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: Joe NYC who wrote (381929)	5/1/2008 12:29:18 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1575187

Electronic storage of health records would not be a deal breaker for me. For me the deal breaker is his naive position on Iraq and his naive energy policy (mainly his duplicitous position on nuclear energy). Joe EMR (Electronic Medical Records) has been mandated for use by 2014. Most of these deadlines end up being extended because the government payers and small clinics are not able to comply, however, if that mandate holds, medical records will pretty much be electronic by then. Any EMR system today has to do a reasonable job of protecting the information and it is really only a step beyond what we already do electronically. However, the big thing the EMR is going to do that I'm uncomfortable with is to make it easier for insurance companies to require more information to pay a claim. For example, Medicare today will deny claims for use of high-dose Depo Provera for cancer treatment because its primary use is as a contraceptive. However, some gynecologic oncologists use this drug as a chemo drug. As it is now, every time a claim is filed for using this drug in this way, the claim must reject then be refiled with a letter stating the medical necessity, and it is a major production. With EMR, it will be easier to facilitate electronic filing of such a claim, however, it will also be easier for the payer to request much more detailed information -- because it is all there and readily accessible in a standard format. Rather than merely knowing the patient is being treated for this cancer, an entire medical history which may include mental health and other aspects could eventually be required. I'm not sure, from a privacy perspective, that ease of accessibility is a good thing. I can envision a little too much "free flowing" of information for many, such as yourself, to be comfortable with it.

To: Joe NYC who wrote (381929)	5/1/2008 2:09:05 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575187

I think Obama has a nuance position on nuclear energy. He's actually for building more nuke plants, but he wants to make sure we have a safe and secure way to store the waste. Of course, the liberals say he's for nuclear and therefore a traitor and the neo-cons say he's against nuclear and therefore anti-energy independence. Both the extremes are just pandering instead of coming up with intelligent solutions. My views are exactly the same on nuclear. I want safe and secure storage of waste, but I want us to build nuclear plants instead of dirty coal.