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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (215091)	8/10/2009 3:33:48 PM
From: James Hutton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Last week, my wife went to get an MRI on her neck and shoulder. They only did her neck because they didn't get/see the second page of the order. So she had to go back for a second MRI on her neck. No doubt we'll be charged and have to fight with the insurance company about it. ______ "Medical "Oops" Medical errors are costing the industry $17 billion a year in wasted expenses, something that makes patient advocacy groups irate. "Do we have a good health IT system in place to prevent this?" asked Kim Bailey, senior health policy analyst with consumer advocacy group Families USA. Bailey suggested that processes such as computerized order entry for drugs and use of electronic health records (EHR) could help ensure that patients get the correct dosage of medications in hospitals."

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (215091)	8/10/2009 3:41:11 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

I agree totally. Too many tests driven by the lawsuit epidemic. There will be no meaningful cost control without tort reform. Leaving it off the table dooms the whole program, IMHO.....

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (215091)	8/10/2009 7:21:00 PM
From: saveslivesbyday	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

"Some conservatives have suggested that capping malpractice awards would help solve the problem." "President Obama doesn't agree; instead, his reform proposal encourages doctors to practice "evidence-based" guidelines as a way to scale back on unnecessary tests." ----- That's fine with me, as long as the Obama administration will pay for an attorney to defend me if I'm sued for malpractice, based on his interpretation of the "standard of care" as practicing evidence-based medicine. In fact, that would save me about 45K per year, and I could enjoy "too big to fail" status like the banks. I'm starting to like that idea! -g-