Posted on 12/19/2013 7:18:18 PM PST by Kaslin
The cancer cases that are really an argument for screening are those involving fairly rapidly growing tumors. The outcome with indolent tumors isn’t impacted much by early discovery since, by definition, they’re slow growing. And aggressive malignancies can progress to where they’re untreatable during the time period between one checkup and another.
Choice of treatment’s a whole different issue.
My experience with sociopaths fits your two options and adds a third. When they’re finally faced with the reality of what their arrogance has created for them, they announce that the game is beneath them and “tune out”. That’d probably be the best outcome for all.
Yet again, Obamacare is whatever Lord Obama proclaims it to be - whenever it suits him.
Some ‘law’, huh?
Death to all misplaced apostrophes!!
Sorry :)
Oh now. It's just my pet peeve acting up again :-)
Making up the rules as they go. Frightening.
I disagree--and I think you are missing my point.
Catastrophic insurance is pure insurance, and for the young and healthy it is very rarely used. Detailed health maintenance isn't going to save much money in the 20 to 30 year age bracket.
The problem for O-care is that they won't (up until this announcement) sell pure insurance; they want to sell and overpriced "maintenance" product that is heavily over-priced as the minimum choice, and use the overcharged amount to subsidize a sizable portion of the population. Many younger people are shocked at how much the rates were driven up, and aren't playing.
This announcement is an effort to at least bring them into the system, but it gives up on a large portion of the anticipated cash flows, and doesn't help the potential death spiral of rates when too few low-cost, healthy people sign up.
Seems if you had a policy canceled and by some miracle were able to purchase and pay for an original Obamacare policy you have been harmed financially by this latest decree and bring a suit.
Health and Human Services spokeswoman Joanne Peters said, "This is a common sense clarification of the law. For the limited number of consumers whose plans have been cancelled and are seeking coverage, this is one more option."No, a common sense approach is repeal, followed by impeachment, then trial and execution. Thanks Kaslin.
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.