KartMan

While there may be many among us that could pay for the costs to repair a broken leg, for many Americans even that relatively small malady would be a major dent in their savings. If that broken leg was addressed in the ER, the bill could easily be $5k or more. What about when grandpa gets cancer? Do you really think he could pay for that himself? Of course not. The bills associated with cancer would likely bankrupt most people. Even if under some miracle the cancer bills did get paid for by some method, he could never get insurance again because of that pre-existing condition.

I guess you didn’t read what I wrote. I described Single Payer, not socialized medicine. You have morphed it into socialized medicine by what you are afraid it “might” become. I don’t want what you described either and I don’t know anyone else that does. It puzzles me though that one would be so afraid of what “might” happen that they won’t even entertain the idea of changing what clearly “is” a flawed design. What Willow describes above about not having any control of who provides her coverage and being forced to switch doctors only because hers was not on the plan is only one of the many problems with the current system. A Single Payer system would allow her to keep that doctor, it would also allow her to leave her job and not worry about where her next coverage would come from. If in the current system during that transition, she developed an illness, her next insurance would not cover that illness. That problem would be addressed by Single Payer. While I do agree that Single Payer like any other government program will need a whole set of rules for it to be well run, we should be smart enough to figure out the details. We have models to work from (France, Canada, and our own Medicare). Aren’t we smart enough to draft legislation that takes the best of those plans to move forward with? Since nobody wants Socialized Medicare (like the British model), aren’t we smart enough to legislate that out? Your arguments sound like the same fear mongering we have been hearing on this topic for the past 20 years. Ignoring the problem has only made it worse. I for one will not stay quite while the Insurance Companies try to stop this again. Health Care is a right that every American should have, just like access to schools, roads, police and fire service, and national security.

I personally don’t count the coffee in my daily Water tally. However, some people do suggest that any clear liquid (and the they classify tea and coffee in that group) as legitimate sources of water. This is another one like the pre-op diet, post-op diet, post-fill diet… every doctor seems to have their own rules. I do agree with you that each of us needs to follow what their doctor says. Lucky for me my doc is ok with artificial sweeteners and coffee:thumbup::eek::thumbup:

I think the verdict is out on water versus SF lemonade. I have had tons of doctors tell me that Crystal Light is equivalent to water for hydration and getting your “water” in. I don’t hate water, but I find it a lot harder to hit 64 oz a day if I don’t mix in Crystal Light for a big chunk of that. It hasn’t slowed my weight loss and I don’t see any other ill effects. I know some people are affected by artificial sweeteners and they should watch out for that, but for me they don’t seem to be a problem. I might be a bit of an anomaly though, I am also able to drink 3-4 8oz cups of coffee a day with no apparent ill affects.

I am a firm believer in term limits and think they should be in place for public office, including judges. But given that we don’t have them for congress, it’s up to the voting public to impose them at the ballot box. I personally have never voted for someone that has been in office more than a few terms (I think 2 is enough for a Senator and 4 is plenty for a Member of the House), even if that person was from the party that I preferred at the time.

Oh come on now, I can be just as cynical as the next person but I don’t think “all” government programs are bad. As I said before, just because there is fraud and abuse doesn’t mean that it is a bad program, it just means that the fraud and abuse need to be corrected. Government programs are run by people and people are flawed. Private businesses succeed and fail everyday, largely due to the actions of the people that operate them. As citizens, it is our duty to ensure that these programs are run efficiently and that fraud is not tolerated. If they are not, then get rid of the people that run them until you find somebody that does it right. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of programs that are not helping anyone and should go, again that is our duty as citizens to root those out. Some of these bad programs are the pet projects of politicians, if those politicians don’t do the right thing – then get rid of them too. But you asked me to give you one example, I’ll give you a couple. The Postal Service – they process millions (billion?) of pieces a mail a day with very few lost items (I don’t think I’ve ever lost anything), they seem pretty efficient. Heck, for 42 cents you can have something picked up at your house and delivered all the way across the country in a couple of days, sounds like a pretty efficient operation to me. The Interstate Highway system – thousands of miles of roads that operate pretty flawlessly. I’m sure there are others, as I’m sure there are plenty that don’t work. I never said government was perfect, clearly it is not. However, some things just can’t be done right by private industry and that is where government needs to provide a solution. Health Care coverage (not the doctors and hospitals, just the administration of costs) has fallen into that category. The private insurance system that we have today is failing us miserably and will bankrupt us (more than we already are) in only a few years at its current trajectory.

I’m sorry if I sound insensitive here, but as far as I am concerned God didn’t “give” us anything. We “took” it away from the aboriginal population and we made it what we wanted it to be. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to shift the topic to Indian rights and colonial injustice (that is a whole different debate), I just don’t believe God “gave” us this country. To me, that sort of statement is just as shallow as an athlete that says he was helped to win the game by his belief in God. Really? The others guys belief in God was less so God picked sides?

If you agree that Health Care is already guaranteed by the nature of everyone being able to walk into and ER then surely you agree we are all already paying for that and that that is an incredibly inefficient way to provide service. One of the nurses or doctors around here can help me out with the figures here, but I’m sure that ER services are an order of magnitude more expensive than going to outpatient care. I would certainly not advocate making it “free” for everyone, it comes out of our taxes. The roads, schools and police are not free to you – you pay for them thru your tax dollars. Because taxes are paid on a graduated scale according to ones income, the costs are based on a proportional rate. You are making my argument, those people that don’t have it today are being subsidized by you and me thru higher premiums now, the difference is the insurance companies are the ones getting rich because of that. With single payer, taxpayers would pay for it but they wouldn’t have an insurance premium. From what it appears that Canadians pay for their benefit, I am anticipating that the average family would pay less in the health care tax than they do in premiums today, what’s not to like about that? Non taxpayers would be covered under single payer as well, but they could go to regular doctors rather than ER which will in turn save us all money. The other huge benefit to single payer is that people would no longer be turned away for pre-existing conditions. Any government benefit is a potential outlet for fraud and abuse. This one is no different. All of our benefit programs should have measures in place to protect against that. Just because fraud and abuse are there, does not mean the program is not good, it just means that it is not being administered properly – why can’t we fix that?

Not true here. Believers don't want to change things, we want them the way they were from the beginning. We don't want to enforce our doctrines on anyone. We had these christian morals and virtues in place since the formation of America. We gradually lost them to 'liberals' over time, little by little, and just want them back. You see, unbelievers have bent the laws (as you call it) that were in place since the founding fathers were here, to conform to their way. Why was it okay for unbelievers to change things in America? We would never have tolerated 'legal' abortions, or gay marriages back in the day We also had slavery, lack of women’s rights, corporal punishment, etc., etc., etc. The point is that we have evolved (I realize that you may see it as devolving) as a society. Unfortunately for your side of the argument, most voters are moving in a more progressive direction. As a secular democracy, our laws should be (and for the most part are) based on the will of the people and not the theology of any of its segments. The majority of Americans believe that a women should have the right to choose with respect to reproductive rights. Not all voters have always gone this way, but most polls are trending towards equal rights for gays (gays in the military, gay marriage, and other gay rights). Most Americans (even religious Americans) are very comfortable with not allowing structured religion into public schools. Now people are forcing that on Christians, the same way you say that christians are forcing unbelievers to conform. Calling them haters and bigots if they don't become tollerant of that sinful lifestyle. We are persecuted if we don't 'accept' what God deems sinful. With these secular laws, nobody is forcing Christians to have abortions or to enter into a Gay marriage, all that is being done is disallowing you the ability to prevent others from doing what the rest of society has agreed to be fair and legal. The difference is that here in America, in a Christian nation, you are not forced to believe in God. You can believe in anything or anyone you choose. We are founded on christian principals, and we run on them, but we don't force anyone to attend christian assemblys or believe in Jesus. This is not true with Afghanistan. They force their people to worship their God. We are not a “Christian Nation”, we are a secular nation full of Christians, Jews, Moslems, Buddhists, other faiths, and unbelievers. I’ve had this debate with you before and the evidence is very clear on this. I challenge you to find an elected official to agree with you that we are a “Christian Nation”, you won’t because they know that we are not and if they said we were they wouldn’t hold that office for long. If you persist in calling America a Christian Nation then you are just proving that you are irrational and out of touch with reality on this topic.

Health care should be a right and not a privilege. We have several other things like this that have universal access and spread costs. Our public schools work this way, our federal and state roads, emergency services, and the list goes on. If someone wants more than the basic package, they could always find off network doctors or possibly a supplemental insurance industry could be started. Imagine the unjustness if we decided that police or fire service was an individual responsibility... “Oh sorry Mrs. Jones, we can’t send an officer to your home to get rid of that burglar because you don’t have adequate Police Insurance Coverage.”

Patty, I see so many things wrong with this rant that I almost don’t know where to begin and since I am pressed for time, I can only address one issue. It’s not the non-believers that want to force doctrine on society – it’s the believers. Well, let me rephrase that, it’s the believers that are convinced that theirs is absolutely the only way and that everybody else has it wrong. They want to bend as many of our laws to their will as they can and have us all follow the same doctrine that they believe in. To me, I really don’t see a big difference in your vision of America and what the Taliban wanted for Afghanistan. Now I realize that both faiths are very different and that both would have different interpretations of religious law on society. But for me, a non believer, those laws and customs that are mandated from a religious rather than secular perspective are equally offensive and repressive. Now before you get mad at me for comparing you and yours to the Taliban, just remember that you started it by comparing liberals to Hitler. I think we can agree that both analogies are a stretch, but if one is fair game then I think the other is as well.

I'm curious, were you also able to forgive him for being Gay?

Thanks BJean!!! Maybe we should propose a bill to Congress. We could call it the “Sensible Single Payer System”

Unfortunately I think even Obama is being influenced by them because so far he has not seriously considered single payer. I think if we look objectively we can find enough good things in the countries that have single payer to make it work here. Heck, we have our own single payer systems here that work (Medicare, Medicaide, Tricare, VA, etc.) Now I know these programs aren’t perfect, but can we seriously say that private insurance companies do it better? They don’t and they have the power to deny people that really need coverage. Obviously the Insurance industry would take a big hit and that sucks for them, (dramatic pause while I shed a tear) but they have made a ton of money in a bad way if you ask me. I don’t get the whole socialized medicine BS. It is called “Single Payer” not “Single Hospital” or “Single Doctor”. I think everybody wants to be able to pick their own doctor, I see no reason why that ability couldn’t be written into the program. If you are one of those people that feels sorry for the insurance industry, don’t – they will adapt. Here’s an idea… Who’s to say we couldn’t still have supplemental insurance on top of single payer? Then, if you can afford the additional coverage you can get an upgraded plan. We all get the basic package; those that pay more get more. The good insurance companies can find a way to leverage that market and strive in the new environment. The other thing that drives me nuts is that we Americans seem to feel like we have the absolute best medical care in the world and going to single payer would endanger lives. Well I hate to break it to you folks – we don’t. If we did, we wouldn’t be ranked down in the 30s for infant mortality (Canada, the UK, and most of Europe are ahead of us) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate_(2005) . We are also 45th in life expectancy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy . This one is interesting because it is not just about health care but it plays a major factor. If we had a system that rewards preventative medicine rather than reactive medicine I think this number would improve. Single payer could dramatically influence preventative medicine by forcing a change in this area.

Woohoo!!! About 11 lbs to go for me before onederland. Down about 74 lbs since being banded on 2/18/09

For all the grief you hear about the government option you would think that we have a perfect system now. I have cycled back and forth between PPO and HMO for the last 18 years and in that time I never really had total choice in doctors. Sure, with the PPO I could pick my doctor but if I went out of network I paid a penalty. On HMO I have to pick a PCP within the network and I must fill out paperwork to switch doctors. When I was in the Navy, I didn’t have a choice of doctors – but I had pretty good care. In fact I suffered from a major illness while in the service and the care was top notch (and that was totally government run). My sister has TriCare and my mother has Medicare, neither are perfect systems but they both get as good or better care than most people I know on private insurance and both seem to have choices in their care. Don’t let the insurance companies fool you on this. Its they that will suffer if a government option is brought to the table not you.

Whoa, hold on a minute!!! Who’s a failure? What guidebook is telling you that losing 20 lbs in 2.5 months is a horrible thing? None, because in reality that is just fine, right in the ballpark in fact. Plenty of people don’t lose any weight till restriction. For some lucky losers, they have restriction right from the beginning others don’t start feeling it until 4 or 5 fills. If you don’t have any restriction you are essentially like an unbanded person and are dieting on willpower alone. Keep your chin up, stick with whatever you are doing (cuz believe it or not its working) and keep going in for fills. Pretty soon the restriction will hit and you will lose even faster. Stop beating yourself up, you are doing great.

I lost 10 lbs on a self imposed 1 week liquid diet. I mostly stuck to the liquid only too. I cheated once with Sushi and another time with something else. Don’t worry about not qualifying. The doctor will realize that you are losing because you are on liquids only and that it is not sustainable for more than a few weeks. I think they do the pre-op for a few reasons. - To just to see that you have some willpower to stick to a plan. - To help ease you into the liquid phase that is required post op. - To slightly reduce the size of the stomach where they will be placing the band. - And probably the most important medical reason is the reduce the size of the liver a bit. Apparently the liver is one of the first things to shrink in early weight loss, and for this surgery the smaller your liver the better. A flap of the liver rests on top the part of the stomach that they are working on. If it is overly large, there is a risk of it tearing (repairable, but a complication they would rather avoid).

It seems to me that the lesson in this is that neither party has a lock on “family values” and they should not try to use those issues for political gain. We have clearly seen that both parties have plenty of members that stray from home, and it’s not even a recent thing. Affairs by politicians go way back. There are reports that Washington had a mistress, Eleanor Roosevelt was rumored to have lovers, JFK – well we know he was a ladies man, Newt cheated on his dying wife, Bill Clinton, Elliott Spitzer, the Colorado Governor, George Bush senior had some rumors, blah, blah, blah. (Interesting article http://www.geocities.com/jacksonthor/knowrsex.html) It still amazes me that some of the most vocal people on it turn out to be guilty of it too. I remember Rush calling Ted Kennedy a philanderer, he even had a special jingle for him (I used to listen to Rush when I was younger I guess you could say I’m a “Born Again Liberal”). Not to mention that Clinton’s escapades are partly the reason Rush is so big now (no pun intended). All the while that Rush was condemning Kennedy and Clinton, Newt and Henry Hyde were doing the same thing while wearing the Republican banner. Infidelity is a trait that crosses party lines on a regular basis. Rush himself has been divorced 3 times and there have been rumors that he travels outside the country on “sexcations”. Also, its not just a male thing. I mentioned Eleanor Roosevelt above. Nancy Reagan was said to have an affair with Frank Sinatra. Former Rep. Helen Chenoweth (R-Idaho), who admitted in 1998 that she had a six-year relationship with her former business partner before she took office. Rep. Mary Fallin (R-Okla.), who is running for governor of her state in 2010, faced allegations of an inappropriate relationship with a state trooper while she was lieutenant governor. I think one reason that we hear of less women doing these things is there are less women in public office than men. But don’t forget that for every powerful man that is having an affair, he is having it with a woman who is just as guilty as he is (er, uh – well except for Larry Craig and Mark Foley).

Count me in. I'm in Poway and can be available on Wednesday mornings.

As I said before, this should not be about the affair(s), that is between him and his wife. I don’t take a conservative or liberal approach on these things. If you abuse your power, you should not have the privilege of serving the people. Elected office is a privilege and not a right. Once in office, you should be held to the highest standards in carrying out your duties. From what I have read, the Governor abused his power by taking the trip using taxpayer dollars and he didn’t communicate his absence to the proper channels. What would have happened had there been a disaster in his state? Does he not realize that things like hurricanes (and his state is in the storm belt), terrorist activity (like the Oklahoma City bombing), or a legislative crisis require the presence of the Governor or his duly appointed representative on hand? I know what would have happened, the catastrophe would have been made that much worse because he would have not been available and there was no chain of command to make the important decisions. What should happen from here? He should man up and resign, that would show me that he has the character that he so often pontificates on. If he doesn’t resign, the AG should charge him to the full extent of the law and the legislature should throw him out. If the state doesn’t boot him out legally, the voters should send him a clear message when he is up for reelection and make sure he doesn’t win any other office. If the voters put him back in office, well then they get what they deserve. One thing I am certainly happy about is that he had this implosion before his rising star took him to national office. Now we know that he makes colossally bad personal choices that make him unfit for office.

I was banded here in the US, however my sister was banded in Mexico by Dr. Ortiz and it was fantastic. You can read my post on the experience here http://www.lapbandtalk.com/f11/dr-ortiz-occ-94998/

I would say that with a BMI of 22 you are “normal” and not too thin at all. Maybe a real test is in order? Go to your doctor and have some blood work done. I’m sure that you will find good things like normal cholesterol, blood pressure, triglycerides and blood sugar. Use this data to prove to them and yourself that you not only feel healthy but are healthy in terms of actual medical tests not just what their “eyes” or maybe jealousy is telling them.

A couple of days ago I passed another Mini-Goal. This one was real important to me. It was passing the lowest weight I had ever previously attained on a diet. For me, that weight was 212lbs. The last time I was there was after about 10 months on Nutrisystem, it was a real struggle to attain at the time and obviously one I was not able to maintain. My second lowest dieting weight was 215 and that was a few years ago while doing Atkins. Again it was about 8-10 months to get there and didn’t last long. This journey on LapBand and taken me about 4.5 months and feels so much better than anything before. Don’t get me wrong, it hasn’t been a cakewalk – but it has certainly been a more rewarding program day to day. Next Mini-Goal is to get under 200, then its just 15lbs to get to my main goal of 185 and a normal BMI.

Ok, so I am hooked on my scale, sorry it’s one of my few vices. I’ve seen a weird phenomenon though that I can’t explain and I’m wondering if anybody has an answer to it. I weigh myself every morning after I go to the bathroom and before I drink or eat, that is the number I use for my calculation. I weigh myself at different times of the day too, just to see what it says. Oddly, sometimes right after I urinate the scale may actually be 0.4 to 0.8 lbs higher than before I went. How is that possible:confused:? I just watched all that urine get flushed away, yet I gained half a pound:cursing:? Usually about half an hour to hour later I’m back to pre-pee weight or a little less. Maybe I need a hobby:lol: