> "cshenk" wrote >> Now waiting on Tricare. 7-10 days and will have letter with >> authorization number. Doc wanted it in 3 but picked the wrong person to >> refer to and they don't do that without the number at that site. Lol, >> tricare will provide the number with a time/date of appointment but >> place wont provide a time/date without the number first. > Man!! What a screwed system!!
It is less than optimal ;-)
>> Don't worry, the tramadol is used very sparingly. It's a bottle of 30 >> from Nov 2008. Have first refill since then. I take it only *as >> needed* as am a long term sort and that stuff can be real bad if >> mis-used over a long time. > If you need some extras, let me know. I have plenty here from a couple of > months ago that I'll never use again. Tramadol made me feel like I was > seasick all the time...... which probaly wouldn't be any big deal for > you!! :-)
Hehe careful there. Not legal here to offer such or get such, but those in real need can get refills with no problem. Probably illegal to ship between countries as well.
> I started on the 150mg and when they had no effect, the doc put me on the > 200mg.
I'm happy with the level the 50's give me and as a careful use only when *needed* it remains effective. Tramadol is one of ther drugs you can get resistive to as well as hooked on if not careful.
PeterL <P...@brissie.aus> wrote: > > <lol> Better late than never. :-) I started a day early and ended a day > > (actually only 3 hours but still) late! I finally posted my pics. Had > > to get at them first, then take the time to run them thru photoshop.
> > I'm not usually this ambitious in the kitchen. <g> I prefer to keep it > > simple but that one sauce was SO good, it'll be a do-over for sure!
> I got back too late to do anything, so I'll maybe just make the recipes at > a later date and let the people concerned know :-)
> -- > Peter Lucas
Please do! -- Peace! Om
"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down." --Steve Rothstein
In article <Xns9CBA71B2EBCD7Peterhomeinbris...@61.9.191.5>,
PeterL <P...@brissie.aus> wrote: > Here, if you want to see an ortho, you go to your local GP and say, "Give > me a referral to such-and-such Specialist."
> He writes out a referral letter and either rings up and makes an > appoinment for you, or you do it yourself.
> You turn up at the ortho appointment with the letter, and away you go!!
Um, that's exactly the way I did it.
It depends on the coverage/insurance. I'm lucky that way. They paid for most of it too. I did have to pay an additional $24.00 on top of my usual $20.00 co-pay to the ortho' today for the shoulder steroid shot.
Big whoop.
I pay out around $100.00 per month payroll deduction for my insurance.
A $2,500 Cervical MRI a few months back cost me a $250.00 co-pay. I consider that to be a bargain.
But, I _am_ one of the lucky ones! My annual deductible is $300.00.
OTOH, there are others that pay higher premiums to end up with lower co-pays. It's a trade-off. But, if I need to see a specialist, I can see one the next day with NO letter from my primary care doc. -- Peace! Om
"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down." --Steve Rothstein
In article <FDqIm.33$dc2...@newsfe20.iad>, "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote:
> > Lighting a candle for you dear! At least what I have is only > > debilitating, not life threatening!
> The specific locations of mine are not life threatening although if the > lower back shifts, they can be. The neck set is below the area that can > remove ability to breathe etc. I could lose full use of one or both > arms(doubtful but is possible), but not loss of life.
> Grin, mostly it is just painful. Quality of life impact.
I feel you there, literally. <g> And I am also blessed with a high pain tolerance, fortunately. But, like you, it has it's limits and I've been putting up with this since May with it steadily getting worse... -- Peace! Om
"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down." --Steve Rothstein
PeterL wrote: > "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote > Here, if you want to see an ortho, you go to your local GP and say, > "Give me a referral to such-and-such Specialist."
It all depends on your insurance. If I want to go see an ortho, I make an appointment and go.
PeterL wrote: > "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote > Here, if you want to see an ortho, you go to your local GP and say, > "Give me a referral to such-and-such Specialist."
It all depends on your insurance. If I want to go see an ortho, I make an appointment and go.
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 23:54:01 -0800, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote: >On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 23:12:06 -0800 (PST), --Bryan <class...@brick.net> >wrote:
>>On Nov 4, 12:43 am, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:27:14 -0600, George Leppla
>>> <geo...@cruisemaster.com> wrote: >>> >I have come to appreciate corn tortillas and >>> >prefer them to flour tortillas now.....
>>> Each has their place, IMO. Hubby has been buying a tortilla that's a >>> combination of corn and wheat. He likes it, I think it tastes weird.
>>That reminded me that my favorite Ameri-Mex restaurant* just >>instituted $4.99 lunch specials, M-F 11-2, and in less than 14 months >>the whole of the indoors will be SMOKE FREE (YAY!!!!), as we just >>passed a smoking ordinance: >>http://www.co.st-louis.mo.us/elections/ballotissues/nov2009/Ordinance... >>It passed with 65.34% of the vote.
>You have no idea how great it's going to be.... especially after they >remodel and get the smoke smell out of everything.
I've tried really hard not to be preachy, but lemme tell you - Sept 27 was 4 years without a cigarette after 30+ years of 3 packs a day. I have apologized to everyone I know for smoking around them, in their homes, in their cars, etc. I never knew how I smelled - I think that was the biggest revelation after I quit. I still cringe when I think about it...
Omelet <ompome...@gmail.com> wrote: > In article <8m82f59th1lfgfo5fcvm3g48itpljg1...@4ax.com>, > sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 17:48:46 -0500, "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote:
> > >For those in favor of 'National health care' take note, it's certainly > > >better than none, but it's not like a well managed HMO.
> > Agreed about the HMO, but those of us who currently have health > > insurance and are pro national health care are not looking at it for > > others, not ourselves. We are appalled at the number of people who > > don't have any health coverage.
> That's just it hon'. It's bull.
> Even the homeless have "health care coverage". They can walk into any ER > any time and if that ER is Federally subsidized (which most are) > Emergency care can NOT be refused to ANYONE, regardless of their > "insured" status.
But what about routine care? Preventative care? Prenatal? Well baby checks?
No, none of those. Instead, wait until it is an emergency and costs far more. And then, somebody who's having a minor life problem may now become unemployable. That'll save us all a lot of money caring for them.
> Those of us that have health insurance end up paying for them already > with higher premiums and co-pays...
So why not pay less by employing preventative medicine instead of paying for emergency care?
> Universal health care coverage is already well in place.
For emergencies.
> It's a solution looking for a problem... and I think all it can do is > hurt us with higher tax rates.
Which insurance company told you that?
-- Dan Abel Petaluma, California USA da...@sonic.net
In article <vQqIm.34$dc2...@newsfe20.iad>, "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote:
> "PeterL" wrote > > If you need some extras, let me know. > Hehe careful there. Not legal here to offer such or get such, but those in > real need can get refills with no problem. > Probably illegal to ship between countries as well.
Yeah, they don't like it when you ship drugs in the mail. My uncle went to Germany for a month, from the US. He carefully packed up enough prescription drugs for a month, but then didn't take them. So he called my sister and asked her to send them. Well, she wanted to do it all legal like. As soon as she uttered the phrase, "prescription drugs", it was like a wall went up. Finally, she just went to the post office out at the base. They have lots of experience with this. The guy just shook his head. He said, OK, you want to send vitamins to your uncle. No, prescription drugs. No, vitamins. Put them in old vitamin bottles. Buy new vitamin bottles and empty them out if you have to. Stuff them with paper or cloth so they don't rattle. If anybody asks, say the packing is to keep them from breaking in transit. On the declaration, write "vitamins".
-- Dan Abel Petaluma, California USA da...@sonic.net
>In article <8m82f59th1lfgfo5fcvm3g48itpljg1...@4ax.com>, > sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 17:48:46 -0500, "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >For those in favor of 'National health care' take note, it's certainly >> >better than none, but it's not like a well managed HMO.
>> Agreed about the HMO, but those of us who currently have health >> insurance and are pro national health care are not looking at it for >> others, not ourselves. We are appalled at the number of people who >> don't have any health coverage.
>That's just it hon'. It's bull.
>Even the homeless have "health care coverage". They can walk into any ER >any time and if that ER is Federally subsidized (which most are) >Emergency care can NOT be refused to ANYONE, regardless of their >"insured" status.
>If it cannot and won't be paid, it gets written off.
>Those of us that have health insurance end up paying for them already >with higher premiums and co-pays...
>Universal health care coverage is already well in place.
>It's a solution looking for a problem... and I think all it can do is >hurt us with higher tax rates.
Sorry, Om. The ER is NOT health coverage. It's Emergency Care.
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:01:32 -0500, "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote: >Sure, and so am I. But fact is in quite a few cases, they don't because >although they make enough for the plan their employer has, they 'opt' to not >take it. I know that isnt the case for the self employed, out of work >person, or temp staff, or part time worker.
I haven't heard of one person who voluntarily opted out of health coverage offered by an employer. Maybe it's different in the south, but not here.
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
>> Here, if you want to see an ortho, you go to your local GP and say, >> "Give me a referral to such-and-such Specialist."
>It all depends on your insurance. If I want to go see an ortho, >I make an appointment and go.
In a lot of cases, you need an initial referral but once you have that you don't need any other referrals. In any case, I don't pretend to know more than the doctor and demand to see specialists... yet.
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
>>> Now waiting on Tricare. 7-10 days and will have letter with >>> authorization number. Doc wanted it in 3 but picked the wrong person >>> to refer to and they don't do that without the number at that site. >>> Lol, tricare will provide the number with a time/date of appointment >>> but place wont provide a time/date without the number first.
>> Man!! What a screwed system!!
> It is less than optimal ;-)
>>> Don't worry, the tramadol is used very sparingly. It's a bottle of 30 >>> from Nov 2008. Have first refill since then. I take it only *as >>> needed* as am a long term sort and that stuff can be real bad if >>> mis-used over a long time.
>> If you need some extras, let me know. I have plenty here from a couple >> of months ago that I'll never use again. Tramadol made me feel like I >> was seasick all the time...... which probaly wouldn't be any big deal >> for you!! :-)
> Hehe careful there. Not legal here to offer such or get such, but those > in real need can get refills with no problem. > Probably illegal to ship between countries as well.
LOL!! It slipped my mind for a moment that you're on the other side of the world.
I often give some of my medications to friends that need it, but can't afford it.
I either get it for next to nothing, or get completely reimbursed for them, so it's no skin off my nose.
And having said that, I watched a show last night about Border Protection here in Oz, and a suitcase and a parcel were snatched before going o/s as they had medicines in them that are on our PBS system, ie, the customer gets them at a greatly reduced rate.
Big fine and up to 2 years in jail for it. But if you pay *full price* for the drugs, you can ship them/send them o/s...... go figger!!
>> I started on the 150mg and when they had no effect, the doc put me on >> the 200mg.
> I'm happy with the level the 50's give me
:-)
The 150's and 200's would probably put you in a coma!!
> and as a careful use only when > *needed* it remains effective. Tramadol is one of ther drugs you can > get resistive to as well as hooked on if not careful.
I only took them for a couple of weeks and saw what effect they were having on me and ditched them.
I'd rather put up with the pain.
-- Peter Lucas Brisbane Australia
If we are not meant to eat animals, why are they made of meat?
George Shirley wrote: > Louisiana, home of the crooked politicians, Chicago can't hold a > candle to us. If you don't believe that, take a look at how many of > our politicians are in the federal slammer.
Which high school was it that had their Valedictorian fail the graduation exam? I know it was somewhere in New Orleans...
-Gina, who went to one of the more academically oriented schools in New Orleans. --
Omelet wrote: > I pay out around $100.00 per month payroll deduction for my insurance.
> A $2,500 Cervical MRI a few months back cost me a $250.00 co-pay. > I consider that to be a bargain.
> But, I _am_ one of the lucky ones! My annual deductible is $300.00.
> OTOH, there are others that pay higher premiums to end up with lower > co-pays. It's a trade-off. But, if I need to see a specialist, I can > see one the next day with NO letter from my primary care doc.
Be very grateful for your $100 per month payroll deduction, the cost of private insurance is through the roof. I paid $600 per month, just for me, and I had a 3K deductible. Mine was just hospitalization, it did not cover doctor visits, mamograms, tests, etc. On top of that, pre-existing conditions were not covered, ever. I cancelled my insurance because the price went up every 3 months. Who knows how much it would cost now, I cancelled it a few years ago.
Jeanne Burton wrote: > I've tried really hard not to be preachy, but lemme tell you - Sept 27 > was 4 years without a cigarette after 30+ years of 3 packs a day. I > have apologized to everyone I know for smoking around them, in their > homes, in their cars, etc. I never knew how I smelled - I think that > was the biggest revelation after I quit. I still cringe when I think > about it...
> Jeanne in Toledo
Congratulations on quitting smoking, Jeanne. :-) My sister quit about 2 months ago and she is hanging in there. I hope her husband quits, his continuing to smoke must be a temptation for her. With all the nicotine gum, patches, lozenges and oral medications, you would think more people would quit. When I quit smoking, we had nothing to rely on but our own determination. I quit, because I did not want my children to be smokers. Chances are, if you smoke, your children will smoke.
On 5 Nov 2009 09:52:20 GMT, "Ravenlynne" <ravenly...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>George Shirley wrote:
>> Louisiana, home of the crooked politicians, Chicago can't hold a >> candle to us. If you don't believe that, take a look at how many of >> our politicians are in the federal slammer.
>Which high school was it that had their Valedictorian fail the >graduation exam? I know it was somewhere in New Orleans...
>-Gina, who went to one of the more academically oriented schools in New >Orleans.
Are you saying s/he did it on purpose?
-- I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Becca <be...@hal-pc.org> wrote: > Omelet wrote: > > I pay out around $100.00 per month payroll deduction for my insurance.
> > A $2,500 Cervical MRI a few months back cost me a $250.00 co-pay. > > I consider that to be a bargain.
> > But, I _am_ one of the lucky ones! My annual deductible is $300.00.
> > OTOH, there are others that pay higher premiums to end up with lower > > co-pays. It's a trade-off. But, if I need to see a specialist, I can > > see one the next day with NO letter from my primary care doc.
> Be very grateful for your $100 per month payroll deduction, the cost of > private insurance is through the roof.
Trust me, I know. :-(
> I paid $600 per month, just for > me, and I had a 3K deductible. Mine was just hospitalization, it did > not cover doctor visits, mamograms, tests, etc. On top of that, > pre-existing conditions were not covered, ever. I cancelled my > insurance because the price went up every 3 months. Who knows how much > it would cost now, I cancelled it a few years ago.
> Becca
Do you have any health coverage now? I've heard Blue Cross/Blue Shield is decent? But, I've never checked that as I have health coverage thru my employer. Sometimes it can literally pay to work in health care... as _they_ are the providers!
I just have to stay in system, but I don't mind that as I know the doctors I can trust. I may be facing my first real surgery here soon with that torn tendon in my right shoulder. I know who has the best reputations for fixing problems like that. But, I'm still scared... -- Peace! Om
"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down." --Steve Rothstein
sf wrote: > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:01:32 -0500, "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Sure, and so am I. But fact is in quite a few cases, they don't because >> although they make enough for the plan their employer has, they 'opt' to not >> take it. I know that isnt the case for the self employed, out of work >> person, or temp staff, or part time worker.
> I haven't heard of one person who voluntarily opted out of health > coverage offered by an employer. Maybe it's different in the south, > but not here.
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 12:28:14 -0500, Goomba <Goomb...@comcast.net> wrote:
>sf wrote: >> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:01:32 -0500, "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> Sure, and so am I. But fact is in quite a few cases, they don't because >>> although they make enough for the plan their employer has, they 'opt' to not >>> take it. I know that isnt the case for the self employed, out of work >>> person, or temp staff, or part time worker.
>> I haven't heard of one person who voluntarily opted out of health >> coverage offered by an employer. Maybe it's different in the south, >> but not here.
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:48:05 -0600, Omelet wrote: > In article <8m82f59th1lfgfo5fcvm3g48itpljg1...@4ax.com>, > sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 17:48:46 -0500, "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>For those in favor of 'National health care' take note, it's certainly >>>better than none, but it's not like a well managed HMO.
>> Agreed about the HMO, but those of us who currently have health >> insurance and are pro national health care are not looking at it for >> others, not ourselves. We are appalled at the number of people who >> don't have any health coverage.
> That's just it hon'. It's bull.
> Even the homeless have "health care coverage". They can walk into any ER > any time and if that ER is Federally subsidized (which most are) > Emergency care can NOT be refused to ANYONE, regardless of their > "insured" status.
this is utter bullshit. try getting cancer treatment at your ER. guaranteed treatment for trauma is not 'health care coverage.'
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:48:05 -0600, Omelet wrote: > In article <8m82f59th1lfgfo5fcvm3g48itpljg1...@4ax.com>, > sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 17:48:46 -0500, "cshenk" <cshe...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>For those in favor of 'National health care' take note, it's certainly >>>better than none, but it's not like a well managed HMO.
>> Agreed about the HMO, but those of us who currently have health >> insurance and are pro national health care are not looking at it for >> others, not ourselves. We are appalled at the number of people who >> don't have any health coverage.
> That's just it hon'. It's bull.
> Even the homeless have "health care coverage". They can walk into any ER > any time and if that ER is Federally subsidized (which most are) > Emergency care can NOT be refused to ANYONE, regardless of their > "insured" status.
> If it cannot and won't be paid, it gets written off.
> Those of us that have health insurance end up paying for them already > with higher premiums and co-pays...
> Universal health care coverage is already well in place.
> It's a solution looking for a problem... and I think all it can do is > hurt us with higher tax rates.
still looking for your cite that you'll have to pay 40 percent of income, or whatever the ridiculous figure was, for health insurance.
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:01:32 -0500, cshenk wrote: > "sf" wrote >> "cshenk" wrote:
>>>For those in favor of 'National health care' take note, it's certainly >>>better than none, but it's not like a well managed HMO.
>> Agreed about the HMO, but those of us who currently have health >> insurance and are pro national health care are not looking at it for >> others, not ourselves. We are appalled at the number of people who >> don't have any health coverage.
> Sure, and so am I. But fact is in quite a few cases, they don't because > although they make enough for the plan their employer has, they 'opt' to not > take it. I know that isnt the case for the self employed, out of work > person, or temp staff, or part time worker.
> I (given a chance) will vote for national health care if the plan is solid > and doesnt include illegal aliens.
more bullshit. none of the plans being discussed include 'illegal aliens.'
blake murphy wrote: > this is utter bullshit. try getting cancer treatment at your ER. > guaranteed treatment for trauma is not 'health care coverage.'
> your pal, > blake
FYI- in countries with nationalized care cancer treatments aren't assured either.
|
