Sad
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

USA Media Totally Blows - They Really Are America's Enemy

Bloomberg News Offers Tips For Americans Struggling With Inflation: Let Your Pets Die



After manufacturing fake news to assist the Democrat Party with rigging the 2020 election results, propagandizing the public with COVID- 19 misinformation, and pushing the experimental mRNA gene therapy compliance, a corporate media outlet is offering tips for working Americans who are struggling with inflation.

Bloomberg News recommends people who are struggling to make ends meet in the Biden economy allow their pets to die to avoid paying for their exorbitant medical treatments.

The only surprising thing is that they didn't include grandma and grandpa. Although, they along with Fido might have been too much even for them.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Carla · 61-69, F
There is an article you should read about the corporate takeovers of the veterinary medicine industry.
The unneeded treatments, unneeded vaccine boosters, ever increasing costs, all basically unchecked.
And the all knowing fact that malpractice in veterinary medicine leads only to the possibility that the vet could maybe be held liable for property damage.

As for this blooomberg article...

The mention in bloomberg is specifically regarding cancer in pets. Treatment for cancer can cost in the tens of thousands of dollars. Ive had the heartbreaking experience of dealing with cancer in two of my dogs and a cat in the past. I had to weigh the cost of treatment against the effictiveness that it may have and the quality of life for my animals. All three times i had to make the decision to put my babies down.
So, your take in your post is again, sensationalized for maximum outrage.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@Carla The article you referenced and never linked to might have been an interesting read.

Your 'maximum outrage' take has some merit but, the story is offensive as part of a story on how to weather inflation. It reminds me of Obama suggesting that government knows when to institute 'end of life counseling'.
Carla · 61-69, F
@Budwick
[image/video deleted]
Here you go. Also from bloomberg(2017) and a pretty long read. Very illuminating though.

I think the idea of having to make life and death decisions for our pets is a hard topic. Better left to a conversation specifically about that. Not to a cost cutting article. It doesnt make the info less true though. Hard topics are often squeezed into other discussions.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@Carla We're closer to agreement than we've been in a while.
Carla · 61-69, F
@Budwick it's the animals bud. Always a warm landing for the two of us
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@Carla The pressure from those corporate vet clinics is incredible. We were told our cat had a malignant tumor behind his ear and needed surgery. Referred to the corporation's surgery specialty hospital. Several thousand dollars for the surgery. Then the surgeon let it slip that what they had removed was benign. Then tried to recover by saying what she meant was that the tissue around the tumor they had removed was benign, indicating they had gotten it all.
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@Budwick I don't think it was Obama suggesting that. The coverage of "end of life counseling" was placed in the Affordable Care Act by Republican Congressmen from Minnesota at the request of the Lutheran Hospitals because such counseling is required under Medicare but not paid for by Medicare. It was part of the Republican strategy of loading up the Affordable Care Act with everything they could in hopes of sinking it.
Carla · 61-69, F
@dancingtongue these vets are pressured.
But i cant square that pressure with ignoring medical ethics.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@dancingtongue Associated Press,July 8, 2015, 5:17 p.m.

WASHINGTON — Medicare said Wednesday it plans to pay doctors to counsel patients about end-of-life care, the same idea that sparked accusations of ‘‘death panels’’ and fanned a political furor around President Barack Obama’s health care law six years ago.

It may not have been his idea, but he certainly embraced it.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@ElwoodBlues Death panels were and are as real as your stench.
@Budwick DUUUDE!!! Insurance companies have ALWAYS had "death panels"! Please, wake up and smell the coffee!!!

Yes, death panels do exist. They exist inside the big health insurance corporations that every day make decisions on whether or not people enrolled in their health benefit plans will get the care their doctors believe might save their lives. I know this firsthand from nearly two decades inside the insurance industry.

You don’t have to take my word for it. Just ask Hilda and Grigor Sarkisyan, who very possibly would be helping their daughter, Nataline, plan her 21st birthday about now had a corporate medical director not refused to pay for a liver transplant Nataline’s doctors believed would save her life.

Nataline was diagnosed with leukemia at 14. Initial treatments were successful and the disease went into remission. It came back a couple of years later, though, and the sort of treatments she’d had previously were not working. She had to have a bone marrow transplant, which weakened her liver. In mid-December 2007, her doctors at UCLA Medical Center said she needed a liver transplant. They asked for prior approval from her insurer, CIGNA, to pay for it. Nataline’s doctors said they believed she had at least a 65 percent chance of living five years or longer if she had the procedure.

A CIGNA medical director 2,500 miles away in Pittsburgh disagreed. To the astonishment of Nataline’s doctors, he ruled the transplant “experimental.” Insurers almost never pay for procedures they consider experimental, so this corporate medical director’s decision meant that the Sarkisyans would have to pay for the transplant and all related care out of their own pockets. Not being wealthy enough to do that, Nataline’s parents launched a campaign to rally public support and media interest in the case. It worked. CIGNA eventually agreed to cover the transplant. Unfortunately, so much time had passed since the original request had been made that Nataline’s other organs began to shut down. She died a few hours after the family got the news that CIGNA had changed its mind.

As chief spokesman for CIGNA at the time, I was on the receiving end of hundreds of calls and emails from reporters and also from regular folks who were outraged that CIGNA had initially refused to pay for Nataline’s transplant. The Sarkisyan family sued CIGNA, but the case was thrown out because of a Supreme Court precedent that shielded employer-paid plans from damages resulting from their decisions.

I wish I could say that Nataline’s story was unique. In the course of my 20 years in the industry, however, I handled media inquiries involving many cases in which coverage had been denied by a corporate medical director for one reason or another. I probably will never know how many of those people died as a result of not getting the care they needed, and I will never know if Nataline would have lived if she had gotten the liver transplant when her doctors wanted to do it. I will also never know if she might have gotten the transplant if she had lived in Canada or England or France, countries that do not permit doctors at for-profit corporations to make such decisions.
https://publicintegrity.org/health/analysis-death-panels-fact-and-fiction/
Budwick · 70-79, M
@ElwoodBlues
Insurance companies have ALWAYS had "death panels"

Then why deny that they exist?

Is the government an insurance company now?
Can I register my SSN at State Farm?
What if Liberty Mutual declares war on Canada?
@Budwick Show me where I denied they exist. Oh, wait, you can't!!
Budwick · 70-79, M
@ElwoodBlues
Show me where I denied they exist.
Do you recall posting your little conspiracy theory meme in response to my mention of death panels?

This speaks to your over the top self image.
@Budwick I never denied that insurance companies have death panels. As soon as you asked me about death panels I confirmed it.

I base my posts on data and evidence and logic. I wish I could say the same for you!
Budwick · 70-79, M
@ElwoodBlues I never mentioned insurance companies.
YOU had to go there - because of your bias.
@Budwick You mentioned death panels

their new HOAX!
Budwick · 70-79, M
@ElwoodBlues I mentioned your character traits too.
All negative.
Carla · 61-69, F
@Budwick biased of what exactly? Insurance companies denying life saving procedures because of cost?
There are your death panels bud.
Insurance companies will deny you, break you, then ultimately allow you to die. Often unnecessarily.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@Carla The death panel is part and parcel of the ACA. Own it.
They called it Independent Payment Advisory Board.

Used to be that insurance would ration health care according to people’s ability to pay for it. Now, it's rationed on governments willingness to pay for it.
@Budwick
The death panel is part and parcel of the ACA.
NOPE.

"Death panels" are part and parcel of EVERY medical insurance plan ever. The conspiracy theory is the pretense that they are somehow par of the ACA - a pretense you are trying and failing to maintain.

The ACA is NOT an insurance plan.
Let me repeat that:
The ACA is NOT an insurance plan.
The ACA is NOT an insurance plan.
The ACA is NOT an insurance plan.

The ACA is a TAX INCENTIVE for people to get private insurance plans, plus some subsidies for private insurance for the poorest, plus some regulations on private insurance plans.
Carla · 61-69, F
@Budwick "ration health care according to people's ability to pay for it"
So...live or die based on income

Ipab
[image/video deleted]
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@Carla @Budwick And it was repealed in 2018 before it even became effective. It's original purpose, first proposed in legislation by Senator Jay Rockefeller before ACA, was to have an independent auditing agency looking at Medicare programs and purchasing systems on a system-wide basis (not individual patients) to make changes that would improve cost-effectiveness and efficiency without changing accessibility of services or quality of care or service. And their decisions would have been subject to Congressional oversight. The purpose was to assure that Medicare was taking full advantage of its volume purchasing abilities which are being restricted by Congress due to many Congress members being beholden to health care lobbyists.
Carla · 61-69, F
@dancingtongue exactly.
Trumps administration halted it.
Not because it would better serve medicare and medicaid participants, with lower costs and nbtter care, but because it was attached to "obamacare".
Budwick · 70-79, M
@Carla All those things that says it's not supposed to be,
describes what it is.