| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Olrik" |
| Date: |
25 Jul 2003 11:28:34 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Lance Armstrong's cancer battle |
Michael Nash wrote:
Olrik <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in
news:zd2Ua.10939$Fo3.161856@weber.videotron.net:
(snip)
Yeah. I've got about 20 years before I become "cancer prone",
age-wise. I hope they lick it before then...
Me too, or sooner if possible. I'm not sure if I qualify as
"cancer-prone", but I do know that I have at least one person on both my
mother and father's side of the family who has had cancer: my mother, of
course, and my grandmother (father's mother) - she died befoer I was
born, and I think she was relatively young. Both were smokers, so I'm
not sure if it's a case of them being genetically predisposed or not.
Anyhow, I worry about cancer a lot - probably a lot more than I should -
and one of these days I'd like to get whatever genetic testing I can to
get a better idea of what my risks are. I'm assuming it would be way
too cost-prohibitive for me to do right now, as I don't even have (nor
can I afford to get) health insurance (ah, the joys of
underemployment!), but I'm hopeful that whatever testing is available is
not so expensive that it would prevent me from getting it unless I was
filthy rich or something. I'm also assuming that it's something that
most health insurance plans wouldn't cover, though I hope I'm wrong.
I live in Canada, so health-care is free. On my mother's side, they all
die old. To date, one uncle from Alzheimer's, one from kidney failure
(at 87, what do you expect?), and one from *treatment* for cancer (he
was in remission for his cancer, but chemo destroyed an organ, I don't
remember which, and he never recovered).
On my father's side, all the men died young from heart attacks
(including, at 38, my father). The women died of cancer.
Science is making tremendous progress in dealing with cancer, so I'm
holding out hope that if I am fated to get it, it won't happen for a few
decades. Then again, I've lived with and around smokers all my life,
though I've never smoked myself, and I haven't exactly taken great care
of myself beyond that, either. So, the sooner, the better...
Well, everybody I knew smoked when I was growing up (my mother still
smokes), so I guess that's part of why I smoke too. Nobody died of lung
cancer, or any smoking-related cancer. Still, I'll be in the lung cancer
"zone" in about 20 years. I hope I'll quit before then, but, like you
justly said, the sooner the better for a cure!
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
.
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Lance Armstrong's cancer battle |
26 Jul 2003 11:18:55 PM |
|
|
Michael Nash wrote:
Olrik <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in
news:ZrnUa.19234$Fo3.302048@weber.videotron.net:
Michael Nash wrote:
Olrik <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in
news:zd2Ua.10939$Fo3.161856@weber.videotron.net:
(snip)
I live in Canada, so health-care is free.
Unfortunately, I live in America where health care is treated as a
commodity and a means for profit, like everything else. My mother would
have benefitted greatly from Canadian-style health care. When she
started her last job a few years before she passed away, she had been
getting a preventative chemo prescription via Medicaid which was
supposed to be helping to keep her cancer in remission, and seemed to be
doing pretty well at that. Unfortunately her new employer's insurance
had a stipulation that pre-existing conditions weren't covered for the
first year after employment, so she couldn't afford to continue her
prescription, or to continue seeing her doctor like she was. After
working there a while she broke her collarbone at work one day and had
to go on disability, and was out for a few months. She was having
headaches but mistakenly atributed it to stress related to the pain in
her collarbone. Ultimately, about the time that she returned to work,
the headaches were getting worse, and it was shortly thereafter that
they determined her cancer had returned; it was originally breast cancer
which had metastatized and spread into her lymph nodes the first time
around, and this time it had returned and was in her brain and lungs.
So she had to leave work again, and was not able to keep her health
insurance, for which the one-year pre-existing clause had finally
expired. We ended up having to rely on Medicaid, emergency room care,
neither of which is adequate.
So you could say that the whole issue of universal health care is a
hot-button issue for me...and, needless to say, I don't care for
Republicans much.
I don't know much about Medicaid or other issues with American health
care, but I suspect hospitals will treat you no matter what, only
they'll send you or your insurance company a bill. But then what? If you
can't pay, do they send collectors? And how do you qualify for Medicaid?
Here in Canada, you can get private supplemental insurances, but it will
cover things like a private or semi-private room and income protection.
On my mother's side, they all
die old. To date, one uncle from Alzheimer's, one from kidney failure
(at 87, what do you expect?), and one from *treatment* for cancer (he
was in remission for his cancer, but chemo destroyed an organ, I don't
remember which, and he never recovered).
It seemed to me that my mother's treatments were the source for a lot of
her difficulties, as well. Pain management was a big issue, as my
mother was a recovering heroin addict and had something of a tolerance
to opiates. We were giving her Roxanol, which is a form of liquid
morphine, and that was causing a lot of troubles with her intestines
getting backed up (I won't get any more descriptiove than that). She
might have lived longer than she did, but she developed a blockage in
her small intestine that they would have had to operate to remove, and
they were convinced that she wouldn't survive the surgery so they
wouldn't perform it.
(snip)
Well, everybody I knew smoked when I was growing up (my mother still
smokes), so I guess that's part of why I smoke too. Nobody died of
lung cancer, or any smoking-related cancer. Still, I'll be in the lung
cancer "zone" in about 20 years. I hope I'll quit before then, but,
like you justly said, the sooner the better for a cure!
I would definitely encourage doing whatever you can to quit. My mom
smoked all her adult life, and she literally continued doing so until it
was physically impossible - one of the last conversations I had with her
was an argument - she was in the hospice center, and she wanted me to
get a nurse so we could put her into a wheelchair, take her outside in
the middle of February, and let her smoke a cigarette. She managed to
get off heroin and stay off of it for 10 years, but could never kick
cigarettes... I know it's hard, but it can be done, and I wish you the
best in that regard.
I know it's hard to quit, that's why I don't try to! It's the hardest
drug out there...
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Lance Armstrong's cancer battle |
27 Jul 2003 10:53:32 PM |
|
|
Michael Nash wrote:
Olrik <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in
news:QoIUa.32516$MS5.491220@wagner.videotron.net:
(snip)
I don't know much about Medicaid or other issues with American health
care, but I suspect hospitals will treat you no matter what, only
they'll send you or your insurance company a bill. But then what? If
you can't pay, do they send collectors? And how do you qualify for
Medicaid?
Well, emergency rooms can't turn you away if you absolutely need medical
care, but it's more a question of the quality and effectiveness of the
medical care that you receive. Emergency rooms are great for people who
have just been shot or stabbed and need immediate treatment, but not so
great for other stuff. You'll get billed regardless of ability to pay,
but the quality of treatment you have access to is higher if you have
proof of health insurance.
As far as Medicaid, it covers most expenses for medically necessary
treatment, but the reimbursement rates often fall short of what health
care providers normally charge, so the quality of care for Medicaid
recipients is often subpar (as it was in my mother's case IMHO).
Doctors tend to be less aggressive if they don't think they'll be paid
as much for their efforts. And Medicaid has other shortfalls, too - for
example, Medicaid only covers three prescription refills a month. This
probably doesn't pose a problem for many Medicaid recipients, but in my
mother's case, she was taking a lot of meds, and there were a few months
where we had to decide which prescriptions got filled and which ones
would have to wait until the 1st of the next month. Fortunately, her
PCP was very sympathetic and gave her samples for some of her pain meds
to help fill the gaps, but I imagine not all people are that fortunate.
Our next door neighbor at the time lost her husband to cancer a few
years prior to my mother's illness, and she said that one month she
couldn't get her husbands morphine patches for him because they had
already used his three scrips for the month, and she didn't have the
money to buy them out-of-pocket.
You basically qualify for Medicaid by being dirt-poor. In my mother's
case, the job she got was for minimum wage, but she still lost her
Medicaid benefits until she had to leave work after her cancer came
back.
Boy, that must have been tough. Here in Quebec, if you have to take
medecine like morphine patches outside of an hospital, you have to pay
for them. But we have a collective, required insurance for that too. The
effect and idea is to offer cheap medecine for the sick while the
healthy pays. I know this sounds "socialist" to most Americans, but it
really works.
(snip)
I know it's hard to quit, that's why I don't try to! It's the hardest
drug out there...
I hear you...I know it's hard to quit, but it is doable. Sometimes it
takes a few tries, and sometimes it depends on the person and their
individual circumstances. Some people do better trying to quit cold
turkey, while others have to weean theirselves off. Then there are all
the nicotene gums and other such things... I guess what I'm saying is
that if you've tried one approach and it hasn't worked, maybe a
different approach will be more successful. The most important thing is
to have a network of supporting people around you. In my mother's case,
I was always one of the few people in her life who didn't smoke, and the
times she tried to quit were realy stressful because the people around
her didn't go out of their way to support or respect her efforts. They
would smoke around her, offer her cigarettes, etc., until she would
finally break down and pick up smoking again. Very frustrating - I
remember arguing with the lady next door one day because she was
convinced that my mother's efforts to quit smoking were a waste of time
since she had been smoking so long.
A guy on aa suggested me a book last year. I bought it, but did not read
it yet. I'm waiting for the "right" moment. I'm also waiting for my
girlfriend to go somewhere for a couple of days, so I can read the book
alone. I don't want her to see me read it because she'll be full of
expectations.
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Nash" |
|
| Title: Re: Lance Armstrong's cancer battle |
27 Jul 2003 11:11:43 PM |
|
|
Olrik <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in
news:271Va.5446$vB6.217035@weber.videotron.net:
Michael Nash wrote:
Olrik <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in
news:QoIUa.32516$MS5.491220@wagner.videotron.net:
(snip)
I don't know much about Medicaid or other issues with American health
care, but I suspect hospitals will treat you no matter what, only
they'll send you or your insurance company a bill. But then what? If
you can't pay, do they send collectors? And how do you qualify for
Medicaid?
Well, emergency rooms can't turn you away if you absolutely need
medical care, but it's more a question of the quality and
effectiveness of the medical care that you receive. Emergency rooms
are great for people who have just been shot or stabbed and need
immediate treatment, but not so great for other stuff. You'll get
billed regardless of ability to pay, but the quality of treatment you
have access to is higher if you have proof of health insurance.
As far as Medicaid, it covers most expenses for medically necessary
treatment, but the reimbursement rates often fall short of what
health care providers normally charge, so the quality of care for
Medicaid recipients is often subpar (as it was in my mother's case
IMHO). Doctors tend to be less aggressive if they don't think they'll
be paid as much for their efforts. And Medicaid has other
shortfalls, too - for example, Medicaid only covers three
prescription refills a month. This probably doesn't pose a problem
for many Medicaid recipients, but in my mother's case, she was taking
a lot of meds, and there were a few months where we had to decide
which prescriptions got filled and which ones would have to wait
until the 1st of the next month. Fortunately, her PCP was very
sympathetic and gave her samples for some of her pain meds to help
fill the gaps, but I imagine not all people are that fortunate. Our
next door neighbor at the time lost her husband to cancer a few years
prior to my mother's illness, and she said that one month she
couldn't get her husbands morphine patches for him because they had
already used his three scrips for the month, and she didn't have the
money to buy them out-of-pocket.
You basically qualify for Medicaid by being dirt-poor. In my
mother's case, the job she got was for minimum wage, but she still
lost her Medicaid benefits until she had to leave work after her
cancer came back.
Boy, that must have been tough. Here in Quebec, if you have to take
medecine like morphine patches outside of an hospital, you have to pay
for them. But we have a collective, required insurance for that too.
The effect and idea is to offer cheap medecine for the sick while the
healthy pays. I know this sounds "socialist" to most Americans, but it
really works.
Hey, if it works they can call it whatever they want, as long as people
are getting the health care they need...
--
Michael Nash - aa # 1651
*******************
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
--Teddy Roosevelt (Kansas City Star, 7 May 1918)
"The Three Branches of Government: Money, Television, and *****"
--P. J. O'Rourke
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
