Rick Badie / My Opinion

By Fred

March 16, 2008 3:35 AM | Link to this

That’s all nice Rick but then reality sets in. The reality is that you can’t tell the difference most times between heart burn and bona fide angina. If you go to the hospital or a doctor and are WRONG they treat you with contempt. If you wait til you are near death from a heart attack they say contemptuously, “Why didn’t you come in earlier?” So what is a person to do? It is a no win situation. Did Laura P. Kimble address that question?

By ELLE

March 16, 2008 3:18 PM | Link to this

FRED

You are soooooooooo wrong here! I called about “chest pains” on 7/5… I called to speak with an advise nurse. I thought maybe I was over-reacting, but my chest hurt. I never had “heart burn”.

I was driving after dropping my kid off at day camp. I explained my symptoms. The nurse was so “CONCERNED” that I was driving, that she stayed on the phone with me until I reached the doctor’s office (less than 10 minutes away).

When I went in, they gave me an EKG, and an x-ray. They showed NOTHING. I was asked if I had “REFLUX”, I said no. My doctor said the spot I was holding in the middle of my breasts was my “upper stomach”.

My doctor review the tests… saw “NOTHING”.

She then gave me a “nitro-glycerin” tablet. And told me she was calling EMS to have me transported to the hospital.

I felt “NO RELIEF”, from the “nitro-glycerin” table.

At the hospital they gave me another EKG, and an x-ray. A cardiologist reviewed the baseline (the ones done at my doctor’s office), and the ones done at the hospital.

They asked me again if I had “REFLUX”. I said “no”, then I asked them to explain what “REFLUX” was. When they explained, I thought about my diet over the week preceeding the problem.

• spaghetti
• broccoli
• barbecue
• broccoli
• baked beans
• did I say broccoli

Anyways… I realized that my diet was filled with acidic, spicy, and gassy foods. A little different from my normal.

I told the attending doctor, maybe I do have “reflux”!

They gave me a “G.I. cocktail”. It contains (maalox or mylanta, and pain medicine).

I drank it and had INSTANT relief.

I had a “stress test” ~ I passed.

I tend to eat pretty healthy. I eat barbecue maybe once or twice a year. I’m maybe a little over weight… not much though. I live an active life.

I ate so much broccoli because I love vegetables!

Please know that a great deal of females don’t realize our symptoms are different from males.

Finally, if a male walks into a doctor’s office, or the ER with the classic symptoms… he is treated right away.

If a female walks in with symptoms of “heart burn”, she may not be prioritized as “URGENT”, even though this is one of the “FEMALE” symptoms of a heart attack.

I am sharing this in hopes that a female will read this, and use the information or pass it on to friends or family members!

I pray this will help someone.

By LT5000

March 16, 2008 4:26 PM | Link to this

Elle,

You story undermines Badie’s premise in his article as well as your own premise at the end of you post.

Seems to me you got pretty good treatment.

Another yawner from Badie.

Hey Badie, how did “Hands Across Gwinnett” at Parkview turnout. Has there been a marked drop in violence across the county?

Didn’t think so.

LT5000

By Cindy

March 16, 2008 5:02 PM | Link to this

Elle, You received excellent treatment and a proper diagnosis to boot. Good for you. Truth be told though…anytime you call and say you’re in chest discomfort…it’s mandatory that they tell you to immediately seek emergency treatment.

Otherwise it’s a liability…a person who disregards and attributes it to indigestion but then BAM has a heart attack, later says “but, but, but you didn’t tell me to go seek emergency treatment now…so you’re to blame.”

By Gwynn Carter

March 16, 2008 6:20 PM | Link to this

I am a 38 yr. old female, about 3 yrs. ago I was diagnosed with cardiac sarcoidosis.Which is usually diagnosed after death. I started a new job and I had to go through employee health first before I begin employment. They noticed my glands were very, very enlarged. Referred me to rheumatology, then my primary doctor. I haven’t seen my rheumatologist in 3 yrs. They discovered a very large mass in my chest. For 3 yrs. I had this mass and no one notified me by mail or phone. Because of the mass I was referred to a pulmonary specialist. It turned out to be a goiter attached the right side of my tyroid. The pulmonary doctor was informed the I was diagnosed with pulmonary sarcoidosis in 1998. So he did a routine EKG and found I was is First degree AV block. I was immediately started on prednisone. He referred me a cardiologist, in which they saw I had a normal heart as of 7/05. My cardiologist went ahead and ordered out of the ordinary tests,even though I didn’t show symptoms to have these tests. He had a hard time explaining to my insurance company, but he still had me do the tests. In 8/05, I was diagnosed with cardiac sarcoidosis which is a very fatal disease. I am still here and I have been on a long recovery road since then. I had to get a defribrillator, I had to get surgery to remove the goiter and the right side of my thyroid. My symptoms were of my heart going down hill was sharp shooting pains in my chest, pain under my right breast, shortness of breath, dizzy, and I was overweighted at the time and asthmatic but I never experienced shortness of breath or chest pain. I am spresding the word about heart health and learning how to stop self diagnosing yourself and get to the doctors. If we can go for birth control, breast reduction/implants etc., we can take time to have a physical and blood work too especially for our thyroids. I’m goig to tell all my friends to read your article. Better than that I’m going to e-mail them. Thank you for sharing.

By Michael H. Smith

March 16, 2008 8:12 PM | Link to this

He [The Doctor] had a hard time explaining to my insurance company, but he still had me do the tests.

The only thing worse than self-diagnoses by a patient is insurance companies practicing medicine with a dang calculator!

Oh by the way, Mr. Badie, didn’t we pass tort reform law in the state of Georgia, what affect did it have on insurance premiums? Did tort reform lower insurance costs in Georgia?

By Cindy

March 16, 2008 9:50 PM | Link to this

Michael, you probably already know this but i’ll say it just in case. The doggone insurance companies actually pay the doctors to NOT do tests on us when we dang well need them. When they (ins co) do their reviews, based on how much the doctor kept the insurance company’s costs down…they send a bonus check. Also for HMO’s…when people have to choose a PCP, the PCP gets paid for that too. It’s a big racket that will drive you nuts if you think about it much. Stupid ins companies. Grrr.

By Bruce Wilcox

March 16, 2008 11:27 PM | Link to this

In fiscal year 2002-2003, only 2 percent of all federal tort cases went to trial, and only 5.2 percent of state cases did. Another problem solved that didn’t exist.

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fttv03.pdf

By Michael H. Smith

March 17, 2008 12:05 AM | Link to this

Yes I am keenly aware of just how big a racket healthcare has become in this country. Fortunately, there are a few good Doctors that remain, like Gwynn Carter’s Cardiologist, who are unwilling to play ball with insurance companies that push sacrificing needed critical patient care.

Unfortunately, everything in this country has become a big racket, so as it seems, with our government serving as Racketeers’– in – Chief. Double Grrrrrrrrr….. :{

Here is another example Mr. Allen, where clearly it is seen Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” is being restrained and defeated from performing the greater good it should bestow upon all of society, when individuals are pursuing the more base elements of personal greed within a capitalist free-market. Might I declare in the absence of a vacuum and our begging the need of Eden sending out engraved invitations RSVP that the market is neither free nor under the rule of capitalism? For is it unfettered capitalism to blame or the unfetter manipulator’s unruly manipulations that demands regulations in a market now held captive, truly deprived of competition?

We definitely need regulations but not on the healthcare consumer or the quality of service in care received; nor on freedom in the market to regulate those misbehaving parties within the healthcare industry whose sole purpose is to drive up costs, receive kick-backs or cut service for profit sake placing lives in jeopardy.

By Michael H. Smith

March 17, 2008 12:26 AM | Link to this

http://medmalblog.thecochranfirmno.com/archives/insurance-reform-not-tort-medical-malpractice-reform-is-needed-georgia-insurers-raise-malpractice-premiums-following-tort-reform.html

Because I’ve had my gut of these so-called conservatives that rant-on about tort reform I’m taking some liberty here in case the link above does not post.

Georgia Insurers Raise Malpractice Premiums Following Tort Reform

In a recent article which appears in the Macon Telegraph News at least seven Georgia Insurance Companies selling medical malpractice insurance to physicians have raised their premiums in the 16 months following the passage of medical malpractice caps in Georgia. This hike was made despite promises from lobbyists for the insurance industry that a cap would decrease malpractice premiums during their push for the malpractice legislation, Senate Bill 3, which passed in March of last year. In July of last year, Dennis Kelly, of the American Insurance Association, admitted in an interview with the Chicago Tribune that “We have not promised price reductions with tort reform.” In fact, a March 2002, media release from the AIA states ” insurers never promised that tort reform would achieve specific premiums savings…”

According to the Macon Telegraph, MAG Mutual, Georgia’s largest malpractice insurer, increased physician premiums by 53.5 percent from 2000-2004 while projecting a 33.1 percent decline in future payments to claimants and plaintiffs. The surplus that MAG Mutual holds is almost three times of that required by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.

Since February 2005, seven insurance companies requested rate hikes. For instance, First Professional Insurance Company requested a whopping 63.8 percent rate increase and received approval for a 35 percent increase. Medical Assurance Company requested an even higher 64.10 percent increase and received approval for a 35 percent increase. The Medical Protective Company requested two separate rate hikes, one of 24 percent in June 2005, only 4 months following passage of the cap legislation, and another 28.8 percent increase two months later in August 2005. Medical Mutual Insurance Company of North Carolina requested a 43.8 percent increase and received approval for a 13.8 percent increase in January 2006.

Senate Bill 3, the tort reform law heavily lobbied by the insurance industry, severely restricts a person’s right to hold any corporation, hospital or doctor accountable for dangerous errors and misconduct for fatalities. Notwithstanding the hype and political agendas of those insurers seeking passage of this legislation, the real proof is the utter failure of this law to achieve the stated purpose of lowering physician premiums. This can only lead one to believe that lawsuits and payouts to claimaints really have nothing to do with insurance premiums.

There was an article that also appeared in the AJC that concluded that insurance premiums charged to consumers actually rose after tort reform. And, I will attest that my health insurance costs did not go down after tort reform passed in Georgia, in fact they went up.

By Cindy

March 17, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

Michael that’s one thing you can count on…a yearly increase in the cost of health care. Of course now even the HMO’s stick it to us by also making the commonly prescribed drugs available to us in Tiers (of pricing). So the insurance company’s self-proclaimed God-sent answer to that little gem was to get your doctor to prescribe it in a 90 day supply (to save a month of co-pay). What they didn’t mention is that while they’re telling you that out of the left side of their mouth, the right side is simultaneously saying, “but we’re not covering a 90 day supply of YOUR medicine…ooops.”

You know what? I could go on and on about health care…big sigh…

oh and let’s not even mention how they also slid in a way to make you pay 10% of everything hospital or surgery related. grrrrrr.

and the worst part is that with all the griping and complaining, we’re still the lucky ones to even have insurance.

what a racket…ya know with those requests in malpractice premiums that you mentioned above…they ask for astronomical amounts, knowing dang well they’ll only get half of what they’re asking for…also knowing that if they do that a few times, they’ve essentially quadrupled every few years…and the ones who are allowing it sit back and get fatter and fatter wallets because of it. They’re steadily screwing up as they direct us toward the downward-spiral that isn’t affecting them.

And we poor suckers don’t even get a kiss with ours…

By Michael H. Smith

March 17, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

The entire healthcare system in this country needs total reform. From the Lawyers, Doctors, Insurance Companies and HMO’s to Big Pharma and the laws politicians have written to protect their interest$.

Nah, they’re not steadily screwing up as they direct us toward the downward-spiral that isn’t affecting them. They’re steadily “screwing us” as they direct profits toward the upward-spiral that is placing healthcare beyond the common means of the average citizen in this country. And, neither Democrats nor Republicans are gracious enough to leave a complimentary mint upon our pillows.

Then again, come to think about it, considering what hospitals charge for an aspirin, it is probably best to forgo the complimentary mint!

By Bruce Wilcox

March 17, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this

You know you’re getting shafted when the only laws effecting the big three, the Insurance companies, the Drug companies and the Health Care idustry are ones that insulate them from damage in the form of Tort Reform.

By LT5000

March 17, 2008 11:51 AM | Link to this

As the old saying goes “If you think Healthcare is expensive now, wait until it’s Free.”

The facts are that in the US 85% of people are covered by insurance. The only people “screwing us” are the trial Lawyers and scumbags who walk out of the hospital without paying a nickel.

Given what Congress has done with Social Security, Welfare and Medicaid, do you people really want socialized health care?

My suggestion would be to purchase supplemental healthcare around age 55, since most healthcare spending occurs in your final 5 years of life.

LT5000

By Michael H. Smith

March 17, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this

The facts are, many amoung the 85% that are insured have had benefits cut and are paying higher premiums. Facts are, small business and even lager corporations face doing away with employee insurance plans altogether or closing the doors. Facts are, Tort reform did not lower my healthcare costs as promised, because tort didn’t go after the profiteering insurance companies. Facts are, I cannot shop for insurance in another state. Facts are, I cannot buy FDA approved re-imported drugs because Mr. Free Trade Global George Bush is practicing isolationism! Yeah, facts are!

I suggest the neo-lib and neo-con elite get ready for the finally of the last 8 years of their remaining time in power. And that is a fact.

By Bruce Wilcox

March 17, 2008 1:20 PM | Link to this

A third, fourth, even a fifth party would be great. Almost every other democracy has more than two major parties, their legislatures have too compromise, wow what a concept.

Mr. Smith I think I’ve told you this before, a Southern Democrat is a Northern Republican. The Southern Democrats are far too conservative for me, even if we had five parties, I’d stick with the Liberal one, but at least I’d have a real choice.

By LT5000

March 17, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this

As usual, from Mikey and Brucie, I hear a lot of complaining but no solutions.

Here are the major contributing factors.

Intensity of services – The nature of health care in the U.S. has changed dramatically over the past century with longer life spans and greater prevalence of chronic illnesses. This has placed tremendous demands on the health care system, particularly an increased need for treatment of ongoing illnesses and long-term care services such as nursing homes.

Prescription drugs and technology – Spending on prescription drugs and the major advancements in health care technology have been cited as major contributors to the increase in overall health spending. After six consecutive years of slowing growth, prescription drug spending growth accelerated in 2006, due in large part to the implementation of the Medicare Part D benefit. The effect of spending on technology, such as devices, is harder to estimate. Some analysts state that the availability of more expensive, state-of-the-art drugs and technological services fuels health care spending not only because the development costs of these products must be recouped by industry but also because they generate consumer demand for more intense, costly services even if they are not necessarily cost-effective.

Aging of the population – Health expenses rise with age and as the baby boomers are now in their middle years, some say that caring for this growing population has raised costs. This trend will continue as the baby boomers will begin qualifying for Medicare in 2011 and many of the costs are shifted to the public sector.

Administrative costs - 7% of health care expenditures are for administrative costs (e.g. marketing, billing) and this portion is much lower in the Medicare program (<2%), which is operated by the federal government. [4] Some argue that the mixed public-private system creates overhead costs that are fueling health care spending.

If you wanna live longer, ya gotta pay.

LT5000

By Cindy

March 17, 2008 3:23 PM | Link to this

Looking back to the top…did I start this? If so…wow…just wow. Even if I didn’t though…Badie’s got himself some comments on this one, huh?

FIRST…an on-topic (the original topic) comment…if in doubt…go to get checked…duh.

SECOND…back to the topic at hand. :) of course.

LT5000…I guess I’m doing alot of complaining without offering solutions too…sorry about that…it happens sometimes. Wasn’t intentional.

About the 85% of Americans who’re covered…the fact is that being covered isn’t always “being covered” anymore. Now I much prefer the coverage I currently have, to being a self-pay patient. But I pay ALOT. And it does kill me to know that i’m also paying for the ones who won’t get out and work for a living, but instead sit around having more and more babies and frauding the system…and get good groceries for free, while I have to budget and plan out buying a dang Easter ham. Do i want a haircut or do i want the ham? Bunch of crap, that’s what it is.

I should probably apply for some credit card and just permanently borrow the ham…well except for the next day when it shows up on my butt…just kidding…the gym keeps the ham from taking up permanent residence. :)

So anyway, there was a poll for government state government…asking what young people viewed and valued as what’s more important “right now”…more take home pay or benefits. Basically, the question posed in simpleton form: hello young people, how would you like to have more in your pocket NOW, with no insurance and/or retirement benefits?

Young people everywhere rejoice…yes more money! They’re being exploited for being unaware of the fact that youth is not forever.

To cover a $35K/yr employee, it costs the employer twice to triple the salary. Since we as a public appear lately to be so stupid and all about self, we’ve got to watch out or we’ll totally out ourselves for our futures.

oh and up there, i meant to say “screwing us instead of up”. I wish there was a way to edit out typos…one little letter messed up my entire meaning. I proofread it too…just missed the typo…yet again.

By LT5000

March 17, 2008 4:12 PM | Link to this

Well, Cindy, the thing about insurance is, just like with those adjustable rate mortgages, you know what your getting just by reading the contract.

If it isn’t up to your liking you have the option of finding your own or getting additional coverage.

Fortunately, for me, I am covered by my HMO. A $20 copay and a small copay for drugs. I’m not complaining. At my age, this is the coverage I need.

However, once I hit 45, I probably will get supplemental insurance. Just to be sure.

Everyone here seems to want a European system, with covered trips to the spa and 3 weeks sick leave for a hangnail.

Of course, the queue for surgery and seeing a doctor is incredibly long and no doctor takes an interest in their work.

If that’s the system you want, be prepared to pay for it.

If you want to be healthy, don’t smoke and keep that BMI below 27.

LT5000

By Cindy

March 17, 2008 6:06 PM | Link to this

No LT5000 I don’t want the other system you described. I just wanted to gripe and moan about it for a little bit. haha. seriously, I did though. Doesn’t matter what I say, it won’t change anything.

But with the choices my job offers, I did choose the best one. And I do the things to stay healthy too, so I’m good on that.

oh well…going to cook chili now. ya’ll have a good evening. and post more stuff for me to read.

By WirelessBuzz

March 17, 2008 7:26 PM | Link to this

Rick is right - ladies take it seriously and do not just assume it is nothing. My cousin, all of 48 years old, died of a heart attack in January. Apparently, the day before she died, she was at work and told a coworker that she was having a chest pain. Her coworker joked about whether it felt like an elephant sitting on her and my cousin reportedly said it did. Her coworkers advised to get it checked out but she assumed it was nothing, even though her husband is a nurse. The next morning, while getting ready for church, she called my aunt and told her she needed her at her house right away. My aunt arrived in time and supposedly the last words my cousin said where “Momma, it hurts so bad.” She died that day. Had she gotten her pain checked on Saturday, maybe she would still be here. Maybe not, but her odds would have been better.

Take it seriously ladies (and men for that matter).

By WirelessBuzz

March 17, 2008 7:33 PM | Link to this

Michael Smith,

It is completely understandable for a doctor to have to justify tests to an insurance company. Doctors have financial incentives to run all kinds of tests, especially when an faceless entity is picking up the tab. Yes, the insurance companies need to not be so tight as to require absolutely proof that a test is required, but if there were not some constraints, some doctors would be ordering tests right and left to pad their bills. There has to be a happy medium between justification to the insurance company for needed tests and cost control on the part of the insurance companies. If you do not think the government would put tight controls on costs if they were paying all the bills, I propose that you are just being naive. I would much rather have to deal with an insurance company who has to face some semblance of competition in the open market than a monopolistic government insurer against which you have no choice or recourse.

By Bruce Wilcox

March 18, 2008 1:07 AM | Link to this

What financial incentive does a doctor have by ordering tests? Unless a doctor owns the hospital or the lab all he gets are the results of the tests. Others conduct the tests and still more read the results.

I disagree WirelessBuzz a doctor should never have to justify anything to an insurance company pencil pusher, unless of course that pencil pusher is a doctor who’s job it is to watch the bottom line.

By Michael H. Smith

March 18, 2008 2:14 AM | Link to this

LT 0000 - as usual your BS does not pass the laugh test and you dare call what you wrote a solution? I’m laugh out loud at your contributing factors. Barely a mention of government driving up costs (only Medicare part D), not one mention of insurance companies ripping us off, not a mummer to address the lack of competition in the healthcare insurance industry allowing the consumer to buy healthcare from anywhere in the country across state lines, no mention of re-importing drugs that costs less outside of this country that we are subsidizing by paying a premium to Big Pharma inside this country.

You haven’t brought one thing to the table that can be called a solution. In fact, I can buy better bologna from a supermarket than you’re trying to feed me and everyone else here. I have yet to see you post anything that would come close to a solution at anytime that healthcare has come up in debate on any of these blogs.

By Michael H. Smith

March 18, 2008 3:17 AM | Link to this

Oh I’m so blown away by your belittling drivel WirelessBuzz. I propose that you are not only being naive but just plain dumb. The last GAO report that I read on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid(as much as I could stomach), which I do believe I made mention of recently and cited $14 billion gone to waste, fraud and abuse proves your balderdash of, “If you do not think the government would put tight controls on costs if they were paying all the bills” a completely inane statement. Your government - our government - can’t even begin to loosely control what they are paying out, let alone actually account for our money they spend on all the bills. Suggested reading ClulessBuzz : http://www.gao.gov/

Now this is a real wingding:

I would much rather have to deal with an insurance company who has to face some semblance of competition in the open market than a monopolistic government insurer against which you have no choice or recourse.

What semblance of competition and where is that open market? Can you buy insurance across state lines, from anywhere in this country? There is no semblance of competition, only a blatant absence thereof. Read some of the things Rep. Duncan Hunter cited on this very matter.

If you knew anything about me you would never have suggested, not even by the silliness of your innuendo that I support in any form or fashion whatsoever government healthcare.

The absolute worse answer to the healthcare problem in this country is to have government control an individual’s healthcare.

By the way CluelessBuzz I have bloged on this subject extensively. Do some homework, maybe next time you will be able to offer up a semblance of knowing what solutions I have proposed.

By Michael H. Smith

March 18, 2008 3:27 AM | Link to this

No Mr. Wilcox you didn’t tell me that Northern Southern bit before, though, I will tell you once again that there are many political parties in this state and the South. They simply cannot get on the ballot, because the two major parties hold a monopoly on the political system.

By Bruce Wilcox

March 18, 2008 11:44 AM | Link to this

“I suggest the neo-lib and neo-con elite get ready for the finally of the last 8 years of their remaining time in power.”, I took this as a severe weakening of the two major parties allowing the smaller parties a place in the race.

If you are talking about the two major parties returning to their base, you would have to pick an era because they evolved so many times I wouldn’t know which base you would mean.

By Cindy

March 18, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this

Michael and Bruce, what the heck??? :) hey guys, we’re talking about other stuff…

By Bruce Wilcox

March 18, 2008 2:59 PM | Link to this

Okay Cindy, let’s look at it this way, watch for the signals and contact your doctor. Now many cannot afford or have any type of insurance. These warning signs get dismissed because of costs, the rent and food on the table come first.

Preventive medicine is by far more cost effective than rushing to an emergency room for lack of insurance.

It is a political and class issue, most here just say go to your doctor, for many it is not that simple.

One party feels the system we have now is just fine, the free enterprise system works it’s wonders, the other party wants some kind of preventive health care, either a combination of private and government or a government run system.

I hope that clears it up a little. One question for you, chili on St. Pat’s Day?

By Cindy

March 18, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this

hmmm. yes Bruce…I see what you’re saying. you still can’t talk bad about the sheriff though without getting a rise out of me…snicker…i had to jab at you :)

ok…yes I made chili and it was dang good too. you no likey chili on St Pat day? it was a toss up between that or chickapede (the family size pack of chicken legs. we call it chickapede because of all the legs…ya know…like a centipede style-chicken).

By Bruce Wilcox

March 18, 2008 6:09 PM | Link to this

Red potato’s, gabbage and of course, corned beef. Otherwise, I’ll never be able to fool a leprechaum to be tellin me where his ‘Pot of Gold’ maybe.

By Cindy

March 19, 2008 7:53 AM | Link to this

ah. gotcha. I can tell ya where my “pot of gold” is this morning. In the Red Lobster’s cash register. :( Dang, it tasted good and all but I could’ve bought some tangible stuff with that $$.