Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (196111)	7/28/2004 12:00:42 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576184

1. You had to go back over a year to find an example. 2. Since Denver Health started screening emergency-room patients in May 2002, an average of 110 patients of the 4,200 who sought care in the ER each month were referred elsewhere. At University, where screenings began in October, an average 176 patients of 3,655 seeking care each month were not treated. That's 2.6%. Not bad. Here's the key to the story: But the same doctor refused to treat him unless he had insurance or cash because he did not live in Denver County, he said. "They told me to go back to New Mexico," said Martinez who had been visiting his girlfriend and her mother in a small town outside Santa Fe when he was attacked and beaten. You've got a guy from New Mexico coming to Denver wanting free treatment. Now, you can argue about whether the guy had a bonafide emergency or not, in which case he should have been treated. But you can't expect all hospitals to provide free treatment to all comers. This story really doesn't support your case. Had the guy gone to HIS OWN COUNTY'S HOSPITAL, he would, no doubt, have been treated. And, ultimately, he was treated. So I don't see what you're complaint is. In Canada, he'd have been told to come back in 3 months for a CT Scan.