apple0154
MEOW
Yea, the bottom line is not paying for shoes. OH, NO!!!:eek3:
Greek Health System Opts for Amputation as Money-Saver
- Thread starter Cancel 2018. 3
- Start date
Yea, the bottom line is not paying for shoes. OH, NO!!!:eek3:
This has to be one of the most inane statements ever. That's like saying, "they are no longer going to cover casts, but they will amputation."Good God, man. They are not cutting off feet to save money. They are simply not going to pay for shoes but still cover amputations. If a person requires special shoes the doctors are not going to cut off his feet while he's asleep.
Talk about spin.
Amputation, in most instances, is the last resort, not the only one.
Spin is trying to make it seem like it is "good" to have to do this to save the cash on this regular form of treatment... You should save the whole treatment thing. They just aren't going to cover insulin anymore, but they'll cover the amputation!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Good God, man. They are not cutting off feet to save money. They are simply not going to pay for shoes but still cover amputations. If a person requires special shoes the doctors are not going to cut off his feet while he's asleep.
Talk about spin.
Well, I know my current health insurance provider will pay for the shoes, or anything else I might need pertaining to my health conditions. They wouldn't make me choose between paying for shoes or getting my feet chopped off. but that's the choice in a country with nationalized health care... I guess they love it so much, this doesn't matter to them... Like I said, I am going with the theory that Greeks don't really care if they have feet. I'm sure we'll be that way before long as well, just so we can go to the doctor and have our feet cut off without having to wait or suffer in the street with aching feet.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Or better yet... When you get sick, they just give you a dose of Cyanide and save the money of treating you altogether... nothing could be any cheaper ...and just think of how much nicer America will be without all these sick people! LOL
apple0154
MEOW
It's no different than physiotherapy. Let's say a person rips a ligament in their knee. An operation can be performed to repair the ligament, if completely detached, or it may heal itself over time and physio can help strengthen other ligaments holding the leg in place. However, whether or not physio is used it is not directly responsible for the torn ligament to heal.
The same applies to diabetic shoes. They do not aid in healing. They are not a "treatment". They are designed to prevent further damage that regular shoes may cause. In other words if a person wore loose slippers, ensuring they do not rub/damage their feet, it would be no different than wearing diabetic shoes.
The same idea with wheel chairs. A medical plan may cover the costs of repairing a broken leg but not cover the wheel chair necessary for the patient to get around.
As for a statement being inane that is the frequent response from those who lack understanding. I wouldn't think it's something to advertise.
apple0154
MEOW
Ah, yes. My learning disabled friend. Do try to grasp this. It is not a choice.
Read my response to Damo. Diabetic shoes are not a treatment anymore than a wheel chair is a treatment for a broken leg.
apple0154
MEOW
Now that you mention it, if I recall correctly, on page 887 of the HCR bill it mentions something to that effect regarding Republicans. Perhaps you can double check that?
True. Got polio? Don't worry, we won't pay for leg braces, but amputation is always an option!
Except they are more like a wheelchair for a paraplegic. If it were possible to "heal" from type I diabetes you may have a point, but really you don't. Instead of treating the problem and trying to stem the tide towards amputation, they choose to skip that step to save money. Rather than treat them, they choose to go to the last resort immediately.
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
It's no different than physiotherapy. Let's say a person rips a ligament in their knee. An operation can be performed to repair the ligament, if completely detached, or it may heal itself over time and physio can help strengthen other ligaments holding the leg in place. However, whether or not physio is used it is not directly responsible for the torn ligament to heal.
The same applies to diabetic shoes. They do not aid in healing. They are not a "treatment". They are designed to prevent further damage that regular shoes may cause. In other words if a person wore loose slippers, ensuring they do not rub/damage their feet, it would be no different than wearing diabetic shoes.
The same idea with wheel chairs. A medical plan may cover the costs of repairing a broken leg but not cover the wheel chair necessary for the patient to get around.
As for a statement being inane that is the frequent response from those who lack understanding. I wouldn't think it's something to advertise.
Do you believe your own inhuman bullshit? So because you are able to split hairs over "treatment" versus "measure", we should go right to amputation?
With that logic, we can say everyone dies eventually, so let's just kill them all at the first sign of illness. Whats wrong with you? You know that's bullshit logic.
Socrtease
Verified User
YOu did notice that in that article he states one of the erroneous claims for why we pay more is that we get better healthcare than they do in other countries? I was a patient for a bit in the german healthcare system. The hospitals were JUST like ours, the equipment was JUST like ours and the doctors were JUST like ours. They just didn't pay the outrageous med mal insurance and didn't go into hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt to be doctors.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
yes, I noticed that, I also noticed the fact that he mentioned that those other countries do not allow people to sue the doctors. Hence... no malpractice insurance being paid and lower costs.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Good God, man. They are not cutting off feet to save money. They are simply not going to pay for shoes but still cover amputations. If a person requires special shoes the doctors are not going to cut off his feet while he's asleep.
Talk about spin.
Exactly the sort of ridiculous spin we've come to know and love from our JPP RightWing extremists.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
OMG... the nationalized health care isn't even going to pay for the anesthesia?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
do you think people shouldn't be allowed to sue doctors?
apple0154
MEOW
No, it's not like a wheelchair for a paraplegic. That is the only way a paraplegic can get around. It is more like a wheelchair for a broken leg. Such a person can use crutches just as a diabetic can use slippers or more comfortable shoes. Furthermore, it is the diabetic's responsibility to frequently check their feet or have a spouse do it for them.
Again, diabetic shoes are not a treatment. It's similar to a person having bronchitis and paying for nicotine patches to help them quit smoking. If a non-smoker had bronchitis and wore nicotine patches it wouldn't help them. The patch does not do anything for the bronchitis sufferer other than help the patient stop doing something that abbreviates the condition just as diabetic shoes help stop the patient from doing something that aggravates his condition; namely, wearing improper shoes.
Furthermore, even if a paraplegic required a wheelchair where would the government draw the line? Do they build an access ramp at his home so he can go outside? Do they remodel inside his home, widening all the doorways, so he can access all the rooms? Do they lower the kitchen and bathroom counters so he has access to them?
You see, it's just access to basic medical care. It's not a big deal and it can be done at a reasonable price just like the dozens of other countries do it.
apple0154
MEOW
Where do you get the idea they go "right to amputation"? Read my responses to Damo. Do try and understand.
apple0154
MEOW
It's will be just Republicans who will go without. After all, we wouldn't want to deny them their First Amendment Right to bitch and spin and rant, would we?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I think you need to go do some studying on diabetes and why they need special shoes. It has nothing to do with "comfort" and "slippers" don't cut it... else they wouldn't be selling many $300 pairs of custom made diabetic shoes.
Again, the point is... My health insurance (in current non-socialized form) covers this sort of thing, along with all kinds of other similar things... I don't have to pay out of pocket for them. Therefore, I never have to worry about having my feet amputated because it's cheaper than paying for the shoes. I thought your idea for nationalized health care was supposed to make things better for people who were less fortunate? This doesn't sound better to me, but maybe to you, having your feet isn't that big of a deal? Or maybe poor people having to fork out $300 for shoes, isn't that big of a deal? In either case, I think the current health care insurance system is far superior, because it covers this sort of thing. You're entitled to your opinion otherwise, but I think you're a fucking moron who doesn't have the sense God gave a billy goat, to be honest.
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
What treatment is administered between diagnosis and amputation?
None? i guess that makes 'right to amputation' accurate. :shrug:
Last edited: