Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 12 Nov 2006 09:00 In article <455638E2.B76D8B7A(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >T Wake wrote: > >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >> >> > And how do you find a doctor? >> >> Well in my case, there is a GP practice about 4 miles away. If I was >> somewhere else and it was urgent I would go to see the nearest doctor. > >I'll add that most ppl are already 'registered' with a regular doctor ( or >practice ) of their choice whom they would normally see. > > >> > Are you assigned to a doctor >> > who has to OK other specialists' services? >> >> Not in the manner you mean. The doctor has to OK the medical need for the >> specialist, but it really shouldn't be any other way. >> >> > Can you walk into >> > a cardiologist's office and get treated or do you have to >> > be "vetted" through a series of physicians' offices and labs >> > to get to that heart doctor? >> >> If I need to be treated by a cardiologist I will be. The vetting process may >> well exist but not in the manner you hope to imply here. Patients are >> assessed as to the clinical need for treatment they have. If the patient >> needs to see a cardiologist, s/he gets to see one. >> >> Are you implying that access to treatment should be on the basis of what the >> patient _thinks_ they need and can afford, rather than what the doctor >> thinks is the best treatment? > >I'm wondering if BAH thinks we have our treatment 'rationed'. Would you know if that happened? Since you can't "shop around" and compare, you cannot find out if your treatment is rationed, especially its efficacy. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 12 Nov 2006 09:04 In article <M_t5h.736$yE6.654(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >news:f223d$45565fb7$4fe73d4$10122(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >> Ben Newsam wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 20:23:39 -0000, "T Wake" >>> <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Are you implying that access to treatment should be on the basis of what >>>>the patient _thinks_ they need and can afford, rather than what the >>>>doctor thinks is the best treatment? >>> >>> >>> I would imagine that under a system where anyone can visit any >>> specialist at any time, the best specialists would be inundated with >>> rich hypochondriacs wasting their time. >> >> That doesn't seem to happen much in the US. I don't >> need a referral to see a specialist. > >Sentence #1 doesn't follow from sentence #2 above. In fact, sentence #1 is >simply wrong. Your anecdote aside, anybody who has an HMO for their health >care (i.e., most of the people insured through their jobs by corporate >concerns) must go through their PCP (primary care physician) to get to a >specialist...at least they do if they want the HMO to pay for it. And you're stuck with that PCP if the others in the system aren't taking new patients. Thus, if the PCP is an incompetent doctor it takes years to be able to transfer to another's list. Here in the northeast no doctor is local. You have to drive or be driven or go the emergency room. That's it. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 12 Nov 2006 09:06 In article <50e26$4555da8b$49ecfa5$6404(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >Ben Newsam wrote: > >> On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:41:23 -0500, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >> >> >>>The fact is that some jobs >>>aren't worth "minimum wage". >> >> >> Are you saying that you consider some jobs to be so menial that you >> would actually pay someone less than enough to live on to do them? >> >> The trouble with naked capitalism is that it doesn't just produce >> winners and wealth, it actually requires losers and poverty to >> operate. Because otherwise there would be no incentive to do anything, >> would there? The "pure" capitalist system actually requires that some >> people starve to death just to make sure that the oiks get back to >> their slave labour. > >Been reading too much Marx of late? > No, what you are seeing is how people, who have grown up in most socialists countries, consider what "capitalism" means. I haven't been able to describe this in English ASCII yet. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 12 Nov 2006 09:08 In article <FAl5h.2394$6t.1241(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:ej4hih$8ss_017(a)s977.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <45535A63.7B55EF05(a)hotmail.com>, >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>Are you frightened of shadows too ? >> >> Nope. I'm not frightened of much these days. > > >You obviously are, but you're not even willing to admit it. When someone >sits around dreaming up doomsday scenarios based on the paranoid fantasy >that a few wackos are going to be able to bring down all of western >civilization, and then runs around yelling "the sky is falling, the sky is >falling", that is nothing but pure, abject fear. I have a suggestion. Pretend that I'm not afriad and that my comments in this thread are not based in fear. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 12 Nov 2006 09:16
In article <4555DE68.BD2CE403(a)earthlink.net>, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> In article <c759l25a236u8bi3r7r84v9q4quu5po7vu(a)4ax.com>, >> John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >> >On Fri, 10 Nov 06 14:10:42 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> > >> >>In article <45547A34.B650DD1F(a)earthlink.net>, >> >> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> In article <0j17l2dnu2acrl45la9t243up4ctu00ebp(a)4ax.com>, >> >>>> John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >> >>>> >On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 17:01:39 +0000, Eeyore >> >>>> ><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> > >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> >>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> >> In addition, people burn the wood that is laced with arsenic. >> >>>> >>> > >> >>>> >>> >What kind of wood is laced with arsenic ? >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> Any wood you want to prevent termintes from eating. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >>I see. >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >>Luckily we don't have that problem here. We do get wood rot though. ! >> >>>> > >> >>>> >--- >> >>>> >Yes, I've noticed that from your posts. >> >>>> >> >>>> Oh, stuff it. He's talking nice and you still have to slam him. >> >>>> >> >>>> /BAH >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> You are only reading him in this thread. If you read more of his >> >>>output to SED, you would understand. >> >>> >> >>Which him? Fields or the donkey? :-) >> > >> >--- >> >Either. Really! :-) >> >> Ah, so you're the PITA type. Are you of Royal flavor of just >> the plain variety. >> >> /BAH > > > I would trust John a hell of a lot more than anything spouted by the >Demeneted Donkey. Since I don't know the expertise of either, I wouldn't trust any of them. If you hadn't figured it out, I asked John a trick question. His mettle is getting tested and he's thinking about it. :-) /BAH |