It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Major Insurance Company Death Panels

page: 1
12

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:04 PM
link   

A Nevada physician says insurance companies in states where assisted suicide is legal have refused to cover expensive, life-saving treatments for his patients but have offered to help them end their lives instead.

Brian Callister, associate professor of internal medicine at the University of Nevada, said he tried to transfer two patients to California and Oregon for procedures not performed at his hospital. Representatives from two different insurance companies denied those transfer requests by phone, he said.

“And in both cases, the insurance medical director said to me, ‘Brian, we’re not going to cover that procedure or the transfer, but would you consider assisted suicide?’ ” Dr. Callister told The Washington Times.

The phone calls took place last year within the span of a month, Dr. Callister said. He said he did nothing to prompt the suggestion in either case.

The patients were not terminal, but “would have become terminal without the procedures.”

“It was estimated that their chance for cure — cure, not just adding time — of about 50 percent in one case and 70 percent in the other case,” Dr. Callister said



Was unsure where to put this.

Insurance companies are advocating killing their patients over covering the cost of their treatment.

I have always been for the right for someone to choose to take their own life, I don't think it should be anyone else's decision.

But some doctors claim patients are being forced to choose assisted suicide over treating a CURABLE illness.

link
edit on 12-7-2017 by rockintitz because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz


A Nevada physician says insurance companies in states where assisted suicide is legal have refused to cover expensive, life-saving treatments for his patients but have offered to help them end their lives instead.

Brian Callister, associate professor of internal medicine at the University of Nevada, said he tried to transfer two patients to California and Oregon for procedures not performed at his hospital. Representatives from two different insurance companies denied those transfer requests by phone, he said.

“And in both cases, the insurance medical director said to me, ‘Brian, we’re not going to cover that procedure or the transfer, but would you consider assisted suicide?’ ” Dr. Callister told The Washington Times.

The phone calls took place last year within the span of a month, Dr. Callister said. He said he did nothing to prompt the suggestion in either case.

The patients were not terminal, but “would have become terminal without the procedures.”

“It was estimated that their chance for cure — cure, not just adding time — of about 50 percent in one case and 70 percent in the other case,” Dr. Callister said



Was unsure where to put this.

Insurance companies are advocating killing their patients over covering the cost of their treatment.

I have always been for the right for someone to choose to take their own life, I don't think it should be anyone else's decision.

But some doctors claim patients are being forced to choose assisted suicide over treating a CURABLE illness.


That's just jacked up.

Terminal illness and choosing to die with dignity is one thing being refused treatment is murder.

It may be "legal murder" but it's still murder.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz


A Nevada physician says insurance companies in states where assisted suicide is legal have refused to cover expensive, life-saving treatments for his patients but have offered to help them end their lives instead.

Brian Callister, associate professor of internal medicine at the University of Nevada, said he tried to transfer two patients to California and Oregon for procedures not performed at his hospital. Representatives from two different insurance companies denied those transfer requests by phone, he said.

“And in both cases, the insurance medical director said to me, ‘Brian, we’re not going to cover that procedure or the transfer, but would you consider assisted suicide?’ ” Dr. Callister told The Washington Times.

The phone calls took place last year within the span of a month, Dr. Callister said. He said he did nothing to prompt the suggestion in either case.

The patients were not terminal, but “would have become terminal without the procedures.”

“It was estimated that their chance for cure — cure, not just adding time — of about 50 percent in one case and 70 percent in the other case,” Dr. Callister said



Was unsure where to put this.

Insurance companies are advocating killing their patients over covering the cost of their treatment.

I have always been for the right for someone to choose to take their own life, I don't think it should be anyone else's decision.

But some doctors claim patients are being forced to choose assisted suicide over treating a CURABLE illness.


Where is the link?
Does the story say what insurance companies they were?
Drop them assholes fast whoever they are.
50% and 70% chance of curing the problem, not just adding maybe months of life?
Time to gather the villagers and their torches and burn Frankensurance out.

Edit....I see the link now and they are not named.
edit on 12-7-2017 by RazorV66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz

But some doctors claim patients are being forced to choose assisted suicide over treating a CURABLE illness.

I dunno about that part. The medical establishment/"big pharma" isn't interested in curing diseases because every time they cure someone, they lose a paying customer. Treatment is where their bread is buttered, not cures. They like it when people have to come back to them for their smack again and again and again, like any good pusher.

But they also know a dead customer can't pay, and suicide is the ultimate cure.
edit on 7/12/17 by NthOther because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:17 PM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz

If true, it's a for profit industry, what do we expect the corps to do?

If there is a way to trim a little $$ from a certain risk pool, then it should be fully expected and the share holders will have big smiles next quarter.

Morally it is repugnant, but the majority of our system is repugnant. The evidence is right in front of our faces, look at other countries doing a better job with health care at a much better cost. Odd how our media hardly touches this topic.
edit on 12-7-2017 by seasonal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: RazorV66

My bad, added link to OP

Here's another reference




posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: rockintitz

But some doctors claim patients are being forced to choose assisted suicide over treating a CURABLE illness.

I dunno about that part. The medical establishment/"big pharma" isn't interested in curing diseases because every time they cure someone, they lose a paying customer. Treatment is where their bread is buttered, not cures. They like it when people have to come back to them for their smack again and again and again, like any good pusher.

But they also know a dead customer can't pay.


That's where the 50%-70% factors in. They're not guaranteed to keep a paying customer.

Their risk/reward analysis shows it's statistically better to just put them down.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz

This is why I laughed when conservatives were running around with the whole death panel scare during the ACA debates years ago.

It's like, haven't you guys been paying attention? Insurance companies have always been "death panels".



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

What I find repugnant is that you are paying the so-called health services to keep you healthy.

Would you trust a doctor that got paid the same salary, no matter if he killed you, or wasted time and money operating on you?



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: NthOther


But they also know a dead customer can't pay, and suicide is the ultimate cure.




A lot of times it is cheaper for the insurance companies to just not pay for the procedure, rather than paying, then hoping they can recoup their investment. As time goes on we will see this with government healthcare as well. When the money starts to run dry, expensive treatments will be forgone for cheaper ones, euthanasia being a primary option.
edit on 12-7-2017 by TruMcCarthy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Abysha


This is why I laughed when conservatives were running around with the whole death panel scare during the ACA debates years ago. 



It's already bad! Let's make it worse!

Tell me how the ACA fixed this. Keep in mind the ACA is stil in effect.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: rockintitz

A Nevada physician says insurance companies in states where assisted suicide is legal have refused to cover expensive, life-saving treatments for his patients but have offered to help them end their lives instead.

Brian Callister, associate professor of internal medicine at the University of Nevada, said he tried to transfer two patients to California and Oregon for procedures not performed at his hospital. Representatives from two different insurance companies denied those transfer requests by phone, he said.

“And in both cases, the insurance medical director said to me, ‘Brian, we’re not going to cover that procedure or the transfer, but would you consider assisted suicide?’ ” Dr. Callister told The Washington Times.

The phone calls took place last year within the span of a month, Dr. Callister said. He said he did nothing to prompt the suggestion in either case.

The patients were not terminal, but “would have become terminal without the procedures.”

“It was estimated that their chance for cure — cure, not just adding time — of about 50 percent in one case and 70 percent in the other case,” Dr. Callister said



Was unsure where to put this.

Insurance companies are advocating killing their patients over covering the cost of their treatment.

I have always been for the right for someone to choose to take their own life, I don't think it should be anyone else's decision.

But some doctors claim patients are being forced to choose assisted suicide over treating a CURABLE illness.

link


And what do you propose we do with it? Seriously?

Do we enact a law that states any decision of life or death can never be made financially? You don't think that would get corrupt with government officials overseeing it?

What is your solution?



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz

The only repercussions to malpractice is a law suit. And many repubs want tort reform so bad they can taste it.

The problem with tort reform of let's say $250,000 limit is that if harm is done to a patient, $250,000 is pee pee in the wind. Our medical system will chop up $250,000 and snort that before breakfast. Then the patient that was harmed by a Dr. has no $$$ guess who pays the bills?
TAXPAYERS.

Guess who is off the hook.
Dr's and insurance co's. TOrt reform protects bad Dr's and insurance co's.

Conservatives are all wet on tort reform. Idiots.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz

Knew that Snip was coming!



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

How about if you agree to pay for health insurance, they should provide you insurance to keep you healthy. Kind of implied under the moniker "health insurance"

Not, we'll keep you healthy, as long as it's cost effective. Otherwise just kill yourself with these now legal and approved treatments.
edit on 12-7-2017 by rockintitz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2017 @ 12:01 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal




The only repercussions to malpractice is a law suit. And many repubs want tort reform so bad they can taste it. 



Who's filing a malpractice suit after death? Thread drift/derail



posted on Jul, 13 2017 @ 12:15 AM
link   
How much does it pay to be on a death panel?
Hmmm.



posted on Jul, 13 2017 @ 03:04 AM
link   
Clear away the BS and follow the trails,big Pharm and the medical industry owned by same people,buisness is to make money,cures and long term illness,are not profitable,FDA,EPA all the same a Dupont engineering



posted on Jul, 13 2017 @ 03:53 AM
link   
The Titanic......WTC.......staged Celebrity Deaths...WCB Canada.....WCB anywhere.....Medical Insurers.....ALL insurance companies are a critical part of the fiat money laundering global conjob played on everyone by TPTB or the baddies who run this planet in underhanded ways unbeknownst to the masses.

The JOB of the employees working for these con-job pirates is TO NOT PAY YOU MONEY....and to turn a blind eye to anything which hurts or kills a claimant and also to encourage the most dangerous damaging painfull invasive diagnostic tests to discourage and further torture claimants.

Assisted suicide is a PLANNED ACTION...a method of social control.....of course Medical insurance companies will try to wait delay any payouts till you are dead...lol....W.C.B has been murdering thousands and thousands of claimants by proxy for generations and they have proffitted Trillions globally in that time doing so.
edit on 13-7-2017 by one4all because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2017 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz

family




top topics



 
12

log in

join