Health Care - was Best Mac Browser?
in [Mac Applications]
|
Prev: convert zvr audio files
Next: convert zvr audio files
From: Wes Groleau on 31 Dec 2009 00:26 AV3 wrote: > On Dec/30/2009 6:1103 PM, Howard Brazee wrote: >> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 17:39:44 -0500, AV3<arvimide(a)earthlink.net> >> wrote: >>> John McCain campaigned for some change, and Barak Obama campaigned for >>> more substantial change. Obama beat him by a decisive majority and >>> should be congratulated for keeping his promise. Defending or attacking McCain, Bush, or Obama has little connection with my complaint about over 500 Congressmen holding things up while each gets his or her own little "treat" in there. What little connection there is has to do with Obama's determination to sign the thing no matter what is in it--even if fifty percent of it is something he promised to oppose. -- Wes Groleau The Basics—Trust as the cement http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/barrett?itemid=1312
From: Wes Groleau on 31 Dec 2009 00:30 Nick Naym wrote: > "public option," then please explain to me how Government-sponsorship of an > additional insurance plan, designed to compete with (and, in a very > Capitalist manner, thereby provide additional consumer choice) the If it's designed to compete with them and succeeds, VERY good. But if it's designed to put them out of business (or if it does so without being "designed" to) then very bad. -- Wes Groleau Why some kids act strange http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/barrett?itemid=1491
From: somnambulist on 31 Dec 2009 03:38 In article <see.signature-F2A243.23254828122009(a)news.qwest.net>, somnambulist <see.signature(a)uswest.net> wrote: .... > Portions of the legislation already passed this year relate to > electronic records, with payment incentives and penalties relating to > their "significant use". The government hasn't clarified which EMRs will > qualify or exactly what "significant use" means ,,, In case you're interested, CMS today published the proposed rules, which may raise some interesting issues of privacy, etc: <http://www.cms.hhs.gov/apps/media/press/factsheet.asp?Counter=3564&intNu mPerPage=10&checkDate=&checkKey=&srchType=1&numDays=3500&srchOpt=0&srchDa ta=&keywordType=All&chkNewsType=6&intPage=&showAll=&pYear=&year=&desc=&cb oOrder=date> (watch the wrap) An excerpt: "In 2012, CMS proposes requiring the direct submission of clinical quality measures to CMS (or to the states for Medicaid EPs and hospitals) through certified EHR technology.� CMS recognizes that for clinical quality reporting to become routine, the administrative burden of reporting must be reduced. By using certified EHR technology to report information on clinical quality measures electronically to a health information network, a state, CMS, or a registry, the burden on providers that are gathering the data and transmitting them will be greatly reduced.� The burden of generating the necessary information for the provider to then use the information to improve health care quality, efficiency, and patient safety will also be reduced. " This sounds like automatic (opaque?) excerpting of medical records. The goal of improving medical care is laudable. The devil is in the details, and the road to Hell is sometimes paved with good intentions. -- armackay
From: Kurt Ullman on 31 Dec 2009 07:34 In article <hhhct4$kvh$2(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Wes Groleau <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote: > Nick Naym wrote: > > "public option," then please explain to me how Government-sponsorship of an > > additional insurance plan, designed to compete with (and, in a very > > Capitalist manner, thereby provide additional consumer choice) the > > If it's designed to compete with them and succeeds, VERY good. > But if it's designed to put them out of business (or if it does so > without being "designed" to) then very bad. The original Govt option HAD to be designed specifically to put them out of biz, see my other recent post for the reasons. I always though the original GO was a back door to single payer because only the GO would have survived. -- To find that place where the rats don't race and the phones don't ring at all. If once, you've slept on an island. Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"
From: Mark Conrad on 31 Dec 2009 10:59
In article <see.signature-701158.00385131122009(a)news.qwest.net>, somnambulist <see.signature(a)uswest.net> wrote: > In case you're interested, CMS today published the proposed rules, which > may raise some interesting issues of privacy, etc: > <http://www.cms.hhs.gov/apps/media/press/factsheet.asp?Counter=3564&intNu > mPerPage=10&checkDate=&checkKey=&srchType=1&numDays=3500&srchOpt=0&srchDa > ta=&keywordType=All&chkNewsType=6&intPage=&showAll=&pYear=&year=&desc=&cb > oOrder=date> > (watch the wrap) > > An excerpt: > > "In 2012, CMS proposes requiring the direct submission of clinical > quality measures to CMS (or to the states for Medicaid EPs and > hospitals) through certified EHR technology.� CMS recognizes that for > clinical quality reporting to become routine, the administrative burden > of reporting must be reduced. By using certified EHR technology to > report information on clinical quality measures electronically to a > health information network, a state, CMS, or a registry, the burden on > providers that are gathering the data and transmitting them will be > greatly reduced.� The burden of generating the necessary information for > the provider to then use the information to improve health care quality, > efficiency, and patient safety will also be reduced. > " > This sounds like automatic (opaque?) excerpting of medical records. Sounds like excerpting of medical records to me, also. The sort of quick fix a government bereaucrat would think up. Lets look at the harm that would do, by taking all those government imposed standardized pretty point-and-click EHR forms as the law of the land, under the guise of efficiency, reducing the paperwork load on doctors, improving health care, and all the other catch phrases of ObamaCare which appeal to the flaming liberals. Drawbacks ******* Doctor dutifully fills in the box for blood type: "O pos" The patient is a foreign official who was in an automobile accident and suffered severe injuries, loss of blood, etc. Now bear in mind because of all the efficiency, our doctor is prevented from writing any free-form description of the patient's condition in the standardized EHR form, because that would destroy ObamaCare efficiency - - - if there is not a box on the EHR form for something, the doctor can not enter it. So medical care is approved, the patient mends, everything is ducky, ObamaCare came through, whoopie. Except the patient died a few days after he left the hospital. Why? Because there was no place in the EHR form to fill in critical details. Seems our patient did indeed have type "O" blood with positive RH factor, however it was "Bombay Phenotype" of the type "O +" blood. He died of severe anemia, caused by the good intentions of ObamaCare in "improving everything" and running roughshod over the doctors desires to allow free-form description of a patients condition in their ObamaCare standardized approved-by-Obama EHR forms. Doctors have always been against these "point-and-click" EHR forms dreamed up by government "quick fix" people. Mark- |