shape
carat
color
clarity

"Snatching Healthcare Away From Millions"

partgypsy

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Nov 7, 2004
Messages
6,622
Rubybeth:
"I had a mammogram like every year. Mine are done with 3 D screening because I have very thick breast tissue. No problem under the old plan. The new plan refuses to cover it because 3D is more expensive. I have a choice - go elsewhere for a cheaper version or pay for it myself.

Eyeglass and dental plan are no where near the old plan. These are important when you are diabetic. I have to be screened for diabetic rhetinopothy (sp) and it is no longer covered. So now instead of going every year I go every 3 years.

Foot care is also important as I have diabetic neuropothy. I put it off."

I'm not sure that ACA can be blamed for all these things.
Before ACA I was prescribed a medicine (for my rosacea). I was on it for a year, but then the next prescription plan for my (private insurance) said it wasn't covered for that condition. Even the doctor was frustrated.
I recently had my mammogram. I also have fibrocystic breast tissue. I asked about 3D exam and they said sure they could give it to me, but it would be at an additional cost, so I declined. So I get the 2D with a warning printed on the bottom that as I have dense breast tissue something may be missed.
Even though I have a private insurer, eye and dental care are under separate, additional plans. That has always been true as long as I have been getting healthcare with last 2 jobs, long before the ACA. Before and after ACA I haven't noticed anything significantly different in coverage.

As far as access, the year before, my eyes were really bothering me. I wanted to go to my regular opthomalogist, but each time I booked, it was for 3 months out, or nothing (call in a month to see if I could book). In frustration I had to be seen in another city to get an appointment (Raleigh versus Durham). Same thing for my my children's pediatric doctor, same network, same provider, but they are moving her to another office, in a different city. I inquired 2 months ago about booking them for their annual (as the provider no longer shows up electronically, but I am willing to drive), no response to either booking with their original doctor or placing them with someone else.
The fact of the matter, when you privatize healthcare, it creates a conflict of interest. The healthcare industry is to provide care, while insurers are there to provide profit to their shareholders, even if it means denying or rationing care. Or, if they charge some people so much they opt out, that is another way of rationing care.
 

Matata

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
8,987
part gypsy|1483732149|4113033 said:
The fact of the matter, when you privatize healthcare, it creates a conflict of interest. The healthcare industry is to provide care, while insurers are there to provide profit to their shareholders, even if it means denying or rationing care.
Bingo! Indisputable truth.
 

ruby59

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
3,553
part gypsy|1483732149|4113033 said:
Rubybeth:
"I had a mammogram like every year. Mine are done with 3 D screening because I have very thick breast tissue. No problem under the old plan. The new plan refuses to cover it because 3D is more expensive. I have a choice - go elsewhere for a cheaper version or pay for it myself.

Eyeglass and dental plan are no where near the old plan. These are important when you are diabetic. I have to be screened for diabetic rhetinopothy (sp) and it is no longer covered. So now instead of going every year I go every 3 years.

Foot care is also important as I have diabetic neuropothy. I put it off."

I'm not sure that ACA can be blamed for all these things.
Before ACA I was prescribed a medicine (for my rosacea). I was on it for a year, but then the next prescription plan for my (private insurance) said it wasn't covered for that condition. Even the doctor was frustrated.
I recently had my mammogram. I also have fibrocystic breast tissue. I asked about 3D exam and they said sure they could give it to me, but it would be at an additional cost, so I declined. So I get the 2D with a warning printed on the bottom that as I have dense breast tissue something may be missed.
Even though I have a private insurer, eye and dental care are under separate, additional plans. That has always been true as long as I have been getting healthcare with last 2 jobs, long before the ACA. Before and after ACA I haven't noticed anything significantly different in coverage.

As far as access, the year before, my eyes were really bothering me. I wanted to go to my regular opthamalogist, but each time I booked, it was for 3 months out, or nothing (call in a month and then book). In frustration I had to be seen in another city to get an appointment (Raleigh versus Durham). Same thing for my my children's pediatric doctor, same network, same provider, but they are moving her to another office, in a different city. I inquired 2 months ago about booking them for their annual (as the provider no longer shows up electronically, but I am willing to drive), no response to either booking with their original doctor or placing them with someone else.
The fact of the matter, when you privatize healthcare, it creates a conflict of interest. The healthcare industry is to provide care, while insurers are there to provide profit to their shareholders, even if it means denying or rationing care.

I am not rubybeth. She is a different poster. But I understand the confusion as there are a lot of Rubys here.

And you are correct. I do not really know what can be attributed to ACA. I just know that I am in a worse situations now than before.

I had 5 miscarriages. So I was put on something (I cannot remember) with the last 2 because I had luteal phase defect. It can increase your risk for breast cancer. That and my very thick breast tissue makes 3D a better choice. I scrimp on a lot of things, but not this. I just pay it.

Eye care may be separate but it is still on the same card I give my PCP and endocrinologist. I had my eyes dilated yesterday to screen for rhetinopothy at my PCP's insistence. And it was expensive. Yet another reason why I keep my part time job.

In the past, because I was a diabetic I was able to get this as well as 3 cleanings a year because of my condition. Blue Cross felt it was preventative. Unfortunately United could not care less. Blue Cross wanted to keep you out of the hospital. United rather deny you now and then pay later.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
ruby59|1483729998|4113017 said:
I had Blue Cross through my husband and it was great. They covered my name brand prescriptions. My deductible was $1,400. It was $400 a month for a family plan.

Now I am in United HealthCare. Our deductible is $5,000 a month. My doctor had to switch over all my meds to the generic brands. In my doctor's view, while the active ingredients may be the same, the fillers are not. And that can be a problem when you are a diabetic. Cost is $1,200 a month for family plan.

I had a mammogram like every year. Mine are done with 3 D screening because I have very thick breast tissue. No problem under the old plan. The new plan refuses to cover it because 3D is more expensive. I have a choice - go elsewhere for a cheaper version or pay for it myself.

Eyeglass and dental plan are no where near the old plan. These are important when you are diabetic. I have to be screened for diabetic rhetinopothy (sp) and it is no longer covered. So now instead of going every year I go every 3 years.

Foot care is also important as I have diabetic neuropothy. I put it off.

My husband kept that job and is still working there 35 years later because of the healthcare. He could have made more money elsewhere but because I have preexisting conditions it was worth it. ObamaCare took it all away.

And we were warned that our premiums would go up again this year.

So once the ACA went on line, your husband lost his BC that was covering you both? Or did it cast you out only?

I'm also going to assume you mis-typed your deductible as being $5,000 a month. :-o A year is enough, surely. ;-)

I swear I'm not just asking questions. It's hard to judge plans side by side without info.

I know that the premiums have gone up substantially for the ACA plans in most places. I also know that the insurance companies have been closing their pharmacopoeias. My meds - the MS meds - are insanely expensive, as in, 2 years ago the quoted price for one month of my medication was $6,250. Yeah, do let that one soak in. There is virtually no one who can afford that, I don't care how much you bring in. And I promise, it's by far not the most expensive - those are in the 10 to 20,000 a month range. And they increase the price every year. Naturally, the insurance companies would rather not pay for those, so each company quietly removes them from the meds they will cover. From what I've read, some states' plans have as few as 2 MS meds on them, and I promise you, those meds (with a single exception of the very oldest MS med out there) have no generic, have completely different actions, and are NOT interchangeable in any way. So, IF there is even anything available in a few years, I will feel the same pain of having to go without, I know that. It's sad to have to hope you hit secondary progressive MS before you have to give up your meds. I say that because when you shift over to the next phase in the MS festivities, there simply are no meds to treat and slow my condition. At least then I can feel like I'm not giving up something that could help, earlier than I must and while I could still slow things down some.

Like others have mentioned though, I don't think these problems - insane drug costs, denied procedures, and 25% increases in premiums, can be laid entirely at the feet of the ACA. These things, sadly, are the natural outgrowth of the idea that 1) regulation is bad, 2) businesses should be able to do exactly as they please, and 3) that the primary responsibility of any company is to its shareholders before anyone or anything. Remember how outraged people were when that little jackass Shrkeli got the license to produce that antiparasitic drug, and jacked the price overnight, from $13.5 to $750 per pill? Perfectly legal, very Gordon Gekko, and completely indefensible from just about any moral standpoint. It may not be happening with quite the drama with the participants of the the ACA, but it's pretty much the same thing. Unfortunately, there was never any mechanism in the ACA, to overcome the actions that come from those basic assumptions, and so yes, we're seeing some serious problems. Unfortunately again, the Republicans - those Gordon Gekko fans - will not improve the ACA, they will try to send us back to what we had before, where people like you and I, couldn't find anything at all at any price.
 

ruby59

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
3,553
ksinger|1483733623|4113045 said:
ruby59|1483729998|4113017 said:
I had Blue Cross through my husband and it was great. They covered my name brand prescriptions. My deductible was $1,400. It was $400 a month for a family plan.

Now I am in United HealthCare. Our deductible is $5,000 a month. My doctor had to switch over all my meds to the generic brands. In my doctor's view, while the active ingredients may be the same, the fillers are not. And that can be a problem when you are a diabetic. Cost is $1,200 a month for family plan.

I had a mammogram like every year. Mine are done with 3 D screening because I have very thick breast tissue. No problem under the old plan. The new plan refuses to cover it because 3D is more expensive. I have a choice - go elsewhere for a cheaper version or pay for it myself.

Eyeglass and dental plan are no where near the old plan. These are important when you are diabetic. I have to be screened for diabetic rhetinopothy (sp) and it is no longer covered. So now instead of going every year I go every 3 years.

Foot care is also important as I have diabetic neuropothy. I put it off.

My husband kept that job and is still working there 35 years later because of the healthcare. He could have made more money elsewhere but because I have preexisting conditions it was worth it. ObamaCare took it all away.

And we were warned that our premiums would go up again this year.

So once the ACA went on line, your husband lost his BC that was covering you both? Or did it cast you out only?

I'm also going to assume you mis-typed your deductible as being $5,000 a month. :-o A year is enough, surely. ;-)

I swear I'm not just asking questions. It's hard to judge plans side by side without info.

I know that the premiums have gone up substantially for the ACA plans in most places. I also know that the insurance companies have been closing their pharmacopoeias. My meds - the MS meds - are insanely expensive, as in, 2 years ago the quoted price for one month of my medication was $6,250. Yeah, do let that one soak in. There is virtually no one who can afford that, I don't care how much you bring in. And I promise, it's by far not the most expensive - those are in the 10 to 20,000 a month range. And they increase the price every year. Naturally, the insurance companies would rather not pay for those, so each company quietly removes them from the meds they will cover. From what I've read, some states' plans have as few as 2 MS meds on them, and I promise you, those meds (with a single exception of the very oldest MS med out there) have no generic, have completely different actions, and are NOT interchangeable in any way. So, IF there is even anything available in a few years, I will feel the same pain of having to go without, I know that. It's sad to have to hope you hit secondary progressive MS before you have to give up your meds. I say that because when you shift over to the next phase in the MS festivities, there simply are no meds to treat and slow my condition. At least then I can feel like I'm not giving up something that could help, earlier than I must and while I could still slow things down some.

Like others have mentioned though, I don't think these problems - insane drug costs, denied procedures, and 25% increases in premiums, can be laid entirely at the feet of the ACA. These things, sadly, are the natural outgrowth of the idea that 1) regulation is bad, 2) businesses should be able to do exactly as they please, and 3) that the primary responsibility of any company is to its shareholders before anyone or anything. Remember how outraged people were when that little jackass Shrkeli got the license to produce that antiparasitic drug, and jacked the price overnight, from $13.5 to $750 per pill? Perfectly legal, very Gordon Gekko, and completely indefensible from just about any moral standpoint. It may not be happening with quite the drama with the participants of the the ACA, but it's pretty much the same thing. Unfortunately, there was never any mechanism in the ACA, to overcome the actions that come from those basic assumptions, and so yes, we're seeing some serious problems. Unfortunately again, the Republicans - those Gordon Gekko fans - will not improve the ACA, they will try to send us back to what we had before, where people like you and I, couldn't find anything at all at any price.

Yes, we have a yearly $5,000 deductible as opposed to $1,400.

All I know is that when insurance renewals were up the next year we were told that United HealthCare would be our new provider.

And I wish I could be sent back to the plan I had before.

I have hypertension, high cholesterol, diabetes, and soon will probably have age related underactive thyroid.

I am lucky that all my meds are pretty cheap - enalapril, furosemide, metformin. glimperride, atorvastatin, and whatever I will have to take for thyroid. I buy baby aspirin over counter.

My prescriptions are $5 each which is pretty good but I preferred Lipidor over the generic.

The mammogram was $750 and I just paid it our of pocket.

The eye doctor will see what insurance will pay, but let me know I am responsible for the rest.

PCP and endocrinologist and GYN I have co pays for $35. I used to get a well visit every year, but no more.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
Tekate|1483731412|4113026 said:
ETA: I AM ON OBAMACARE also.. this is my 3rd year, it is a hardship for me, but I understand why I pay 800.00$ a month for a bronze plan, because good old IBM isn't paying for me anymore. We had cobra for 18 months after we retired, that was great.

Yeah, I'm on COBRA right now. Hopefully certain aspects of our situation will have changed by the time I'm no longer on it, and something decent will be available to me. My plan right now is pretty darn good, and I've used it to the max more than once. Great med coverage too. Must be a side-effect of the IT companies, even the smaller ones. ;-)
 

ruby59

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
3,553
My husband is quite a bit older than me.

If he retires and goes on Medicare then he will have to get COBRA for me as well.

We have not priced it out yet, but I know it can be very expensive.
 

chrono

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Messages
38,364
Ruby,
Your plan sounds like mine and mine is already subsidized by my employer. My deductible is also $5K per year, my Vision covers the basic vision testing and $100 max for either glasses or contacts, which I have to pay the balance. If I need to do a retinal scan or anything else, it is all out of pocket. My dental will cover only the checkups and I pay the other 40% of other dental work. I think my co-pay might also be close to what you are paying.
 

ruby59

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
3,553
Chrono|1483736140|4113062 said:
Ruby,
Your plan sounds like mine and mine is already subsidized by my employer. My deductible is also $5K per year, my Vision covers the basic vision testing and $100 max for either glasses or contacts, which I have to pay the balance. If I need to do a retinal scan or anything else, it is all out of pocket. My dental will cover only the checkups and I pay the other 40% of other dental work. I think my co-pay might also be close to what you are paying.

I could live with my plan. While it was not as good as the old one, it is still better than a lot of others.

The only problem is with the very high deductible. That $3,600 extra a year has to come from somewhere and our budget is pretty tight.
My husband is at the end of his earnings years, and I only work part time.

One thing my husband and I always promised our 3 children is that we would pay for their college education. We did it with our son, doing it for one daughter and will do it for the other.

Our house is paid up. We drive our cars til they go no more. Have not taken a real trip since our honeymoon. And I wear my original E ring. We live well within our means which thankfully means we have a comfortable cushion for retirement. Nothing extravagant, but we will not have to rely on Social Security alone.

So that $3,600 will have to come out each year out of our retirement funds.

I am not trying to be selfish but my husband and I worked since we were 15 often times 2 jobs each. We lived very sparingly. We raised our family. Now we would like some me time while we are still physically able. That cushion will have to last.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
Chrono|1483736140|4113062 said:
Ruby,
Your plan sounds like mine and mine is already subsidized by my employer. My deductible is also $5K per year, my Vision covers the basic vision testing and $100 max for either glasses or contacts, which I have to pay the balance. If I need to do a retinal scan or anything else, it is all out of pocket. My dental will cover only the checkups and I pay the other 40% of other dental work. I think my co-pay might also be close to what you are paying.

(not directed at anyone in particular, just adding to the conversation)

The most important part of all this though, and no one has mentioned this yet, is the maximum out of pocket for the year.

While a $5000 deductible is pretty sucky, and certainly shifts the cost up to the front rather than allowing some to be on the back end, seen in the light of the final bill you'll have to pay (if everything goes south and you have something epic happen - something with which I am more than a bit familiar, multiple times), it is probably not that bad - depending on the out of pocket limits. I know there are out of pocket limits on ACA plans, in fact standardizing out of pockets and making them more honest, was a big part of the ACA and why so many of the junk plans that people were so attached to, were phased out. However, the out of pockets are going up too this year. Sucks. But then most people never use those, or don't for many years. I know I didn't. Until I did. :sick:

I'm shelling out $600 a month to keep continue coverage from my last employer. On that plan, which was the most expensive they offered, my current out of pocket max for a calendar year, is (I think) $4500? With a $1000 deductible, $50 co-pay for a specialist (went up 10 bucks last July), and an 80/20 split on co-insurance. The out of pocket total includes deductible, office co-pays, and the co-insurance portion. So once I've hit 4500, the rest is totally on the house (so to speak) until the end of the year. Unfortunately, the med cost does not factor in, and of course, prems never do.

So $7200 a year for coverage
$4500 a year for all the rest - office visits, portions of stuff done, deductible
$1000 a year for meds - at LEAST, kinda hard to keep track of that.
--------------------
So...$12,700 a year for medical, and that has zip to do with the ACA. Not cheap by any standard.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
ruby59|1483736887|4113067 said:
I could live with my plan. While it was not as good as the old one, it is still better than a lot of others.

The only problem is with the very high deductible. That $3,600 extra a year has to come from somewhere and our budget is pretty tight.
My husband is at the end of his earnings years, and I only work part time.

One thing my husband and I always promised our 3 children is that we would pay for their college education. We did it with our son, doing it for one daughter and will do it for the other.

Our house is paid up. We drive our cars til they go no more. Have not taken a real trip since our honeymoon. And I wear my original E ring. We live well within our means which thankfully means we have a comfortable cushion for retirement. Nothing extravagant, but we will not have to rely on Social Security alone.

So that $3,600 will have to come out each year out of our retirement funds.

I am not trying to be selfish but my husband and I worked since we were 15 often times 2 jobs each. We lived very sparingly. We raised our family. Now we would like some me time while we are still physically able. That cushion will have to last.

Ruby, I'm getting that you're currently on your husband's plan - a family plan, correct? Does his company offer any different levels of coverage? Is there an offering through his company that has a higher premium, but a lower deductible? If so, it might be worth paying that instead of having the lower premium. Just wondering out loud here.
 

ruby59

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
3,553
ksinger|1483738645|4113081 said:
ruby59|1483736887|4113067 said:
I could live with my plan. While it was not as good as the old one, it is still better than a lot of others.

The only problem is with the very high deductible. That $3,600 extra a year has to come from somewhere and our budget is pretty tight.
My husband is at the end of his earnings years, and I only work part time.

One thing my husband and I always promised our 3 children is that we would pay for their college education. We did it with our son, doing it for one daughter and will do it for the other.

Our house is paid up. We drive our cars til they go no more. Have not taken a real trip since our honeymoon. And I wear my original E ring. We live well within our means which thankfully means we have a comfortable cushion for retirement. Nothing extravagant, but we will not have to rely on Social Security alone.

So that $3,600 will have to come out each year out of our retirement funds.

I am not trying to be selfish but my husband and I worked since we were 15 often times 2 jobs each. We lived very sparingly. We raised our family. Now we would like some me time while we are still physically able. That cushion will have to last.

Ruby, I'm getting that you're currently on your husband's plan - a family plan, correct? Does his company offer any different levels of coverage? Is there an offering through his company that has a higher premium, but a lower deductible? If so, it might be worth paying that instead of having the lower premium. Just wondering out loud here.

Yes, I am under my husband's plan which is why he cannot retire. I only work part time. My oldest is 30 and has his own. Our 2 girls are under 26 so they are covered under us.

I know my husband and I discussed it. And I believe he took this plan because it fit better into our budget.

Thank G-d my conditions are well controlled under diet and exercise. And my meds are cheap. I only see my OBGYN once a year - knock on wood clean mammograms and pap smears. I pay for the 3D mammo out of pocket. Worth the peace of mind.

I see my PCP twice a year. And since he has me well controlled I do not see the endocrinologist that often.

Do not know what my eye visit will cost me, but I go only every 3 or four years. My doctor insisted I go before I saw him next.

Footcare I put off. I just check my feet daily for changes to the skin and try to control the neuropathy by not standing too long and I wear diabetic socks when I can.

My husband refuses to see a doctor so he adds nothing to the bill.

So for us this plan is cheaper for us right now.
 

Tekate

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 11, 2013
Messages
7,570
ksinger|1483738292|4113078 said:
Chrono|1483736140|4113062 said:
Ruby,
Your plan sounds like mine and mine is already subsidized by my employer. My deductible is also $5K per year, my Vision covers the basic vision testing and $100 max for either glasses or contacts, which I have to pay the balance. If I need to do a retinal scan or anything else, it is all out of pocket. My dental will cover only the checkups and I pay the other 40% of other dental work. I think my co-pay might also be close to what you are paying.

(not directed at anyone in particular, just adding to the conversation)

The most important part of all this though, and no one has mentioned this yet, is the maximum out of pocket for the year.

While a $5000 deductible is pretty sucky, and certainly shifts the cost up to the front rather than allowing some to be on the back end, seen in the light of the final bill you'll have to pay (if everything goes south and you have something epic happen - something with which I am more than a bit familiar, multiple times), it is probably not that bad - depending on the out of pocket limits. I know there are out of pocket limits on ACA plans, in fact standardizing out of pockets and making them more honest, was a big part of the ACA and why so many of the junk plans that people were so attached to, were phased out. However, the out of pockets are going up too this year. Sucks. But then most people never use those, or don't for many years. I know I didn't. Until I did. :sick:

I'm shelling out $600 a month to keep continue coverage from my last employer. On that plan, which was the most expensive they offered, my current out of pocket max for a calendar year, is (I think) $4500? With a $1000 deductible, $50 co-pay for a specialist (went up 10 bucks last July), and an 80/20 split on co-insurance. The out of pocket total includes deductible, office co-pays, and the co-insurance portion. So once I've hit 4500, the rest is totally on the house (so to speak) until the end of the year. Unfortunately, the med cost does not factor in, and of course, prems never do.

So $7200 a year for coverage
$4500 a year for all the rest - office visits, portions of stuff done, deductible
$1000 a year for meds - at LEAST, kinda hard to keep track of that.
--------------------
So...$12,700 a year for medical, and that has zip to do with the ACA. Not cheap by any standard.

AMEN on that.. Last March I was taking a shower (yay!).. and I noticed blood coming out of my right nipple, that was a shockeroo!, I had just had a mammo in January, so off I go for a sonogram of the breast, all clear, the doctor recommends I have an MRI of the breast to ensure nothing was being missed.. sooooo good old Anthem denied me 3X and my cancer doc 3x also.. so.. I had a choice, no MRI and hope it was nothing or pay it myself, so I paid it myself, I paid the MRI the radiologist reading it, blood tests before the doctor calling me etc.. it was a bit of an expense. The reason why the insurance company denied me was: I was not BRCA 1 or 2, no history of breast cancer in my family, so therefore I was a low candidate for breast cancer - to be fair to Anthem, my mammo was clear and my sono was clear so the chance was low so I get that, but I did experience early menustration, oveweight, late pregnancies, no breast feeding, I was 63! I was shocked, it would NEVER EVER have happened when my husband was working for the company. I was never questioned on anything, they paid both my hip replacements - less our copay and deductible which was 3,800$ as I had them done b4 my husband retired.

So I so understand people's anger, but I also so understand it's just me paying, no corporation paying more.

Peae.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
Tekate|1483744290|4113104 said:
ksinger|1483738292|4113078 said:
Chrono|1483736140|4113062 said:
Ruby,
Your plan sounds like mine and mine is already subsidized by my employer. My deductible is also $5K per year, my Vision covers the basic vision testing and $100 max for either glasses or contacts, which I have to pay the balance. If I need to do a retinal scan or anything else, it is all out of pocket. My dental will cover only the checkups and I pay the other 40% of other dental work. I think my co-pay might also be close to what you are paying.

(not directed at anyone in particular, just adding to the conversation)

The most important part of all this though, and no one has mentioned this yet, is the maximum out of pocket for the year.

While a $5000 deductible is pretty sucky, and certainly shifts the cost up to the front rather than allowing some to be on the back end, seen in the light of the final bill you'll have to pay (if everything goes south and you have something epic happen - something with which I am more than a bit familiar, multiple times), it is probably not that bad - depending on the out of pocket limits. I know there are out of pocket limits on ACA plans, in fact standardizing out of pockets and making them more honest, was a big part of the ACA and why so many of the junk plans that people were so attached to, were phased out. However, the out of pockets are going up too this year. Sucks. But then most people never use those, or don't for many years. I know I didn't. Until I did. :sick:

I'm shelling out $600 a month to keep continue coverage from my last employer. On that plan, which was the most expensive they offered, my current out of pocket max for a calendar year, is (I think) $4500? With a $1000 deductible, $50 co-pay for a specialist (went up 10 bucks last July), and an 80/20 split on co-insurance. The out of pocket total includes deductible, office co-pays, and the co-insurance portion. So once I've hit 4500, the rest is totally on the house (so to speak) until the end of the year. Unfortunately, the med cost does not factor in, and of course, prems never do.

So $7200 a year for coverage
$4500 a year for all the rest - office visits, portions of stuff done, deductible
$1000 a year for meds - at LEAST, kinda hard to keep track of that.
--------------------
So...$12,700 a year for medical, and that has zip to do with the ACA. Not cheap by any standard.

AMEN on that.. Last March I was taking a shower (yay!).. and I noticed blood coming out of my right nipple, that was a shockeroo!, I had just had a mammo in January, so off I go for a sonogram of the breast, all clear, the doctor recommends I have an MRI of the breast to ensure nothing was being missed.. sooooo good old Anthem denied me 3X and my cancer doc 3x also.. so.. I had a choice, no MRI and hope it was nothing or pay it myself, so I paid it myself, I paid the MRI the radiologist reading it, blood tests before the doctor calling me etc.. it was a bit of an expense. The reason why the insurance company denied me was: I was not BRCA 1 or 2, no history of breast cancer in my family, so therefore I was a low candidate for breast cancer - to be fair to Anthem, my mammo was clear and my sono was clear so the chance was low so I get that, but I did experience early menustration, oveweight, late pregnancies, no breast feeding, I was 63! I was shocked, it would NEVER EVER have happened when my husband was working for the company. I was never questioned on anything, they paid both my hip replacements - less our copay and deductible which was 3,800$ as I had them done b4 my husband retired.

So I so understand people's anger, but I also so understand it's just me paying, no corporation paying more.

Peae.

And you fought to have it??? Holy crapoleum, they got me into the machine and after 12 minutes, I was a gibbering wreck. They pulled me out for the contrast and I totally lost it. Totally. And me the master of all things MRI (I thought) after so freaking many of them. I walked in nonchalant, and out shaking like a leaf. I can pretty much fall asleep for a brain MRI, but I would SO need sedation for one of those. Lots. I've also had several medical people point out that they are not that much better than 3D mammography. I know my inability to endure one made no difference in my situation. They knew the score before it was attempted, and so did I.

And yes, by this you may assume I had breast cancer (stage II, surgery, rads, but no nasty infusion type chemo). In 2015. A watershed year for our family, as my lovely sweet 38 year old SIL was diagnosed with stage IV colon cancer 3 weeks earlier than my diagnosis. It was hell, and 2016 had more than a few bobbles too. We're both fine now - well, me quite a bit finer than her even in spite of my other issues. Both of us are still here at least. If anyone knows the deep deep worries of losing health care, it would be our families. She is already on SSDI disability, since her cancer is considered a terminal condition. Sobering to know that it is classified thus. I don't think she is on Medicare yet though, I think she's still on her husband's plan.

So basically, I should have all of whatever other "issues" I'm going to have, THIS year. I hope my body gets the news and obliges. ;))
 

AGBF

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 26, 2003
Messages
22,143
Matata|1483732750|4113036 said:
part gypsy|1483732149|4113033 said:
The fact of the matter, when you privatize healthcare, it creates a conflict of interest. The healthcare industry is to provide care, while insurers are there to provide profit to their shareholders,even if it means denying or rationing care.
Bingo! Indisputable truth.

Actually, it goes beyond this. Watch Michael Moore's "Sicko". The job of people who work for insurance companies in the United States is to make as much money as possible for the company. They (the employees) have historically been rewarded by raises and bonuses as well as promotions for denying more claims than their colleagues. If you watch "Sicko" you can see Congressional hearings where former insurance company employees testify about this practice.

AGBF :read:
 

rubybeth

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
2,568
The real rubybeth chimes in. :bigsmile:

I have news that people who hate Obamacare aren't going to like: Paul Ryan's plan turns Medicare into a voucher system and gives people funds to buy their own private plans instead of being on Medicare. So as much as some people say they hate the ACA reforms, imagine being old and having to compare insurance plans on an open market which is fairly unregulated. Some fun reading: http://www.forbes.com/sites/howardgleckman/2016/06/22/what-paul-ryans-latest-health-proposal-would-mean-for-seniors/#1d3a58765f39

Also, as is stated in the article, "The Affordable Care Act currently limits insurers from charging their oldest enrollee three times as much as their youngest clients, but that would no longer be the case under Price’s approach." So older folks could be charged even more for worse plans. Boy, doesn't that sound fun, after saving your entire life for retirement assuming you'd have Medicare, but then not being able to afford to see a doctor? :lol: :???:

And I want to clarify that the ACA isn't a type of insurance--it's a series of policy reforms that made shopping for insurance much easier for those who had to buy it on the open market. It also added regulation to the insurance industry to keep them on the hook for more medical costs--it regulated that insurance companies need to spend 80% of what they make on actual medical costs, leaving 20% for overhead/administrative costs: https://www.healthcare.gov/health-care-law-protections/rate-review/

Keep in mind that insurance is a business. Do you know how businesses in the US (and most of the world) operate? They try and make lots of money, and they try to make more and more of it each year. Some companies have ethics and stand by their products and customers, but other companies don't and try to fight their customers--this is how I would characterize insurance companies. They look for loopholes to drop people or charge them higher rates. Dismantling/repealing/phasing out the ACA will do away with many of its consumer protections.

Both my husband and I were on plans from our state insurance exchange in the past few years, since he was in graduate school and my employer plan was very costly (high deductible). We were able to shop for high deductible plans that we could actually afford (around $300 for each of us per month, plus we saved what we could in an HSA to cover the deductibles, and we had savings from previous years already in our HSAs). My husband meets his deductible every year due to a chronic, non-curable condition that requires expensive medication. If the ACA didn't exist, I doubt we could have sent him to graduate school--he wouldn't have been able to risk giving up employer coverage to do school. And the applications to get into the exchange plans were very simple, age/gender, address type stuff. Took maybe 30 minutes max for each of us. We didn't qualify for subsidies since we made too much in the previous year. But that was fine--we were happy not to have the invasive, many pages long applications for insurance that we'd previously done under the old system when we didn't have employer coverage.
 

Tekate

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 11, 2013
Messages
7,570
ksinger|1483747427|4113127 said:
Tekate|1483744290|4113104 said:
ksinger|1483738292|4113078 said:
Chrono|1483736140|4113062 said:
Ruby,
Your plan sounds like mine and mine is already subsidized by my employer. My deductible is also $5K per year, my Vision covers the basic vision testing and $100 max for either glasses or contacts, which I have to pay the balance. If I need to do a retinal scan or anything else, it is all out of pocket. My dental will cover only the checkups and I pay the other 40% of other dental work. I think my co-pay might also be close to what you are paying.

(not directed at anyone in particular, just adding to the conversation)

The most important part of all this though, and no one has mentioned this yet, is the maximum out of pocket for the year.

While a $5000 deductible is pretty sucky, and certainly shifts the cost up to the front rather than allowing some to be on the back end, seen in the light of the final bill you'll have to pay (if everything goes south and you have something epic happen - something with which I am more than a bit familiar, multiple times), it is probably not that bad - depending on the out of pocket limits. I know there are out of pocket limits on ACA plans, in fact standardizing out of pockets and making them more honest, was a big part of the ACA and why so many of the junk plans that people were so attached to, were phased out. However, the out of pockets are going up too this year. Sucks. But then most people never use those, or don't for many years. I know I didn't. Until I did. :sick:

I'm shelling out $600 a month to keep continue coverage from my last employer. On that plan, which was the most expensive they offered, my current out of pocket max for a calendar year, is (I think) $4500? With a $1000 deductible, $50 co-pay for a specialist (went up 10 bucks last July), and an 80/20 split on co-insurance. The out of pocket total includes deductible, office co-pays, and the co-insurance portion. So once I've hit 4500, the rest is totally on the house (so to speak) until the end of the year. Unfortunately, the med cost does not factor in, and of course, prems never do.

So $7200 a year for coverage
$4500 a year for all the rest - office visits, portions of stuff done, deductible
$1000 a year for meds - at LEAST, kinda hard to keep track of that.
--------------------
So...$12,700 a year for medical, and that has zip to do with the ACA. Not cheap by any standard.

AMEN on that.. Last March I was taking a shower (yay!).. and I noticed blood coming out of my right nipple, that was a shockeroo!, I had just had a mammo in January, so off I go for a sonogram of the breast, all clear, the doctor recommends I have an MRI of the breast to ensure nothing was being missed.. sooooo good old Anthem denied me 3X and my cancer doc 3x also.. so.. I had a choice, no MRI and hope it was nothing or pay it myself, so I paid it myself, I paid the MRI the radiologist reading it, blood tests before the doctor calling me etc.. it was a bit of an expense. The reason why the insurance company denied me was: I was not BRCA 1 or 2, no history of breast cancer in my family, so therefore I was a low candidate for breast cancer - to be fair to Anthem, my mammo was clear and my sono was clear so the chance was low so I get that, but I did experience early menustration, oveweight, late pregnancies, no breast feeding, I was 63! I was shocked, it would NEVER EVER have happened when my husband was working for the company. I was never questioned on anything, they paid both my hip replacements - less our copay and deductible which was 3,800$ as I had them done b4 my husband retired.

So I so understand people's anger, but I also so understand it's just me paying, no corporation paying more.

Peae.

And you fought to have it??? Holy crapoleum, they got me into the machine and after 12 minutes, I was a gibbering wreck. They pulled me out for the contrast and I totally lost it. Totally. And me the master of all things MRI (I thought) after so freaking many of them. I walked in nonchalant, and out shaking like a leaf. I can pretty much fall asleep for a brain MRI, but I would SO need sedation for one of those. Lots. I've also had several medical people point out that they are not that much better than 3D mammography. I know my inability to endure one made no difference in my situation. They knew the score before it was attempted, and so did I.

And yes, by this you may assume I had breast cancer (stage II, surgery, rads, but no nasty infusion type chemo). In 2015. A watershed year for our family, as my lovely sweet 38 year old SIL was diagnosed with stage IV colon cancer 3 weeks earlier than my diagnosis. It was hell, and 2016 had more than a few bobbles too. We're both fine now - well, me quite a bit finer than her even in spite of my other issues. Both of us are still here at least. If anyone knows the deep deep worries of losing health care, it would be our families. She is already on SSDI disability, since her cancer is considered a terminal condition. Sobering to know that it is classified thus. I don't think she is on Medicare yet though, I think she's still on her husband's plan.

So basically, I should have all of whatever other "issues" I'm going to have, THIS year. I hope my body gets the news and obliges. ;))

Aw Ksinger I am sorry you have to have gone through breast cancer/treatments. My MRI came out fine, I was lucky. I figured after the sonogram something would have shown, I understand that the insurance company (ugh), works on stats, but I am a person, I paid over 3.5K of my own savings to have peace of mind.. I was denied all by my insurance company so I paid an even higher price due to the fact that I didn't get the contract rate for Anthem. I would have taken a loan if I had had to. But it sure made me feel that I am less. Obamacare is not a panacea, but I do get my sulfur cleanser and antibiotic for my Rosacea at the contract price, I get a checkup once a year and a mammo, blood tests for 'free' but I am paying almost 10k this year, it may be cheaper to just go it without insurance till I get medicare, but what happens if this year I do have something really expensive and serious.. (my hip replacements cost over 300K combined).

So again I am sorry you have to have gone through breast cancer, but I am glad you are here and I send you a hug. Take care of yourself. sending good vibes to you sister in law also!

May 2017 be a wonderful year for you.. truly.

kate
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
Tekate|1483836271|4113408 said:
Aw Ksinger I am sorry you have to have gone through breast cancer/treatments. My MRI came out fine, I was lucky. I figured after the sonogram something would have shown, I understand that the insurance company (ugh), works on stats, but I am a person, I paid over 3.5K of my own savings to have peace of mind.. I was denied all by my insurance company so I paid an even higher price due to the fact that I didn't get the contract rate for Anthem. I would have taken a loan if I had had to. But it sure made me feel that I am less. Obamacare is not a panacea, but I do get my sulfur cleanser and antibiotic for my Rosacea at the contract price, I get a checkup once a year and a mammo, blood tests for 'free' but I am paying almost 10k this year, it may be cheaper to just go it without insurance till I get medicare, but what happens if this year I do have something really expensive and serious.. (my hip replacements cost over 300K combined).

So again I am sorry you have to have gone through breast cancer, but I am glad you are here and I send you a hug. Take care of yourself. sending good vibes to you sister in law also!

May 2017 be a wonderful year for you.. truly.

kate

Thanks Kate, you're very kind. It was no fun, but I skated and I know it. Lucked out. As freaky as it was, it so paled next to what my SIL has endured, is still enduring. And she has 2 young children, so that has added to the "worse" part too.

I try to not worry about losing coverage, but it's very hard to feel confident that adequate coverage will be available. Rip-off coverage that breaks the bank while offering jack in the way of the type of medical care and screening I must have to live? You know, the kind they "offered" back in the good old days? I'm pretty sure that will be available to me. :rolleyes: That way the insurance companies can suck someone like me, totally dry while at the same time ensuring that the chronically sick (and I have to put myself in that category, which is depressing in itself) die off like decent people should and quit draining society. I'm sure there's a win in there, I just don't think it's for me.

Karen
 

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
53,978
Karen, I am sending you continued good health vibes and also sending healing vibes to your dear SIL. I am so sorry about what you are both going through and I am keeping your SIL in my thoughts. Truly little else matters without good health and good health care is of critical importance to reaching that goal. Period. This shouldn't be something the insurance companies get to dictate to the healthcare professionals. The healthcare professionals should be making the decision (in conjunction with their patients) as to what care is needed. :!: :!: :!:
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
missy|1483882424|4113489 said:
Karen, I am sending you continued good health vibes and also sending healing vibes to your dear SIL. I am so sorry about what you are both going through and I am keeping your SIL in my thoughts. Truly little else matters without good health and good health care is of critical importance to reaching that goal. Period. This shouldn't be something the insurance companies get to dictate to the healthcare professionals. The healthcare professionals should be making the decision (in conjunction with their patients) as to what care is needed. :!: :!: :!:

Thank you Missy. You are sweet, as always. And I promise I did not post about me to garner sympathy. I rarely talk about my personal life on here, but I thought it would help explain why I hold the position I do. Not only do I support universal health care in theory, I also understand the need on a pretty visceral level, as does my SIL. We both hold that new-fangled idea that we should not have to die for lack of health care because we can no longer work.
 

AGBF

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 26, 2003
Messages
22,143
ksinger|1483892353|4113518 said:
missy|1483882424|4113489 said:
b]Karen[/b], I am sending you continued good health vibes and also sending healing vibes to your dear SIL. I am so sorry about what you are both going through and I am keeping your SIL in my thoughts. Truly little else matters without good health and good health care is of critical importance to reaching that goal. Period. This shouldn't be something the insurance companies get to dictate to the healthcare professionals. The healthcare professionals should be making the decision (in conjunction with their patients) as to what care is needed. :!: :!: :!:

Thank you Missy. You are sweet, as always. And I promise I did not post about me to garner sympathy. I rarely talk about my personal life on here, but I thought it would help explain why I hold the position I do. Not only do I support universal health care in theory, I also understand the need on a pretty visceral level, as does my SIL. We both hold that new-fangled idea that we should not have to die for lack of health care because we can no longer work.

I know you wouldn't post personal information in a general thread without reason, K. I hesitate to respond here given your general desire for privacy. But I wish you and your sister-in-law well with all your health problems, and I have read elsewhere that the breast cancer is not your only challenge.

This thread has, in my opinion, been good because it has given the health care challenges Pricescopers have faced a more personal face. My husband and I have had out fair share of health problems, too. We have been lucky not to have been wiped out by them...yet.

But I refer everyone to "Sicko" by Michael Moore. In the beginning one sees a professional couple who raised, I believe, six children, all of whom graduated from college, forced to sell their home and move across country to live in the storage room of one of their children. The woman was a former newspaper editor. Her husband was also a professional. But he had three heart attacks (while she worked). Then she got cancer. Eventually all insurance ran out and they still had bills to pay and they lost their house. I remember that one of their six kids went to The University of Chicago. When they moved into the home of their daughter, her husband was leaving that night on a job that took him away from home because it was the only place he could get work. His little children were crying. He was going to Iraq to do his plumbing or electrical work (I forget which). These are people with medical insurance. Working people. Not bums. This is not right.

Deb/AGBF :read:
 

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
53,978
ksinger|1483892353|4113518 said:
missy|1483882424|4113489 said:
Karen, I am sending you continued good health vibes and also sending healing vibes to your dear SIL. I am so sorry about what you are both going through and I am keeping your SIL in my thoughts. Truly little else matters without good health and good health care is of critical importance to reaching that goal. Period. This shouldn't be something the insurance companies get to dictate to the healthcare professionals. The healthcare professionals should be making the decision (in conjunction with their patients) as to what care is needed. :!: :!: :!:

Thank you Missy. You are sweet, as always. And I promise I did not post about me to garner sympathy. I rarely talk about my personal life on here, but I thought it would help explain why I hold the position I do. Not only do I support universal health care in theory, I also understand the need on a pretty visceral level, as does my SIL. We both hold that new-fangled idea that we should not have to die for lack of health care because we can no longer work.
\


Karen, no need to explain as I realize you are illustrating a very important point and that is why you shared that personal information here. I never thought you posted for sympathy. And I just don't understand why everyone does not agree with what should be this very basic human right. No one should have to die for lack of health care. What happened to compassion and humanity and common sense???

:cry:

Deb, the movie Sicko was well done but I did have issues with it. I watched it when it first came out so I will need to re-watch in order to intelligently discuss the movie. I do enjoy Michael Moore and his movies and he always makes excellent points. And it is a travesty that the USA does not have universal health care.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
I agree that good heath care should be available to every single person. What will happen remains to be seen. Here's hoping and praying.

But I hope people will begin to learn that to a huge extent, we hold our health in our hands. Our bodies are wonderful, intricate machines that run on (good) food and all that that food encompasses. If you think good food is unimportant, try eating cardboard, plastic and cotton balls. How far do you think you'd get? Ok, then the food you put in your body has to be of good quality to make it function and run well. If you don't, it starts breaking down. Eventually some malady pops up. Conventional medicine says, let's give you this drug. Only, drugs aren't what your body runs on, and it's not going to TRULY fix the problem. It may (or may not) do a decent job of masking the symptoms, but it won't truly heal you. Only the things that make the body run optimally will do that. And that is, again, good food. Food IS medicine. Of course that sounds crazy to a lot of people, because that's not what we've been sold for the last several decades. But if medicines are so good, and we have more now than at any time in history, why are we all so much sicker?

This is really common sense stuff when you start looking at it. But food doesn't make big pharma money. It really IS as simple as that. If some find that offensive, good, so do I. But it doesn't change the fact that food is real medicine, that really heals, not drugs. Think about it, look into it. I am including two links I think some on here might find helpful. They are about a medical doctor who developed MS. She went the conventional medical treatment route for I believe 7 years. She progressively got worse. Then she finally took her health into her own hands, researched, realized what medical school hadn't taught her about nutrition, and came up with a new way of eating. She healed herself of MS. Take a look.

There is a very informative, short video of her giving a talk in this first link, plus commentary.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/12/23/overcoming-multiple-sclerosis-through-diet.aspx

And here is her website.
http://terrywahls.com/about-the-wahls-protocol/
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
Here's another lady you could look into. And her protocol doesn't just heal cancer, it helps heal a multitude of ails.

http://www.mykidcurescancer.com/budwig-diet/



From the section on the history and science behind her protocol, first paragraph.

Dr. Johanna Budwig had a doctorate in physics and PhD in natural science, and was also a chemist and qualified pharmacologist. Read those credentials a few more times and really let them sink in, and then compare them to those who might tell you that this is all “woo-woo.” In the 1950’s, she was the chief expert consultant for drugs and fats at the Bundesanstalt fur Fettforschung, or Federal Institute for Fats Research, in Germany. Yes, apparently that was actually a thing, although I can think of quite a few worse ways that governments choose to spend taxpayer money. It was here she did her major work on the differences between good and bad fats and their role in disease.

She was also a 7 time nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize. :think:
 

lovedogs

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 31, 2014
Messages
18,014
Ellen|1483976910|4113742 said:
Here's another lady you could look into. And her protocol doesn't just heal cancer, it helps heal a multitude of ails.

http://www.mykidcurescancer.com/budwig-diet/



From the section on the history and science behind her protocol, first paragraph.

Dr. Johanna Budwig had a doctorate in physics and PhD in natural science, and was also a chemist and qualified pharmacologist. Read those credentials a few more times and really let them sink in, and then compare them to those who might tell you that this is all “woo-woo.” In the 1950’s, she was the chief expert consultant for drugs and fats at the Bundesanstalt fur Fettforschung, or Federal Institute for Fats Research, in Germany. Yes, apparently that was actually a thing, although I can think of quite a few worse ways that governments choose to spend taxpayer money. It was here she did her major work on the differences between good and bad fats and their role in disease.

She was also a 7 time nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize. :think:

I'm sorry, but none of this has been proven using any scientific method or trials. If you look into it on the Sloan Kettering website or others that are the most respected in terms of Cancer treatment centers, this is considered experimental and unproven. So to claim that this "heals" cancer just isn't accurate until we know more.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
Um, love, you're missing the point. If you look to the so called "cancer experts" for approval of anything other than the big 3-cut, burn and poison, you won't find it. That's why others have taken health into their own hands and figured out there are healthy ways to heal ourselves. If it doesn't make them money, it's taboo.

Did you ever wonder how these certain institutions got to be the big dogs? I mean, who died and made them the so called "experts"? Answer-nobody. They're self appointed. And they will fight tooth and nail to keep it that way.

I will be blunt, and then you're on your own. You, and the rest of this country (and parts of the world) are being had. We have been sold a bill of goods. We have been lied to. They don't care about us, they care about the all mighty dollar and that's it. And when I say they, I mean the people at the very top, who make things happen, who are sitting at the controls. Not Dr. Jones at your neighborhood cancer clinic. He means well, he's just been had also. He only knows what he's been taught, and that's about drugs. Ask any doctor how much studying they did on nutrition and how that affects the body. They will tell you, none. Or maybe one day. I have read countless testimonies of doctors saying this very thing. They have no clue how much they don't know about how to truly heal people.

Time to wake up and take your health back. Because if you only adhere to the so called "experts", you do so at your own (possible) detriment.


Dr. Budwig did do trials over in Germany. I thought I bookmarked a very informative article on her but I can't find it. If I do I will link it. Meanwhile I will link another where she talks a little about her patients . Here's why we aren't seeing evidence of her trials here.

“I have the answer to cancer, but American doctors won’t listen. They come here and observe my methods and are impressed. Then they want to make a special deal so they can take it home and make a lot of money. I won’t do it, so I’m blackballed in every country.” — Dr. Johanna Budwig

http://www.budwigcenter.com/download/budwig-cancer-guide.pdf


And one last thing, there are disinformation agents everywhere when you go to research. Because the last thing they want you to know, is the truth.
 

lovedogs

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 31, 2014
Messages
18,014
I understand your point, I am just saying that I disagree. Specifically, I disagree with the following statements:


Did you ever wonder how these certain institutions got to be the big dogs? I mean, who died and made them the so called "experts"? Answer-nobody. They're self appointed. And they will fight tooth and nail to keep it that way.

I will be blunt, and then you're on your own. You, and the rest of this country (and parts of the world) are being had. We have been sold a bill of goods. We have been lied to. They don't care about us, they care about the all mighty dollar and that's it. And when I say they, I mean the people at the very top, who make things happen, who are sitting at the controls. Not Dr. Jones at your neighborhood cancer clinic. He means well, he's just been had also. He only knows what he's been taught, and that's about drugs. Ask any doctor how much studying they did on nutrition and how that affects the body. They will tell you, none. Or maybe one day. I have read countless testimonies of doctors saying this very thing. They have no clue how much they don't know about how to truly heal people.

Time to wake up and take your health back. Because if you only adhere to the so called "experts", you do so at your own (possible) detriment.

In my view, the above quotes are similar to conspiracy theories, and spread misinformation. As to "who died and made them the so called experts?", the answer to that is that they went to medical school for years, got a degree, specialized in their discipline, and now have experience working with cancer. It isn't accurate that doctors are only taught about drugs--many of them suggest behavioral/dietary changes along with the drugs that are known to be effective. It also isn't true that doctors don't know about about nutrition. If the treatments you are talking about had been studied and shown to be effective, they would be used on a widespread scale. I just don't believe in conspiracy theories, I believe in science and research.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
It is a conspiracy love, against us. If you read this book, it will open your eyes. It is an excellent in depth expose on the medical establishment in regards to cancer. Complete with experts in the field exposing the dark side of this whole ugly business. In senate hearings to boot. It's official, and it's on the record.

I wish you well, I know it's a hard thing to swallow. But once you wrap your head around the fact that everything in this country is motivated by greed and power, it becomes quite easy to see the truth.

https://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Cancer-Story-Vitamin/dp/0912986506/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1484046078&sr=8-1&keywords=world+without+cancer+book
 

chrono

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Messages
38,364
Any published links to controlled studies that has been peer reviewed?
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
Can Diet Cure MS?
With a focus on MS, a razor sharp takedown of many alternative medicine tropes, from the claims that “they only focus on managing not curing” to claims that all disease starts from nutritional deficiency of some sort. It’s a good read, but if you don’t feel like reading it, the takeaway short answer to the question above, is NO.
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/can-diet-cure-ms/

The Diabetes Treatment Your Doctor Won’t Tell You About
A step by step breakdown of but a single one of the inexhaustible, tiresome, and predictable conspiracy claims of the woo peddlers.
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-diabetes-treatment-your-doctor-wont-tell-you-about/#more-8446

For those who wish more information about MS (and most of you won’t but I totally get that - it is my fondest wish to be blissfully ignorant on this subject) this is a British blog set up by MS researchers. One of the favorites of actual people with MS. Probably too arcane and boring for those outside the fold. There is an excellent and detailed explanation of how MRIs work, that might be of general interest.
http://multiple-sclerosis-research.blogspot.com

For those who would prefer something less down in the weeds, there is of course the National MS Society. I have some problems with them, but they do have a good, well-laid-out and just-enough-but-not-too-much website that is pretty easy to navigate. Stuff for both patients and clinicians. Go as deep or not, as you wish.
http://www.nationalmssociety.org

An excellent book about cancer - it’s history, how we got to the current understanding of this complex group of diseases, the development of treatments, all of it. NOT written and published in 1974.
https://www.amazon.com/Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography-Cancer/dp/1439170916

Even better and more accessible is the 3 part Ken Burns documentary of the same name. It was on Netflix for awhile and may be accessible via PBS, depending on your location.

Finally, my unsolicited advice section:
Follow whatever fad/restrictive diet you wish, just do not do it assuming it will do more than lose you some weight and maybe make you feel better, which could be placebo effect, but hey who cares right? You feel better. Win. But feeling better is not the same as actually being better. This is an important distinction. Certainly don't do it thinking it is going to cure whatever ails you, or that it should be used in lieu of actual medical care for something like cancer.

But I'm sure you guys already know that.
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top