“Such disclosures would eliminate hospitals’ ability to negotiate pricing with insurers, which would undermine competition and blunt incentives for health insurers to sign arrangements that could potentially lower costs, the plaintiffs said.” I call BS
There should be unanimous agreement that the Trump administration is doing a good thing here, something that should have been done a long time ago.
Meanwhile, the media ignores this as well as the new revelation about Bill and Hillary visiting Epstein’s New Mexico ranch, where the woman accusing Prince Andrew says she saw them.
Wait, didn’t Bill say the only time he saw Epstein was a couple of times at his NY townhome? By golly, that’s what he said. And didn’t Big Bill say he only flew with the Lolita Express 4 times, when flight logs show him on the plane over 25 times? By golly, yes.
Anyone in the media care to ask Bill and Hillary about this? Why Hillary was so close to Weinstein and now apparently Epstein?
Hello? Any honest MeToo supporters out there curious about pedophilia? Answer: no. MeToo is just another partisan fraud.
Bro! If you had stopped at, “there should be unanimous agreement that the Trump administration is doing a good thing here, something that should have been done a long time ago,” I bet you would have gotten all likes. But then you went on a snowflake rant and well…you know what you did. (What does Me Too have to do with hospital bills? Goodness.)
Dude! The point was the media bias. For the millionth time. Get it? They don’t report the GOOD NEWS about hospital pricing or the BAD NEWS about Clinton.
Oh, never mind. Who cares about “likes”? Seriously. I have been trashed for truth telling on Insurance Journal countless times.
First I want to start off by saying just stop. Stop your constant false information. You have not been trashed for telling the truth, you have been corrected when you post false or misleading claims, just like the last sentence. IF you think this is thrashing you, maybe you should have a higher standard for fact checking sources, reading studies, admitting when you are wrong, and putting your own bias in check.
Your first statement was true, Trump is doing a great thing on this, but you lost me with everything after that. Stop making it so political, highlight something good coming out of this, but you didn’t and you shouldn’t defend yourself, it was off topic, and I think Boomer had you on the church article about why your rant is wrong.
December 4, 2019 at 4:40 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
5
12
What did I say that is not true? You made the accusation. Walk the walk.
December 4, 2019 at 4:47 pm
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
11
5
So the falsehood on here is that you have been thrashed for truth telling. This is not true sir as I pointed out (I don’t know how you are not comprehending this) people have corrected you. Let me grab my list I have posted before that I have reposted below:
1. Claims 26 out of 27 mass shooters were from fatherless families. This was false and then you claimed 19 out of 27. Neither has data to back that up.
2. You linked a website that did not bring you to a study, it brought people to a page that said page does not exist.
3. Claimed air conditioners were the main cause of man-made climate change. Even bob called you out on this one and said your claims were misleading.
4. You continuously link reports that are not saying what you are indicating. Your CNN report was a fear-mongering campaign, as the studies themselves refuted your exact points.
5. You have been saying that Cannabis is a hallucinogen, this was proven false as it is a depressant although it does have properties of other intoxicants
6. You claimed cannabis causes schizophrenia in people who who are not predisposed to this, this was false as it increases the risk in those who are predisposed to those diseases.
I think I have proven my point on the numerous times you have lied, and you still use some of these today. They are not truthful, and your links have proved you are posting misleading claims as the studies behind the articles prove the opposite of your argument. Anything else?
December 4, 2019 at 5:07 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
7
12
YOU are the liar.
19 of 27 was the supposed “refutation” by SNOPES, a discredited left wing trash dump! And their “facts” were inferences about whether or not fathers were actually “in the home”. They didn’t actually have facts. And STILL, Snopes couldn’t refute 19 of 27, a very convincing number for the premise anyway.
I linked to the science that connects schizophrenia to THC for people WITHOUT a predisposition. And you refuse to acknowledge that very, very few people know they have a predisposition, as they haven’t done a DNA test and the test would have to show the absence of several genes. Most people may as well have no predispostion; the risk of consumption is the same.
You go from having a 1% chance of becoming schizophrenic to having a 5% chance. That would be 1 in 20 regular pot smokers.
Congratulations on not caring about them.
You are an ignorant defender of THC consumption and should be ashamed. But you are a liberal; shame was removed along with your pride in honesty and integrity.
I could address every single one of your false accusations. But you are boring.
December 4, 2019 at 5:17 pm
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
10
4
Hey Craig.
“As far as being liberal, other fact-checkers, such as Truthorfiction.com; David Emery, who researches urban legends for the information website About.com; and FactCheck.org have researched Snopes.com and none has found any instance where the Mikkelsons have stated a political preference or affiliation.” – https://www.jacksonville.com/article/20120928/NEWS/801246493
So it is your opinion it is a biased website, but in reality it is not.
Now let’s dissect your other claims:
The article did not state the higher risk for those without a predisposition, that is false. The study determined it was only higher in those who were predisposed, but they admitted they couldn’t make the final link because then they would have to supply people who are predisposed to those diseases with cannabis and that causes a moral hazard, but they still said from their research that was the link, not your everyone has a higher chance if you smoke cannabis. Congrats on not caring about science and just trying to push your false claims! Glad you are still not comprehending the studies even though multiple people pointed this out for you.
I am an independent, and I admitted I didn’t even vote for Obama, but that doesn’t matter because I am defending something you disagree with because of your personal bias from personal experiences and those are not indicative for what is really happening, but again that doesn’t matter to you. If you want to address them, go ahead, but I won’t wait as I have admitted when I was wrong before, something you cannot seem to do.
Happy ignorance Craig!
December 4, 2019 at 5:25 pm
helpingout says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
10
0
Craig,
I posted my reply already. It isn’t showing up for me as it was long as you are again just blatantly ignorant of your own issues. I will wait until tomorrow to see if it posted, if not I will repost.
I will say again, go ahead and point out my falsehoods, because the difference is I can admit when I was incorrect because I am not right about everything, but on these subjects, you have proven your lack of understanding behind your sources and your own bias you try and use and pass off as facts. Should we discuss when you posted a link claiming the schizophrenia link when it went no where and the only thing that resembled PCM512A was an article not relating to what you were quoting at all? We asked you to fix that link, but you couldn’t, so here we are with your falsehoods again.
Happy ignorance Craig!
December 4, 2019 at 5:47 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
5
12
If anyone wants to use Snopes as a source of info they’re not going to be held up as a serious or credible poster. I’ll ignore such post(er)s now and hereafter.
December 5, 2019 at 9:51 am
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
8
1
Polar,
Can you back up that assertion or is it just your opinion that it is a biased site? Because what I can see and read on, no one has proven snopes to be biased, and they have found them to be factually reported. At times they have posted information that was not completely true, they have updated those stories and admitted where they were wrong and how they fixed it. This is called journalism, and is a great tool of a free press as I just proved snopes is… not biased.
Snopes just posted a piece regarding a false claim that fox doctored a photo of troops to promote trump, but they quickly discredited that claim and said the photo was real. Should I not believe them under your own logic, or can we admit that this is a news site that reports for all sides and only cares for facts and not someone’s opinion they try to pass off as fact.
December 9, 2019 at 1:18 pm
Ebb Tide says:
Like or Dislike:
5
1
Nobody derails a conversation quite like Craig Cornell.
It would be amusing if he wasn’t such a gigantic ball of seething boomer antics.
Craig we’re trying to have a conversation on this board, can you just keep to yourself for a week or two?
With how much ya’all react to Craig, he must be doing the right thing. Craig is heated, but it’s for good reason.
Boomer antics? Yeah…How about no generational wars on this thread?
December 4, 2019 at 5:56 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
10
2
” “The rule… does not provide the information patients need. Mandating the public disclosure of negotiated charges would create confusion about patients’ out-of-pocket costs, not prevent it,” the plaintiffs wrote. ”
There would be no confusion if insurers have access to the price lists (transparency) and download them into their IT system to calculate OOP costs under their various plans…. for each med service provider. Data storage is cheap. A lack of market price transparency is costly to consumers.
Would you buy a product off a shelf at ‘MegaMart’, or online at ‘Armageddon’ if there were no prices listed?
Summing up the objection: “publicly disclosing prices hurts our ability to be competitive.” Huh? Are you serious? Could you imagine, if say, roofers, were allowed to not disclose their prices after a CAT storm came through? Or how about if claims adjusters could withhold payment information from the insured? This is absolute madness! These folks are terrified because they know that the increased competition will cause a lot of overly bloated systems to start losing money. Next time you go to see your doctor ask him how much the cost would be if you just simply pay cash (assuming you have health insurance). There is something seriously amiss with the way hospitals and insurers do business. Lack of transparency ALWAYS hurts the consumer.
I recently had a procedure done, I went through insurance and it is costing me $1,900 after insurance. Insurance has paid about $500. Had I paid cash on the first day they said they would have charged me $1,250. I was very upset I did not ask them to pay cash right away.
An Actuary: Yes I have! My wife is also a Registered Nurse and works for a massive hospital group here in Dallas–she is the one that initially told me to ask about being a “cash payor.” I had blood work done for a physical and the physician–to help me out–basically said that if the insurance company didn’t pay then he could set me up as a cash payor for a fraction of the cost. I would make it a habit to always ask the “cash price” of the procedure. Basically, if a procedure gets billed to insurance and they deny it, you can be in a very tough position if you don’t have a good physician. Essentially, the physician can turn around and charge you “insurance prices” if the insurer decided not to pay. Fortunately, because of my wife working with physicians, she has a very good sense of who the good physicians are versus the bad ones.
I’ve had major experience in dealing with the Hospitals and Doctors over the past three years due to my Cancer battle. I can tell you why the Hospitals do not want their prices revealed.
If you have an MRI at the Hospital, depending on your location, it may run anywhere from $3,500 to $5,000. You can have the same MRI done at an outpatient facility, like ImageRight, for $900. Hospitals will not tell you about the outpatient facilities that do the scans, or they will go as far as telling you the scans are “different”, but cannot explain how.
The same applies to Hospital stays. The Hospital I was in just a few months ago costs upwards of $1,500 per night for just the room. That isn’t medications, therapy or anything else, just the cost of being there. I truly only needed 3 days in the Hospital, but they kept me for almost 6. The cost, with everything included, was near $6,500 per night. I was not given the cost of the stay ahead of time, even though I asked numerous times. Fortunately, I had already hit my deductible for the year (or unfortunately), but had I been able to shop around, other Hospitals were half that price. It seems the newer the hospital, the crazier the cost is for a basic service after surgery.
The other issue is the non-disclosure of how they bill at the Hospitals. If a Doctor walks into your room to say hello, you are billed as it being a consultation. Resident doctors will walk in simply to introduce themselves, then leave. That’s it. You will be billed for a consultation of some kind though. That needs to be disclosed prior to any doctor walking into your room.
The price of medicine varies from hospital to hospital too. If you have your vitals checked at your regular doctors office, it’s not an expensive ordeal. If done in the hospital, especially after a surgery where they do it every few hours, you will be paying quadruple what it costs outside the hospital.
Personally, I think everything they do should be listed clearly and plainly with the cost. Patients should be allowed to shop around. A cheaper rate does NOT mean lesser care. These new hospitals with 4k televisions, marble statues in the lobby, gift shops the size of a small store and cafeterias as big as a large restaurant are making you pay for the luxuries you could easily do without.
Most health insurance companies will have you work with a private nurse who is supposed to review your bills and make certain you aren’t being overcharged. I have United Healthcare and the lady called me only once, prior to the surgery, then not again for months, well after I needed her assistance. I called, left messages, and never had a return call. It was useless. They don’t care about saving you money as they will simply charge your company more next year.
“Such disclosures would eliminate hospitals’ ability to negotiate pricing with insurers, which would undermine competition and blunt incentives for health insurers to sign arrangements that could potentially lower costs, the plaintiffs said.” I call BS
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Love the Down Votes! Imagine if George Bush had been tied to Epstein along with Laura Bush.
Think the MeToo crowd would be howling to find out more? Of course they would, and rightly so.
All you Down Voters are showing your true colors.
Bro! If you had stopped at, “there should be unanimous agreement that the Trump administration is doing a good thing here, something that should have been done a long time ago,” I bet you would have gotten all likes. But then you went on a snowflake rant and well…you know what you did. (What does Me Too have to do with hospital bills? Goodness.)
Dude! The point was the media bias. For the millionth time. Get it? They don’t report the GOOD NEWS about hospital pricing or the BAD NEWS about Clinton.
Oh, never mind. Who cares about “likes”? Seriously. I have been trashed for truth telling on Insurance Journal countless times.
Craig,
First I want to start off by saying just stop. Stop your constant false information. You have not been trashed for telling the truth, you have been corrected when you post false or misleading claims, just like the last sentence. IF you think this is thrashing you, maybe you should have a higher standard for fact checking sources, reading studies, admitting when you are wrong, and putting your own bias in check.
Your first statement was true, Trump is doing a great thing on this, but you lost me with everything after that. Stop making it so political, highlight something good coming out of this, but you didn’t and you shouldn’t defend yourself, it was off topic, and I think Boomer had you on the church article about why your rant is wrong.
What did I say that is not true? You made the accusation. Walk the walk.
So the falsehood on here is that you have been thrashed for truth telling. This is not true sir as I pointed out (I don’t know how you are not comprehending this) people have corrected you. Let me grab my list I have posted before that I have reposted below:
1. Claims 26 out of 27 mass shooters were from fatherless families. This was false and then you claimed 19 out of 27. Neither has data to back that up.
2. You linked a website that did not bring you to a study, it brought people to a page that said page does not exist.
3. Claimed air conditioners were the main cause of man-made climate change. Even bob called you out on this one and said your claims were misleading.
4. You continuously link reports that are not saying what you are indicating. Your CNN report was a fear-mongering campaign, as the studies themselves refuted your exact points.
5. You have been saying that Cannabis is a hallucinogen, this was proven false as it is a depressant although it does have properties of other intoxicants
6. You claimed cannabis causes schizophrenia in people who who are not predisposed to this, this was false as it increases the risk in those who are predisposed to those diseases.
I think I have proven my point on the numerous times you have lied, and you still use some of these today. They are not truthful, and your links have proved you are posting misleading claims as the studies behind the articles prove the opposite of your argument. Anything else?
YOU are the liar.
19 of 27 was the supposed “refutation” by SNOPES, a discredited left wing trash dump! And their “facts” were inferences about whether or not fathers were actually “in the home”. They didn’t actually have facts. And STILL, Snopes couldn’t refute 19 of 27, a very convincing number for the premise anyway.
I linked to the science that connects schizophrenia to THC for people WITHOUT a predisposition. And you refuse to acknowledge that very, very few people know they have a predisposition, as they haven’t done a DNA test and the test would have to show the absence of several genes. Most people may as well have no predispostion; the risk of consumption is the same.
You go from having a 1% chance of becoming schizophrenic to having a 5% chance. That would be 1 in 20 regular pot smokers.
Congratulations on not caring about them.
You are an ignorant defender of THC consumption and should be ashamed. But you are a liberal; shame was removed along with your pride in honesty and integrity.
I could address every single one of your false accusations. But you are boring.
Hey Craig.
“As far as being liberal, other fact-checkers, such as Truthorfiction.com; David Emery, who researches urban legends for the information website About.com; and FactCheck.org have researched Snopes.com and none has found any instance where the Mikkelsons have stated a political preference or affiliation.” – https://www.jacksonville.com/article/20120928/NEWS/801246493
“In March 2018, FactCheck.org reported that nearly a decade earlier, in 2009, it addressed questions of Snopes.com’s alleged political bias and wrote that it “found the website’s work to be ‘solid and well-documented’ and that its articles appeared ‘utterly poker-face’ when tackling rumors about Democratic and Republican politicians.”
– https://www.politifact.com/facebook-fact-checks/statements/2019/jun/19/viral-image/no-factcheckorg-didnt-bust-snopescom/
So it is your opinion it is a biased website, but in reality it is not.
Now let’s dissect your other claims:
The article did not state the higher risk for those without a predisposition, that is false. The study determined it was only higher in those who were predisposed, but they admitted they couldn’t make the final link because then they would have to supply people who are predisposed to those diseases with cannabis and that causes a moral hazard, but they still said from their research that was the link, not your everyone has a higher chance if you smoke cannabis. Congrats on not caring about science and just trying to push your false claims! Glad you are still not comprehending the studies even though multiple people pointed this out for you.
I am an independent, and I admitted I didn’t even vote for Obama, but that doesn’t matter because I am defending something you disagree with because of your personal bias from personal experiences and those are not indicative for what is really happening, but again that doesn’t matter to you. If you want to address them, go ahead, but I won’t wait as I have admitted when I was wrong before, something you cannot seem to do.
Happy ignorance Craig!
Craig,
I posted my reply already. It isn’t showing up for me as it was long as you are again just blatantly ignorant of your own issues. I will wait until tomorrow to see if it posted, if not I will repost.
I will say again, go ahead and point out my falsehoods, because the difference is I can admit when I was incorrect because I am not right about everything, but on these subjects, you have proven your lack of understanding behind your sources and your own bias you try and use and pass off as facts. Should we discuss when you posted a link claiming the schizophrenia link when it went no where and the only thing that resembled PCM512A was an article not relating to what you were quoting at all? We asked you to fix that link, but you couldn’t, so here we are with your falsehoods again.
Happy ignorance Craig!
If anyone wants to use Snopes as a source of info they’re not going to be held up as a serious or credible poster. I’ll ignore such post(er)s now and hereafter.
Polar,
Can you back up that assertion or is it just your opinion that it is a biased site? Because what I can see and read on, no one has proven snopes to be biased, and they have found them to be factually reported. At times they have posted information that was not completely true, they have updated those stories and admitted where they were wrong and how they fixed it. This is called journalism, and is a great tool of a free press as I just proved snopes is… not biased.
Snopes just posted a piece regarding a false claim that fox doctored a photo of troops to promote trump, but they quickly discredited that claim and said the photo was real. Should I not believe them under your own logic, or can we admit that this is a news site that reports for all sides and only cares for facts and not someone’s opinion they try to pass off as fact.
Nobody derails a conversation quite like Craig Cornell.
It would be amusing if he wasn’t such a gigantic ball of seething boomer antics.
Craig we’re trying to have a conversation on this board, can you just keep to yourself for a week or two?
With how much ya’all react to Craig, he must be doing the right thing. Craig is heated, but it’s for good reason.
Boomer antics? Yeah…How about no generational wars on this thread?
” “The rule… does not provide the information patients need. Mandating the public disclosure of negotiated charges would create confusion about patients’ out-of-pocket costs, not prevent it,” the plaintiffs wrote. ”
There would be no confusion if insurers have access to the price lists (transparency) and download them into their IT system to calculate OOP costs under their various plans…. for each med service provider. Data storage is cheap. A lack of market price transparency is costly to consumers.
Would you buy a product off a shelf at ‘MegaMart’, or online at ‘Armageddon’ if there were no prices listed?
Summing up the objection: “publicly disclosing prices hurts our ability to be competitive.” Huh? Are you serious? Could you imagine, if say, roofers, were allowed to not disclose their prices after a CAT storm came through? Or how about if claims adjusters could withhold payment information from the insured? This is absolute madness! These folks are terrified because they know that the increased competition will cause a lot of overly bloated systems to start losing money. Next time you go to see your doctor ask him how much the cost would be if you just simply pay cash (assuming you have health insurance). There is something seriously amiss with the way hospitals and insurers do business. Lack of transparency ALWAYS hurts the consumer.
“Next time you go to see your doctor ask him how much the cost would be if you just simply pay cash (assuming you have health insurance).”
Have you done this? If so, what response did you get? Genuinely curious.
I recently had a procedure done, I went through insurance and it is costing me $1,900 after insurance. Insurance has paid about $500. Had I paid cash on the first day they said they would have charged me $1,250. I was very upset I did not ask them to pay cash right away.
An Actuary: Yes I have! My wife is also a Registered Nurse and works for a massive hospital group here in Dallas–she is the one that initially told me to ask about being a “cash payor.” I had blood work done for a physical and the physician–to help me out–basically said that if the insurance company didn’t pay then he could set me up as a cash payor for a fraction of the cost. I would make it a habit to always ask the “cash price” of the procedure. Basically, if a procedure gets billed to insurance and they deny it, you can be in a very tough position if you don’t have a good physician. Essentially, the physician can turn around and charge you “insurance prices” if the insurer decided not to pay. Fortunately, because of my wife working with physicians, she has a very good sense of who the good physicians are versus the bad ones.
I went to the doctor recently. The doctor said I had a hernia. I asked if I could get a second opinion. He said, “yeah, you’re also ugly.”
I’ve had major experience in dealing with the Hospitals and Doctors over the past three years due to my Cancer battle. I can tell you why the Hospitals do not want their prices revealed.
If you have an MRI at the Hospital, depending on your location, it may run anywhere from $3,500 to $5,000. You can have the same MRI done at an outpatient facility, like ImageRight, for $900. Hospitals will not tell you about the outpatient facilities that do the scans, or they will go as far as telling you the scans are “different”, but cannot explain how.
The same applies to Hospital stays. The Hospital I was in just a few months ago costs upwards of $1,500 per night for just the room. That isn’t medications, therapy or anything else, just the cost of being there. I truly only needed 3 days in the Hospital, but they kept me for almost 6. The cost, with everything included, was near $6,500 per night. I was not given the cost of the stay ahead of time, even though I asked numerous times. Fortunately, I had already hit my deductible for the year (or unfortunately), but had I been able to shop around, other Hospitals were half that price. It seems the newer the hospital, the crazier the cost is for a basic service after surgery.
The other issue is the non-disclosure of how they bill at the Hospitals. If a Doctor walks into your room to say hello, you are billed as it being a consultation. Resident doctors will walk in simply to introduce themselves, then leave. That’s it. You will be billed for a consultation of some kind though. That needs to be disclosed prior to any doctor walking into your room.
The price of medicine varies from hospital to hospital too. If you have your vitals checked at your regular doctors office, it’s not an expensive ordeal. If done in the hospital, especially after a surgery where they do it every few hours, you will be paying quadruple what it costs outside the hospital.
Personally, I think everything they do should be listed clearly and plainly with the cost. Patients should be allowed to shop around. A cheaper rate does NOT mean lesser care. These new hospitals with 4k televisions, marble statues in the lobby, gift shops the size of a small store and cafeterias as big as a large restaurant are making you pay for the luxuries you could easily do without.
Most health insurance companies will have you work with a private nurse who is supposed to review your bills and make certain you aren’t being overcharged. I have United Healthcare and the lady called me only once, prior to the surgery, then not again for months, well after I needed her assistance. I called, left messages, and never had a return call. It was useless. They don’t care about saving you money as they will simply charge your company more next year.
Some of the best doctors I’ve been to work out of an old house