Americans are fat and getting fatter by the year. Recent data reported in medical journal Lancet showed that BMI (Body Mass Index), a recognized measurement of obesity, is higher on average in America than in any other nation.
The obesity problem, however, is international. The report in Lancet states that "In 2008, 9.8 percent of the world's male population were obese, as were 13.8 percent of women. In 1980, these rates were 4.8 percent and 7.9 percent." U.S. eating habits and diets have been exported, many experts say. Nations which before had relatively lean diets which were high in grains and fruits now consume many more soft drinks and hamburgers
LINK
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
10 States With the Deadliest Eating Habits
Americans are fat and getting fatter by the year. Recent data reported in medical journal Lancet showed that BMI (Body Mass Index), a recognized measurement of obesity, is higher on average in America than in any other nation.
The obesity problem, however, is international. The report in Lancet states that "In 2008, 9.8 percent of the world's male population were obese, as were 13.8 percent of women. In 1980, these rates were 4.8 percent and 7.9 percent." U.S. eating habits and diets have been exported, many experts say. Nations which before had relatively lean diets which were high in grains and fruits now consume many more soft drinks and hamburgers
Your title is absolutely innappropriate for this article. The article speaks to why people's diets suck, and how that leads to health problems. This leads to the perceived need for more health care, when the answer is really diet and exercise.
If you want to talk about health care COSTS, and why the costs are high, that is an entirely different discussion. It has to do with countless regulation and needless legislation enacted to restrict competition. Unwind all of that which was primarily enacted my special interest money and you will see the COSTS go down dramatically.
0
Your title is absolutely innappropriate for this article. The article speaks to why people's diets suck, and how that leads to health problems. This leads to the perceived need for more health care, when the answer is really diet and exercise.
If you want to talk about health care COSTS, and why the costs are high, that is an entirely different discussion. It has to do with countless regulation and needless legislation enacted to restrict competition. Unwind all of that which was primarily enacted my special interest money and you will see the COSTS go down dramatically.
It has to do with countless regulation and needless legislation enacted
to restrict competition. Unwind all of that which was primarily
enacted my special interest money and you will see the COSTS go down
dramatically. -----------
removing government from any industry forces competition and price reductions
0
It has to do with countless regulation and needless legislation enacted
to restrict competition. Unwind all of that which was primarily
enacted my special interest money and you will see the COSTS go down
dramatically. -----------
removing government from any industry forces competition and price reductions
removing government from any industry forces competition and price reductions
Keep beating that drum, you might get it right eventually.
Regulation
and the government hand is EXTREMELY necessary in the food and drug
industry because the private sector does not consider the health and
well being of the consumer, they hide behind every corner they can and
never do more than is forced by the government.
Why did we go
100 plus years without knowing what the ingredients were in what we
eat? Why do firms hide the content of ingredients using names and terms
we have no idea where they are derived (even now)? Why are companies
only inclined to do the right thing when caught, forced and prosecuted?
The
industry is dominated by a few firms in most all areas of food
production and distribution, there has never been full and transparent
disclosure in most any private sector industry unless forced by
government.
Since the choices are so few and the alternatives
are not cost or time effective, the supply and demand equation has
little to do with how we make decisions or how suppliers make decisions.
0
Quote Originally Posted by KOAJ:
removing government from any industry forces competition and price reductions
Keep beating that drum, you might get it right eventually.
Regulation
and the government hand is EXTREMELY necessary in the food and drug
industry because the private sector does not consider the health and
well being of the consumer, they hide behind every corner they can and
never do more than is forced by the government.
Why did we go
100 plus years without knowing what the ingredients were in what we
eat? Why do firms hide the content of ingredients using names and terms
we have no idea where they are derived (even now)? Why are companies
only inclined to do the right thing when caught, forced and prosecuted?
The
industry is dominated by a few firms in most all areas of food
production and distribution, there has never been full and transparent
disclosure in most any private sector industry unless forced by
government.
Since the choices are so few and the alternatives
are not cost or time effective, the supply and demand equation has
little to do with how we make decisions or how suppliers make decisions.
Keep beating that drum, you might get it right eventually.
Regulation
and the government hand is EXTREMELY necessary in the food and drug
industry because the private sector does not consider the health and
well being of the consumer, they hide behind every corner they can and
never do more than is forced by the government.
Why did we go
100 plus years without knowing what the ingredients were in what we
eat? Why do firms hide the content of ingredients using names and terms
we have no idea where they are derived (even now)? Why are companies
only inclined to do the right thing when caught, forced and prosecuted?
The
industry is dominated by a few firms in most all areas of food
production and distribution, there has never been full and transparent
disclosure in most any private sector industry unless forced by
government.
Since the choices are so few and the alternatives
are not cost or time effective, the supply and demand equation has
little to do with how we make decisions or how suppliers make decisions.
while i agree with you that some regulation is needed, yes it wasnt right that the ingredients werent known. but what good is there in the corn syrup funding? and if the fat taxes go into effect, the govt will spend tax payer money funding corn syrup production, then tax those that consume it, talk about a fucked up system. what good is there in potatoes being the only vegetable not covered under WIC?
trying to manipulate the market is not good, and i cant recall a time where it did work.
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Keep beating that drum, you might get it right eventually.
Regulation
and the government hand is EXTREMELY necessary in the food and drug
industry because the private sector does not consider the health and
well being of the consumer, they hide behind every corner they can and
never do more than is forced by the government.
Why did we go
100 plus years without knowing what the ingredients were in what we
eat? Why do firms hide the content of ingredients using names and terms
we have no idea where they are derived (even now)? Why are companies
only inclined to do the right thing when caught, forced and prosecuted?
The
industry is dominated by a few firms in most all areas of food
production and distribution, there has never been full and transparent
disclosure in most any private sector industry unless forced by
government.
Since the choices are so few and the alternatives
are not cost or time effective, the supply and demand equation has
little to do with how we make decisions or how suppliers make decisions.
while i agree with you that some regulation is needed, yes it wasnt right that the ingredients werent known. but what good is there in the corn syrup funding? and if the fat taxes go into effect, the govt will spend tax payer money funding corn syrup production, then tax those that consume it, talk about a fucked up system. what good is there in potatoes being the only vegetable not covered under WIC?
trying to manipulate the market is not good, and i cant recall a time where it did work.
I would imagine the reason for pots not being in WIC (I had no idea of that obviously) is political, which points out a blaring flaw which is separate issue but along the lines of my original point. When business can they always find ways to gain influence and market share/profits.
The only way business truely is contained is when they are forced, and more often than not the force is due to regulation. Consumers are not educated enough to make a decision worthy of the basic economic theory, because business is not transparent, they hide to gain advantage. The less the counter party knows the more you profit, the more power you hold and the more you can hide from regulators or truth seekers.
How many non-scientists know where the chemicals listed on a box of cookies or a box of cereal or a loaf of bread are derived from, or HOW they are derived?
0
I would imagine the reason for pots not being in WIC (I had no idea of that obviously) is political, which points out a blaring flaw which is separate issue but along the lines of my original point. When business can they always find ways to gain influence and market share/profits.
The only way business truely is contained is when they are forced, and more often than not the force is due to regulation. Consumers are not educated enough to make a decision worthy of the basic economic theory, because business is not transparent, they hide to gain advantage. The less the counter party knows the more you profit, the more power you hold and the more you can hide from regulators or truth seekers.
How many non-scientists know where the chemicals listed on a box of cookies or a box of cereal or a loaf of bread are derived from, or HOW they are derived?
Keep beating that drum, you might get it right eventually.
Regulation and the government hand is EXTREMELY necessary in the food and drug industry because the private sector does not consider the health and well being of the consumer, they hide behind every corner they can and never do more than is forced by the government.
Why did we go 100 plus years without knowing what the ingredients were in what we eat? Why do firms hide the content of ingredients using names and terms we have no idea where they are derived (even now)? Why are companies only inclined to do the right thing when caught, forced and prosecuted?
The industry is dominated by a few firms in most all areas of food production and distribution, there has never been full and transparent disclosure in most any private sector industry unless forced by government.
Since the choices are so few and the alternatives are not cost or time effective, the supply and demand equation has little to do with how we make decisions or how suppliers make decisions.
Please provide your perspective on laser vision correction.
It is an extremely sophisticated medical procedure. It is a procedure that is almost never covered by medical insurance-it is considered an elective, cosmetic procedure. Without third (or fourth) party interference, the cost is determined by the consumer and the surgeon. This is an example of the Market.
What has happened?
It has gotten better, safer, and cheaper. In fact, almost anyone with a decent job, the desire to have it done, and the discipline to "save for it", can aquire it.
Save yourself the embarrassment of asking for more examples. Despite the meddlesome hand of government fouling nearly every nook and cranny of our economic system, I have dozens of them.
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Keep beating that drum, you might get it right eventually.
Regulation and the government hand is EXTREMELY necessary in the food and drug industry because the private sector does not consider the health and well being of the consumer, they hide behind every corner they can and never do more than is forced by the government.
Why did we go 100 plus years without knowing what the ingredients were in what we eat? Why do firms hide the content of ingredients using names and terms we have no idea where they are derived (even now)? Why are companies only inclined to do the right thing when caught, forced and prosecuted?
The industry is dominated by a few firms in most all areas of food production and distribution, there has never been full and transparent disclosure in most any private sector industry unless forced by government.
Since the choices are so few and the alternatives are not cost or time effective, the supply and demand equation has little to do with how we make decisions or how suppliers make decisions.
Please provide your perspective on laser vision correction.
It is an extremely sophisticated medical procedure. It is a procedure that is almost never covered by medical insurance-it is considered an elective, cosmetic procedure. Without third (or fourth) party interference, the cost is determined by the consumer and the surgeon. This is an example of the Market.
What has happened?
It has gotten better, safer, and cheaper. In fact, almost anyone with a decent job, the desire to have it done, and the discipline to "save for it", can aquire it.
Save yourself the embarrassment of asking for more examples. Despite the meddlesome hand of government fouling nearly every nook and cranny of our economic system, I have dozens of them.
tiki - my brother had the lasik done 10 years ago., paid 3k an eye. now you can do it for 1k for both or cheaper in some areas. NJ costs are higher for everything
competition in the market drove prices down through competition and innovation
did you know the FDA does not allow american companies to make proper parmesean cheese? need to let the milk age for more than 6 weeks. however, the government does allow for the import of real parmesean cheese
Kraft Foods paid a pretty penny for that rule
wall - i buy most of my produce from local farms. there are no government cronies with their hands out for their seal of approval. if the food is bad, i wont go back. if i get sick, then i tell the town about it. the farmer's business will slow to the point where he will need to either address those concerns or go under
also, the recent food scares have all come from large corporate farms, not small local "non FDA" farms
0
tiki - my brother had the lasik done 10 years ago., paid 3k an eye. now you can do it for 1k for both or cheaper in some areas. NJ costs are higher for everything
competition in the market drove prices down through competition and innovation
did you know the FDA does not allow american companies to make proper parmesean cheese? need to let the milk age for more than 6 weeks. however, the government does allow for the import of real parmesean cheese
Kraft Foods paid a pretty penny for that rule
wall - i buy most of my produce from local farms. there are no government cronies with their hands out for their seal of approval. if the food is bad, i wont go back. if i get sick, then i tell the town about it. the farmer's business will slow to the point where he will need to either address those concerns or go under
also, the recent food scares have all come from large corporate farms, not small local "non FDA" farms
The
industry is dominated by a few firms in most all areas of food
production and distribution, there has never been full and transparent
disclosure in most any private sector industry unless forced by
government. ---------- https://iowaindependent.com/22980/iowa-law-firm-files-as-monsanto-lobbyist-in-advance-of-ag-antitrust-workshop
the current head of the USDA is a former lobbyist for Monsanto
who's interests does he serve? the taxpayer or Monsanto's? if its the taxpayer, then he never gets the Sec of Agriculture job
0
The
industry is dominated by a few firms in most all areas of food
production and distribution, there has never been full and transparent
disclosure in most any private sector industry unless forced by
government. ---------- https://iowaindependent.com/22980/iowa-law-firm-files-as-monsanto-lobbyist-in-advance-of-ag-antitrust-workshop
the current head of the USDA is a former lobbyist for Monsanto
who's interests does he serve? the taxpayer or Monsanto's? if its the taxpayer, then he never gets the Sec of Agriculture job
I have dozens of examples to the exact opposite of your claim, what does that mean?
Your example of laser surgery is awesome, it is an easy target to disprove.
I know quite a bit about laser eye companies because years ago I owned the largest player, VISX (now EYE), this was before the demise of their second competitor and when the industry was young.
The reason laser surgery is cheap has nothing to do with government being in or out or regulating at all, it has only to do with saturation. When laser surgery first started the prices were high and the quality was low because there was more demand than supply and the technology was new. Now the technology has improved, demand is lower than supply and prices have dropped. A comparable example(s) is computer memory, computers, Blu-ray dvd prices, digital cameras, HD tv sets etc etc.
When supply slows, companies start reducing prices which hurts margins but is necessary to maintain sales, it has little to do with the government. Innovation is also a function of sales, if you do not improve or change the product features you have no pricing power.
How much could Visx charge now for a procedure using a system with old technology, how much more is charged for the most current technology?
Terrible example tom, but thanks for making it so easy.
0
tom,
I have dozens of examples to the exact opposite of your claim, what does that mean?
Your example of laser surgery is awesome, it is an easy target to disprove.
I know quite a bit about laser eye companies because years ago I owned the largest player, VISX (now EYE), this was before the demise of their second competitor and when the industry was young.
The reason laser surgery is cheap has nothing to do with government being in or out or regulating at all, it has only to do with saturation. When laser surgery first started the prices were high and the quality was low because there was more demand than supply and the technology was new. Now the technology has improved, demand is lower than supply and prices have dropped. A comparable example(s) is computer memory, computers, Blu-ray dvd prices, digital cameras, HD tv sets etc etc.
When supply slows, companies start reducing prices which hurts margins but is necessary to maintain sales, it has little to do with the government. Innovation is also a function of sales, if you do not improve or change the product features you have no pricing power.
How much could Visx charge now for a procedure using a system with old technology, how much more is charged for the most current technology?
Terrible example tom, but thanks for making it so easy.
Your title is absolutely innappropriate for this article. The article speaks to why people's diets suck, and how that leads to health problems. This leads to the perceived need for more health care, when the answer is really diet and exercise.
If you want to talk about health care COSTS, and why the costs are high, that is an entirely different discussion. It has to do with countless regulation and needless legislation enacted to restrict competition. Unwind all of that which was primarily enacted my special interest money and you will see the COSTS go down dramatically.
You and Koaj need to watch the documentary Food Inc because you surely do not understand what goes on when you give big business space to do whatever they want.
It is scary !!
0
Quote Originally Posted by SportsFan9698:
Your title is absolutely innappropriate for this article. The article speaks to why people's diets suck, and how that leads to health problems. This leads to the perceived need for more health care, when the answer is really diet and exercise.
If you want to talk about health care COSTS, and why the costs are high, that is an entirely different discussion. It has to do with countless regulation and needless legislation enacted to restrict competition. Unwind all of that which was primarily enacted my special interest money and you will see the COSTS go down dramatically.
You and Koaj need to watch the documentary Food Inc because you surely do not understand what goes on when you give big business space to do whatever they want.
you are proving my point. private industry buys political influence so they can maximie profits and gain advantage. Monsanto is one of the worst most deceptive companies in the world, they are cheating monopolistic scum so of course they need an insider running a government agency, it helps them continue to exploit and destroy the ability to stop them.
0
Koaj,
you are proving my point. private industry buys political influence so they can maximie profits and gain advantage. Monsanto is one of the worst most deceptive companies in the world, they are cheating monopolistic scum so of course they need an insider running a government agency, it helps them continue to exploit and destroy the ability to stop them.
You and Koaj need to watch the documentary Food Inc because you surely do not understand what goes on when you give big business space to do whatever they want.
It is scary !!
mikael - in the US, big business owns the government. Monsanto owns the FDA/USDA.
did it here? https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/08/health/main7034821.shtml
0
Quote Originally Posted by Mikael99:
You and Koaj need to watch the documentary Food Inc because you surely do not understand what goes on when you give big business space to do whatever they want.
It is scary !!
mikael - in the US, big business owns the government. Monsanto owns the FDA/USDA.
did it here? https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/08/health/main7034821.shtml
you are proving my point. private industry buys political influence so they can maximie profits and gain advantage. Monsanto is one of the worst most deceptive companies in the world, they are cheating monopolistic scum so of course they need an insider running a government agency, it helps them continue to exploit and destroy the ability to stop them.
so we agree that government is corrupt on almost every level, yet you argue for more of it
why? if the SEC failed the first time, why give them more funds. if Monsanto runs the USDA, why give them more power?
i dont understand
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Koaj,
you are proving my point. private industry buys political influence so they can maximie profits and gain advantage. Monsanto is one of the worst most deceptive companies in the world, they are cheating monopolistic scum so of course they need an insider running a government agency, it helps them continue to exploit and destroy the ability to stop them.
so we agree that government is corrupt on almost every level, yet you argue for more of it
why? if the SEC failed the first time, why give them more funds. if Monsanto runs the USDA, why give them more power?
I have dozens of examples to the exact opposite of your claim, what does that mean?
Your example of laser surgery is awesome, it is an easy target to disprove.
I know quite a bit about laser eye companies because years ago I owned the largest player, VISX (now EYE), this was before the demise of their second competitor and when the industry was young.
The reason laser surgery is cheap has nothing to do with government being in or out or regulating at all, it has only to do with saturation. When laser surgery first started the prices were high and the quality was low because there was more demand than supply and the technology was new. Now the technology has improved, demand is lower than supply and prices have dropped. A comparable example(s) is computer memory, computers, Blu-ray dvd prices, digital cameras, HD tv sets etc etc.
When supply slows, companies start reducing prices which hurts margins but is necessary to maintain sales, it has little to do with the government. Innovation is also a function of sales, if you do not improve or change the product features you have no pricing power.
How much could Visx charge now for a procedure using a system with old technology, how much more is charged for the most current technology?
Terrible example tom, but thanks for making it so easy.
A SOPHISTICATED MEDICAL PROCEDURE GOT BETTER CHEAPER AND SAFER WITH ZERO GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION (SUBSIDY OR REGULATION). IN YOUR OPINION HOW/WHY DID THIS HAPPEN.
JUST AN ANSWER PLEASE. DO NOT NEED YOUR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO, PETS NAMES, FAVORITE FOOD, AND/OR ETC.
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
tom,
I have dozens of examples to the exact opposite of your claim, what does that mean?
Your example of laser surgery is awesome, it is an easy target to disprove.
I know quite a bit about laser eye companies because years ago I owned the largest player, VISX (now EYE), this was before the demise of their second competitor and when the industry was young.
The reason laser surgery is cheap has nothing to do with government being in or out or regulating at all, it has only to do with saturation. When laser surgery first started the prices were high and the quality was low because there was more demand than supply and the technology was new. Now the technology has improved, demand is lower than supply and prices have dropped. A comparable example(s) is computer memory, computers, Blu-ray dvd prices, digital cameras, HD tv sets etc etc.
When supply slows, companies start reducing prices which hurts margins but is necessary to maintain sales, it has little to do with the government. Innovation is also a function of sales, if you do not improve or change the product features you have no pricing power.
How much could Visx charge now for a procedure using a system with old technology, how much more is charged for the most current technology?
Terrible example tom, but thanks for making it so easy.
A SOPHISTICATED MEDICAL PROCEDURE GOT BETTER CHEAPER AND SAFER WITH ZERO GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION (SUBSIDY OR REGULATION). IN YOUR OPINION HOW/WHY DID THIS HAPPEN.
JUST AN ANSWER PLEASE. DO NOT NEED YOUR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO, PETS NAMES, FAVORITE FOOD, AND/OR ETC.
A SOPHISTICATED MEDICAL PROCEDURE GOT BETTER CHEAPER AND SAFER WITH ZERO GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION (SUBSIDY OR REGULATION). IN YOUR OPINION HOW/WHY DID THIS HAPPEN.
JUST AN ANSWER PLEASE. DO NOT NEED YOUR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO, PETS NAMES, FAVORITE FOOD, AND/OR ETC.
Already answered Mr.Sarcasm.
It got cheaper and better because of demand dropping and market saturation.
The government should be involved in regulating that product, the implications of the damage which can be done if the procedure isnt done correctly are quite serious.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tikitom:
A SOPHISTICATED MEDICAL PROCEDURE GOT BETTER CHEAPER AND SAFER WITH ZERO GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION (SUBSIDY OR REGULATION). IN YOUR OPINION HOW/WHY DID THIS HAPPEN.
JUST AN ANSWER PLEASE. DO NOT NEED YOUR INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO, PETS NAMES, FAVORITE FOOD, AND/OR ETC.
Already answered Mr.Sarcasm.
It got cheaper and better because of demand dropping and market saturation.
The government should be involved in regulating that product, the implications of the damage which can be done if the procedure isnt done correctly are quite serious.
so we agree that government is corrupt on almost every level, yet you argue for more of it
why? if the SEC failed the first time, why give them more funds. if Monsanto runs the USDA, why give them more power?
i dont understand
We are looking at the problem with different reasons but the same conclusion.
The reason government is corrupt (I dont think on all levels) is because of the infestation of the private sector..get rid of the private sector pollution in government, the corruption goes down dramatically.
0
Quote Originally Posted by KOAJ:
so we agree that government is corrupt on almost every level, yet you argue for more of it
why? if the SEC failed the first time, why give them more funds. if Monsanto runs the USDA, why give them more power?
i dont understand
We are looking at the problem with different reasons but the same conclusion.
The reason government is corrupt (I dont think on all levels) is because of the infestation of the private sector..get rid of the private sector pollution in government, the corruption goes down dramatically.
It got cheaper and better because of demand dropping and market saturation.
The government should be involved in regulating that product, the implications of the damage which can be done if the procedure isnt done correctly are quite serious.
Why/How did it get safer?
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Already answered Mr.Sarcasm.
It got cheaper and better because of demand dropping and market saturation.
The government should be involved in regulating that product, the implications of the damage which can be done if the procedure isnt done correctly are quite serious.
If you make a product which isnt safe, you do not sell said product.
The reason the product is safer (if indeed it is) resulted from the need to actually provide a product and stay in business.
Why did cars get safer over the years? Because innovation and improvement sell more product and make better sales.
If there is room to improve, there is more profits to be made. If Visix did not improve their procedures they would not have a product to sell or they would have been shut down by lawsuits and complaints.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tikitom:
Why/How did it get safer?
Not due to the lack of regulation.
If you make a product which isnt safe, you do not sell said product.
The reason the product is safer (if indeed it is) resulted from the need to actually provide a product and stay in business.
Why did cars get safer over the years? Because innovation and improvement sell more product and make better sales.
If there is room to improve, there is more profits to be made. If Visix did not improve their procedures they would not have a product to sell or they would have been shut down by lawsuits and complaints.
WSC Mr Sarcasm has another question. If you would humor me please;
Why did an ovariohysterectomy cost under $500 for my 150 lb Bull Mastiff?
I had it done at the nicest, most modern Vet Clinic in my entire state. The Surgeon allowed me to watch and, as I have a background in human surgery, I didn't see any dramatic differences. A sterile surgery field was maintained (I watched from another room through a window) she was intubated and he used a gas anesthetic called Sevoflurane. She was attached to a monitor that gave audio and visual feedback to the assisting nurse as to her BP, SP02, ETC02, Temp and so on. When he closed the incision I noted he used a brand I see most comonly in human facilities.
The price included not only the procedure but also preanesthetic blood work (chem screen and CBC) post op pain meds and two nights hospitalization. I called around and could have had it done for half that amount but nothing is too good for daisy so I went with the best.
The Surgeon I used was premed before electing to go to vet school instead. He graduated at the top of his class from Cornell.
The same surgery in a Human hospital would be between 20 and 50 times more money.
Which would you rather pay for?
Which more closely resembles a Free Market?
0
WSC Mr Sarcasm has another question. If you would humor me please;
Why did an ovariohysterectomy cost under $500 for my 150 lb Bull Mastiff?
I had it done at the nicest, most modern Vet Clinic in my entire state. The Surgeon allowed me to watch and, as I have a background in human surgery, I didn't see any dramatic differences. A sterile surgery field was maintained (I watched from another room through a window) she was intubated and he used a gas anesthetic called Sevoflurane. She was attached to a monitor that gave audio and visual feedback to the assisting nurse as to her BP, SP02, ETC02, Temp and so on. When he closed the incision I noted he used a brand I see most comonly in human facilities.
The price included not only the procedure but also preanesthetic blood work (chem screen and CBC) post op pain meds and two nights hospitalization. I called around and could have had it done for half that amount but nothing is too good for daisy so I went with the best.
The Surgeon I used was premed before electing to go to vet school instead. He graduated at the top of his class from Cornell.
The same surgery in a Human hospital would be between 20 and 50 times more money.
regarding food/diet. we are a nation of fat lazy pigs. the cheapest food per calorie is generally the worst food per calorie.
i cannot wait for pure national health care. lets say a real biggun comes in. BMI of 40(thats real fat for those of you playing the home game), apnea,diabetes,hypertension,fatigue,back pain, osteoarthrits....
well in the brave new world, i record his weight and BMI and tell him to do this that and the other and return in 1 month. If he fails to lose weight or does not follow up we reduce his goverment alotted food stamps, and should he fail to lose after that we give him the option of no government aid or a mandatory gastric bypass done by a foreign medical graduate from east india. after all, he'll cost us all more. i'm already drunk with power.
0
regarding food/diet. we are a nation of fat lazy pigs. the cheapest food per calorie is generally the worst food per calorie.
i cannot wait for pure national health care. lets say a real biggun comes in. BMI of 40(thats real fat for those of you playing the home game), apnea,diabetes,hypertension,fatigue,back pain, osteoarthrits....
well in the brave new world, i record his weight and BMI and tell him to do this that and the other and return in 1 month. If he fails to lose weight or does not follow up we reduce his goverment alotted food stamps, and should he fail to lose after that we give him the option of no government aid or a mandatory gastric bypass done by a foreign medical graduate from east india. after all, he'll cost us all more. i'm already drunk with power.
WSC Mr Sarcasm has another question. If you would humor me please;
Why did an ovariohysterectomy cost under $500 for my 150 lb Bull Mastiff?
I had it done at the nicest, most modern Vet Clinic in my entire state. The Surgeon allowed me to watch and, as I have a background in human surgery, I didn't see any dramatic differences. A sterile surgery field was maintained (I watched from another room through a window) she was intubated and he used a gas anesthetic called Sevoflurane. She was attached to a monitor that gave audio and visual feedback to the assisting nurse as to her BP, SP02, ETC02, Temp and so on. When he closed the incision I noted he used a brand I see most comonly in human facilities.
The price included not only the procedure but also preanesthetic blood work (chem screen and CBC) post op pain meds and two nights hospitalization. I called around and could have had it done for half that amount but nothing is too good for daisy so I went with the best.
The Surgeon I used was premed before electing to go to vet school instead. He graduated at the top of his class from Cornell.
The same surgery in a Human hospital would be between 20 and 50 times more money.
Which would you rather pay for?
Which more closely resembles a Free Market?
fantastic points. the answers to why one is 15,000 and one is 500 are the things to address in our human system.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tikitom:
WSC Mr Sarcasm has another question. If you would humor me please;
Why did an ovariohysterectomy cost under $500 for my 150 lb Bull Mastiff?
I had it done at the nicest, most modern Vet Clinic in my entire state. The Surgeon allowed me to watch and, as I have a background in human surgery, I didn't see any dramatic differences. A sterile surgery field was maintained (I watched from another room through a window) she was intubated and he used a gas anesthetic called Sevoflurane. She was attached to a monitor that gave audio and visual feedback to the assisting nurse as to her BP, SP02, ETC02, Temp and so on. When he closed the incision I noted he used a brand I see most comonly in human facilities.
The price included not only the procedure but also preanesthetic blood work (chem screen and CBC) post op pain meds and two nights hospitalization. I called around and could have had it done for half that amount but nothing is too good for daisy so I went with the best.
The Surgeon I used was premed before electing to go to vet school instead. He graduated at the top of his class from Cornell.
The same surgery in a Human hospital would be between 20 and 50 times more money.
Which would you rather pay for?
Which more closely resembles a Free Market?
fantastic points. the answers to why one is 15,000 and one is 500 are the things to address in our human system.
So you are asking me why a surgeon who COULD have gone into a different line of work and make more money went into a different line that he felt was more beneficial to him and the money wasnt worth the loss of gratification from doing what he loved.
What does that have to do with the free markets?
I guess I need to brush up on my vet knowledge since I have none to begin with. If you are comparing why it costs more to do a surgery for a dog versus a human, I guess you need to look at fixed costs and intangible costs which go into doing a HUMAN surgery versus an animal.
Seriously tom, how about comparing apples to missles, the dog/human example is absurd.
0
tom,
So you are asking me why a surgeon who COULD have gone into a different line of work and make more money went into a different line that he felt was more beneficial to him and the money wasnt worth the loss of gratification from doing what he loved.
What does that have to do with the free markets?
I guess I need to brush up on my vet knowledge since I have none to begin with. If you are comparing why it costs more to do a surgery for a dog versus a human, I guess you need to look at fixed costs and intangible costs which go into doing a HUMAN surgery versus an animal.
Seriously tom, how about comparing apples to missles, the dog/human example is absurd.
WSC Mr Sarcasm has another question. If you would humor me please;
Why did an ovariohysterectomy cost under $500 for my 150 lb Bull Mastiff?
I had it done at the nicest, most modern Vet Clinic in my entire state. The Surgeon allowed me to watch and, as I have a background in human surgery, I didn't see any dramatic differences. A sterile surgery field was maintained (I watched from another room through a window) she was intubated and he used a gas anesthetic called Sevoflurane. She was attached to a monitor that gave audio and visual feedback to the assisting nurse as to her BP, SP02, ETC02, Temp and so on. When he closed the incision I noted he used a brand I see most comonly in human facilities.
The price included not only the procedure but also preanesthetic blood work (chem screen and CBC) post op pain meds and two nights hospitalization. I called around and could have had it done for half that amount but nothing is too good for daisy so I went with the best.
The Surgeon I used was premed before electing to go to vet school instead. He graduated at the top of his class from Cornell.
The same surgery in a Human hospital would be between 20 and 50 times more money.
Which would you rather pay for?
Which more closely resembles a Free Market?
Malpractice insurance.....
0
Quote Originally Posted by tikitom:
WSC Mr Sarcasm has another question. If you would humor me please;
Why did an ovariohysterectomy cost under $500 for my 150 lb Bull Mastiff?
I had it done at the nicest, most modern Vet Clinic in my entire state. The Surgeon allowed me to watch and, as I have a background in human surgery, I didn't see any dramatic differences. A sterile surgery field was maintained (I watched from another room through a window) she was intubated and he used a gas anesthetic called Sevoflurane. She was attached to a monitor that gave audio and visual feedback to the assisting nurse as to her BP, SP02, ETC02, Temp and so on. When he closed the incision I noted he used a brand I see most comonly in human facilities.
The price included not only the procedure but also preanesthetic blood work (chem screen and CBC) post op pain meds and two nights hospitalization. I called around and could have had it done for half that amount but nothing is too good for daisy so I went with the best.
The Surgeon I used was premed before electing to go to vet school instead. He graduated at the top of his class from Cornell.
The same surgery in a Human hospital would be between 20 and 50 times more money.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
