Off With Their Feet

ford reference- pintos were known for bursting into flames upon rear end collision. deaths and then lawsuits resulted. it was later discovered (from an internal memo i think)that the company knew, due tio positioning of the pinto gas tanks, that the fires were likely. i t was decided that it would be cheaper to pay out on the deaths than to recall and move all the gas tanks.

i was tempted to post a picture of a foot with the kind of gangrenous wound that requires amputation but thought better of it. suffice it to say it is horrendous, i've seen them. i'd like to say this story is unbelievable, but really it isn't even suprising, sadly.
check out the last paragraph of the story at the link too.

martel, shame on you! :lol:

I have to hope, then, that the politicians that voted this in get defeeted in the next election.

and you threatened to pun-t me for bad ones! :lol:

:red:

I hope this ends up on the chopping block next time around. They will have to change things over there to : This little piggy went to market .. this little piggy stayed home .. this little piggy had diabetes in Greece and got cut off. (or something similar)

BTW I toetally agree with Expat47 :lol:

Expat, you know it was Bureaucrats and not Politicians who made that decision, just like it was Insurance Company Bureaucrats who decided to not give my Mother-in-Law Chemo or Radiation therapy after her Mastectomy because she was 75 years old and would probably die of old age before she died of a reoccurance of the Cancer. Does that make it a Death Panel? Insurance Companies have been running Actuarial Panels like that for Decades.

Patty, re. Ford Reference, the Pinto wasn't alone; the Ford Bronco II, the basis for the Ford Explorer, was considered to be a rollover risk by Ford's Engineers, but Management decided that it was cheaper to hire lawyers than to redesign the vehicle.

I had a '71 Pinto, Patty, and I read about a settlement in the newspaper sometime in '78. There was some class-action lawsuit, and if I just showed up at a Ford dealer with my title, they would repair the problem for free. I didn't get around to it. Then I gave it to my ex-wife as part of our divorce. I used to pray she'd get rear-ended, but, alas, she lives on, and on, and on... :shut:

Make that a '73, sorry.

Freddie, over here Bureaucrats = Politicians. Can't tell one from the other without a score card. Anyhow, the "health care system" over here is state run.

As far as the insurance companies deciding to "Not" pay for some procedure: Your best bet is to let/make them compete across state lines. You'll have to talk to your local politicians about that.
You may also want to make sure that Obama-care never happens and that the tarp law is changed to protect doctors/hospitals from these ridiculous multimillion $$ malpractice awards. Florida caped them at $2M some years ago and that is a start.

danny, i am appaled that you would wish ill on your ex-wife!!! 🐛
so sorry about that experience with your mother-in-law freddie, doctors, not insurance company schmucks should make those decisions.
obamacare, i weep at the thought.

either they don't intend to cover prothetics or the full cost of treatment, including prothetics, for those that get sores that end in amputation will be cheaper than diabetic shoes for ALL diabetics.

Expat, I've read your post twice and I don't understand what you mean by allowing insurance competition over state lines will fix my Mother-inLaw's problems; she actually has incredible health care ($5-$20 co-pays for everything including surgery, she gets to chose her own Drs, has check-ups at the Mayo every couple years, free prosthetics with a minimum co-pay for fittings, etc.), but the decision on the Chemo & Radiation overrode her Dr's recommendation purely on the basis of her age & actuarial charts, and that sort of thing is worse with most health insurance carriers (I've had Aetna overrule my Drs on Meds, tests, plans of treatment, PT, etc.), AND there are already many national & multi-state Health Insurance carriers, so what will your plan actually be doing? Is there a plan there?

You said you want "the tarp law [I assume you meant "Tort"?...] changed to protect doctors/hospitals from these ridiculous multimillion $$ malpractice awards," but many states, including California (we have a $250,000 pain & suffering cap, 1/4 of Florida's), have those in place already, and the rates that the Malpractice Insurance rates are rising is actually higher in those states! So Tort Reform won't cure the problem. Tort Reform is certainly needed, and was included in "Obama Care", AND THE REPUBLICAN'S VOTED AGAINST IT! Much of "Obama Care" is made up of the already existing ideas that Republican Senators had put forward as ways to improve Health Care in the years since that well-known Communist Richard Nixon first suggested a National Health Insurance System, and the resultant law has little to do with the Clinton Administration's attempt at the same thing, and yet THE REPUBLICAN'S VOTED AGAINST IT. If they've voted against their own ideas, what do they have to have to counter their ideas with?

Health Insurance isn't a zero sum game, it doesn't just pay out from the premiums paid in, 99-100% of Health Insurance premiums are paid out in claims; Health Insurance companies make most of their profits from investment of your premiums between the time they're paid & the time they pay out claims, and Health Insurance companies make enough to pay out an average 35% of Revenues in Salaries, Lawyer Bills, and Lobbying. Gee, looking at that link above that compares the rate that Malpractice Insurance is rising, the average rate of increase is about 35%! What the rise in the premiums for Malpractice Insurance is paying for, and the costs of which are being passed on to us in turn, is bad investments on the part of the Health Insurance companies!

Oh, and I finally found another source for the story, and that source says that they were planning to discontinue buying the Diabetic Shoes because they don't prevent amputations but merely put off the amputations for a year or two. The cost of a pair of Diabetic Shoes to the Greek Health Insurance carrier is €250, 2 to 3 times the amount they cost a company that isn't a Monopoly and riddled with sweetheart deals & kick-backs. The article also says the cost for an amputation in Greece is €70,000, much more than it would cost to teach Diabetics to take care of themselves, like the Universal Health Insurance in Germany does. And the Greek National Health Insurance company has already said they'll look at this again and find the money they need to pay for the shoes.