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: Alighieri who wrote (705926)	3/26/2013 2:59:04 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573433

Al, Duh! Ideal...pretty high standard. Cost...a better benchmark. You wouldn't say that if your own quality of health care suffered because of cost considerations. Crazy liberal Joe Shepard, for example, chooses to be on Lipitor over generics because he claims to have done the research: Message 26413515 Of course, it's easy for him to choose the more expensive treatment when he's not paying the bill. But I'm sure it's Pfizer's fault for charging so much for Lipitor. If only government had the power to dictate what Pfizer gets for one of their flagship drugs ... Tenchusatsu

To: Alighieri who wrote (705926)	3/26/2013 3:08:31 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1573433

>> Cost...a better benchmark. Why bother with quality at all. You want reduced cost? Eliminate preventive care altogether. Don't merely stifle innovation, kill it -- after all, that's responsible for a significant portion of American health costs. Instead of 3t MRIs, insist that insurers will reimburse only for 1.5t. No one needs improved resolution -- as with mammography, you damned well might detect something that needs expensive treatment. Reducing cost is easy. The hard problem is doing it without destroying quality.