Petition your government for Free diabetic treatment!!!

Ian P
By Ian P Latest Reply 2009-12-16 20:38:28 -0600
Started 2009-03-02 19:37:09 -0600

Let's get this straight, particularly if you are type 1 which is wholey an inherited genetic malfunction, you have a life threatening condition that means that without constant treatment within the space of a few months you would be dead or close to death. Is that your fault? Did you make the decision to become Diabetic? I am astounded that in this modern time the, supposedly, most advanced civillisation ever on the earth, charges it's tax paying citizens to live, whilst just over the northern border your Canadian cousins get free treatment. In the U.K. we get free treatment, in other less developed countries all around the world, we don't get charged to live. Why don't you ask WHY????????
Sorry to "put a fox in the coop" but it's just not right.
How many diabetics are in the USA? The answer is…23.6 million, now who in government is brave or stupid enough to argue with that amount of people/voters, just a thought. Say what you think.

61 replies

southern_ lady
southern_ lady 2009-03-14 19:59:03 -0500 Report

I agree with you,I am diabetic and the med,s are so high,and most also have high
BP or heart trouble,we need to fing out how to do this and then do it,thank,s for the info.

2009-03-11 08:33:37 -0500 Report

Welll, I have to say, it would scare the bejesus outta me if our government was in control of our health. How can they take care of US, when they are throwing money at Gaza???

The whole 'Big Brother' thing is too big already, I don't need them in the doctors office with me.

This is a really good discussion, because people get a chance to voice their opinions without being 'looked at'. Thanks Ian!

jsd2005 2009-03-07 23:53:35 -0600 Report

I completely agree with you. It just totally doesn't make any sense. Listen to this, if you present for treatment to a hospital and possibly admitted or not. depending on whether you have insurance or not, you are charged differently and pay for services in a totally different manner.

If you don't have insurance, you are considered as self pay. You are also given an automatic reduction (a percentage) in your charge for these services. They write off the remainder that you are not charged.

If you have public aid (PA), you are only charged what
PA will pay. Nothing else matters or is applied. You basically don't pay anything out of pocket.

Now, if you have some type of insurance, you are charged the full rate for services and are responsible for anything insurance doesn't pay. The remaining amount
is out of pocket and your responsibility.

Does any of this make sense? It's absolutely ridiculous and totally unfair. We should all be treated the same regardless of ability to pay.

I have seen situations where someone with insurance was given an unbelievable discount on the bill if they paid at discharge. A 70,000 bill was reduced to 15,000 if they paid the day of discharge from the hospital. An astronomically disproportional reduction based on their ability to pay. You and I or someone with insurance would be charged the total amount. Possibly allowed a reduction.

I know most hospital do have and allow a grant of money for those that demonstrate difficulty with payment for financial reasons. They also have a loan program if you apply and are accepted. Otherwise, you are billed for services and expected to pay a specific amount each month. regardless of the amount they expect you to pay, it doesn't matter if it may be more that your house payment or other personal bills, it is demanded to be paid. If you are late they will demand payment in full after a specific time. I always tell people pay what you can and at least you won't be reported to a bill collector. I have heard a hospital representative tell people to sell their house if they need help and cannot pay. Now, that is totally off base and out of line.

Why can't we all be charged and pay the same? Good question. I can speculate on the answer, but don't have enough room in this forum to discuss that issue!
Anyway, just another example of how wrong our system is.

Tommy003 2009-03-08 00:28:41 -0600 Report

I am curious as to who you sre agreeing with. I think I know what you are saying, yet, I am not sure. If you could reference for me who you are agreeing with, then, I can read that note to better understand our reply.

honestly, I am curious, nothing moe,



jsd2005 2009-03-11 03:27:26 -0500 Report

No problem. I got confused about this one too. Initially, I believe I was responding to Ian's initial post. Melissa also sparked an interest with her view on socialized medicine, so I added comments. Unfortunately, I realize now, I should had clicked on add a comment following her post. Maybe this would have helped.

I tend to get very passionate about certain things and don't always pay attention to detail and I missed the best way to post this one.

Melissa Dawn
Melissa Dawn 2009-03-11 09:41:15 -0500 Report

I do think that there could be a better management on how things are charged — I know that my insurance company chooses to use only one supplier for my pump supplies. I have to buy from them, but they are charging an additional $70 per box on my infusion sets. I tried to buy them directly from the supplier (in theory saving me and my insurance company some serious cash) and they wouldn't cover me if I did.

In this respect, I can see how the government might make things a little more even across the board. I don't feel I should be charged MORE because I have insurance. Granted, they pay a percentage. I have insurance so that they will. I pay that premium, and I'd like to see them defend my rights more and the rights of the people capitalizing off of my illness less.

LadyDi - 26259Miller
LadyDi - 26259Miller 2009-03-11 10:13:02 -0500 Report

I agree that we should not be penalized (charged more) for having insurance, but unfortunately that does occur. When paying for doctors' visits, services, etc., on our own, the charges can be quite a bit less, but most of us cannot afford even those charges. Those of us who can depend on our insurance company. Round and round we go. A vicious circle. Up go premiums, down go benefits, care and treatment diminishes in some cases, more folks are forced to go without coverage. I would definitely welcome some changes in this regard.

So do the doctors and hospitals charge more because the insurance companies don't pay them enough to begin with - they have to "pad" the charges? Are they just being greedy? When they resort to padding the charges, that drives up our insurance premiums, causing the insurance companies to take drastic action that does anything but help the consumer. What do we do? I sure don't have the answer, but hope someone does or will.

kdroberts 2009-03-11 10:55:53 -0500 Report

deductibles. You are not responsible for the difference between the allowed amount and billed amount and any facility making you pay that can get in serious trouble. I've seen things that have a facility price of $100+ be negotiated to less than $1 by an insurance company. On this side of things the insurance companies really do work very hard for you, really because it helps them out as well but you also get the benefit.

Tommy003 2009-03-07 21:17:41 -0600 Report

I am considered by most to be a open minded individual. I do not speak of anything I know nothing about. Such is not my style. I have a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology and a Bachelor of science degree in Bus. Asmin. w/great emphasis in Accounting. I am a jack of many trades; of master of only one. That one is Leather craving and tooling westrn styl merchandise.

I was a tax preparer for six years, an printing estimator for four yeas, and a Fanancial Manager for a State university in which I managed the monies of many government grants.

All that being said, why is everyone asking for their own little bailout monies for their paticular affliction. Whhy, one part of the second bailout package deals $200,000.00 to California residents who have tatoos. These folks don't want their tatoos anymore and they want government monies (Our Monies) to have the tatoos removed.

Oh, you say. They did that to themselves, so, if they dont like them anymore. they ar the ones who should pay to have them removed. I agree. Us Diabetics, on the other hand, did not ask to be Dissbetics. I can only half-heartedly agree. Some of us are simply victums of this diseasse. No one knws what causes this disease. Some are of the heriditary kind. Others have habitsin their lives that may be the cause of our disease. Others of us are wy overwieght. That one is not excussable to me andI am one of those. No exact link to obesesity and Diabetes. How come every Doctor I have talk to has told me to lose wieght and take better care of myself. I do this stuff and I am better for this in many ways. I no longer have togive myself shots of insulin. With a extremely heathy diet and some exercise, I am better. My sagar runs between 115 and 125. The Doctor told me that day when my sugar ht 203 that I officially had Diabetes. Once you have it, you will always have it. I disagree withthat statemnt fully, yet, I so not know where lines are drawn. Seems to me that if you sugr runs where my has for three years that I must be, at some point, healthly better and, perhaps, with no Diabetes inside me anymore.

You are speaking of nationalized medical insurance. Our countery is now upon its very extention financially. Folks in America just don't let others die on the streets just because they have Diabetes or much of anything else either.

Look for other sources. They are there. Look and work hard to find them and quit asking a broken government that is not mending itself to mend you.

God Bless All Of US,


Anonymous 2009-03-07 21:45:48 -0600 Report


Tommy003 2009-03-07 23:13:43 -0600 Report

Are you here to annoy me. What ever do you mean with one word, "Unbelievable"? Unbelievable what? Do you find my writing and knowledge here to be unbelievable or is it that yiou are so far gone onto the liberal socialistic flagship. Say what you meas and mean what you say. you are looknig pretty foolish with comments of nothingness.

Randy42 2009-03-07 22:17:54 -0600 Report

Hey Tommy, I do agree fully of what have said on this topic. Only thing I am asking is for these companies to start hiring. You see I've been unemployed for almost four months now. I'm on unemployment benefits but no insurance. I'm a type 2 diabetic and I don't feel that I ask for this decease ether. It's been in my family for many generation. My dad died from it, I would jest like to try to go back to work and have insurance through them. I had good insurance with my previous jod, I was a tech in maintenance at warehouse. I never ask for a handout and never will ether. Thats the reason why I like to go back to work. My eye site isn't the best as it was a year ago. I'm taking after my dad, he went totally blind about 20 years before he died. I do think that the US health care needs alot of change that probably wont happen in my lifetime and I'm 42 years old.

Tommy003 2009-03-08 00:09:12 -0600 Report

Hi Randy,

Sorry I did not get back to a person that has responded to my comments in a positive way. I have been wated my time and breath with anonymous. He is definitely one of those 'it tkaes all kinds, I guess' folk.

I am in total agreement with you concerning the companies hiring again. The is the deal with all that as I see it. These companies have been loosing a great deal of monies. They cannot maintain their workforce because the public at large is not bartering with their own monies right now. We are not buying. We are all in this horrifying catch twenty-two at the moment. (Yes, anonymous, that's the truth and the whole truth.)

Randy, I am on ssdi. I have been disabled for eleven years now. Two years ago a finnally became strong enough to look for work again. I am looking for four hours a day. I began thinking that people looked at e in my wheelchair and though, "Well, his body is wreaked, so, his mind probably is to. (Wouldn't you agree with that, Anonymous?)

So , here both of us sit, Randy, without a job in need of cold hard cash just so that we can live decently. Neither of us want others to be in the same bind nor do we want them to live in a less than decent lifestyle. And, to to all of this off, hundreds of thousands are losing their jobs daily. In my college town, a rather large one, people are losing jobs everyday. Common jobs such ssecretaries, clerks,food scanners, Professors, salespeople, and food handlers. The economy is spiraling down. What can we do about this. we can do our best to put whatever assets we have back into the economy. I did laugh at our new Prez the oher day. He dicided to spek to us ons again and again and again. He told us this time to not buy anything we wanted, but buy only what we need to buy. Aren't we already doing this? Mnay of us are already doing this.

Here is the scope, in my humble opinion, on that matter. Summer is coming around. That time of the year is the time of the year families go on vacation. Many families realize in their own lives that going on vacation will stree their dollars for months or they just aren't going to go this year. I bring this up becausse this is what our Prez is really asking of us. No one must go on vacation, nor is vacation something we need. Vacatoin is something that we all want to do. If we don't, however, imagine how many millions of people will not have a job in the service industry of vacation spots, time share rental, weekend adventures, purchasing of air flights to new places, yes, the entire capitalistic industry of tourism. Randy, Anonymous is saying "Unbelievalbe!'. I still do't know what he means when he says that word.

Bear with me, please. The answer to your question is one of complexity. By know means could I answer this here. ou have given me my writing assignment for tomorrow. I don't know all the site rules. I would like to get your email address after I have researched this further.

To complete my thoughts at this moment I will say this. If we only buy what we need, total collapse the US economic system. Neither you or me are going to save anything by not buying what we want as well as what we need.

What we need to do, both you and me, is to spreas the word as I have placed it here letting people know that eeryone needs to stat buying. Boats, trailers, cars, moe food, fun entertainment things for all ages, and a new house. ~~~lol~~~

the more the American people buuy, the sooner the demand will rise to a point inwhich companies will have to oncce again hire workers to meet the new demand. That is Capitalism in a nut shell.

Beyond that, you and me, no matter how long we have been unemployed and NO MATTER how many others have become unemployed, search every which way to include loose for a job, any job, anywhere, and at the best the folks offering us the job are willing to pay. Why? Randy, you and I know that something is most definitely better than nothing. (Would you not agree, Anonymous?)

Whew, I have been on Tiger, my computer, for a good four hours. Replying to you is enoughfor tonight.

God Bless and Peace to you and yourin',


Melissa Dawn
Melissa Dawn 2009-03-04 08:14:05 -0600 Report

I actually disagree. No, I did not choose my disease — however, in the capitalistic society that I'm apart of, I realize that progress comes at a cost — a cost that the government wouldn't pay nearly so well as me and my fellow diabetics do. While socialized health care has its merits, if all health care around the world was socialized, I fear things wouldn't progress the way I'd like them to. Pharmaceutical companies work hard to find new technologies, treatments, etc. in part because of the big $$$ that would come attached to it. There is a limit to how much a government can or will pay — which would slow down progress.

I haven't gotten on board with the idea of making society pay for what is my burden. Did I choose it? No. Can I deal with it? Absolutely, and I do and will every day.

Hows that for displaying an unpopular opinion?

jsd2005 2009-03-08 00:03:31 -0600 Report

The ideal would be that everyone is treated the same with regard to health care, allowed the same options and treatment for care. Our government has so much money and a lot of it goes to places that it doesn't need to.

If we were socialized in regards to health care and the government allotted monies for the advancement of technology etc. we could benefit from the system.

The law states that regardless of ability to pay, when we present for treatment to a hospital, we must be SEEN.

It doesn't say the same for your ability to pay. They don't care. We should all be treated and allowed the same service and billed the same charges regardless.

our system currently allots nothing for those who can pay and essentially, we are the one's who are paying for those who can't. This system needs to change, especially with the current climate in society.

I understand what you are saying, but am totally frustrated and disagree with the way health care is currently managed.

It is noble for you to be so responsible.

Melissa Dawn
Melissa Dawn 2009-03-08 22:40:08 -0500 Report

Its not noble to be responsible, its responsible to be responsible. The system isn't perfect, but nationalizing it would mean a slow down in the progress (and as other people have mentioned, a huge job loss).

jsd2005 2009-03-11 03:23:07 -0500 Report

I disagree with you. It is responsible to be responsible no doubt.You can't assume that everyone takes this route and involuntarily assumes the position of being responsible all the time. In today's society there are so many variables which affect our decisions. It is because of this, I mentioned that Ian was noble to be responsible. It is a noble thing, because not everyone will take or assume the same standard of responsibility. So, in my eyes it is a noble quality about Ian that is important to note.

Melissa Dawn
Melissa Dawn 2009-03-11 09:35:02 -0500 Report

I thought you were telling me I was noble to be responsible since you were responding to my post. :) I appreciate that you think its noble. I just don't feel that it is more than it is. If more people were willing to do what they had to do instead of making reasons for why they can't do it, we'd have a more stable economy, a less involved government, and I honestly believe people would be happier with their lives. I do so much better when I take ownership of my problems rather than having someone else fix them for me. I learn from it, I grow from it, and I feel happy for having conquered the challenge. Sometimes I may be too independent for my own good — but overall, I think its done me more good than anything else.

The point is, I don't want the government making my health care decisions. I don't want what they consider to be "good enough". Research costs a lot of money which is why we pay so much for all of the things we need — I don't believe the government can tax people enough to cover those costs without putting a heavy burden on their backs. So research would slow. I don't want to see that happen.

We are all entitled to our opinion. The great thing about this government is we each have a voice — so its great to get your voice out there. Thanks for sharing!

firefightermom 2009-03-04 06:13:53 -0600 Report

I believe while so true noone asks to be sick but if we asked for free treatment for diabetes then what about the people with cancer their meds are more expensive I'm sure and then there are about a zillion other conditions people have (that they would not of asked for) that have problems getting thier meds. I don't think I could say my condition deserves free treatment then put quarters in a jar at the gasstation for a kid with cancer that without thier treatment they will die also.

LadyDi - 26259Miller
LadyDi - 26259Miller 2009-03-04 07:43:12 -0600 Report

Beautifully said. I agree. Diabetics are not the only ones being devastated by exhorbitant medical costs. And many diseases are inherited and not the "fault" of the person. Things definitely need to be different/better, but I'm not so sure how we achieve that. Wish I had the answer, and surely hope someone does eventually get us to a better place. I do think everyone should have access to good medical care, and care that does not ultimately bankrupt them.

Burke - 30425
Burke - 30425 2009-03-03 18:22:09 -0600 Report

Man this is one of those areas that there can't be a total solution. I had good insurance while I was married. Then I got divorced and had to cover my own insurance since I can't work and therefore can't be covered under a work plan.. I now have to pay $983.00 a month. I am 61 and my income has dwindled considerably since my divorce since my ex husband can't seem to keep his maintenance payments up even though he makes over $250K a year. I would love for the government to take on some of these costs but I also know that it can't be covered by it completely. Even with the high cost of my insurance they have tightened the rheins so much that it even costs a whopping $30 or $60 co-pay. Since I am on insulin and all that goes with testing and have a chronic bone problem and have had multiple surgeries on my back and bilateral knee replacement and a shoulder replacement and plates and screws in both feet and rods and pins incorporating most of my spine, I have many other meds each month. What is one to do? What do you choose, meds or a house payment or food. It is becoming a struggle for many of us Americans and we do need some help.

Ian P
Ian P 2009-03-04 03:50:00 -0600 Report

I think anyone reading this will see the merits of a national health system, one without the insurance companies and private medicine entrepeneurs scraping profits off from an industry which should be concentrated soley on fixing people, people in real need.

kdroberts 2009-03-04 08:45:20 -0600 Report

You would be surprised about how much insurance companies and private facilities make off the NHS. The bottom line is you can't have a national health system in the US, it would be a complete failure due to the sheer size and complication of it. If you eliminated the insurance companies and other related companies, even if it was only half, you would have completely unfathomable job losses that would cripple the economy and all welfare programs. It would mean job losses across the entire healthcare industry and the country simply wouldn't be able to cope and would very quickly melt down. What can be done is reform the healthcare system as whole so it makes it possible for everyone to be covered and for everyone to afford their treatment. You also have to remember that the NHS has been evolving for over 60 years. You can't go from essentially nothing to a nationalized health service and expect it to work.

I do know a lot about both types of system. I used the NHS and private healthcare in the UK for years, I've used the US system for a number of years, I've worked in UK private healthcare, I have family and friends that work for the NHS and I've worked in the US system as do family and friends. It may sound like an easy and good idea to say the US should adopt a national healthcare system but in reality doing so would actually cause many more, far more serious problems, than it would solve.

Reform the current system, yes. Impose a universal, nationalized system, no.

momwith juvie
momwith juvie 2009-03-03 07:56:54 -0600 Report

Thank you!!!I am a care giver for my son who is type 1 and i tell you at time i go without because his medicine is so much important.but i have to say it is living hell knowing one day my son will be going threw what we are so he can live.

Lanore 2009-03-03 06:39:35 -0600 Report

Are you saying because some have type 2 it is our fault?? Just wondering because you are only talking of type 1?? Help me understand this. I did not ask for diabetic it runs in my family. Thanks

Ian P
Ian P 2009-03-03 06:58:49 -0600 Report

No not saying that, it is a society thing. In earlier days we worked at more physical jobs at work and in the home and were cold in the winter so we needed a high fat, carb and sugar content diet, now we just don't. We are attacked on all sides by the big corperations who sell us over flavoured, overprocessed so called convenience food, if you had asked me if it was your fault for ingesting more than your required intake of these sorts of food I would, hand on heart, say sorry but yes. But hang on a minute I don't off hand call you responsible or irresponsible, you're not. It really is a society problem, our diets haven't moved on as quickly as the changes around us.
If we don't adjust more of us will succumb.

kdroberts 2009-03-03 08:59:53 -0600 Report

"if you had asked me if it was your fault for ingesting more than your required intake of these sorts of food I would, hand on heart, say sorry but yes."

Based on what evidence?

I've been looking for a couple of years for proper evidence that that or obesity causes type 2. I've yet to find anything. What I have found is that type 2 is genetic, more so than type 1, and some forms of it may actually be an autoimmune disease. The only difference is it's not one that attacks the pancreas but one that attacks the immune system itself, specifically the innate immune system.

LadyDi - 26259Miller
LadyDi - 26259Miller 2009-03-03 09:17:22 -0600 Report

Neither have I ever seen any evidence to that effect. There's been much discussion on this issue previously that you might want to review. I think some of the things Ian mentioned definitely have contributed to our current diabetes crisis, but the statement you quoted from his comments is just not 100% accurate. There are certainly cases where people have neglected their health and that played a part in their current state, but they most likely received that predisposition to diabetes in their genes and the poor eating habits and lack of exercise/activity caused the diabetes to surface. Everyone who eats poorly and/or does not exercise enough does not develope diabetes.

Ian P
Ian P 2009-03-03 10:48:00 -0600 Report

KD I accept what you have said but do try to take that statement in it's complete context.

I will say this, it is an undeniable fact that countries all around the world are suffering with an epidemic of diabetes particularly type 2. I do not deny that there are genetic factors at work and we don't know exactly what triggers it, but the proprtion of people developing Type 2 is significantly biased towards those with a more unhealthy lifestyle and by adopting a more healthy lifestyle it is massively easier to manage our condition…fact.

Not everyone who drives recklessly is killed in a car crash.

kdroberts 2009-03-03 11:09:17 -0600 Report

"adopting a more healthy lifestyle it is massively easier to manage our condition…fact."

Mostly I agree, there are plenty of type 2s who lead a healthy lifestyle but still get it so there isn't much to change. However, a healthy lifestyle in general is the base of management.

"but the proprtion of people developing Type 2 is significantly biased towards those with a more unhealthy lifestyle"

There is no real scientific evidence that actually links those two things together, its a casual link, not a causual one. To steal an example, it's a fact that in certain areas when ice cream sales increase so does the incidence of shark attacks. Using your logic, eating ice cream causes shark attacks. However, that is not the causual link. The causual link is that the ice cream sales went up because it was summer and because it was summer there were more people swimming in the sea so the number of shark attacks increased. The point is that just because there is a casual link observed between two things doesn't mean that either one causes the other. You could just as easily say that the diabetes caused the poor lifestyle which is actually a little closer to the truth.

Melissa Dawn
Melissa Dawn 2009-03-04 08:40:03 -0600 Report

I'm not saying I know a ton about Type 2 diabetes and I know that not all Type 2 diabetics have issues with obesity (in fact, most of the ones I know do not). Type 2 diabetes can come with and from a variety of factors — however, there is a link between obesity and Type 2. From reading this article, I think its safe to call it a causal link — not that its the only cause, but it is one of the causes.

This site will take you to an article that explains the link between Obesity and Type 2. Apparently high levels of fat in the blood can destroy insulin producing beta-cells. You can read the explanation — it'll do it better than I will.

rbergman 2009-03-02 23:30:23 -0600 Report

We live in the "free world" problem is, nothing is free and most don't come cheap. I don't see it changing any time soon, not in my lifetime and probably not in my childrens' lifetime either. Petitions are great, they get people all fired up but in the end most of them become "file 13" as my father would say when he was alive. I personally would settle for affordable coverage for pre-existing conditions rather then ask for the whole kit-n-kaboodle, but even THAT doesn't seem like it will become a reality any time soon. Years ago, low income families qualified for medical assistance, now, if you have what is considered low income your children qualify but as an adult it doesn't exist, well I take that back, I was told for a family of 4 in order for me to qualify for medical help (medicaid) we could make no more than $883 per month gross income…I don't know anyone that could live on that amount as a family of 4, heck I don't think a single person who lives alone could live on that amount. Yes, I think our system is broken, but again, I don't see any "fix" coming any time soon.

kartist1 2009-03-02 21:27:27 -0600 Report

I really like your comments. There various sites that offer help and assistance for perscriptions. are many free drugs at No…I did not ask to it become diabetic either. But given that deck, I am dealing with it. For 2 and half years now. I was healthy when it hit like a ton of bricks. I was well educated over the next year about my condition. Hang in there man… treatment and excersise are the keys to staying on track.

John Crowley
John Crowley 2009-03-02 20:10:04 -0600 Report

Help me understand the idea that it is the govenment's responsibility to provide care for my son.

Ian P
Ian P 2009-03-03 01:42:23 -0600 Report

if your son had deliberately caused himself to have this condition, then I would be the first to stand up and say "you chose to make yourself ill, you deal with it".
Also I am listening daily to your compatiots in "the good ol' US of A" the conversation, that I know you have read, about lowest readings, it seems as though you are all saying too similar things about struggling to steady your bloods, things that I just don't hear over here as much. You know that diabetes is a hormone related condition and as such hormones of all types effect it, our bodies produce stress hormones such as cortisol, GH and norepinephrine which are destructive to the body. Our bodies are already under attack by our own defences and the damage is irreversible and are compounded by these added stress substances, worrying about paying for your meds is yet another factor shortening the life of a sufferer.
Do you feel that the man, or child, with the most cash has the right to the better physical well being? Where I come from health care is a right not a priveledge. Governments can provide national health care, our insignificant little country does, is it wrong to ask yours to even the playing field.

kdroberts 2009-03-03 09:04:59 -0600 Report

It's not that simple. Although I do believe health care is a right I struggle with the argument that it's the governments responsibility to provide it. Make it easily accessible, yes. Make it so people can afford to go and get equal treatment, yes. Run and provide it for everyone, too hard a question. You also have the problem here that should the government take over completely as in an NHS style system there would be massive job losses in the health care sector, probably enough to cripple the country in a way that makes the credit crunch look like blip on the radar.

John Crowley
John Crowley 2009-03-03 09:37:18 -0600 Report

It is a fact that when governments provide services they are slow and inefficient. If we think healthcare is expensive now, just wait until we have to pay for it ALL through taxes. So much of our money will be wasted through bureaucracy and inefficiency that we will be paying more (and perhaps much, much more) than we pay today.

I cannot see how placing the whole burden of healthcare on the government leads to anything positive other than increased access. Everything else about it is a huge negative. More expensive. Less efficient. Harder to get an appointment—especially to see a specialist. Less incentive for anyone to choose to be a doctor because generally wages are fixed.

For me, that seems too high a price to pay just to increase access.

Ian P
Ian P 2009-03-03 11:09:10 -0600 Report

I hear you, I don't necessarily accept what your saying or where you get your information from but I can tell you despite the negative publicity the NHS is not the ineffectual, lumbering behemoth as you may have been led to believe.
I would rather pay my taxes than have a hospital turn me away because my insurance company had found some way of wriggling out of paying for my treatment, and quite frankly to say that your economy would collapse in misguided at best.

John Crowley
John Crowley 2009-03-03 11:19:41 -0600 Report

I really don't have to witness your healthcare system to draw a conclusion regarding how effective my government would be at administering a national healthcare program. I can look at thousands of examples in every other program administered by the government to see that classical economic theory holds—namely that governments are slow and inefficient in providing service.

Please don't think I'm saying that I think the US healthcare system is perfect as it is. I certainly don't believe that. But I also don't see a national healthcare system as a better option.

Ian P
Ian P 2009-03-03 11:33:02 -0600 Report

I value your opinion greatly and think that there's value in both sides of the arguement and I believe that this is asubject worth persuing.

Is there a national insurance scheme that people can pay into?

kdroberts 2009-03-03 11:50:48 -0600 Report

Technically yes, Medicare and Medicaid but they have eligibility requirements and because of the gap in funding and price of care, a lot of things are not covered well or at all. Interestingly enough if you compare their costs with those of private insurance companies they have the lowest overhead and highest % of healthcare spending. I forget the figure but something like 85c per dollar medicare and medicaid have gets spent on healthcare as opposed to about 75c per dollar for private insurance.

You and John are both right about the timing and quality of care. On one hand the NHS is not as bad as it is made out to be. However, it's system that serves approximately 60 million people and it's had a lot of trouble scaling to that number. Think about trying to scale that system to 5 times the size and then you will see the problems John talks about. You also don't have to deal with the multiple governments as there are here which will complicate things even more.

John Crowley
John Crowley 2009-03-03 13:26:21 -0600 Report

Wow, I had never heard that about Medicare and Medicaid before. If indeed they are more efficient with funds than private insurance, that does cause me to step back from my argument some. However, the natural next question is, could they hold that same efficiency on a much larger scale?

I don't know the answer to that.

Ian P
Ian P 2009-03-04 04:05:11 -0600 Report

The NHS is by no way perfect, but I know from travelling to many places around the world, including the US, I feel that we are privileged here to have continuous medical treatment without the worry of where my next "buck" will come from to pay for my condition.

John Crowley
John Crowley 2009-03-04 12:19:37 -0600 Report

One of the hardest things for me about the concept of national healthcare is that people act like it's "free." (Not saying you Ian, but rather my fellow US citizens.) The government is not free. Every dollar the government has is a dollar they took out of the citizen's pockets (or will take in the future in the case of the insane debt we're seeing) through taxes.

Whether we pay for it through premiums and co-pays or through taxes, we're still paying for it.

Tommy003 2009-03-07 21:35:41 -0600 Report

Gees! I have been a writer of prose, poetry, short storie, And yes, I have a part of a book. I began writing at the age of twelve. I write everyday including this day. I am fifty-six. where ver did you come up with the 'word' "compatiots"? I have, not once, run accross this word. Mreover, when ever you do this, I become distracted because I do not know the word leaving me to question as I read the remainder of your coments.

Sicerelt and with the Utmost Peace in mind,


Anonymous 2009-03-07 21:44:29 -0600 Report

For someone claiming to be so highly educated and criticizing others spelling, etc., I think you need to re-read your comments. Horrendous spelling and grammar - especially for someone who also claims to be a writer.

I do not agree with the person who began this discussion, by the way.

Tommy003 2009-03-07 22:24:15 -0600 Report

That's OK anonymous. I never claimed to be a good speller. Nor did I clam to be 'so intelligent'. I am a published writer. I have an editor by the name of Tony. As for my grammer, I see where I did not get a comma in one spot. You assume to much with such a short shot of writing for me on this site. I am also a lousy typist. However, I can understand that you may be one who thinks you are better than some others. I DO NOT put people down, nor disgrace them, nor think anyone is lesser than me.

I do not intend to continue this insignificant subject matter back and forth with you. If you have something else to say on this matter, then say it. You can have the last word. Do so if having that last word would satisfy Bad Karma. I insist.

Sometimes saying what you mean i the best way to take action. Like, don't say you can't do something when the truth of the matter is that you do not want to do something.

As for NHS, well, the whle is this. NHS SUCKS.

Anonymous 2009-03-07 22:29:18 -0600 Report

I would not have said anything, except that your comments to Ian were rude and uncalled for. It appeared to me that you were the one feeling superior.

Tommy003 2009-03-07 22:58:50 -0600 Report


Folks who know me at all know this. I generally ignore anonymous people. I write to the editor now and again. A few times in the past in our college town, either me or my son have stood firmly for what we believed in on the political front and the social front. More often than not, letters to the editor about what either of us were standing right out there in public doing end their letters with anonymous.
My son and I think little of what these folks have to say because they don't have the guts to identify themselves. Why is this senario upsetting to us? These folks haven't the ability to be heard publicly as they attemp to demean others. Most folks around here agree. Most folks around here have no problem speaking their mind. Stop being anonymous and show your face. As for being 'rude and crude', well, anonymous folks are the worst. For, they can put other people down saying anything they want about other people without being allowing others to know who the this rude and crude 'anonymus' is. In many cases, the anonymous is the rudest and crudest.
Just some life long experience I have encountered. Nothing more to say.


Tommy003 2009-03-07 22:42:28 -0600 Report

I know John. Everybody lighten up, for goodness sake. I was just a bit peeved with his coments. You will see many typos with me keying stuff. I think I need a new keyboard anyway. One that is more sensitive to picking up all the letters I key. I am not trying to make excuses here. I have difficulty everyday I write with the darn thing.

I am human everyone. I am a great conversationalist, a great listener, I sarcastic son of a gun, homebound and bored, always looking to met new people who are wishing the same so that friends become more abundant. I think it's so groovy, now, that people are still finally getting together.

May Peace, Tranqulity, Serenity, Good Health, Honesty, and most importantly, FAITH be with you from this moment and forever and forever more,


Carl Carter
Carl Carter 2009-03-11 12:58:57 -0500 Report

I am a long term diabetic, caused by a heart attack. I do not feel that the government (We the People, not those jerks in Washington) should be responsible for paying for everyone's health care. I recently traveled to Europe and listened to the frustrations of the Socialist countries residents with their health care and its problems. The smaller the country, Sweden and Norway with under 5 million population, the easier it is to provide health care. Also, those Nordics were in fantastic physical condition. We on the other hand have a population of over 300 million and many are fat or obese, and in lousy physical shape. We cause most of our health problems ourselves with our fast food indulgences and lack of physical conditioning. I am 6' 5" and weigh in a less than 190 lbs. I have LADA, Heart trouble and work at being physically fit. It isn't easy, but I do get the exercise I need.
Universal health care isn't affordable for this country.

2009-03-02 19:43:41 -0600 Report

Amen and thank you! I am also Type 1 and I do have insurance, however, my insurance is very limited as to what it will pay for. It will cover my insulin, but meters, lancets, vitamins and the most expensive of all TEST STRIPS are NOT covered. It cost a fortune when you have to test 5 to 6 times a day. Many of us are in the same sinking boat over here. I totally agree with you!!!! Angie…Oh, syringes I forgot those, they are not covered either!

kartist1 2009-03-02 21:35:33 -0600 Report

Hey there sister…I am type 2-21/2 year's now… and it's a crazy world out here when you do not have insurance as well. I had good insurance with my teaching job as well. My insurance ran out when changing jobs, and now I am with you in your shoes of trying to meat the high cost of medicines also. I take Lantus daily and it last for about a month. Check Walmart stores. They have low cost products such as lancets, pricker's, meters under $20.00. Take care,

2009-03-03 06:11:12 -0600 Report

I am in the same position you are. I was laid off in October from Wells Fargo Bank. I had great insurance. I was in the process of changing over to cobra when I wound up in ICU and was diagnosed with diabetes. I had paid those premiums for years and I was stuck, spending 2 weeks in ICU, and the insurance DID NOT cover it. I'm 43 and it will take 100 years to pay that bill off. Now I have limited insurance that really isn't worth the cost and pays for very little. Something is wrong with this picture! I was caught in a gap at the wrong time. That is why I agree that something needs to be done. When you have worked your entire life and are laid off for no reason other than the economy, we need some back up plan.

jsd2005 2009-03-08 21:38:14 -0500 Report

hae you ever searched for some type of additional insurance as a supplement for this very reason. Usually, you should be able to find something that can help you.

I just sent for a free meter and in talking with the seller, discovered they offer strips at half the price we purchase them for. I just got online and searched for free meter and came up with one I liked and they called me.

It was actually 20.00 for the meter and 50.00 for 100 strips. I will continue to use them. I still recommend you contact some individual regarding supplement insurance.
Good Luck

Next Discussion: I Apologize »