1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

World Health Organization healthcare ranking

Discussion in 'The Dungeon' started by twg, Oct 25, 2003.

  1. ysr612

    ysr612 Well-Known Member

    That was not error that is no balls. There is a difference.
     
  2. mad brad

    mad brad Guest

  3. ysr612

    ysr612 Well-Known Member

    When you have a patient come in with a virus. If you do not prescribe them something they are going to be unhappy if this happens what happens to your practice. Some docs rationalize this with a idea like when they have a virus they are more likely to pick up a bact therefore I will give a prophylactic script (bad medicine). These are not errors they are no balls


    ps sometimes those prophylactics are hard to swallow
     
  4. mad brad

    mad brad Guest

    hasn't this practice rendered most antibiotics useless? i.e. once you them them so much they become ineffective?
     
  5. ysr612

    ysr612 Well-Known Member

    some are coming back because they have not been used for so long. As you can imagine it is metabolically costly to for the bug to keep up a resistance so these genes are dumped when not usefull anymore.

    However the most likely place for resistance to form is places where drugs are not regulated and cheap.
     
  6. twg

    twg Well-Known Member

    Here's a true story.

    In October 1995 I crashed while riding a GSXR600 on a FM road outside of Boerne TX. I fractured my pelvis and dislocated my hip. A couple of guys who passed by saw the wreckage and called for help. Well the damn DPS trooper was more interested in writing me a ticket.... I digress sorry!

    Anyway, in the hospital the doctor was telling the nurse what kind of schedule to put me on to assist with re-hab. At the time I was unemployed. I told him I had no insurance. The next words out of his mouth were, "get him some crutches and release him".

    I recovered fine so maybe I didn't need re-hab after all. However, they put me back together and I did pay a pretty hefty medical bill.

    twg
     
  7. peekay

    peekay Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Oct 29, 2003
  8. twg

    twg Well-Known Member

    Yeah, that's pretty scary.
     
  9. Robert

    Robert Flies all green 'n buzzin


    With acetabulum fractures, internal bleeding is common and it's standard procedure to wait five or more days for it to subside before having surgery. During that time, large amounts of traction are applied to prevent further injury and there's nothing much to do but be "largely unattended."

    The place Birkley should have been was the ECU. But with the amount of morphine they administer he'd barely be aware of his surroundings. And from a medical point of view, if he was hooked up to all the proper machines there is no practical difference. Except to concerned friends or relatives.

    So I think those comments in the RRW article are largely bullshit.
     
  10. mad brad

    mad brad Guest

    morphine and the like (i.e. conscious sedation) supresses respiratory function. he didn't need to be in a hallway. of course, in america that would never happen.

    go canada.
     
  11. Robert

    Robert Flies all green 'n buzzin

    If the guy was hooked up to all the monitors, which side of a door he was on is irrelevant.

    But for sure, you americans get first class care.

    go USA :Poke: :)
     
  12. HPPT

    HPPT !!!

    Robert, you're not allowed to use facts. :D :D :D
     
  13. mad brad

    mad brad Guest

    sorry, i'll take my priveledged ass and keep my first class american care. and fuck if i care who won't pay for insurance. keep your socialized medicine.
     
  14. Robert

    Robert Flies all green 'n buzzin

    The Canadian healthcare system is so far from perfect. I'd never argue that.

    But I don't like your system either. :D
     
  15. thane

    thane Well-Known Member

    Some folks on this thread don't appear to understand why there're social safety nets, such as free health care and welfare.

    Two reasons:

    1) It's morally correct to provide for the less advantaged.

    2) (and this one might appeal to the more heartless of you) It costs more not to provide safety nets. That statement begs a lot of support and documentation. Unfortunately, I'm feeling lazy; so I'll just sum up. Let the disadvantaged rot and they lay down all manner of plague, pestulance, and criminality in your country.

    Oh and BTW, I don't know if Hillary's plan would have worked. I do know that it was sunk by folks on the right who were determined to prevent success in the Clinton administration. Not to say that both parties aren't guilty of putting their parties interests above those of the American people. It's just that this time it was the evil people on the right. ;)

    thane
     
  16. peekay

    peekay Well-Known Member

    But universal health care has absolutely NOTHING to do with "social safety nets." Even Bill Gates would be fully covered under such system. Why should my hard-earned tax dollars pay for some billionaire's medical bill? Why should YOUR tax dollars pay for Hillary's next OBGYN visit?

    If helping the disadvantaged is truly the goal, then the solution is to fix and expand low-income programs like Medicaid, not by socializing health care. With socialized care, the vast majority of medical $$$ is spent on middle and upper income families. That doesn't sound like helping the needy to me!

    Clearly the real aim of socialized care is not to help the disadvantaged, but to fit with some left-wing notion of "wealth redistribution." That is to say, the real goal is homogenized care, creating a one-tier system for everyone.

    -peekay
     
  17. Dave K

    Dave K DaveK über alles!

    No Peekay, it isn't just for the less advantaged it's for everyone including Bill Gates and Hillary and YamahaRick and Mad Brad and the little old lady up the street.
     
  18. mtk

    mtk All-Pro Bike Crasher

    Can someone find me the section of the Constitution that says you have a right to the fruits of someone else's labors?

    And please, spare me the "morally correct to provide for the disadvantaged" crapola as that is a statement of YOUR moral code. That is FAR from universal. The Bible says (to put a morality spin on things) both "I am my brother's keeper" and also "God helps those who help themselves" so they can't even decide which is which.

    As for the poor rotting and causing plague, not as long as we've got plenty of backhoes in this country. :D

    If you want someone else to provide you with a service, pay for it. It's that simple.
     
  19. Dave K

    Dave K DaveK über alles!

    The constitution has been warped and twisted to fit everyone’s needs and agendas from the NAMBLA to the NRA to the Aryan nations. The forefathers are rolling over in their graves.

    My reason for coming up pro on a national health care system is purely selfish. “What if” is my defining motivation.
     
  20. mtk

    mtk All-Pro Bike Crasher

    Cnosidering that the government could screw up a wet dream, I'll perform at-home brain surgery on myself before I submit to government health care. Think Post Office, DMV, etc. No thanks.
     

Share This Page