The obvious conclusion is that they show up in the emergency room long
after they should have seen a primary care physician...


An analysis of 687,091 patients who visited trauma centers nationwide
from 2002 to 2006 found that the odds of dying from injuries were
almost twice as high for the uninsured than for patients with private
insurance, researchers reported in Archives of Surgery.

Trauma physicians said they were surprised by the findings, even
though a slew of studies had previously documented the ill effects of
going without health coverage. Uninsured patients are less likely to
be screened for certain cancers or to be admitted to specialty
hospitals for procedures such as heart bypass surgery. Overall, about
18,000 deaths each year have been traced to a lack of health
insurance....

The research team from Harvard University and Brigham and Women's
Hospital in Boston used information from 1,154 U.S. hospitals that
contribute to the National Trauma Data Bank. The team found that
patients enrolled in commercial health plans, health maintenance
organizations or Medicaid had an equal risk of death from traumatic
injuries when the patients' age, gender, race and severity of injury
were taken into account.

The risk of death was 56% higher for patients covered by Medicare,
perhaps because the government health plan includes many people with
long-term disabilities, said Dr. Heather Rosen, who led the study
while she was a research fellow at Harvard Medical School.

The risk of death was 80% higher for patients without any insurance,
the report said.

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:14:06 -0800, jps wrote:


The obvious conclusion is that they show up in the emergency room long
after they should have seen a primary care physician...


An analysis of 687,091 patients who visited trauma centers nationwide
from 2002 to 2006 found that the odds of dying from injuries were
almost twice as high for the uninsured than for patients with private
insurance, researchers reported in Archives of Surgery.

Trauma physicians said they were surprised by the findings, even
though a slew of studies had previously documented the ill effects of
going without health coverage. Uninsured patients are less likely to
be screened for certain cancers or to be admitted to specialty
hospitals for procedures such as heart bypass surgery. Overall, about
18,000 deaths each year have been traced to a lack of health
insurance....

The research team from Harvard University and Brigham and Women's
Hospital in Boston used information from 1,154 U.S. hospitals that
contribute to the National Trauma Data Bank. The team found that
patients enrolled in commercial health plans, health maintenance
organizations or Medicaid had an equal risk of death from traumatic
injuries when the patients' age, gender, race and severity of injury
were taken into account.

The risk of death was 56% higher for patients covered by Medicare,
perhaps because the government health plan includes many people with
long-term disabilities, said Dr. Heather Rosen, who led the study
while she was a research fellow at Harvard Medical School.

The risk of death was 80% higher for patients without any insurance,
the report said.


My assumption was only partially right. After further reading, it's
revealed that uninsured, among other factors, wait longer to be seen,
are more likely to be victims or participants in/of violent crime, or
aren't afforded more expensive diagnostic procedures.

Don't know how badly I feel for the perps but their victims shouldn't
suffer...


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. They are also likely to receive fewer services, especially
expensive ones like MRI scans. They also are likely to have more
untreated underlying condidtions that compromise their overall health.
Additionally, the demographics of the uninsured and traumatic injuries
is a factor; "gunshot and stabbing victims -- frequently younger
people involved in crime" are more likely to die and more likely to be
uninsured than other trauma patients.

Bottom line, being uninsured is potentially deadly. The moral and
financial costs to the country are unacceptable, and any member of
Congress who obstructs this effort to reform the system will carry the
responsibilty of those deaths.

jps wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:14:06 -0800, jps wrote:

The obvious conclusion is that they show up in the emergency room long
after they should have seen a primary care physician...


An analysis of 687,091 patients who visited trauma centers nationwide
from 2002 to 2006 found that the odds of dying from injuries were
almost twice as high for the uninsured than for patients with private
insurance, researchers reported in Archives of Surgery.

Trauma physicians said they were surprised by the findings, even
though a slew of studies had previously documented the ill effects of
going without health coverage. Uninsured patients are less likely to
be screened for certain cancers or to be admitted to specialty
hospitals for procedures such as heart bypass surgery. Overall, about
18,000 deaths each year have been traced to a lack of health
insurance....

The research team from Harvard University and Brigham and Women's
Hospital in Boston used information from 1,154 U.S. hospitals that
contribute to the National Trauma Data Bank. The team found that
patients enrolled in commercial health plans, health maintenance
organizations or Medicaid had an equal risk of death from traumatic
injuries when the patients' age, gender, race and severity of injury
were taken into account.

The risk of death was 56% higher for patients covered by Medicare,
perhaps because the government health plan includes many people with
long-term disabilities, said Dr. Heather Rosen, who led the study
while she was a research fellow at Harvard Medical School.

The risk of death was 80% higher for patients without any insurance,
the report said.


My assumption was only partially right. After further reading, it's
revealed that uninsured, among other factors, wait longer to be seen,
are more likely to be victims or participants in/of violent crime, or
aren't afforded more expensive diagnostic procedures.

Don't know how badly I feel for the perps but their victims shouldn't
suffer...


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. They are also likely to receive fewer services, especially
expensive ones like MRI scans. They also are likely to have more
untreated underlying condidtions that compromise their overall health.
Additionally, the demographics of the uninsured and traumatic injuries
is a factor; "gunshot and stabbing victims -- frequently younger
people involved in crime" are more likely to die and more likely to be
uninsured than other trauma patients.

Bottom line, being uninsured is potentially deadly. The moral and
financial costs to the country are unacceptable, and any member of
Congress who obstructs this effort to reform the system will carry the
responsibilty of those deaths.

I think you answer the question in in the last couple of lines of the
first paragraph. It is much easier to survive a finger cut on a saw
than it is to survive a gunshot, beating, or stabbing. In the central
part of the city where I living hardly a day goes by without someone in
the news with gunshot, beating, or stabbing.

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.

"Keith Nuttle" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:14:06 -0800, jps wrote:

The obvious conclusion is that they show up in the emergency room long
after they should have seen a primary care physician...


An analysis of 687,091 patients who visited trauma centers nationwide
from 2002 to 2006 found that the odds of dying from injuries were
almost twice as high for the uninsured than for patients with private
insurance, researchers reported in Archives of Surgery.

Trauma physicians said they were surprised by the findings, even
though a slew of studies had previously documented the ill effects of
going without health coverage. Uninsured patients are less likely to
be screened for certain cancers or to be admitted to specialty
hospitals for procedures such as heart bypass surgery. Overall, about
18,000 deaths each year have been traced to a lack of health
insurance....

The research team from Harvard University and Brigham and Women's
Hospital in Boston used information from 1,154 U.S. hospitals that
contribute to the National Trauma Data Bank. The team found that
patients enrolled in commercial health plans, health maintenance
organizations or Medicaid had an equal risk of death from traumatic
injuries when the patients' age, gender, race and severity of injury
were taken into account.

The risk of death was 56% higher for patients covered by Medicare,
perhaps because the government health plan includes many people with
long-term disabilities, said Dr. Heather Rosen, who led the study
while she was a research fellow at Harvard Medical School.

The risk of death was 80% higher for patients without any insurance,
the report said.


My assumption was only partially right. After further reading, it's
revealed that uninsured, among other factors, wait longer to be seen,
are more likely to be victims or participants in/of violent crime, or
aren't afforded more expensive diagnostic procedures.

Don't know how badly I feel for the perps but their victims shouldn't
suffer...


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. They are also likely to receive fewer services, especially
expensive ones like MRI scans. They also are likely to have more
untreated underlying condidtions that compromise their overall health.
Additionally, the demographics of the uninsured and traumatic injuries
is a factor; "gunshot and stabbing victims -- frequently younger
people involved in crime" are more likely to die and more likely to be
uninsured than other trauma patients.

Bottom line, being uninsured is potentially deadly. The moral and
financial costs to the country are unacceptable, and any member of
Congress who obstructs this effort to reform the system will carry the
responsibilty of those deaths.

I think you answer the question in in the last couple of lines of the
first paragraph. It is much easier to survive a finger cut on a saw than
it is to survive a gunshot, beating, or stabbing. In the central part of
the city where I living hardly a day goes by without someone in the news
with gunshot, beating, or stabbing.

Which has nothing to do with the real issue of the uninsured, the vast
majority of whom (80%) are employed and not considered poor.

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.

And, there's only so much a thinking person can do to help someone who is
not thinking.


--
Nom=de=Plume

nom=de=plume wrote:


And, there's only so much a thinking person can do to help someone who is
not thinking.


um. what did you say?

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:07:00 -0500, achmed wrote:

nom=de=plume wrote:


And, there's only so much a thinking person can do to help someone who is
not thinking.


um. what did you say?

Think 'vacuous'.
--

John H

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:12:38 -0500, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:14:06 -0800, jps wrote:

The obvious conclusion is that they show up in the emergency room long
after they should have seen a primary care physician...


An analysis of 687,091 patients who visited trauma centers nationwide
from 2002 to 2006 found that the odds of dying from injuries were
almost twice as high for the uninsured than for patients with private
insurance, researchers reported in Archives of Surgery.

Trauma physicians said they were surprised by the findings, even
though a slew of studies had previously documented the ill effects of
going without health coverage. Uninsured patients are less likely to
be screened for certain cancers or to be admitted to specialty
hospitals for procedures such as heart bypass surgery. Overall, about
18,000 deaths each year have been traced to a lack of health
insurance....

The research team from Harvard University and Brigham and Women's
Hospital in Boston used information from 1,154 U.S. hospitals that
contribute to the National Trauma Data Bank. The team found that
patients enrolled in commercial health plans, health maintenance
organizations or Medicaid had an equal risk of death from traumatic
injuries when the patients' age, gender, race and severity of injury
were taken into account.

The risk of death was 56% higher for patients covered by Medicare,
perhaps because the government health plan includes many people with
long-term disabilities, said Dr. Heather Rosen, who led the study
while she was a research fellow at Harvard Medical School.

The risk of death was 80% higher for patients without any insurance,
the report said.


My assumption was only partially right. After further reading, it's
revealed that uninsured, among other factors, wait longer to be seen,
are more likely to be victims or participants in/of violent crime, or
aren't afforded more expensive diagnostic procedures.

Don't know how badly I feel for the perps but their victims shouldn't
suffer...


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. They are also likely to receive fewer services, especially
expensive ones like MRI scans. They also are likely to have more
untreated underlying condidtions that compromise their overall health.
Additionally, the demographics of the uninsured and traumatic injuries
is a factor; "gunshot and stabbing victims -- frequently younger
people involved in crime" are more likely to die and more likely to be
uninsured than other trauma patients.

Bottom line, being uninsured is potentially deadly. The moral and
financial costs to the country are unacceptable, and any member of
Congress who obstructs this effort to reform the system will carry the
responsibilty of those deaths.

I think you answer the question in in the last couple of lines of the
first paragraph. It is much easier to survive a finger cut on a saw
than it is to survive a gunshot, beating, or stabbing. In the central
part of the city where I living hardly a day goes by without someone in
the news with gunshot, beating, or stabbing.

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.

I'd flip that on its head. If those victims were covered by
insurance, they may get the services that would save their lives or
they'd at least know that the emergency room they went to would have
to admit them.

Your supposition assumes the worst scenario. Welfare mom drivin' a
Cadillac and poppin' babies to increase her montly payments.

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.

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?

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.