786
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Tronn4@lemmy.world 24 points 6 days ago

It's time for that green guy from that one video game that I can't mention because the auto mods are erasing free speech

[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 25 points 6 days ago
[-] RIPandTERROR@sh.itjust.works 14 points 6 days ago

It's WeeGee time.

[-] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 6 days ago
[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago

More like, disconnected from reality.

Poh-tay-toh tuh-mah-toh

[-] dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee 15 points 6 days ago

I feel like health insurance companies are putting a lot of pressure on people named Mario right now.

[-] frostysauce@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago
[-] Hikermick@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

To be fair, I've had doctors pad the bill. I'm lucky enough to have decent insurance and I have a few stories about doctors taking advantage of that.

[-] forrgott@lemm.ee 11 points 6 days ago
[-] Hikermick@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

So it's a good argument for single payer healthcare

[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

so does that make it ok for healthcare providers to deny coverage for procedures or medication that has been prescribed due to an illness or ailment impacting a patients quality of life?

[-] Hikermick@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

No it doesn't but I can understand why they don't greenlight everything. This all is a glaring example why we need single payer health care and doctors that earn a flat rate and not get paid per procedure (there is a name for this, i don't know it).

[-] nieminen@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

It's self fulfilling though. Doctors offices are at the whims of their agreements with the insurance companies to stay afloat. They pad the bill (charging maximum for everything) because the insurance company will only pay percentages on most procedures. Then they usually write off the rest (or close to it). Doctors are incentivized to prescribe certain drugs over others, and other such meddling.

Healthcare costs are as high as they are specifically because of private insurance. The evidence is in every single other developed country that has state-provided healthcare. It's overall cheaper, and often better.

Insurance companies default to denying claims because they know, if the barrier is high enough (denial after denial), people will simply stop asking for the procedure (or whatever), so they don't have to pay anything. Then their earnings go up, and they pad their pockets.

[-] Hikermick@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

To say "insurance company bad" oversimplifies the problem. That's why it's foolish to base opinions on memes. Where there's lots of money, greedy people will find a way to get at it or as I like to say "shit attracts flies". In my work I deal with private companies that are paid with public dollars. What I see going on has jaded me hardcore. Publicly funding the health care system will be a disaster without overhauling the whole system.

[-] nieminen@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

I don't disagree with you. We can't simply replace insurance companies with a public version and expect everything to be okay. But Medicare and Medicaid seem to work really well for a lot of people. They can simply expand it, and then private insurance can still exist as a supplement if someone wants.

But what we really need is more regulation, everywhere, on almost all industries.

Gotta kill citizens United, and make superpacs illegal. When money gets out of politics, is when we'll finally see some change.

[-] shawn1122@lemm.ee 3 points 6 days ago
[-] Hikermick@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

A few. I had a primary care doctor who would talk my ear off. After we discussed whatever my problem was he would talk about religion and politics. He was pretty right wing, me having a catholic school education and have long paid attention to politics can hold my own. The odd thing, there was always a waiting room full of patients but he would gab on and on. Eventually I came in for an appointment and I said to his receptionist "the doctor sure doesn't rush me out of there". That's when she said "yeah most insurance companies want you out in fifteen minutes". At that moment it clicked. The doctor was always looking at his watch, if he went over fifteen minutes he could charge for another fifteen minutes. He also had a waiting room full of posters and pamphlets paid for by pharmaceutical companies. He suggested prescribing me medication for my anxiety, i just laughed. My doctor now has none of that propaganda in his waiting room. My last visit he pushed eating fresh fruit and vegetables. I told him that's why I come to him, he tells me what I don't want to hear. I had a dentist who was the same way. Also very religious and right wing.

[-] donuts@lemmy.world 224 points 1 week ago

You know, at face value he's absolutely right. We shouldn't claim care that is unnecessary or maybe even harmful. But where we disagree is that I think that decision should be left to our medical professionals

[-] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 150 points 1 week ago

Really what it should be is that if a doctor prescribes unnecessary care, they should go after the doctor, not the patient. Doctors have malpractice insurance. If the health insurance can't win a case of malpractice, then they should pay the bill. Why are patients in the midfle here at all.

[-] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

Patients usually have the least amount of power. That's why.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

My attitude is that if the doctor prescribes unnecessary care there's a professional board for that.

Though let's be real, the health insurance for profit industry is the problem and it's not going to get better until we get rid of it

Yeah, but the professional board is kinda like an HOA board. Should be more like a jury of all regular doctors or something.

[-] Kichae@lemmy.ca 41 points 1 week ago

This is still validating the profit incentive of private health insurance.

If the doctor prescribes unnecessary care, it should be none of these peoples' business, because they shouldn't be allowed any stake in the decision whatsoever.

[-] SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world 36 points 1 week ago

It’s the same trick as rebranding bank robberies to identity theft. It puts the blame on the consumer who can’t afford to defend themselves.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rumba@lemmy.zip 33 points 1 week ago

Really what it should be is that if a doctor prescribes unnecessary care

That's the core problem. The entity that defines unnecessary care is health insurance. And there are TONS of stories of them denying Diabetes medication for people with diabetes and anti-nausea meds to pediatric patients getting chemo.

If they were doing the right thing, no one would be pissed off. The "recent target" was the one to decided to run on AI driven denials that were denying 90% of care for months.

They are not fulfilling their duty to take the money from the subscribers and pay their righteous medical bills and instead using it as raw profit.

They are employing their own 'doctors' to prove stuff that is definitely necessary is labeled unnecessary.

[-] NocturnalEngineer@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

Reminds me of the Tobacco Instrustry setting up the "Tobacco Institute", to disprove any links between smoking being addictive, and lung cancer.

They were constantly gaslighting the public, even tried to discredit the Surgeon General for his report on second hand smoke.

[-] unphazed@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Not just meds. Patients with chronic pain are expected to take painkillers for treatment but omg if the doctor prescribes therapy deny that shit. Even though therapy helps faaaar better than medications for chronic pain sufferers.

It's the conflict of interest in the "decision maker"

load more comments (15 replies)
[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 80 points 1 week ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works 49 points 1 week ago

I miss Anonymous. Those fuckers would be figuratively burning down UHC right now.

[-] CuddlyCassowary@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

What actually happened to them? Did key members get tracked down or something?

[-] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 37 points 1 week ago

I don't have sources, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the OGs aged out or got caught, and the new gen that replaced them weren't as ideologically driven or competent or something. I think they still technically exist but aren't nearly as influential as they once were

[-] Tinidril@midwest.social 33 points 1 week ago

It's also not as easy to hack electronic systems anymore. It's not that they are invulnerable, but the vulnerabilities are generally more complicated and difficult to exploit. Setting aside people still running Windows XP or something, vulnerabilities get patched pretty quickly today. State actors have the time and resources to still do straight up electronic hacking, but opportunities for individuals are sparse.

Of course there is still the human element. Most data breaches done by individuals nowadays rely, at least in part, on social engineering.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 44 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

What did you expect?

We've been told for years that herp derp the economy is doing amazing! If you don't agree there's something wrong with you! if you got laid off or your corpo landlord raised your rent and you're now dying in the street well then... look everybody! An evil homeless person lowering your property values with their continued existence! Git em!

[-] Gork@lemm.ee 24 points 1 week ago

Did he not have a PR person tell him that video was a bad idea? Or more likely, did he not listen to their advice?

[-] tkw8@lemm.ee 22 points 1 week ago

Headline says video was leaked. It was probably a private meeting. Agree that it was a stupid thing to say regardless.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
786 points (100.0% liked)

memes

10636 readers
2067 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS