Confidentiality?

[JohnnyV]

Here is an interesting article from our sister station, gay.com:

http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2005/12/28/3

It is about the new rule by which the CDC will require states to release the names of people who test positive for HIV, in order to qualify for federal funds. This means they can no longer offer anonymous testing. (For our friends in Europe, Canada, or elsewhere, this is a US thing, and it comes at the same time that our president is now asserting his right to wiretap citizens and keep extensive files on us for homeland security purposes.)

As a bi guy, this worries me. I think most bisexual men who worry about HIV are going to be too scared to give their real name at a testing site. On another online forum, however, posters jumped on one member for suggesting as much, telling him that the medical profession is careful about keeping names private.

Do most bi folks on here feel okay about giving their names to a medical office as a necessary step in getting tested? Just curious.

[laidback]

LOL You have had NO medical confidentiality since the Clinton Administration required doctors to release your medical information to the government this isnt a Bush issue my friend. And if Hitlary becomes Prez you can count on even less privacy as she usurps your right to the doctor of your choice and compels you to use a government doctor so we can all have universal healthcare. And oh btw the Clintons routinely used no wiretaps against US citizens not even calling overseas as Bush has restricted his wiretapping. And they took 900 FBI files of political opponents and made copies of them before returning the stolen files to the FBI. LOL just thought you should be a more informed consumer.

[Ratchick]

What's wrong with universal health care?
I pay enough taxes I should get something for my money.
More then half my Paycheck goes to taxes.
I have to pay for my health care now, and that is a second rate HMO, similar to having universal Health care.
Why shoudl I pay for it? It is a basic Human right to have health care available to everyone, not just those who can afford it or have a job willing to offer it.
THE USA is so behind the times. Europe is kicking our ass in the Human rights department right now.
Tiem for the USA to wake-up.

Oh and privacy? What Privacy? You Have cameras everywhere now and your e-mails being monitored. All in the name if homeland security.
I hope you weren't thinking you had ay privacy anymore.
If I need HIV testing or any sexual health issues, I goto a clinic where I am annonymous and it isn't repoted to my GP.

-RC

[laidback]

LMAO just exactly what I expected from the liberals!!! You have NO right to health care except what you can provide for yourself!! I am not inclined to pay for your healt care. And if you are paing 50taxes don't ou think you tae too high?? The wonderful Europeans pay more than that for 10% PLUS UNEMPLOYEMENT, MORE THAN 30% IN 25 YEAR OLDS AND YOUNGER SO IF YOU WANT THAT SYSTEM BE PREPARED TO BE OUT OF A JOB... Also the Europena monitor your emails, phone calls, letters etc far more than does the US. It is a fools paradise you want to live in...just don't make e go with you.

[wanderingrichard]

Good Morning and Happy New Years to one and all..( yes, Anchorage AK is cold right now, thank the stars for warm caring partners :rolleyes: )

What a great topic to start the spirited debates we usually have here. Here's my :2cents:

Laidback's right, Johnny, since the Clintonista's and their 3 predecessors, we've not had any reasonable right to privacy. [ actually it goes back even farther, and yes, J. Edgar was the big impetus for most of it..closeted hypocrite that he was] that's one area that Europa has been ahead of us..privacy when it comes to medical matters? HIPAA did away with that.. sure they tell you that your privacy is protected, but there is a clause in there [ isn't there always] that states that in matters of "national security", or "the health and safety of the president or his staff" (sic) , etc, that you have zero right to privacy.. so, in effect, it's a paper tiger.

Yes, Ratchick, my tax burden is very high too.. single , no dependants rate on 42k base /yr. is killing me.. sure it helps to have group health insurance, but it still doesnt cover all the expenses, as we both know. fact is, i'm still paying down uncovered medical costs from 2 years ago.. and no, it wasnt enough to qualify for an IRS tax break. fact is, it was very much below the minimum limit allowed as a tax write off. and incidentally, that limit has gone up now. also, i had to learn the hard way; folks, don't ever file the short form on your taxes, use a good tax prep service and itemize everything! personally, i'd love to see a flat rate tax go into effect, similar to what Steve Forbes and company proposed some years back.. plus the elimination of the IRS, and several other depts of our gov't that actually dont do much at all..

[ side note; did you know that there are over 400 "federal law enforcement "agencies? come on, what does the beareau of statistics or HUD need with it's own private police force? why dont we close those down, reassign the manpower to appropriate, real, law enforcement depts., and use that money to fund things we really need, like alternative energy and better health care]

I've several co owrkers who've grown up in England, U.K. en toto, or Canada. we've discussed this blanket socialized medical issue. they tell me it's a worthless fiasco becuase there is no responsiblity in the system for recompense when it comes to screw ups, and you never get the same doc twice.. that no matter how much of your taxes are paid into it, the system is easily flooded and over burdened by even a simple outbreak of, say,the flu. again, this is from people who grew up "in the systems" and not my personal observations.

Currently, as our gov't is structured right now, HHS [ Dept. of Health and Human Services ] would administer the program if it ever went into place.. trouble is, this is an office that historically has not been on the cutting edge of anything except making sure it's own offices and budget survives annaul review. At one point in it's history, in the not too distant past, it was even the oversight entity for FEMA.. which was just as ineffective then as recently.

Gotta remember this about our gov't, too.. it looks at health care as a service, not as a right.. and that, we can legally lay at the doors of the "health care " and "social security" industry lobbyists. so, we'd need to do not only a sweeping change in the way our gov't does business, but in the way it is structured and thinks as an institution, too.. taking a look at recent history, say from LBJ onward, that prospect looks mighty darn grim. from my perspective, we've got a monster eating our incomes and resources that has taken the appearance of Janus, the two faced creature of legend.

so, folks, the debate is gonna go on no matter what. what we as a nation need to do if we really want these changes to go into effect, and actually regain our rights to privacy, and "more advanced, public, healthcare" is to start becoming more active in our political and societal processes. change comes from within. lets get inside.

[Ratchick]

Maybe we could look at other countries' floibles in a unviersal health care system and improve it. Healthcare shoudl be a right. We are too advanced a culture to just ignore those that can't afford the most basic of healthcare.

About a blanket tax...considering I make less then 28K a year, am a Single female, and have no deductions, I am not sure a blanket tax is the right mode. When I say over half my income goes to tax, I mean it. I have tried itemizing, it doesnt help but make me pay my accountant more to prepare my taxes.

This country is is trouble and until people wake-up and notice, we will fall wayyy behind Europe.

-RC

[searchingbrian]

I find Ratchick's comments about universal health care and some imagined "basic human right to have health care available to everyone" insulting to the US and all the health care workers who now slave in conditions that almost no one would work in,
I think it is you who need to wake up. Your taxes now DON't go to pay a single thing in health care. In fact, it is people demanding things like you are that makes health care costs go up. Then when you get sick, you want to have everything taken care of without any forethought on your part or any RESPONSIBILITY. If you want to have the PRIVILEGE and BENEFIT that our health care system offers, I suggest you PLAN to be sick sometime in your life and PLAN accordingly, since you almost certainly will get sick in your lifetime and it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to plan for it. I also suppose you want to have the best doctors and hospitals waiting for you right at the moment you get sick, have a heart attack, have a stroke, or get into an accident. All that "readiness" costs big bucks, so why don't you take your ignorance and pseudointellectualism about human rights and go elsewhere.

[laidback]

High fives to Richard and Brian it is the individuals responsibility to take care of themselves. Not spend other peoples money taking care of you. I have absolutely no issue taking care of people that are incapable by reason of disability or mental health issues. They deserve our compassion. But if you are an able bodied person fully capable of caring for yourself...then do it..leave me out of your plans.

[Lisa (va)]

I have mixed feeling on socialized health. As a nurse i think everyone should be afforded proper health care, but what you save in insurance premiums would probably be sent to the government to cover costs. Side note, I know of no hospital that will refuse treatment to someone in need. High health costs, not all but some, can be atrributed to the huge amounts the health care profession rights off as unrecoverable. And though it is probably a local thing here, but sure other communities have similiar set ups, but we also have a free clinic that operates on Tuesdays and Thursdays for general health isssues not requiring a hospital, it is staffed by volunteers and I have spent many an evening helping as best I can in my free time. In my opinion we do have a small bit of socialized health care in the form of medicare and medicaid (and yes I know they are not nearly good enough).

As far as making public HIV + testers, has good and bad points, good in that you are aware and can get an idea of how rampant it is in your community. Bad point being that some folks will use false names rendering it useless or even worse having folks not bothering to get tested at all.

[Ratchick]

POSTED BY SEARCHIGN BRIAN*****"I think it is you who need to wake up. Your taxes now DON't go to pay a single thing in health care. In fact, it is people demanding things like you are that makes health care costs go up. Then when you get sick, you want to have everything taken care of without any forethought on your part or any RESPONSIBILITY. If you want to have the PRIVILEGE and BENEFIT that our health care system offers, I suggest you PLAN to be sick sometime in your life and PLAN accordingly, since you almost certainly will get sick in your lifetime and it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to plan for it. I also suppose you want to have the best doctors and hospitals waiting for you right at the moment you get sick, have a heart attack, have a stroke, or get into an accident. All that "readiness" costs big bucks, so why don't you take your ignorance and pseudointellectualism about human rights and go elsewhere."

First of all let me adress this backwards thinking and misunderstanding:
1) My mom is a nurse for 45 years, grossly underpaid, and watched OVERPAID docotors drug companies, and HMOS KILL our healthcare system. No one can afford to goto a doctor anymore without an HMO or insurance, that is disgusting. She remembers a day when you could pay for a doctor out of pocket.

2) I DO think that adequite(sp?) healthcare is a RIGHT for all. How can you say that just because someone doesn't have a job that offers adequite coverage should suffer? This is called *Social Darwinism* and is a digusting way to think. I know plenty of people that work very hard 60 hrs/week and get nothing for thier hard work in health care. IN your words only the folks lucky enough to have the money should be able to see a dentist or a doctor. How disgusting. YOU are the type of american that thinks that people are poor because they are lazy and didnt make the right connections. Probably because you have never been in a tight situation in your life.

3) I never said any of my taxes was going to healthcare, that is my problem.
I pay such high taxes and I still have to pay for healthcare. When my freinds who live in Germany, Sweden, and Canada pay as much tax and get better benifits. They think our country is backwards. We work 50 weeks/year and accept crappy wages and benifits from our employers, not to mention we let all our jobs goto other countries. The world is laughing at us, and unless America wakes up, and sees it, we are in trouble.


And BTW try READING MY post before you flame me publicly. Also, just because you can use big words doesn't change the fact that this mentality of thinking that "I will take care of myself, forget it mother of 2 with a dead father, you find your own healthcare, it ain't my problem" is disgusting and ignorant.







Thank You
RC

[arana]

This thread makes me want to cry at how little compassion some of you people have for your fellow man/woman.

[MikeW]

I've several co owrkers who've grown up in England, U.K. en toto, or Canada. we've discussed this blanket socialized medical issue. they tell me it's a worthless fiasco becuase there is no responsiblity in the system for recompense when it comes to screw ups, and you never get the same doc twice.. that no matter how much of your taxes are paid into it, the system is easily flooded and over burdened by even a simple outbreak of, say,the flu. again, this is from people who grew up "in the systems" and not my personal observations.


I can't speak for England or UK but as a Canadian I can tell you you're coworker's wrong. I've had the same doctor for 17 years. I've never in my 42 years seen a simple outbreak of anything cause a "flooding" of our hospitals.

I'm a father of 2 kids. One teen and one almost a teen. I've NEVER had a bill for medical services, EVER. I can take my child to the doctor for any reason, real or imagined, as often as I like and I don't have to worry about getting a bill.

Sure, our system has its faults and problems but universal health care is, according to surveys, Canadians' most valued social service. A lot of Canadians complain about the health care system but not one of them would give up their universal coverage.

[MikeW]

This thread makes me want to cry at how little compassion some of you people have for your fellow man/woman.

and yet they'll claim to be Christians

[wanderingrichard]

thanx, marc, like i said, these are coworkers who've lived in the universal health care systems.. i'd only passed along what they'd claimed...

arana?

[chook]

I agree with you arana, Its a damn shame that the old "fuck you jack I'm ok" attitude is alive and well all over the world.

Here in Australia we have a system called medicare where everyone pays a very small percentage of their wages to have a basic medical health system so in other words if you suffer a heart attack or are involved in an accident you wont be left at the hospitals front door to cark it just because your health insurance isnt up to date it has worked well for both rich and poor, the only thing being is that if you have to have selective surgery you may have to join a waiting queue but other than that it has worked well for everbody here.

I just cant believe the cold hearted attitude of some people. I firmly believe that each and every one of us deserves at least some sort of basic medical attention when we need it...after all we dont live in the third world.....or do we???? :(


Cheers Chook :bigrin:

[smokey]

Laidback's tiraid is a prime example of what is wrong with the right wing conservative world view...I got mine so screw you. It is ultimately short sighted and selfish. We are not just an aggragate of business concerns but a community of people and it is not how we treat the well off, but how we treat the poor and unfortunate that reveals our true calibre as a people. In the long run some sort of national health care will be enacted, the reniging on pension funds by corporate America is the beginning of the end of private pay system that we currently have.

That is my political staement for the new year. LOL!!!

As for the question 20 plus years into the AIDS disaster there are still irresponsible HIV positive men and women out there spreading the disease either out of ignorance or apathy and that has to stop. I don't see anything wrong about posting the names of HIV positive individuals...it is after all a public disease, and short of locking up spreaders, something has to be done. The flip side of that how many of us are going to keep a copy of the current listings in our pockets and check the name of a potential partner against it? I know I wouldn't...at that moment all I am interested in is whats between their legs and how to get to it LOL.

[Michael623]

I don't see anyone jumping up and down about the millions spent on fighting a war that doesn't make our country safer. My taxes don't go there? And if a person dies because they can't get proper medical care how do we bury them? Certainly don't want our tax dollars going to burial expenses. Oh, damn let's just leave them in the street.

[laidback]

typical liberal hopelessnss lets not make people responsible for their decisions and choices in life lets make someone else pay for them...lol and if our healthcare system is sooo awful why do europeans and canadians come here to seek care? lol oh wait lets not be bothered by fatcs an d as for you ratchick I never said a word about your situaution or death of the father or anything else read my posts before you knee jerk react like a fool. I show my compassion not through taxes but charitable giving and volunteerism do you do the same?? probably not...if you are too poor for health care how did you afford a pc and internet access???

[laidback]

and oh by the way if your HMO is a mess blame your liberal democrats in congress because the asshole Ted Kennedy structured the law that way the reason your costs are high is because the government is already involved in your health care...but dont let the facts cloud your thinking lol

[12voltman59]

To laidback: From your postings--you need to change your handle to something else, for you are certainly not laidback.

I am dissappointed that you had to resort to personal attacks on some of our fellow community members.

I am not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination and neither do I consider myself to be a "liberal", but by the definitions of folks like Ann Coulter and other rightwing pundits with their "if you ain't a fer us then yur agiina us" Hatfield and McCoy approach to public policy, diplomacy and discourse that is a common tool of the right wing mega spin machine--I guess that I am a liberal.

Actually--we have so narrowed the parameters of the definition of "conservative" and "liberal" in this country, that both terms have lost any real meaning--they are just some more tools in the spin machine's effort to divide us instead of unite us.

"A house divided against itself cannot stand.." The Hon. Abe Lincoln, Esq.

To get back to the issue of health care: I do not know not what the answer to this problem is--I do know that our health care system is in a state of crisis and that is a fact that anyone at any point on the political/idealogical spectrum can hopefully agree upon--but then--"conservatives" don't want seem to want to agree with anyone they consider "liberal" because liberals are of the devil and are communists.

Don't forget laidback--not only does our money have "In God We Trust" stamped upon it---It also has the term: "E Pluribus Unum" (from the many,one) stamped upon it as well.

What we need in this country is to have a full, open, frank discussion from all quarters of our society that considers all options in order to get things in order in this matter.

This is a matter of such grave importance because health care costs pose a threat to America's continued prosperity.

I do acknowledge that government health care systems have many faults, but what about the way our system is operating today? Is this anyway to run a popsicle stand?

I do believe that providing health care is not something that is compatible with our corporate structure. Publicly traded companies have, as their prime objective as laid out in the law,--to return the greatest value to shareholders. To me--that type of mode of operation may work well for building automobiles (maybe not so well, just look at Ford or GM) or whatever--but not when it comes to health care.

In manufacturing and other businesses, one of the prime means of increasing profits is to reduce costs--that did work in the early days of HMOs/PPOs but the cost savings have already been squeezed out of the system---that is one reason that we now see the increased costs in recent years that have dramatically driven up health care costs for companies, government and workers themselves.

It also bothers me that medical insurance companies hire low to modestly paid workers who process the claims and base payment to their clients for medical treatments and procedures based on code books that allow for no dispute over denial of claims, while the top level managers of these countries sit in offices with real mahogany desks and gilded water faucet handles--get major stock bonuses as they cut the number of their own workforce, fly around in G-5s and business helicopters, play golf at Pebble Beach and live in 25,000 square feet houses in gated communities.

Another thing we need to change in order to reduce health care costs--is to not have a reactive system--but a pro-active system. We have an epidemic of obesity in not just America, but many other countries. This one condition alone leads to many other health problems--very expensive health problems such as cardiac disease and diabeties.

There is a weight loss program that has been developed by a medical organization that is offered by many hospitals across the country---it has a success rate of nearly 90 percent. It costs something like $2,000 to enroll in the program which sounds like a great deal of money, but money that is well spent me thinks.

For this reason--few if any health insurance plans will pay for the program. Now if someone has a heart attack or is diagnosed with diabetes, that treatment is far more expensive than the $2,000 the weight loss program cost. Had that person taken the program and lost the weight, they may not have had the heart attack or gotten the diabetes.

Of course--a new cost cutting measure many insurance companies are instigating--get diabetes or someone in your family gets it--there goes the insurance.

Sorry for getting back up on my soapbox--I was not going to respond to this post--but the personal attacks inspired me to respond.

I suppose we may never chat laidback--Ann Coulter would only want you to speak to this traitorous liberal if you had to....

[JohnnyV]

First of all, I wish everyone a happy new year. I went offline for two days and had no idea my question had sparked such a heated discussion!

I'd like to apologize, first of all, to all the people from Britain, Canada, and Australia, for the behavior of my fellow Americans. It is truly embarrassing how low so much American discourse has sunk, to the point where right-wing extremists attack people with slurs and poorly understood falsehoods about the medical systems in countries they know nothing about.

I'd also like to say that I think there is hope for the United States, because more people in the US are getting irritated with the damage done by 12 years of the Gingrich Revolution and 6 years of the Bush Doctrine. To people who would distract us with invectives against Bill Clinton's plan for universal health care, all I can say is this:

The GOP has been in control of Congress since '94, the White House since '00, and the Supreme Court since the days of Reagan. They have nobody to blame.

They have to take responsibility for what they've done, and not done.

The fact that over 45 million Americans now have no health coverage is a problem. The fact that the US has a higher infant mortality rate than many Third World Countries, including Cuba and Costa Rica, is a problem. I could go on and on, but I don't think it's necessary.

I don't know ANYONE who is happy with America's health care system. People fly to the US for medical care, but many Americans also fly overseas for medical care. If you have a highly unusual condition, you go to where the experts are. Most health care depends on whether you can get an appointment and see someone halfway decent who won't put you in permanent debt afterwards.

I am a professional with a very comfortable life, I have no debts because I'm careful with money, and my income is probably in the uppermost fifth for people my age. Yet I have been waiting for an appointment with my PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIAN since August 1, 2005. I am supposed to see him on January 6. I have tried to switch doctors, but under my medical plan, there are only a few doctors accepting new patients and they are booking new people in MARCH!

Do not call me a liberal or someone who won't take "responsibility" or any of that other ridiculousness. If I had had a serious flu or diarrhea or something like that, I would have had to go to an EMERGENCY ROOM to be treated! And then the health plan would not approve it because I would need authorization from a PCP, and in a dizzying post-procedure, I would end up being blamed for not being able to get an appointment. I'd probably have to spend years fighting a blotch on my credit record.

What does this mean? Currently, for all intents and purposes, I have no basic medical care for half the year while I am waiting for an appointment. THAT IS OUTRAGEOUS.

It has to change. And regardless of whether the Clintons' plan in the early 90s was good or not, the point is, this is a new decade and it has belonged entirely to one political party. So the GOP has to be accountable for it, and whatever Clintonian liberals may have done or said (even if it was wrong), it's irrelevant because they haven't made any of the major decisions that led us here.

Thanks for listening,
J

[Ratchick]

As for the question 20 plus years into the AIDS disaster there are still irresponsible HIV positive men and women out there spreading the disease either out of ignorance or apathy and that has to stop. I don't see anything wrong about posting the names of HIV positive individuals...it is after all a public disease, and short of locking up spreaders, something has to be done. The flip side of that how many of us are going to keep a copy of the current listings in our pockets and check the name of a potential partner against it? I know I wouldn't...at that moment all I am interested in is whats between their legs and how to get to it LOL.

WOAH! Dude, use a condom.
OKAy and if you have HPV or Anything else contageous, by your logic the whole world should know. OMG!!!!
Do you know anyone with HIV? Not all peoele get HIV As drug addicts or through premiscuious sex. Some people are married women who have only slept with thier husbands who fooled artound ON THEM, and gave them the virus. Why should everyone be able to know she has HIV? Imagine what her kids in school will go through? How she will be shunned from public places?
There is still a huge ignorance about this disease .

UNIVERSAL PERCAUTIONS is WHY we use it. So we don't have to know WHO is positive.

If you don't want to get AIDS, Don't have unprotected sex with people who aren't tested or you don't know, Don't use IV Drugs, and USE Universal precautions.

OMG By this logic everyone would know everything you have..imagine the yeast infection reports or athlete's foot reports???

Ridiculous.

RC

[Ratchick]

typical liberal hopelessnss lets not make people responsible for their decisions and choices in life lets make someone else pay for them...lol and if our healthcare system is sooo awful why do europeans and canadians come here to seek care? lol oh wait lets not be bothered by fatcs an d as for you ratchick I never said a word about your situaution or death of the father or anything else read my posts before you knee jerk react like a fool. I show my compassion not through taxes but charitable giving and volunteerism do you do the same?? probably not...if you are too poor for health care how did you afford a pc and internet access???
Laidback...Get a clue.
YOu sound lke a fool.

[smokey]

[QUOTE=Ratchick]WOAH! Dude, use a condom.


UNIVERSAL PERCAUTIONS is WHY we use it. So we don't have to know WHO is positive.

I use a condom thank you. There are many arguments one way or the other about AIDS...when I think about it in context of me of course (and I am very HIV negative) I don't want my name broadcast but there comes a point where individual rights have to segue with or give way to social responsiblity, and if someone refuses to be socially responsible what are we to do then? Let them continue to spread the disease?

All this brings to mind something I have never been able to understand. Gay Republicans or in the case of laidback, right wing bisexuals. How can you possibly embrace with good concious the politics of a party that obviously barely tolerates you and for the most part, activily dispises you for being what you are?

[laidback]

LOL Can you people even read? Look at the postings and see who made this personal first. I was dealing with issues and others made it personal with their attacks on those of us that disagreed with ratchick but I am used to that from the libs. You are confusing taxes with compassion. hitler taxed the Jews highly but was he compassionate to them? Don't think so. The Moslem countries tax Jews and Christionas at a higher rate and are they comapssionate? Dont thinks so either.. So lets stick to the issues ok?

[sailorashore]

Forgive him, folks. He gets his information from Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Fox News. Is it any wonder?

[laidback]

lol dont need your forgiveness sailor and they beat CNN ABC abd CBS lol but that wasnt a personal attack was it sailor? didnt think so libs dont engage in personal attacks LMAO

[MikeW]

lol dont need your forgiveness sailor and they beat CNN ABC abd CBS lol but that wasnt a personal attack was it sailor? didnt think so libs dont engage in personal attacks LMAO


You're an ignorant idiot. And yes, that is a personal comment on you.

Jeez, this conservative mud slinging is fun... can you teach me some more?

[arana]

LOL Can you people even read? Look at the postings and see who made this personal first. I was dealing with issues and others made it personal with their attacks on those of us that disagreed with ratchick but I am used to that from the libs. You are confusing taxes with compassion. hitler taxed the Jews highly but was he compassionate to them? Don't think so. The Moslem countries tax Jews and Christionas at a higher rate and are they comapssionate? Dont thinks so either.. So lets stick to the issues ok?

No Laidback, you with some of your LOL comments and Searchingbrian's whole post made it personal. Some people actually deal with the system and even with being prepared and taking care of themselves financially know insurance and healthcare the way it is, isn't the answer. Your thinking would mean that having a serious accident like Christopher Reeves had and then his insurance capping out on him was his fault?:


LOL You have had NO medical confidentiality LOL just thought you should be a more informed consumer.
LMAO just exactly what I expected from the liberals!!!


I find Ratchick's comments about universal health care and some imagined "basic human right to have health care available to everyone" insulting to the US and all the health care workers who now slave in conditions that almost no one would work in,
I think it is you who need to wake up. Your taxes now DON't go to pay a single thing in health care. In fact, it is people demanding things like you are that makes health care costs go up. Then when you get sick, you want to have everything taken care of without any forethought on your part or any RESPONSIBILITY. If you want to have the PRIVILEGE and BENEFIT that our health care system offers, I suggest you PLAN to be sick sometime in your life and PLAN accordingly, since you almost certainly will get sick in your lifetime and it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to plan for it. I also suppose you want to have the best doctors and hospitals waiting for you right at the moment you get sick, have a heart attack, have a stroke, or get into an accident. All that "readiness" costs big bucks, so why don't you take your ignorance and pseudointellectualism about human rights and go elsewhere.

You both couldn't just state your opinion on the subject, instead of putting people down and LOL for their beliefs and knowledge. If someone is misinformed then you show them the truth, but don't belittle them and back them in a corner. You're better than that.

[smokey]

From what I have seen of this fellow laidback so far...I'd bet he isn't even a bisexual...he's probably one of those right wing nutjobs that stalk so called liberal websites and harrass people...I have seen them on everything from news services like media matters to neo-pagan websites and their mode of operation is always the same, bilgerence against anyone who disagrees with them. Ya actually have to feel sorry for them, if they have to validiate themselves by such tatics. :rolleyes:

[arana]

Before anymore gets started, Laidback is bisexual and here legitimately

[tinman714]

em·pa·thy (mp-th)
n.

1. Direct identification with, understanding of, and vicarious experience of another person's situation, feelings, and motives.
2. The projection of one's own feelings or emotional state onto an object or animal.


My feelings on this whole liberal/conservative issue is that people get so emotional about their opinions that they can't put themselves "in someone elses shoes" before they become upset that not every one thinks like they do. In reality, whether it's healthcare, national security, or any other issue handled by the government, (demacrooks or republicrumbs) we as the "consumer" are fucked!

[Ratchick]

[QUOTE=Ratchick]WOAH! Dude, use a condom.


UNIVERSAL PERCAUTIONS is WHY we use it. So we don't have to know WHO is positive.

I use a condom thank you. There are many arguments one way or the other about AIDS...when I think about it in context of me of course (and I am very HIV negative) I don't want my name broadcast but there comes a point where individual rights have to segue with or give way to social responsiblity, and if someone refuses to be socially responsible what are we to do then? Let them continue to spread the disease?

All this brings to mind something I have never been able to understand. Gay Republicans or in the case of laidback, right wing bisexuals. How can you possibly embrace with good concious the politics of a party that obviously barely tolerates you and for the most part, activily dispises you for being what you are?

I still say it is just easier to practice Safe sex and universal percautions.
If you dont have unprotected sex, you'll be fine.
If you are practicing safe sex, why do you need to know who is positive?
Imagine, People carring phone books full of names of folks with HPV, HErpes, AIDS, ect......
Kinda scary?
-RC

[JohnnyV]

There's a complex psychology behind gay Republicans, black conservatives, and Jewish neoconservatives. In all three cases, I think they admire the orderliness and seeming confidence of a heartless right wing stance. It makes them feel less victimized and powerless. Unfortunately, the down side is that they get stuck in a worse position because of what they support.

J

[JohnnyV]

Oh by the way, I just reread the posts and realized I'd missed the part where Laid Back was implying that I was "uninformed" and that others couldn't read.

I would like to point out, for the record, that most of what Laid Back posted was historically inaccurate anyway. Basically he isn't saying anything grounded in reality.

Brian's point about our compromised privacy is a little more accurate, since he traces the history of domestic intelligence programs back to Hoover's changes in the FBI. But he's missing the point about the stage we're at now and his arc of history is not entirely on the mark. Joseph McCarthy was disavowed for his campaign, Nixon had to resign because of outrage over his abuse of federal domestic espionage powers, Reagan narrowly avoided a crucifixion over his abuse of covert operations because Oliver North martyred himself. And the anti-Clinton investigators under Ken Starr looked and looked -- ad nauseam -- for proof that he had violated the privacy of his paramours to save his political career. They came up with nothing.

What the review above implies is that domestic espionage has never been treated as an acceptable routine in American culture, with good reason. There's a Bill of Rights that outlaws it. Bush's bold acknowledgement of and insistence on wiretapping is a whole new phase, not merely more of the same.

J

[jadewell]

I think that:
No matter who you are with, a one night stand or a long lasting relationship, the thought and question if this person is save or not is an on going battle. Your 9 times out of ten going to ask that perons if he or she is HIV + ( I would hope) before entering in a sexual act. I think this is a pretty good idea, since a lot of people dont think of others lives(or anyting else for that matter) in the heat of passion, this list would make people have to tell the truth, and let those others deciede if they want to get involved with someone,who is infected, and may be a fibber at that.

However, I do think that this may be going against our rights, as being constitutional, but, the goverment will soon change the whole constitution to fit there ideas anyway, with little to no regard to the people.

[biRooky]

Hey if you want a model health care look at Canada, rember how just before the 2004 elections we were hearing about all the doctors closing their doors and coming here? I was there that summer and watched it on their news whole time there. There is the joy of federall health care.
Also as for the wire tap thing, listen Clinton DID do DOMESTIC TAPS cause worried about skinheads blowing up another building like Oklahoma. The ones Bush has done are ONLY to calls to and from this counrty and Afganistan or other terrorists nations,, and then only on numbers that have been revealed by intelligence sources , either ours of foreign sources. Rember those people want us dead, and they get 72! virgins for killing us!

[12voltman59]

We are getting a bit off track here, but talking about the disclosure that the president, by his own authority--a degree of authority that is likely nonexistent--the Bush administration approved a number of wire taps and other intercepts of American citizens using the NSA.

I find this to be highly objectionable and more than a triffle scary.

First--there is no need for the extralegal manueverings of Bush regarding these wiretaps and other related activities for there already exists a legal structure to secure authorization for such intercepts--the FISA courts established by Congress in the 1970s. The FISA courts have in their history, reportedly only denied requests for such intercepts in four cases.

Second--the charter for the National Security Administration specially prohibits the NSA from conducting intelligence gathering domestically.

Oh I know--we face this foe that is determined to kill us. Fine. But if we change our ways to the point that we nullify major aspects of our laws and the rights previously granted on our own accord due to fear---the terrorists have gone a long way in "destroying" us already and all without "firing another shot."
I think they want us to do such things--to show that in spite of our expressed love of freedom--when threatened, we will overreact and basically scuttle our own freedoms--freedom lost from any quarter is freedom lost that will be hard fought to regain.

Well--I like the saying that is on the license plates of either Maine or New Hampshire: "Live Free or Die"

It doesn't matter to me if we lose our freedoms to our own government or a bunch of mullahs who want to party like its 1595---neither is very appealing to me.

We fought one revolution to get rid of a King George over 200 years ago--we sure as hell don't need another one today.

[smokey]

I still say it is just easier to practice Safe sex and universal percautions.
If you dont have unprotected sex, you'll be fine.
If you are practicing safe sex, why do you need to know who is positive?
Imagine, People carring phone books full of names of folks with HPV, HErpes, AIDS, ect......
Kinda scary?
-RC


ratchick...I am talking about the irresponsible, not the responsible

[yaknowthatguy]

Wow. So many sticky issues.

As to the HIV issue. I think we need a medium ground - there have been cases where people have intentionally exposed people to HIV (assaults, promiscuity without discussions of HIV status, etc.). Those people are dangerous and should be stopped - their desire to infect is less important than people's right to NOT be infected (consider the anti-tobacco legislation in a lot of the country). However, not everyone with HIV is dangerous, as we all know.

There are already laws in most states regarding reportable diseases and notification of public health, and the states require patient information - so this concept isn't new. What I find to be disturbing is that Hep C is MUCH worse than HIV (for risks of transmission primarily - but also shares some similarities, which is why HepC and HIV research goes hand in hand) and this isn't being discussed for Hep C. Interesting, isn't it? The stigma continues, and is, in my opinion, aimed at the gay community, and by some extension, to us.

There does need to be some level of reporting - keeping track of epidemiology is critical; but that data needs to be tightly controlled. I don't see any need for changing the current system as it exists - so this new federal law seems pretty bogus. On one hand, people deserve the right to medical privacy - this is paramount. On the other, there is a need to address the needs of society - I think this needs to be addressed occasionally from a law enforcement perspective, not just public health....but should be based specifically on known risk (intentional exposure of others), as opposed to known HIV+ status. Truly a sticky area. New law tends to complicate issue, whereas enforcing present law tends to be better - though not politically expedient.

Just so you know, if you have an adverse reaction to a vaccine (say, a problem with a tetanus shot), your medical practitioner is supposed to file a VAERS report (vaccine adverse event reporting service), and this does divulge some personal information - I've filed two, but discuss it with my patients ahead of time.


The medical system in the US. Wow. I'm going to cover this in a couple of sections.

I practice medicine, specifically emergency medicine. Without revealing too much personal data, my practice setting is decidedly unique. We have a large contingent of Canadian personnel where I work. We also do not charge patients, nor their insurance, for treatment - it's all free to the work force, as a line item cost in the parent company's budget. This keeps us from having to follow the HIPPA laws, but we operate in their spirit of privacy anyway.

I have found that free medical care brings out an interesting combination of attitudes in people. One, since it's free, many people have an outright sense of entitlement - you would NOT BELIEVE the level of disrespect to the medical staff that is associated with this. Two, since it's free, people come in for very minimal complaints, simply because they can, for those they would not see their doc at home - the primary complaint being a minimal cold ("I sniffled once yesterday, so you need to look at me"). Many expect antibiotics, since they're "at the doc's", and become more indignant when they don't get them (we have public health to consider, not just the patient's demand for antibiotics for a viral illness). Three, and please do not consider me Nationalistic over this, we see a large percentage of Canadian personnel with both of the above - the expectation of immediate care, and indignance associated with coming in. This is NOT a blanket statement about Canadians - but it is more common amongst those who live with a socialized medical system than those without, at least in my experience.

Is the US healthcare system broken? Grossly. Nobody with any experience with it would think otherwise. While many pharmaceutical companies are located in the US, their drugs are sold worldwide.....yet the US patent system grants them exclusivity for some time, and there are no real market-set values on their drugs, they can charge as they wish - I think this is part of the basis for our runaway costs, along with frivolous lawsuits. Now I have little problem with capitalism as a whole....but when it comes down to "you may not live because you're not wealthy enough" that is a real problem. And while the drugs are sold worldwide, the US seems to bear the brunt of paying off the associated R&D (even though direct-to-consumer advertising has more spent on it than drug R&D).

We need a few changes to our healthcare system....Socialized medicine has some significant drawbacks...but our system is wrong all by itself. I think we need something like the UK has - guaranteed healthcare for all, but increased options if you pay a premium. So it's a tiered system, where everyone's covered, and you can get some extra stuff if you pay for them - kinda like paying for upgrades on your car.

While I don't like federal involvement where it's not really needed (I'm Libertarian), I think we need some assistance with pharmaceuticals. We have a system that is driven by stockholder perception, not production of good drugs - and the US is funding most of the research, while other affluent modern countries (western europe, japan, australia, etc) reap the benefits. Many of those countries (including Canada) have some level of price fixing, that allows reasonable profits to the drug companies, without pillaging the pockets of the patient. That cost needs to be spread about a little more. Our system also has little in place for addressing vaccines - we regularly have shortages of things as common as Hep B, and adult Tetanus. Our research on new vaccines has been pretty limited in some respects, although we have some new ones on the horizon (thankfully).

We also have a system that favors drugs and surgery over anything else (acupuncture, etc); that has a faulty drug evaluation system (the FDA); and has a litigious nature such that any problem may result in a lawsuit. That's not to say that incompetent docs shouldn't be punished - but let's think about the hot coffee analogy and apply it to medicine. As an interesting perspective, my medical malpractice tripled from 2003 to 2004 - with no complaints, suits, findings of fact, depositions, funny looks, nothing. It just tripled, pay up or quit practicing.

My home state has recently enacted a lawsuit review committee - so that outside practitioners are brought in to review the merits of all medical malpractice suits. If there is no merit found to the case, then it's disallowed, and cannot continue in the courts in its initial form (eg, patient ended up with a scar after a chainsaw accident - duh). If it does have merit, then it can proceed (eg, physician knowingly gave a drug to which patient was allergic, even when warned by nursing staff). I think this is a good way to keep from (a) clogging the courts with bogus suits and (b) keep malpractice rates down....which also keeps patient visit costs from increasing.

I don't claim to have all the answers, but I do have some perspective on how things work from the inside. I have some ideas on how to make some improvements....but it's going to take more than just suggestions to enact change that is meaningful in any way.

And as for government? When our representatives have the same medical care that the rest of us do, term limits are enacted, ridiculous retirements for 6 years of political service are repealed, and judicial review is brought about - then we will have a nation worth fighting for, as we'll have one that's modeled after public interest instead of handshakes and who-owes-whom. Until we intentionally start voting OUT the ineffectual career politicians, we're accepting their rule, and ultimately have ourselves to blame.

Flamesuit on. Something tells me I am going to need it.

yaknowthatguy

[12voltman59]

BRAVO!!!!!!!BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!!!BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!!!! YAKNOWTHATGUY!!!!!!!!!!!!
:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

An excellent post from someone actually in the trenches. Good show old boy!!!

I don't know what else more can be said about this part of our discussion.

I have to say, that since I left formal employment and struck out on my own, health care has been a concern. I had my COBRA until that ran out and that was a shocker---the cost of my plan while still with my employer was about $50 per pay check--it was one heck of a lot more when I had to take the whole load.

When the COBRA was set to expire--I started looking for independent programs and wow-is that some big money.

Fortunately, due to military service, I am qualified for VA benefits--something I never made use of in any form because I had the idea that I didn't want to take anything away from the government.

I am entitled to those benefits, and I am glad I have them. I have had to use the care lately.

It is my understanding that the VA system is hit and miss--in some places it is very good and at other facilities--very poor. In my case--I think it is very good health care but I can see the strains in the system.

The VA has had to face its share of budget cuts in recent years.

I recieve good care from the hard working folks at my VA center. I feel sorry for the employees of the VA though.

The VA has recently completed a round of "buyouts" to thin their workforce of older, higher paid employees.

Those cut positions have not been refilled and those workers who remain are picking up the slack. The position cuts have been heavy up and down the all levels of VA staff ranging from laundry workers, janitors, technicians, nurses, doctors, and even many management and administrative positions have been cut as well.

Recently there was some sort of budget crisis situation regarding the VA, that had it not been recitified--would have essentially shut the VA down. Fortunately the Congress, in an all night session--took action to rectify the situation.

All this comes at a time that so many citizens are being called to duty in battle zones in various locales.

It always seems that politicians of every stripe often fail to keep the faith for those of us who did as we were asked and offered to serve our nation in good times and bad, to give all if necessary.

For me--I don't demand my health car when I go the center--I am very thankful that I have it and am nice even when an employee gets a bit snippy about something--I understand the pressures they are under and the kind of workload they are dealing with--all you have to do on any given day is to sit in the waiting area in the urgent care/emergency room to see that.

I treat these folks with the respect they deserve and most of them have shown me the same thing.

[Michael623]

June 23, 2000 I had an angioplasty/stent that was $30,000 for the immediate medical cost. Additional cost followed that since that time have been approximately $10,000. I am self employed and had no insurance and was given 30 days to pay in full.

I knew a man who had a by-pass done a few months before my procedure and he too was self employed with no insurance and his bill was around $100,000. He told me he gave the hospital and doctors financial statements which showed his net worth and income insufficient to pay and his bill was reduced to approximately $25,000. I submitted financial documents and was told I didn't qualify for any reduction in my bill and to pay up.

So, my bill included cost to cover malpractice suits, write offs for those that can't pay, etc. We complain about socialized medical care! What happened to me is fair? Where are all the right-wingers to come to my aid.

Oh, my wife and I did qualify for medical insurance in 2001, no classification for my heart diease though (that's another story). Mega Life, premium started out at $450 per month with a $3,000 semiannual deductible. Went to $925 per month in 2004. Needless to say I dropped it. I do hope you good people out there don't have any medical problems. Even with medical insurance it doesn't mean the insurance company is going to pay. They are always finding ways to deny your claim. Great system we have now!

Love ya all,
Michael

[Diddybidaddy]

Wow!

I can't believe the attacks on Ratchick? is that the name? I believe? Wow?
Obviously there is some very strong and passionate views on politics here. Personally, I as most Canadians, believe in socialized medicine. It is the sign of a developed society that that society takes care of its people.

What I would like to know is why, out of curiousity is "Laidback" so angry? I'm really curious. And why, I wonder did you need to attack Ratchick so viciously?

I'm just curious, what is it about a socialist point of view or even the concept of socialized medicine or a social safety net gets you all riled up?

I'm just curious, what is it that bugs you so much about these concepts?

Because if maybe we can understand what bothers you so about these concepts, we might be able to see why you find them so loathsome and why your attack seemed to be so vicious against Ratchick.

Just your average Curious (Socialized :rotate: ) Canadian.

[Ratchick]

:soapbox:

I am by no means a Canadian Expert, but the few Canadians I know, like thier socialised medical system as a whole. There are hang-ups sometimes, but this is true of many systems including a system like ours where you need health insurance and the insurance companies premiums are going-up daily. I have to have my Asthma meds APPROVED everytime I get a new RX. ASTHMA MEDS?!?!?!? I have had this condidtion since childhood but need to go through all kinds of paperwrangling and nashing of teeth to get them. My Asthma is hardly as bad as a lot of folks I know, I can't imagine if I had very bad asthma how going through this would effect me possibly fatally, if because of this paperwork, I didn't have my meds. Wich happens to me a lot. Luckily, I am not a severe Asthmatic.

This is just ONE in a long list of porblem sI have had with multiple Medical insurance carriers. BUT Atleast I have insurance. I know lot's of people in my income level with nothing.

How scary is this? My one friend had a BOWEL OBSTRUCTION, very deadly, no insurance because her job doesn't offer it, and has a $23,000 debt on her back now. Here she is, trying to get through school, (College), to better herself, tons of student debt, (Because our country doesn't offer higher education either, but don't get me started on this), and now because she had this almost fatal condidtion, she is saddled with this whopping medical debt. How fair is this? Not even 25 and she had $50,ooo dollars in debt.

As said before, an advanced culture takes care of it's people, not sucking off of them with taxes, invading thier privacy, educates them, and makes sure they are fed and healthy.

The American culture is set-up for rich people. Period. IF you have the money you can goto school and therefore get the better jobs, have better healthcare, and better education. If you are poor and work your ass off, making money for the rich you get debt and maybe an education if you are willing to go further into debt.

Other counties are bounding ahead of us. Swedens Literacy rate is 95%, what's ours?
OH yeah, 76%.
Hmmmm, advanced culture? Not sure. I think the proof is in how our culture treats it's poor.

looks grim for me.

-RC

[Ratchick]

ratchick...I am talking about the irresponsible, not the responsible
IT still apples...USe a condom and you wont have to worry about the irresponsible people.

I understand yoru concerns, and in some ways I think folks who have HIV And don't disclose it should have criminal charges against them, (and do in some states.

I was a victom of this personally. My HUSBAND had sex without me knowing it for years, with a man with full-blown AIDS, and didnt use a condom. I had to endure 2 years of testing as taking the cocktails were out because it was 2 years after The fact. Anyway, I still don't feel that thier shodul be a public list.

PS- I am negative.

I was lucky.

Also, if we make it public, who do you think will be willing to get tested?
Then this will lead to more undisclosed AIDS victoms.


-RC

[yaknowthatguy]

The American culture is set-up for rich people. Period. IF you have the money you can goto school and therefore get the better jobs, have better healthcare, and better education. If you are poor and work your ass off, making money for the rich you get debt and maybe an education if you are willing to go further into debt.



This is not completely true. The very poor and very wealthy have the best options (medicaid through tax shelters), but the bulk of working poor and middle class take it in the shorts regularly. Medical insurance premiums, if you cover the policy yourself, ARE tax deductible - that doesn't necessarily mean it's easy to get nor afford, but there is at least SOME benefit. When I was a paramedic in the early 90s, immigrants who came across the border got better health insurance through the state of California than I had working as much as I did - and I transported them all the time. Something about that is wrong.

I grew up very poor by US standards. First year after my parents divorced, my mom and I lived on $8000 (1980). I know poor firsthand - and I worked my ass off to get where I am today. I had about $3000 in grants and scholarships overall for school, I'm 34, been paying my student loans for almost ten years, and will probably be 40 before I get all the student loan debt paid off. Did I start out rich? Anything but. Did I have my education handed to me? Hell no. And I'm not alone - if you've got the motivation it CAN be done, but you have to take the risks and accept the responsibility.

I think the arguments against socialized medicine were described - my experience with it has been (a) abuse of medical staff by patients on a regular basis and (b) inappropriate use of medical services (I've NEVER gone to a doc for a cold, athlete's foot, nor a hangnail, even before I got into medicine). I'm not saying that socialized medicine is bad, per se - but the applications of it are imperfect, AS ARE many attributes of the American system. One thing I DO think is great about the Canadian system is how tobacco/alcohol are taxed, and how that goes into the health care system. THAT is a winning move in my book - because those who are going to end up utilizing the system the most are paying into it because of the decisions they made (not bad luck).

No system is perfect - at least not one with which I'm familiar. It's going to take a few things to radically change it before it gets markedly better - changes in tort laws, changes in drug company profit seeking (anyone notice how drug prices went insane around the time direct to consumer ads started? pharma companies frequently have great profits...and I refuse to invest in them on an ethical basis), changes in how insurance companies "approve" critically important drugs and procedures (as Ratchick chronically experiences). It's going to take physicians not accepting drug company propaganda as truth, and associating drug expense with viability ($5 worth of erythromycin kills Mycoplasma just as well as $150 worth of Levaquin). It's also going to take people being responsible for themselves to some degree - quit smoking, get a little exercise, and be willing to accept the outcomes of the things we've done to our bodies.

I would love a Utopian system where everyone's covered, but 'free' is so easily abused (I see it all the time, as do others). From what I know, I think the UK's system is best, but I'm sure it has its faults too, as nothing's perfect.

If anybody's got ideas on how to viably make a system work, I'm all ears. There's a lot of potential amongst us, and while we probably can't force it into existence, we can start taking baby steps.

[Ratchick]

From YAKNOW THAT GUY: "I had about $3000 in grants and scholarships overall for school, I'm 34, been paying my student loans for almost ten years, and will probably be 40 before I get all the student loan debt paid off. Did I start out rich? Anything but. Did I have my education handed to me? Hell no. And I'm not alone - if you've got the motivation it CAN be done, but you have to take the risks and accept the responsibility."

As I said, you had to go into debt to get your education. Just as I did. But the wealthy folks out there had thier education handed to them. They started their young lives with a leg-up, not being in debt. I never qualified for grants,(Always fell through the cracks), my student loans for one semester took me 5 years to pay off.

How do other countries manage to pay for thier citizen's Higher education?

Woudl make it more possible for folks of any origin to get ahead in life.

RC

[APMountianMan]

In this issue, I would simply insist that my HIPPA rights were enforced. I am sure that this is a conflict and that the CDC regulation will be over turned.

:cool: :2cents:

[12voltman59]

In this issue, I would simply insist that my HIPPA rights were enforced. I am sure that this is a conflict and that the CDC regulation will be over turned.

:cool: :2cents:

I would hope what you say is true MountainMan, but with the way the government is going to "total information awarness" in these post 9/11 days, my cynical nature regarding overly intrusive government--and yes--as a "liberal/progressive" I too am very concerned about this negative aspect of government largess. Now that the rules have been changed to allow this--it will take a major battle to get the new way negated.

One can only speculate about why the rule changed---if you have a conspiratist bent it is possible to think up all kinds of nefarious reasons as to why "they" "promulgated" this rule change.

Being generous--I will just chalk it up to the old bureaucratic tendency that when "it works fine--let's break it" mentality that seems to be the case whether the entity is big brother government or big old evil corporate America.

I think the requirement of name disclosure will tend to scare people off from getting tested for HIV/AIDS due to this factor, I mean how many times do we hear "trust us--we have your best interests in mind..." Yeah right, and I have some ocean front property in Tennesse I want to sell you--(well it may be ocean front property in a 100 years or so when global warming really kicks in--buy it now and beat the rush...)

I admit--it would tend to make me more reluctant to take the test--but since I do get most of my health care needs taken care of at the Veteran's Administration anyway--it is a moot point for me--the government already has my health records.....

[moonlitwish]

This is so sad. Our government is going to discuss this issue and decide on the wrong course of action and overpay the discussers. Why don't they feed that into the state and federally funded hospitals?
I had no insurance from the time I was 14 until this past July(6 years) Luckily for me, I dont' get sick aside from an occasional cold, b/c both of my parents were unemployed, due to layoffs. I worked at the same job from 16 until I graduated part time. My income in 2003 was a whopping $8000. I worked 2 jobs after graduation, one full time, the other part. and neither even gave the option of a group healthcare policy. My gross annual income has not topped $20000, ever. Because I'm a very hard working person, I was offered a permanent, and then fulltime position at a job that was supposed to be just for the winter holiday season. This company has a good insurance program that cost only $12 per paycheck. This I can afford. If I would have gone to see my doctor during those 6 years prior-one full year of which I had a UTI- I noticed on the window when I went to be drug tested for my postion, I would have had to pay up front $150, plus pay for any additional lab tests that would have been needed. Can a 17 year old making 6 bucks an hour 20 hours a week after school afford this?? Hell no. I was lucky to be able to buy shampoo and toilet paper, while my dad scraped up $$ for us to still have a roof over our heads. No we couldn't have sold our house and downgraded to save $ either- we already lived in a trailer. Because of this, I should hope that someone who is less fortunate than I, when they get sick can get the appropriate healthcare when they need it. I would not wish the pain I went through in that one year on anybody, and I have to hope it did not do any long term damage. Plus when you start with a leg down, it's really hard to get up and take that extra step to prepare for being sick. Been there, done that. Let's not repeat.

[Fresia]

Bump it up!

[charles-smythe]

Here is an interesting article from our sister station, gay.com:

http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2005/12/28/3

It is about the new rule by which the CDC will require states to release the names of people who test positive for HIV, in order to qualify for federal funds. This means they can no longer offer anonymous testing. (For our friends in Europe, Canada, or elsewhere, this is a US thing, and it comes at the same time that our president is now asserting his right to wiretap citizens and keep extensive files on us for homeland security purposes.)

As a bi guy, this worries me. I think most bisexual men who worry about HIV are going to be too scared to give their real name at a testing site. On another online forum, however, posters jumped on one member for suggesting as much, telling him that the medical profession is careful about keeping names private.

Do most bi folks on here feel okay about giving their names to a medical office as a necessary step in getting tested? Just curious....may discourage some from getting tested...

[Christopher South]

Target hacked
Bitcoin hacked
Forbes hacked
White House hacked

Anyone who thinks their info is private needs to wake up.