On 7/7/2012 2:11 AM, Califbill wrote:
"thumper" wrote in message ...

On 7/6/2012 4:10 AM, BAR wrote:
In article , lid says...

On 7/5/2012 8:10 PM, Califbill wrote:
"thumper" wrote in message ...

So you were happy with the status quo? If you are wealthy you always
have alternatives.

-----------------------------------------------------
Look at the rest of government programs. Way over budget, 40 cents on
the dollar being barrowed and you think government run health care
system will be an improvement?

status quo may be screwed, but why screw it up, most likely, even more?

How do you explain numerous other nations getting better results at less
cost? Are they smarter than us? Have more integrity?

http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/20...t-of-care.html

Better results? What are these better results you talk about. If I have
a problem I can go to a doctor today, be seen, diagnosed and prescribed
a method to wellness.

Will that be the case when the government is running health care.

Be careful that you don't substitute longevity for quality of life.

How would you quantify quality of life? Shorter lifespan is somehow
better? As I said, If you are wealthy you always have alternatives.

------------------------------------
Longevity is not quality of life. My mother had quality of life for 92
of her 96 years. My dad had quality of life for 62 of his 68 years.
Bone Cancer killed my dad. A very bad way to go. I see a lot of excess
spending on extending life for a very short time. My mom's best friend,
Betty, had Congestive Heart Failure. 94 years old, and they spent
$63,000 to extend her life 1 week. that is wrong. when someone is the
far gone, why spend excess money trying to cure the incurable? Just
make them comfortable.

Hospice care should be considered for all terminally ill patients.
There's a lot more to it than pain killing drug administration.