Posted on 03/26/2009 3:38:55 AM PDT by tobyhill
planting false information is merely one of the things theose in control could do.
when I think of whart this guy is doing, I think of the 1920’s in Europe, and it terrifies me.
taking advantage of a bad economy to grow government conmtrol.
creating scapegoats (corporate bigwigs)
governing by lunch mob (bus tours of people’s homes)
inciting people to hate.
government targeting certain people as evil
government taxing certain people to death
it’s a small step to hauling people away in the dead of night.
Hitler was very popular with the masses.
If the Robert Woods Johnson foundation did the study, it may help to know that RWJF is the big money behind most of the anti-smoking and anti-drinking campaigns worldwide.
The foundation is the non-profit arm of SC Johnson Corp. and currently is the 5th wealthiest non-profit in the world.
More info here:
http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/Controversies/1122492295.html
better link here:
http://www.alcoholfacts.org/RWJfoundation.html
I’ve been avoiding making those comparisons openly for fear of being labeled a nut case, but since you brought it up . . . I understand and agree completely.
(sigh!) now I’m a nutcase...
thanx bro;-)
the problem is that there were people who foresaw what was hapenning and failed to stop it for whatever reason. We can only learn when we recognize what is hapenning to us and in the world around us in a historical context.
I’ve never made an anology of a politician with Schiklegruber before, but I see it in this guy.
remember that Schikleburger (Hitler) won election by a wide margin and was very popular with his people. It’s wonderful how popular one can be when one finds someone to blame...
I have worked in the medical coding and billing services for 15 years, and within the past 5 - 10 years I can not think of one major (or even minor clinics) health organization that does not use electronic medical records.
My current job works with the VA system, along with some private hospitals and clinics and everyone of them totally depend on electronic medical records. These systems are not just their billing records, they are the total medical records. The only thing I could think of that describes the discrepancy of statistics is if they mean downloading to a national data base. The facilities I work for are totally self contained, they do not report the full records to any national database, just Medicare/insurance companies and to other facilities within their networks.
If the government insisted on mandatory EMR and really wanted to lower medical costs, the least they could do is provide standardized software to hospitals and clinics free. Better yet, they should also provide the hardware too. Small doctor offices can’t afford the kind of high tech goodies that hospitals have.
Could you be more specific? I assume you have technical understanding of the process that differs from my understanding. If so, could you explain how this could be done quickly and efficiently?
However, it adds about 25% more time per patient encounter, so if hours are kept constant (and in primary care, hours worked can't rise any more) patients seen will inevitably fall.
But who cares? If you actually SEE the patients, you are adding to health care costs. If they stay home, costs level off. If they die, costs go down.
You do the math.
They don't care about the errors.
If so, then they will have a worthless database, won’t they?
If a physician tries to use that database to determine the past medical history of a patient, he will be endangering the patient or, at the least, treating for something fictitious. What about cases where overzealous practitioners, practicing defensive medicine, prescribe more than two different drugs, causing an insurer (even if that is the government), to conclude this person is higher risk than they actually are? Today, someone receiving 3 different medications will be turned down for coverage or charged a higher premium.
This happened to my husband. It took a long session with his physician to get the record corrected and then it took 3 years for the insurance company to change their risk assessment. (Two meds prescribed for high BP/one med caused a side effect/a third med was prescribed to treat the side effect. The patient wasn’t even taking the third med for more than a week, but there it was, on the chart forever). Had he been forced to change physicians, he would have been listed as having a condition he only had for a short time due to over-prescribing. Finally, the offending med was reduced by half and that is what solved the problem.
I think you were being bitter, but the lack of concern for this sort of thing (and the example I cited was minor as it didn’t imperil life) is horrendous, IMO. Control based on error with slavish adherence to the *record* . Lord help us all.
Then there are the PC issues that occur when a physician thoughtlessly writes down *fat* or something similar as their subjective observation and can be sued for defamation. Who owns those records?
I guess I hope they cannot accomplish this quickly just because we are old enough that if they can’t, we will be spared the consequences.
Whomever designed the program they use....was an idiot.
NOT user friendly at all......
So what?
None of this - NONE - has anything to do with what's good for patients.
I see Epic replacing that program in many places, but Cerner is a starting point for those that can’t afford more. The problem is not software, it is lawyers forcing doctors to do things that did not need to be done AND bad or old fashioned practices. Finally, some reports say that software actully raises prices because it helps doctors to ID billing opportunities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.