![]() |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:43:18 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: The US could institute the most socialized health care system in the world and it would not prevent injuries inflicted by one person on another, not would it change the survival rate. There is only so much a Doctor can do to save a life. It's selective editing on the Assistant Paste Eater's part. Trauma treatment does not rely on "insurance" for treatment. ER Trauma centers only treat and stabilize. Once the patient is stable enough to further testing and treatment, they are moved to the appropriate facility or in-hospital ward. What happens at that point may be due to insurance, but the initial ER treatment has nothing to do with stabilization and life saving. DILDO: Please pay attention. Among the things that happen is that people with serious injuries go to the wrong hospitals and aren't admitted because they don't have insurance. If all were insured, the instances where people went to the nearest ER wouldn't have an impact on their survival rate. Secondly, even if they do go to the ER with life threatening circumstances, they may have other uknown medical conditions that are unrelated to the visit but impact the outcome. A situation brought on by the fact that they haven't been seen regularly by a primary care physician Hello? Are you listening? What should we call your faction? DDD for deaf dumb and blind? |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
jps wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:43:18 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: The US could institute the most socialized health care system in the world and it would not prevent injuries inflicted by one person on another, not would it change the survival rate. There is only so much a Doctor can do to save a life. It's selective editing on the Assistant Paste Eater's part. Trauma treatment does not rely on "insurance" for treatment. ER Trauma centers only treat and stabilize. Once the patient is stable enough to further testing and treatment, they are moved to the appropriate facility or in-hospital ward. What happens at that point may be due to insurance, but the initial ER treatment has nothing to do with stabilization and life saving. DILDO: Please pay attention. Among the things that happen is that people with serious injuries go to the wrong hospitals and aren't admitted because they don't have insurance. If all were insured, the instances where people went to the nearest ER wouldn't have an impact on their survival rate. Secondly, even if they do go to the ER with life threatening circumstances, they may have other uknown medical conditions that are unrelated to the visit but impact the outcome. A situation brought on by the fact that they haven't been seen regularly by a primary care physician Hello? Are you listening? What should we call your faction? DDD for deaf dumb and blind? I have lived in several state and have have seen people admitted and receive treatment at hospitals WITH NO INSURANCE. If you believe people in need of emergency medical care are turned away from a hospital you must not live in the United States. Indigent people become the ward of the township/county depending on where you live. As wards of the township/county, the government insures they receive the proper treatment. If you don't believe this look up the county, township or state laws on indigent care. You have been listening to the obamodytes too long. |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:33:35 -0500, Keith Nuttle
wrote: jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:43:18 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: The US could institute the most socialized health care system in the world and it would not prevent injuries inflicted by one person on another, not would it change the survival rate. There is only so much a Doctor can do to save a life. It's selective editing on the Assistant Paste Eater's part. Trauma treatment does not rely on "insurance" for treatment. ER Trauma centers only treat and stabilize. Once the patient is stable enough to further testing and treatment, they are moved to the appropriate facility or in-hospital ward. What happens at that point may be due to insurance, but the initial ER treatment has nothing to do with stabilization and life saving. DILDO: Please pay attention. Among the things that happen is that people with serious injuries go to the wrong hospitals and aren't admitted because they don't have insurance. If all were insured, the instances where people went to the nearest ER wouldn't have an impact on their survival rate. Secondly, even if they do go to the ER with life threatening circumstances, they may have other uknown medical conditions that are unrelated to the visit but impact the outcome. A situation brought on by the fact that they haven't been seen regularly by a primary care physician Hello? Are you listening? What should we call your faction? DDD for deaf dumb and blind? I have lived in several state and have have seen people admitted and receive treatment at hospitals WITH NO INSURANCE. If you believe people in need of emergency medical care are turned away from a hospital you must not live in the United States. Indigent people become the ward of the township/county depending on where you live. As wards of the township/county, the government insures they receive the proper treatment. If you don't believe this look up the county, township or state laws on indigent care. You have been listening to the obamodytes too long. There are myriad private hospitals which will not admit patients without insurance. There are designated hospitals in every area of the country that are public hospitals which are mandated to take anyone, no matter the circumstances. You need to brush up on your vast knowledge of hospitals and admitting practices. Secondly, most visits to the hospital aren't by indigants. They're working and working poor who do not have coverage. You need to take a wake up pill or maybe smell the coffee? |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
"jps" wrote in message ... On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:33:35 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:43:18 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: The US could institute the most socialized health care system in the world and it would not prevent injuries inflicted by one person on another, not would it change the survival rate. There is only so much a Doctor can do to save a life. It's selective editing on the Assistant Paste Eater's part. Trauma treatment does not rely on "insurance" for treatment. ER Trauma centers only treat and stabilize. Once the patient is stable enough to further testing and treatment, they are moved to the appropriate facility or in-hospital ward. What happens at that point may be due to insurance, but the initial ER treatment has nothing to do with stabilization and life saving. DILDO: Please pay attention. Among the things that happen is that people with serious injuries go to the wrong hospitals and aren't admitted because they don't have insurance. If all were insured, the instances where people went to the nearest ER wouldn't have an impact on their survival rate. Secondly, even if they do go to the ER with life threatening circumstances, they may have other uknown medical conditions that are unrelated to the visit but impact the outcome. A situation brought on by the fact that they haven't been seen regularly by a primary care physician Hello? Are you listening? What should we call your faction? DDD for deaf dumb and blind? I have lived in several state and have have seen people admitted and receive treatment at hospitals WITH NO INSURANCE. If you believe people in need of emergency medical care are turned away from a hospital you must not live in the United States. Indigent people become the ward of the township/county depending on where you live. As wards of the township/county, the government insures they receive the proper treatment. If you don't believe this look up the county, township or state laws on indigent care. You have been listening to the obamodytes too long. There are myriad private hospitals which will not admit patients without insurance. There are designated hospitals in every area of the country that are public hospitals which are mandated to take anyone, no matter the circumstances. You need to brush up on your vast knowledge of hospitals and admitting practices. Secondly, most visits to the hospital aren't by indigants. They're working and working poor who do not have coverage. You need to take a wake up pill or maybe smell the coffee? If they have an emergency room they will treat you insured or not. Law requires stabilization. They will ship you off to the county hospital at first chance, but if they refuse to treat you they will be a broke and non accredited hospital. |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:18:19 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote: "jps" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:33:35 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:43:18 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: The US could institute the most socialized health care system in the world and it would not prevent injuries inflicted by one person on another, not would it change the survival rate. There is only so much a Doctor can do to save a life. It's selective editing on the Assistant Paste Eater's part. Trauma treatment does not rely on "insurance" for treatment. ER Trauma centers only treat and stabilize. Once the patient is stable enough to further testing and treatment, they are moved to the appropriate facility or in-hospital ward. What happens at that point may be due to insurance, but the initial ER treatment has nothing to do with stabilization and life saving. DILDO: Please pay attention. Among the things that happen is that people with serious injuries go to the wrong hospitals and aren't admitted because they don't have insurance. If all were insured, the instances where people went to the nearest ER wouldn't have an impact on their survival rate. Secondly, even if they do go to the ER with life threatening circumstances, they may have other uknown medical conditions that are unrelated to the visit but impact the outcome. A situation brought on by the fact that they haven't been seen regularly by a primary care physician Hello? Are you listening? What should we call your faction? DDD for deaf dumb and blind? I have lived in several state and have have seen people admitted and receive treatment at hospitals WITH NO INSURANCE. If you believe people in need of emergency medical care are turned away from a hospital you must not live in the United States. Indigent people become the ward of the township/county depending on where you live. As wards of the township/county, the government insures they receive the proper treatment. If you don't believe this look up the county, township or state laws on indigent care. You have been listening to the obamodytes too long. There are myriad private hospitals which will not admit patients without insurance. There are designated hospitals in every area of the country that are public hospitals which are mandated to take anyone, no matter the circumstances. You need to brush up on your vast knowledge of hospitals and admitting practices. Secondly, most visits to the hospital aren't by indigants. They're working and working poor who do not have coverage. You need to take a wake up pill or maybe smell the coffee? If they have an emergency room they will treat you insured or not. Law requires stabilization. They will ship you off to the county hospital at first chance, but if they refuse to treat you they will be a broke and non accredited hospital. Sounds like it could be a very arbitray judgement call on behalf of the admitting staff. If the ER is flooded and at capacity, what happens to those who wait to be treated? Why are the compiled numbers showing the results? Is this some kind of ruse Harvard Research is foisting on the public? "The reason for this much higher risk of death isn't immediately clear. The researchers point out that, while federal law requires that emergency rooms provide care, the uninsured often have longer waits in the ER, and sometimes have to go to various ERs to find one that will treat them." Is this a lie? A fabrication? A misrepresentation? |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
"jps" wrote in message ... On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:18:19 -0800, "CalifBill" wrote: "jps" wrote in message . .. On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:33:35 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:43:18 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: The US could institute the most socialized health care system in the world and it would not prevent injuries inflicted by one person on another, not would it change the survival rate. There is only so much a Doctor can do to save a life. It's selective editing on the Assistant Paste Eater's part. Trauma treatment does not rely on "insurance" for treatment. ER Trauma centers only treat and stabilize. Once the patient is stable enough to further testing and treatment, they are moved to the appropriate facility or in-hospital ward. What happens at that point may be due to insurance, but the initial ER treatment has nothing to do with stabilization and life saving. DILDO: Please pay attention. Among the things that happen is that people with serious injuries go to the wrong hospitals and aren't admitted because they don't have insurance. If all were insured, the instances where people went to the nearest ER wouldn't have an impact on their survival rate. Secondly, even if they do go to the ER with life threatening circumstances, they may have other uknown medical conditions that are unrelated to the visit but impact the outcome. A situation brought on by the fact that they haven't been seen regularly by a primary care physician Hello? Are you listening? What should we call your faction? DDD for deaf dumb and blind? I have lived in several state and have have seen people admitted and receive treatment at hospitals WITH NO INSURANCE. If you believe people in need of emergency medical care are turned away from a hospital you must not live in the United States. Indigent people become the ward of the township/county depending on where you live. As wards of the township/county, the government insures they receive the proper treatment. If you don't believe this look up the county, township or state laws on indigent care. You have been listening to the obamodytes too long. There are myriad private hospitals which will not admit patients without insurance. There are designated hospitals in every area of the country that are public hospitals which are mandated to take anyone, no matter the circumstances. You need to brush up on your vast knowledge of hospitals and admitting practices. Secondly, most visits to the hospital aren't by indigants. They're working and working poor who do not have coverage. You need to take a wake up pill or maybe smell the coffee? If they have an emergency room they will treat you insured or not. Law requires stabilization. They will ship you off to the county hospital at first chance, but if they refuse to treat you they will be a broke and non accredited hospital. Sounds like it could be a very arbitray judgement call on behalf of the admitting staff. If the ER is flooded and at capacity, what happens to those who wait to be treated? Why are the compiled numbers showing the results? Is this some kind of ruse Harvard Research is foisting on the public? "The reason for this much higher risk of death isn't immediately clear. The researchers point out that, while federal law requires that emergency rooms provide care, the uninsured often have longer waits in the ER, and sometimes have to go to various ERs to find one that will treat them." Is this a lie? A fabrication? A misrepresentation? Because lots of the uninsured come in with mortal knife or gunshot wounds. They all get treated at emergency. Some quicker than others, as they are making a mess on the floor. |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:41:21 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote: "jps" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:18:19 -0800, "CalifBill" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:33:35 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:43:18 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: The US could institute the most socialized health care system in the world and it would not prevent injuries inflicted by one person on another, not would it change the survival rate. There is only so much a Doctor can do to save a life. It's selective editing on the Assistant Paste Eater's part. Trauma treatment does not rely on "insurance" for treatment. ER Trauma centers only treat and stabilize. Once the patient is stable enough to further testing and treatment, they are moved to the appropriate facility or in-hospital ward. What happens at that point may be due to insurance, but the initial ER treatment has nothing to do with stabilization and life saving. DILDO: Please pay attention. Among the things that happen is that people with serious injuries go to the wrong hospitals and aren't admitted because they don't have insurance. If all were insured, the instances where people went to the nearest ER wouldn't have an impact on their survival rate. Secondly, even if they do go to the ER with life threatening circumstances, they may have other uknown medical conditions that are unrelated to the visit but impact the outcome. A situation brought on by the fact that they haven't been seen regularly by a primary care physician Hello? Are you listening? What should we call your faction? DDD for deaf dumb and blind? I have lived in several state and have have seen people admitted and receive treatment at hospitals WITH NO INSURANCE. If you believe people in need of emergency medical care are turned away from a hospital you must not live in the United States. Indigent people become the ward of the township/county depending on where you live. As wards of the township/county, the government insures they receive the proper treatment. If you don't believe this look up the county, township or state laws on indigent care. You have been listening to the obamodytes too long. There are myriad private hospitals which will not admit patients without insurance. There are designated hospitals in every area of the country that are public hospitals which are mandated to take anyone, no matter the circumstances. You need to brush up on your vast knowledge of hospitals and admitting practices. Secondly, most visits to the hospital aren't by indigants. They're working and working poor who do not have coverage. You need to take a wake up pill or maybe smell the coffee? If they have an emergency room they will treat you insured or not. Law requires stabilization. They will ship you off to the county hospital at first chance, but if they refuse to treat you they will be a broke and non accredited hospital. Sounds like it could be a very arbitray judgement call on behalf of the admitting staff. If the ER is flooded and at capacity, what happens to those who wait to be treated? Why are the compiled numbers showing the results? Is this some kind of ruse Harvard Research is foisting on the public? "The reason for this much higher risk of death isn't immediately clear. The researchers point out that, while federal law requires that emergency rooms provide care, the uninsured often have longer waits in the ER, and sometimes have to go to various ERs to find one that will treat them." Is this a lie? A fabrication? A misrepresentation? Because lots of the uninsured come in with mortal knife or gunshot wounds. They all get treated at emergency. Some quicker than others, as they are making a mess on the floor. Yes, I'm sure you're right but the messy ones may not be the ones in the most acute need. If they all had insurance, the traffic would be more evenly dispersed and maybe some of them would have primary care that'd keep 'em out of the trauma centers... |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
jps wrote:
There are myriad private hospitals which will not admit patients without insurance. There are designated hospitals in every area of the country that are public hospitals which are mandated to take anyone, no matter the circumstances. You need to brush up on your vast knowledge of hospitals and admitting practices. Secondly, most visits to the hospital aren't by indigants. They're working and working poor who do not have coverage. You need to take a wake up pill or maybe smell the coffee? I'm sure you are wrong. Can you name any? Rob |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
"jps" wrote in message ... On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:41:21 -0800, "CalifBill" wrote: "jps" wrote in message . .. On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:18:19 -0800, "CalifBill" wrote: "jps" wrote in message m... On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:33:35 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:43:18 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: The US could institute the most socialized health care system in the world and it would not prevent injuries inflicted by one person on another, not would it change the survival rate. There is only so much a Doctor can do to save a life. It's selective editing on the Assistant Paste Eater's part. Trauma treatment does not rely on "insurance" for treatment. ER Trauma centers only treat and stabilize. Once the patient is stable enough to further testing and treatment, they are moved to the appropriate facility or in-hospital ward. What happens at that point may be due to insurance, but the initial ER treatment has nothing to do with stabilization and life saving. DILDO: Please pay attention. Among the things that happen is that people with serious injuries go to the wrong hospitals and aren't admitted because they don't have insurance. If all were insured, the instances where people went to the nearest ER wouldn't have an impact on their survival rate. Secondly, even if they do go to the ER with life threatening circumstances, they may have other uknown medical conditions that are unrelated to the visit but impact the outcome. A situation brought on by the fact that they haven't been seen regularly by a primary care physician Hello? Are you listening? What should we call your faction? DDD for deaf dumb and blind? I have lived in several state and have have seen people admitted and receive treatment at hospitals WITH NO INSURANCE. If you believe people in need of emergency medical care are turned away from a hospital you must not live in the United States. Indigent people become the ward of the township/county depending on where you live. As wards of the township/county, the government insures they receive the proper treatment. If you don't believe this look up the county, township or state laws on indigent care. You have been listening to the obamodytes too long. There are myriad private hospitals which will not admit patients without insurance. There are designated hospitals in every area of the country that are public hospitals which are mandated to take anyone, no matter the circumstances. You need to brush up on your vast knowledge of hospitals and admitting practices. Secondly, most visits to the hospital aren't by indigants. They're working and working poor who do not have coverage. You need to take a wake up pill or maybe smell the coffee? If they have an emergency room they will treat you insured or not. Law requires stabilization. They will ship you off to the county hospital at first chance, but if they refuse to treat you they will be a broke and non accredited hospital. Sounds like it could be a very arbitray judgement call on behalf of the admitting staff. If the ER is flooded and at capacity, what happens to those who wait to be treated? Why are the compiled numbers showing the results? Is this some kind of ruse Harvard Research is foisting on the public? "The reason for this much higher risk of death isn't immediately clear. The researchers point out that, while federal law requires that emergency rooms provide care, the uninsured often have longer waits in the ER, and sometimes have to go to various ERs to find one that will treat them." Is this a lie? A fabrication? A misrepresentation? Because lots of the uninsured come in with mortal knife or gunshot wounds. They all get treated at emergency. Some quicker than others, as they are making a mess on the floor. Yes, I'm sure you're right but the messy ones may not be the ones in the most acute need. If they all had insurance, the traffic would be more evenly dispersed and maybe some of them would have primary care that'd keep 'em out of the trauma centers... Nope, they would still be getting shot and knifed. And how many actually do not have insurance? If you are on welfare, the state pays for your medical costs. |
Emergency room fatalities 80% higher for uninsured
On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 20:49:01 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote: "jps" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:41:21 -0800, "CalifBill" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:18:19 -0800, "CalifBill" wrote: "jps" wrote in message om... On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:33:35 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: jps wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:43:18 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle wrote: The US could institute the most socialized health care system in the world and it would not prevent injuries inflicted by one person on another, not would it change the survival rate. There is only so much a Doctor can do to save a life. It's selective editing on the Assistant Paste Eater's part. Trauma treatment does not rely on "insurance" for treatment. ER Trauma centers only treat and stabilize. Once the patient is stable enough to further testing and treatment, they are moved to the appropriate facility or in-hospital ward. What happens at that point may be due to insurance, but the initial ER treatment has nothing to do with stabilization and life saving. DILDO: Please pay attention. Among the things that happen is that people with serious injuries go to the wrong hospitals and aren't admitted because they don't have insurance. If all were insured, the instances where people went to the nearest ER wouldn't have an impact on their survival rate. Secondly, even if they do go to the ER with life threatening circumstances, they may have other uknown medical conditions that are unrelated to the visit but impact the outcome. A situation brought on by the fact that they haven't been seen regularly by a primary care physician Hello? Are you listening? What should we call your faction? DDD for deaf dumb and blind? I have lived in several state and have have seen people admitted and receive treatment at hospitals WITH NO INSURANCE. If you believe people in need of emergency medical care are turned away from a hospital you must not live in the United States. Indigent people become the ward of the township/county depending on where you live. As wards of the township/county, the government insures they receive the proper treatment. If you don't believe this look up the county, township or state laws on indigent care. You have been listening to the obamodytes too long. There are myriad private hospitals which will not admit patients without insurance. There are designated hospitals in every area of the country that are public hospitals which are mandated to take anyone, no matter the circumstances. You need to brush up on your vast knowledge of hospitals and admitting practices. Secondly, most visits to the hospital aren't by indigants. They're working and working poor who do not have coverage. You need to take a wake up pill or maybe smell the coffee? If they have an emergency room they will treat you insured or not. Law requires stabilization. They will ship you off to the county hospital at first chance, but if they refuse to treat you they will be a broke and non accredited hospital. Sounds like it could be a very arbitray judgement call on behalf of the admitting staff. If the ER is flooded and at capacity, what happens to those who wait to be treated? Why are the compiled numbers showing the results? Is this some kind of ruse Harvard Research is foisting on the public? "The reason for this much higher risk of death isn't immediately clear. The researchers point out that, while federal law requires that emergency rooms provide care, the uninsured often have longer waits in the ER, and sometimes have to go to various ERs to find one that will treat them." Is this a lie? A fabrication? A misrepresentation? Because lots of the uninsured come in with mortal knife or gunshot wounds. They all get treated at emergency. Some quicker than others, as they are making a mess on the floor. Yes, I'm sure you're right but the messy ones may not be the ones in the most acute need. If they all had insurance, the traffic would be more evenly dispersed and maybe some of them would have primary care that'd keep 'em out of the trauma centers... Nope, they would still be getting shot and knifed. And how many actually do not have insurance? If you are on welfare, the state pays for your medical costs. That's completely besides the point and you know it. If the same number were shot and stabbed, whether they be perps or innocent victims, there'd be less congestion at the county trauma centers if insured were treated at every hospital with an ER. Most people who go to the ER are not indigent. This has been repeated any number of times in the stats but, evidently, your case is wearing so thin you're having to repeat erroneous information. Try again if you must or just watch some television. For you, it's time better spent. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:12 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com