

51 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 Much like the Canadian surgery procedure from yesterday, it seems weird that your anecdotal experience is much different than mine. 

 

My wife, a nurse, works in the largest clinic in our area. She has been there 20 years, so we know a lot of doctors and other medical related positions. Our longtime close family friend, (stood up with my brother in his wedding) is an ER/Trauma doc, and is a leading force in our new hospital. While I may have forgotten an exchange or two, all of them say a single payer Government run system will be a disaster. 

To expand on this a bit: If you asked me to speculate on whether the majority of doctors and nurses think the current system is better, then I'd guess that the majority does. But I'd say the same thing for any current system since the doctors and nurses are self-selecting such that they're the ones that can work in that system and know that system as compared to a system they don't know and would have to experience change to get to a new system. Same thing for doctors and nurses in single-payer systems, they're very likely to think their system that they know is better than a different system they'd have to change to. I don't think that means much in the end for whether the current system or another system is the better or whether we should change. The opinions of doctors and nurses should be considered, but I'm not sure we should give it much weight.

[Archy1221]

https://www.newsweek.com/doctors-who-support-medicare-all-should-careful-what-they-wish-opinion-1489078

[DevoHusker]

1 minute ago, RedDenver said:

To expand on this a bit: If you asked me to speculate on whether the majority of doctors and nurses think the current system is better, then I'd guess that the majority does. But I'd say the same thing for any current system since the doctors and nurses are self-selecting such that they're the ones that can work in that system and know that system as compared to a system they don't know and would have to experience change to get to a new system. Same thing for doctors and nurses in single-payer systems, they're very likely to think their system that they know is better than a different system they'd have to change to. I don't think that means much in the end for whether the current system or another system is the better or whether we should change. The opinions of doctors and nurses should be considered, but I'm not sure we should give it much weight.

 

(That's a lot of systems )

 

I see your point. It reminds me of the old adage "There are two things that __________ hate the most. Things staying the same, and change."

 

Regarding the bold, if we don't rely on those that have the experience, knowledge and expertise, who are we to entrust with determining the bestest solution?

 

[knapplc]

5 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

https://www.newsweek.com/doctors-who-support-medicare-all-should-careful-what-they-wish-opinion-1489078

 

 

I'm old enough to remember when you dismissed opinion columns.

 

  

On 11/22/2020 at 4:53 PM, Archy1221 said:

An opinion column from a Democrat columnist trying to use revisionist history doesn’t change the fact that Obama did not utilize any bipartisan ideas in the bill.  It’s why only one Republican votes for it and that was after it already had majority support in the House. 

 

 

 

[RedDenver]

3 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

https://www.newsweek.com/doctors-who-support-medicare-all-should-careful-what-they-wish-opinion-1489078

An opinion piece that hinges on the assumption that Medicare for All would result in fewer doctors and therefore longer working hours. The evidence however is just that the UK has overworked doctors; however, while the article claims the UK has a similar system to Medicare for All, the UK has a completely different system where not just the payer but also the healthcare system itself is government run. The other evidence is that Canada has hospital overcrowding, which isn't a problem with enough doctors but a problem of enough hospitals and rooms.

 

Not a convincing piece.

[Archy1221]

2 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

I'm old enough to remember when you dismissed opinion columns.

 

  

 

 

 

Howl old are you?

 

Sally Pipes, an expert in the subject matter at hand, utilized factual data within her opinion column unlike the VOX columnist , not an expert on legislative affairs, doing things like claiming things McConnell said without putting in an actual quote from McConnell. 
 

I’m sure you Can see the difference when reading the columns.  

[RedDenver]

5 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

(That's a lot of systems )

 

I see your point. It reminds me of the old adage "There are two things that __________ hate the most. Things staying the same, and change."

 

Regarding the bold, if we don't rely on those that have the experience, knowledge and expertise, who are we to entrust with determining the bestest solution?

 

We can't determine the bestest system. We can't even be sure one system is better than another. We can only debate and revise our opinions based on evidence and do what seems to be the better course of action based on democratic methods. Part of that is to consider the experience, knowledge, and expertise of those in the current system but to also understand that they may not know what's better either and they may have biases as well (like fearing change).

[knapplc]

4 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Howl old are you?

 

Sally Pipes, an expert in the subject matter at hand, utilized factual data within her opinion column unlike the VOX columnist , not an expert on legislative affairs, doing things like claiming things McConnell said without putting in an actual quote from McConnell. 
 

I’m sure you Can see the difference when reading the columns.  

 

"Opinion columns are good when they support my opinion but bad when they do not."

 

 

 

[Archy1221]

12 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

An opinion piece that hinges on the assumption that Medicare for All would result in fewer doctors and therefore longer working hours. The evidence however is just that the UK has overworked doctors; however, while the article claims the UK has a similar system to Medicare for All, the UK has a completely different system where not just the payer but also the healthcare system itself is government run. The other evidence is that Canada has hospital overcrowding, which isn't a problem with enough doctors but a problem of enough hospitals and rooms.

 

Not a convincing piece.

 

[Archy1221]

3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

"Opinion columns are good when they support my opinion but bad when they do not."

 

 

 

fixed it for ya free of charge.  
 

“Opinion columns linked with facts to justify the opinion are good when they support my opinion, but bad when they do not have facts to justify the opinion” 

[Archy1221]