Mga app ng Google
Pangunahing menu

Post a Comment On: Steve Sailer: iSteve

"Why I hired an oncologist as my private consultant when I had cancer"

16 Comments -

1 – 16 of 16
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Health care is basically like everything else in life... a trade-off. We need to drop the free-market/socialist dichotomy and find something that works. Hearing Giuliani and Clinton talk about health care is like listening to the vapid debate over the Iraq War, where both mainstream positions were palpably asinine. Michael Moore and the Insurance companies both have it wrong. That would be a great place to start. How about writing off all medical debt over 10,000$ for those making under 50,000$ in the tax code. Simple steps can be taken to increase access to medical care, stop the debt machine that is killing anyone without insurance and ruining families. That'd be a great place to start 'reform' and stop the bullshit finger pointing between the two-party shell figures who nonstop posit moronic black/white pc dichotomies on every single issue to appease their funders. America and its banal Kleptocractic oligarcy, need more be said?

7/14/07, 12:22 AM

Anonymous tggp said...

There's not really any reason to expect Medicare to jump in and cover something like that. It was twenty years behind private insurance covering prescription drugs (which actually have an effect on health, rather than doctor visits) and its perverse incentives discourage higher quality treatments in favor of a large quantity of treatments and procedures, regardless of how well they work.

7/14/07, 4:36 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Informative, "keeper" article, as usual - but just wanted to say, I'm glad you're still with us!

7/14/07, 6:31 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"So, I'm a big fan of market forces on the supply side of medicine."

I'm not 100% sure what you mean here, so I'll withold the artillery fire. I'll point out though that major advances in cancer treatment invariably come from, ultimately, basic research performed in academia.

People think that the major pharm companies are doing "cutting edge research" - that's BS. They're in the business of making money - as much as possible - on already available drugs, and the "new drugs in the pipeline" are most often licensed to them from smaller biotech (often founded by academics on the research) or from universities themselves.

The problem is that people pay for what they directly receive - the average moron sees no direct benefit from basic research, so that's the first thing cut in the budget (the NIH has been eviscerated by the Bush administration).

Look, without an understanding of the human immune system and the modulation of said system, you'd be dead now. Your cure should be attributed not only to your doctor and the drug companies and "supply side", but to the poorly paid and insecure-positioned researchers who, over the years, made the discoveries that made the drugs possible.

And, by the way, the major pharms seem these days more concerned with "diversity" than "discovery", yet another reason that one can expect most important discoveries to be made by leaner, smaller, less "diverse" biotech as well as academia.

The bottom line: the non-market forces of government investment in research is going to be required to get things moving. Relying on market economics is not going to get the job done, because economics dosn't cover the "black box" that lies in between basic research and the person being prescribed the new miracle drug in the doctor's office.

The "oncologist" is the last link in the chain. You need to look a bit further upstream.

7/14/07, 7:48 AM

Anonymous Dr. Galt said...

Steve,

Excellent posting. Thanks for this information.

7/14/07, 8:49 AM

Anonymous Mark A said...

Just to give a perspective from Canada - where socialized medicine is as Canadian as mom and apple pie: While a doctor's office is a private business, going outside of the univeral government health insurance program to hire a doctor as your personal consultant is illegal. If the system doesn't cover it, its against the law to pay for it yourself. And the waiting list for things like biopsies and MRI's is nothing to laugh at either. A now-deceased friend of mine waited for several months for a biopsy while grapefruit sized tumour on his back metastasized. And he had a previous history of cancer.

7/14/07, 10:26 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

honestly, I feel for the cancer...

BUT get back to the politics of the war...

damn it...

should we pull out or not...

get with it ok...

7/14/07, 2:32 PM

Anonymous fifi said...

Congratulations on surviving 10 plus years.

Interesting that doctors don't usually charge for phone consultations. Lawyers have no compunction about charging for a phone call from a client.

7/14/07, 2:47 PM

Anonymous tggp said...

Bruce G Charlton claims much of medical research spending has been a waste and is due for a crash.

7/14/07, 10:02 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Any American who gets cancer and survives is entitled to SSI disability benefits for life. Steve Sailer, I have a question for you. You are a conservative, as indicated by your posts. Are you also getting SSI/disability payments?

I do not look down upon it. As a leftist populist (who is also against mass immigration because it helps the elite and hurts the workers), I supprort government payments such as SSI for people like yourself.

But as a conservative, you should not support SSI. Hypocrite much?

7/15/07, 7:09 AM

Anonymous ben tillman said...

Very valuable information, Steve.

7/15/07, 2:56 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Steve's case would not be covered by SSI by the way.

7/15/07, 11:26 PM

Blogger Steve Sailer said...

Damn, I better see if I can get my money back on the Jet Ski and Segway I bought today expecting a decade of SSI backpayments.

7/16/07, 12:32 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I work for a large HMO and have never seen Bexxar and Zevalin used for our lymphoma patients. However, if I am ever diagnosed with lymphoma I will scream bloody murder until I get the treatment!

7/23/07, 11:44 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

> Any American who gets cancer and survives is
> entitled to SSI disability benefits for life.

This is NOT TRUE. What is true is this: Any American worker
(1) who has paid enough into the Social Security system AND
(2) they paid enough of those taxes in the last five years (too bad for stay-at-home parents, people who were trying to start a business instead of being a wage-slave, and those who took a couple of years off to care for disabled family members) AND
(3) is totally (100%) disabled to the point that they can't earn even a minimum income (currently less than $250 a week, I believe) AND
(4) that disability is expected to last for more than one year AND
(5) they can assemble sufficient medical reports to prove all of this
will qualify for disability.

However, it's only "for life" if by "for life" you mean "until normal Social Security retirement age" AND you assume that you never recover enough to be able to work again.

10/22/07, 12:13 PM

Blogger AMac said...

I happen to come across this post... a great read, even six years after it went up, and quite relevant to the early days of implementation of the Affordable Care Act (in the US).

Steve, I'm glad you're still with us, still typing away, still pressing "submit"!

12/13/11, 6:16 AM

Comments are moderated, at whim.
You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL