Medical emergency: what to do?

[Doodazzle]

Thank you for clarifying things for me, perhaps amending the Attitude Page should be considered to make clear the appropriate justifications and circumstances by which disregard of respectful communication is advocated by the Nexus administrators and moderators.

I definitely agree with you on that.


Traveler please can you make it clear to the mods that they also need to obey the Attitude page otherwise there is not point to have one.

Thank you

Good luck with that....they can't even see it, it seems.

 

[obliguhl]

Also when it comes to this notion of "alternative medicine" take solace in the fact that even doctors are trying alternative medicine, they just use science to see if it actually works, there are numerous studies on the various alternative medicice. And when it does work, they don't call it alternative medicine anymore . . . they just call it medicine.

It isn't that simple, actually. I'll get to that in a later post, but biomedicine ignores a large spectrum of medical systems. Also, medical systems do not have to be science based to work.

That being said, i do not see a reason to advise for or against a certain method of healing.
You can go to a doctor and practice other methods of healing, they are not necessary mutually exclusive even though they can be (see SSRIs for instance).

The extreme focus of the nexus on biomedicine is a bit simplistic though.

 

[Jin]

Thank you for clarifying things for me, perhaps amending the Attitude Page should be considered to make clear the appropriate justifications and circumstances by which disregard of respectful communication is advocated by the Nexus administrators and moderators.

I definitely agree with you on that.


Traveler please can you make it clear to the mods that they also need to obey the Attitude page otherwise there is not point to have one.

Thank you

oh cmmon , stop derailing this thread with pettyness on your part
how petty are you willing to become ?

there is nothing written about pettyness at the attitude page so what do you think , is your pettyness currently in sync with the attitude page or what ?

also if its offensive to be a hippy then be happy :lol: :twisted:

, also remember many of us have not found anything offensive in what was written and are 100% backing this up , so what you have there is your opinion

it might be your opinion that what was written was offensive , but that is what it is your opinion , and only that nothing more

i have a different opinion and many share this opinion , so basiclly just with an opinion you cannot start pointing fingers ,

we need data people , we need proof , we cannot just believe opinion's
the mystery needs to be solved and facts are required on the table
there are opinions lying all over the place
and scrambled data has begun to show its shape
points are being connected to form the bigger picture
there are places being currently explored
the potential we have is just the tip of the iceberg
so let us continue our work and not derail from facts

 

[The Traveler]

The extreme focus of the nexus on biomedicine is a bit simplistic though.

obliguhl,

It is not the focus on biomedicine but the unproven medical advice that people are giving for serious illnesses that I don't want to see anymore. When someone has a serious disease we should not gamble with their life. We do not know this person, we do not know the medical history of this person and we certainly do not know what the best treatment will be.

When someone has a serious issue like having cancer, then we should never give any advice on how to treat that illness. We shouldn't even point them at the regular and known treatments since we simply do not know if they will work in their situation.


And about the focus on modern medicine:

As a1pha pointed out, when something is found to be able to work without serious side effects then the medical world embraces it too, like chiropractic work and acupuncture. Even if something only works by the act of placebo then it can still be used too to cure relative light diseases. However, when there is a more serious disease that cannot be cured by placebo alone then more serious treatments (and often medicine) have to step in.

Modern medicine are only allowed after thorough clinical trials, where medicine are being tested if they actually work and what their side effects will be. If a new medicine or treatment works without having serious side effects then it is allowed to practice.

If we do not have this mechanism then we are back to the middle ages and snake oil. Anyone can state "this will work to cure cancer and aids" and gullible and desperate people will fall for it and there will be unneeded and painful deaths.

Of course there will always be rotten apples, where doctors will lazily prescribe certain medicine that are actually too heavy and unneeded. But that is another issue than what I am talking about. I am talking about unproven treatments that are proposed as real alternatives for serious diseases and are therefor taking away the chances of a successful treatment.

I also agree that modern medicine and treatment is seriously lacking in certain fields but that does not mean that unproven alternatives are by default working better.

Instead of unconditionally promoting alternative treatments people should work on researching those unproven treatments with clinical trails to see if they actually work at all and if so, that they work better than the current treatments. Yes it is VERY costly, yes it is VERY time consuming but at least it is better than promoting anything just because it sounds good.


Kind regards,

The Traveler

 

[Psychelectric]

Also when it comes to this notion of "alternative medicine" take solace in the fact that even doctors are trying alternative medicine, they just use science to see if it actually works, there are numerous studies on the various alternative medicice. And when it does work, they don't call it alternative medicine anymore . . . they just call it medicine.

It isn't that simple, actually. I'll get to that in a later post, but biomedicine ignores a large spectrum of medical systems. Also, medical systems do not have to be science based to work.

That being said, i do not see a reason to advise for or against a certain method of healing.
You can go to a doctor and practice other methods of healing, they are not necessary mutually exclusive even though they can be (see SSRIs for instance).

The extreme focus of the nexus on biomedicine is a bit simplistic though.

"Biomedicine ignores a large spectrum of medical systems."

"Biomedicine", I'm not really sure what that means, it sounds rather cryptic to me. Like a made up arbirtrary distinction. Medicine is concerned with the pathologies that ail the human body and sometimes the psyche, which is a construct of the brain. They look at enzymes tissues electrolytes, blood pressure, ect. Please distinguish between what you call "biomedicince" and medicine. It's hard for me to interpret what you mean. Medicine is a feild regarding the study and treatment of biological pathologies of the human body. I wouldn't make it out to be anything more. If you are refering to "spiritual healing" or psychiatric medicince to differentiate between fixing the human body itself that's a fair distinction but it's not so simple as to seperate the psyche from the body, such as the case with how nuerotransmitters interact in the body. Just like the heart can have irregularities in electroconduction, the brain, being an organ itself can have abnormalities as well. Though I'm not sure what you mean, so I kind of have to infer.


"That being said, i do not see a reason to advise for or against a certain method of healing."

I do. Because if you advise against certain medication's or "methods of healing" you can kill people. I've seen it. If you advise for certain medications you can kill people. If you don't understand most of the nuances to how the human body actually works you can cause serious harm. People overdose on vitamins for God sake. People who are not trained medical professionals shouldn't be giving medical advice period, they do not understand how the human body works. They don't understand it. Yes we all have a human body, but that doesn't make one an expert on it. There is a reason doctors spend so much time studying the body, and we still don't know everything. They are the most qualified to address the ailments of the body. If you are not getting your advise from a trained medical professional that would be like talking to someone who merely drives a car without any real knowledge of how it works over talking to an automotive engineer. Quite frankly it's just stupid. I understand people can be jaded by the medical industry, fuck-ups do happen, we are all human beings, but doctors know what they're doing. If they get to a point where they don't, they lose their liscence. Even the bad doctors know more than the non-doctors when it comes to the body.

"You can go to a doctor and practice other methods of healing, they are not necessary mutually exclusive even though they can be (see SSRIs for instance)."

If you are talking about psychiatric medicine I do have some problems with how the feild is handled, there is a lot of focus on drug pushing rather than true behavioral therapies, but that problem is not really the fault of the doctors it's largely a cultural problem. That's because American's and the Western world seems to have a knack for "quick fixes" that's why we (as a culture) obsess with fast food and getting things quick. It's a sad biproduct of this culture and when it comes to some (not all) psychiatric issues it can be a hinderence, but lets face it the people who are more qualified with behavior techniques in psychiatric medicine are psychologists, not psychiatrists. Usually they work side by side with treatment plans, but a lot of times it's a game of pill trying. And many medications especially in the psychiatric feild have some messed up side effects. The issue with behavioral type therapies is that they take time, a lot of time. And in a quick fix society most people don't go for that,they go for the pills.

"The extreme focus on the nexus on biomedicine is a bit simplistic"

Yeah, but come on, that makes sense. Not everyone is a doctor, or even a nurse. Most people don't understand how the body works. Though I have come across a doctor on this site who is very knowledgable about the human body.

Though you really need to clarify your terms, what is this "biomedicine"? Playing a semantics game by making different lables for terms doesn't change what you are actually talking about, just your perception about what you are talking about. Medicine is the study and understanding of pathologies and treatments for the pathologies that ail the human body, psyche included. That's it. Also you have to rememeber that medicine is not perfect, there is a lot of progress that can be made. Back in the day we use to cut people and bleed them out to cure them, we used to put hot cups on people to take out the evil spirits. Hell we cure people with placebos and that's not a joke, a placebo is a powerful medicine. And if you want to talk about psychedelics utilized as medicine, they certainly are very strong medicine and can be useful, however in the medicial profession they are not utilized because they are illegal, though some drugs are studied. Maybe we we legalize drugs then we will expland on the phramacopia that we use to treat people in medicine, but until then, the shamanic style medicine used with psychedelics will be an underground practice. Hell I get pissed off every time I study iboga, given it's power to help people with addictions. It's a great very powerful medicine and it's illegal, and that is sad to me. But I think in the future, doctors will brave studying these tools and pharm companies will wise up to there potential and we will live in a better society, but alas that time is not now, but somewhere in our distant future.

So it really is that simple, when alternative medicine gets utilized it will become medicine. Though in a way you are right, it is a bit more complicated, as there are some hinderences involved.

I hope I addressed what you were trying to articulate. It was hard to really understand because I wasn't sure of what distinctions you were trying to make, but either way. That's what I got.

 

[Bill Cipher]

Thank you for clarifying things for me, perhaps amending the Attitude Page should be considered to make clear the appropriate justifications and circumstances by which disregard of respectful communication is advocated by the Nexus administrators and moderators.

I definitely agree with you on that.


Traveler please can you make it clear to the mods that they also need to obey the Attitude page otherwise there is not point to have one.

Thank you

Good luck with that....they can't even see it, it seems.

For all of you still confused as to the official position here, let this entire exchange serve as clarification:

Dispensing alternative medical advice to those with serious conditions will not be tolerated - EVER - nor will steering people away from doctor prescribed treatment plans.

If you find this to be too strict, or rigid, or censoring, or whatever... Please, by all means, move along and find a more tolerant web forum. If you find me rude and less than nurturing, save your whining for your mommies. Our gracious host owes you no justifications. No round robin debate is necessary. It's his house, his rules, and he's the only one who gets to make em.

And just so we're perfectly clear: The Next dope to chime in with some down with authority, I refuse to be stifled bullshit wins the Uncle Knucles banned me for a month prize.

 

[FiorSirtheoir]

Oh rest assured I wasn't insulted directly by the pretensions displayed that instigated my comments to begin with, just simply pointing out the obvious. After seeing this I want no part of this house. I never gave medical advice, I never claimed to practice 'hocus pocus', I wasn't crying to my mommy, I simply pointed out an unnecessary rudeness and gave a small portion of my conclusions deducted from observation and research, BUT unfortunately it differs from the opinions of the autocracy.

Really Traveler, so disappointing...

 

[smokerx]

oh cmmon , stop derailing this thread with pettyness on your part
how petty are you willing to become ?

there is nothing written about pettyness at the attitude page so what do you think , is your pettyness currently in sync with the attitude page or what ?

also if its offensive to be a hippy then be happy :lol: :twisted:

Dear Jin I am sorry you did not understand me. I am not offended at all. And I am not hippy neither. I am just an ordinary christian human being who joined this forum and staid here and obey the rules. These rules are here for everyone as far as I understand it. So I was only expressing my disappointment of Arts and alphas comments that were definitely not in line of attitude of this forum. For that they should apologize not to me but to this community.

Just because they are modes that really does not mean they can be disrespectful to other members of this community.

So Jin as you can see it is not my ego problem. Hope you understand it now.

 

[Bill Cipher]

Oh rest assured I wasn't insulted directly by the pretensions displayed that instigated my comments to begin with, just simply pointing out the obvious. After seeing this I want no part of this house.

Ask and ye shall receive.

So I was only expressing my disappointment of Arts and alphas comments that were definitely not in line of attitude of this forum. For that they should apologize not to me but to this community.

That ain't gonna happen.

 

[jamie]

you and alpha both come off sounding harsh often and rude towards other members. Just saying..The rules are the rules but how you come off is going to change how people respond. Instead of calling people hippies sputing off new bs etc you might try address them differently..you might be better recieved.

 

[a1pha]

Thanks jamie. Think we can get this thread back on topic?

The topic is medical emergencies, not mod behavior. Feel free to start a new one if necessary.

 

[Amygdala]

Terrible outcomes may result from the best intentions of giving medical advice to strangers via the internet, whether the advice falls under the medical model or alternatives.

It is impossible to accurately assess someone over a phone or the internet, which is exactly why when we take call, we can only recommend going to the ER for problems. One person's persistent cough may be a cold, another person's exact same symptom could be congestive heart failure... its just dangerous, even when we mean well.

Regarding 'western' medical models vs alternatives, each have their place. Despite the numerous faults of the medical model, as discussed in this thread, it is standing on a long history of evidence based practice and refinement of those practices.

I remember before I started working in medicine, I was in the ER and they wheeled this kid in on a stretcher who spoke no english and was covered in these large red welts. The RN's and docs couldn't pinpoint what the hell these red circles everywhere were. Having not much else to do while the drugs kicked in, I watched the story progress as the translator arrived. The kid had fractured his arm several weeks ago, and saw a traditional chinese medicine healer type. The healer decided that he kid's energy fields were wrong (something to this effect) and had the kid covered in leeches for several weeks while his arm meanwhile started to fuse into place and become horribly edematous and inflamed. A simple immobilization was all the kid needed, now he was up a creek.

The point of this story is not to dish dirt on alternative medicine practices, it is just to realize that while they have their place, if you are seriously injured, pretty please, go to a hospital.

 

[John Smith]

Psychelectric, allow me to clarify my point, it is not my intention to imply you are a zealot of the medical industry, if you think you are, well you know yourself better than I.

I think it would be advantageous to contemplate and draw a distinction between the practice of medicine and the medical industry; individual passion and corporate mentality. It would be naive of us to not consider the distinctions and the realities of what is, on both sides of the coin. Critical realism is a beautiful thing and a keystone of entheogens, or so it appears:| .

Edit: SpartanII hit the nail on the head.

I think seperating the idea of "practice of medicine" and "corporate menatlity" is obfuscating your ability to see how the system and the implimentation of medicine works. Yes corporations can do bad things, such as I gave the example as to how the pharmacy industry spiked the rise in opiate and heroin addiction with their promotion of Oxycotin. I have studied for years how the industry works, both in my spare time and at school. And I work in the industry. There are many wrongs, but those wrongs should be addressed individually. Any notion of "down with the corporations" is just spewing rhetorical nonsense. You have to address the issues individually and not just spout phrases like "corporate menatlity", state the problem that is going on and then come up with solutions to address a specific problem.

I have experienced a positive correlation between "practice of medicine" and "corporate mentality" myself. One doesn't go without another. Especially with medical insurance policies. I've had instances where during an appointment I would mention a specific drug(I like to do a thorough research before being prescribed) and present my doc with a pile of printed research papers on efficacy of a certain drug(and no, it wasn't medical cannabis, nor it was a euphoric substance) and he would agree that my arguments were sound, only to reschedule the appointment because he would have to consult his boss first. Then due to the fact that even though the research results were solid, but it was an off-label use (apparently off-label use is really a big deal in Canada, even though a 1/4-1/3 of drugs are being prescribed off-use in US) his boss wouldn't allow it for some(insurance?) reasons, and I ended up basically having to order it on-line from shady sources. So yeah, I think politics of corporations policies play a big role between a distinction of "practice of medicine" and "corporate mentalilty".

 

[Psychelectric]

Psychelectric, allow me to clarify my point, it is not my intention to imply you are a zealot of the medical industry, if you think you are, well you know yourself better than I.

I think it would be advantageous to contemplate and draw a distinction between the practice of medicine and the medical industry; individual passion and corporate mentality. It would be naive of us to not consider the distinctions and the realities of what is, on both sides of the coin. Critical realism is a beautiful thing and a keystone of entheogens, or so it appears:| .

Edit: SpartanII hit the nail on the head.

I think seperating the idea of "practice of medicine" and "corporate menatlity" is obfuscating your ability to see how the system and the implimentation of medicine works. Yes corporations can do bad things, such as I gave the example as to how the pharmacy industry spiked the rise in opiate and heroin addiction with their promotion of Oxycotin. I have studied for years how the industry works, both in my spare time and at school. And I work in the industry. There are many wrongs, but those wrongs should be addressed individually. Any notion of "down with the corporations" is just spewing rhetorical nonsense. You have to address the issues individually and not just spout phrases like "corporate menatlity", state the problem that is going on and then come up with solutions to address a specific problem.

I have experienced a positive correlation between "practice of medicine" and "corporate mentality" myself. One doesn't go without another. Especially with medical insurance policies. I've had instances where during an appointment I would mention a specific drug(I like to do a thorough research before being prescribed) and present my doc with a pile of printed research papers on efficacy of a certain drug(and no, it wasn't medical cannabis, nor it was a euphoric substance) and he would agree that my arguments were sound, only to reschedule the appointment because he would have to consult his boss first. Then due to the fact that even though the research results were solid, but it was an off-label use (apparently off-label use is really a big deal in Canada, even though a 1/4-1/3 of drugs are being prescribed off-use in US) his boss wouldn't allow it for some(insurance?) reasons, and I ended up basically having to order it on-line from shady sources. So yeah, I think politics of corporations policies play a big role between a distinction of "practice of medicine" and "corporate mentalilty".

I might could have articulated myself better, but one of my points on that issue was regarding specificity. If there is a particular issue with the corporate model that is bad, address the specific issue, instead of just say hollow phrases like "down with the corporations" or that type of rhetoical stance. Because corporations do do some good too. My point was that instead of using lofty rhetoric to to try to make a point, discuss specific issues. Which is what you did.

Drug coverage under the insurance model can be very bad indeed, I have had to jump through numerous loopholes and paperwork to get my patients the treatments they needed. It's a tricky game navigating that beauracracy and it's said that the laws don't let healthcare be more streamlined. My original point wasn't aimed at how people pay for their healthcare, but the healthcare itself.

On that side of things insurance in general is a scam, it always has been, it always will be. The problem is that we don't have a model where out-of-pocket costs work very well so insurance companies have taken over how people pay for their healthcare. So in that regard you are absolutely right, insurance companies have fucked up how people get treatment. I know numerous doctors and nurses who "bend the rules" just to get patients specific treatments.

I'm glad you brought up the issue of insurance companies, in all honest my thoughts were going towards treatment itself rather than how it's paid for. That's definately a legit critisism of the coporate healthcare insurance model and it truly is a tragedy.

Though even with all of that, regarding specific treatment plans, if the insurance company doesn't pay for something (at least in the US), people who can afford a particular treatment simply pay out of pocket.

 

[Jin]

I remember before I started working in medicine, I was in the ER and they wheeled this kid in on a stretcher who spoke no english and was covered in these large red welts. The RN's and docs couldn't pinpoint what the hell these red circles everywhere were. Having not much else to do while the drugs kicked in, I watched the story progress as the translator arrived. The kid had fractured his arm several weeks ago, and saw a traditional chinese medicine healer type. The healer decided that he kid's energy fields were wrong (something to this effect) and had the kid covered in leeches for several weeks while his arm meanwhile started to fuse into place and become horribly edematous and inflamed. A simple immobilization was all the kid needed, now he was up a creek.

The point of this story is not to dish dirt on alternative medicine practices, it is just to realize that while they have their place, if you are seriously injured, pretty please, go to a hospital.

well this exactly describes the point many are making here , its important to look at alternatives , yet before all that a visit to your Doc can literally save your life ,

thanks Amygdala for bringing the thread back on track

please people lets keep this on track , ( all the other trivial issue's can be solved easily in time )

 

[John Smith]

I might could have articulated myself better, but one of my points on that issue was regarding specificity. If there is a particular issue with the corporate model that is bad, address the specific issue, instead of just say hollow phrases like "down with the corporations" or that type of rhetoical stance. Because corporations do do some good too. My point was that instead of using lofty rhetoric to to try to make a point, discuss specific issues. Which is what you did.

Drug coverage under the insurance model can be very bad indeed, I have had to jump through numerous loopholes and paperwork to get my patients the treatments they needed. It's a tricky game navigating that beauracracy and it's said that the laws don't let healthcare be more streamlined. My original point wasn't aimed at how people pay for their healthcare, but the healthcare itself.

On that side of things insurance in general is a scam, it always has been, it always will be. The problem is that we don't have a model where out-of-pocket costs work very well so insurance companies have taken over how people pay for their healthcare. So in that regard you are absolutely right, insurance companies have fucked up how people get treatment. I know numerous doctors and nurses who "bend the rules" just to get patients specific treatments.

I'm glad you brought up the issue of insurance companies, in all honest my thoughts were going towards treatment itself rather than how it's paid for. That's definately a legit critisism of the coporate healthcare insurance model and it truly is a tragedy.

Though even with all of that, regarding specific treatment plans, if the insurance company doesn't pay for something (at least in the US), people who can afford a particular treatment simply pay out of pocket.

Well you see, here is where our opinions differ. You studied one thing(medicine) I studied another(one of my majors in mathematics was actuarial science). I can assure you that there goes nothing but cold hard math into these policies. Linear algebra, calculus, applied probability and statistics. Just as you mention that doctors study their lives off to understand human bodies in one of your above posts, actuaries study mathematical models of insurance and how to apply them to policies in real life too. Professional actuarial exams are no joke, and they also basically require them to have no life and utter dedication to mathematics. Further, base policy-makers are nothing more than spreadsheet/SAS "plug-inners" that basically fit complex computations for them, and can be easily checked for scam if they were needed to.

How it gets convoluted so much when being mixed together(acturial science&medicine) nobody really knows, besides high level officials that deal with those things directly. Things get complicated so much at higher levels that it's really hard to tell a conspiracy from the truth.

Besides trivial examples of using "Chakra Cleansing" to heal an obvious physical trauma, what about non-FDA approved drugs to cure certain conditions that are off-label but have quite a bit of research behind them ? Would I banned for suggesting a "woo" because FDA did not approve a certain drug yet, but maybe numerous European countries did beforehand ? There a certain amount of grayzone that is hard to distinguish IMO.

 

[Psychelectric]

On that side of things insurance in general is a scam, it always has been, it always will be.


Well you see, here is where our opinions differ. You studied one thing(medicine) I studied another(one of my majors in mathematics was actuarial science). I can assure you that there goes nothing but cold hard math into these policies. Linear algebra, calculus, applied probability and statistics. Just as you mention that doctors study their lives off to understand human bodies in one of your above posts, actuaries study mathematical models of insurance and how to apply them to policies in real life too. Professional actuarial exams are no joke, and they also basically require them to have no life and utter dedication to mathematics. Further, base policy-makers are nothing more than spreadsheet/SAS "plug-inners" that basically fit complex computations for them, and can be easily checked for scam if they were needed to.

How it gets convoluted so much when being mixed together(acturial science&medicine) nobody really knows, besides high level officials that deal with those things directly. Things get complicated so much at higher levels that it's really hard to tell a conspiracy from the truth.

Besides trivial examples of using "Chakra Cleansing" to heal an obvious physical trauma, what about non-FDA approved drugs to cure certain conditions that are off-label but have quite a bit of research behind them ? Would I banned for suggesting a "woo" because FDA did not approve a certain drug yet, but maybe numerous European countries did beforehand ? There a certain amount of grayzone that is hard to distinguish IMO.

I think I misunderstand you. Are you trying to say that because insurance companies use higher level mathematics that they can't be a scam? You did bold my scam comment. Maybe you don't like the term, but some of the best scams in the world use high levels of math and stats. Im not talking about a back alley shell game. Either way.

The reason those companies are a scam is rather simple, they have employees and advertising costs they have to pay, which means that they have to take money out of the insurance pool to pay themselves and their other costs which means the clients lose a percentage of the money they put it. It really is that simple and a you don't need calculus to figure that out. Maybe you don't like the term "scam", but that would just be a semantics argument and those kinds of discussions are useless.

Also as to your last paragraph, I have no idea of what you are talking about with chakra medicine to heal obvious trauma and the point youre trying to make. As well as your questions its hard to get what your point is. Likewise I do agree that treatment coverage under insurance plans with their corporate model can cause some problems. Also doctors use meds for off label use all of the time where I'm at, sometimes they have to fill out a special form or sometimes patients pay out of pocket, but they can still get treatment. I understand the gray zone, trust me, I deal with insurance companies everyday trying to get treatment plans to work. Likewise I was premed before I became a nurse so have have taken higher level calculus and even business cal. I do understand a lot if how this works, though there are gaps in my knowledge.

Also let me be very clear. I do agree that there is a certain amount of gray zone when you mix insurance policies and how it impacts medicine. I agreed with that in my last post.

 

[John Smith]

On that side of things insurance in general is a scam, it always has been, it always will be.


Well you see, here is where our opinions differ. You studied one thing(medicine) I studied another(one of my majors in mathematics was actuarial science). I can assure you that there goes nothing but cold hard math into these policies. Linear algebra, calculus, applied probability and statistics. Just as you mention that doctors study their lives off to understand human bodies in one of your above posts, actuaries study mathematical models of insurance and how to apply them to policies in real life too. Professional actuarial exams are no joke, and they also basically require them to have no life and utter dedication to mathematics. Further, base policy-makers are nothing more than spreadsheet/SAS "plug-inners" that basically fit complex computations for them, and can be easily checked for scam if they were needed to.

How it gets convoluted so much when being mixed together(acturial science&medicine) nobody really knows, besides high level officials that deal with those things directly. Things get complicated so much at higher levels that it's really hard to tell a conspiracy from the truth.

Besides trivial examples of using "Chakra Cleansing" to heal an obvious physical trauma, what about non-FDA approved drugs to cure certain conditions that are off-label but have quite a bit of research behind them ? Would I banned for suggesting a "woo" because FDA did not approve a certain drug yet, but maybe numerous European countries did beforehand ? There a certain amount of grayzone that is hard to distinguish IMO.

I think I misunderstand you. Are you trying to say that because insurance companies use higher level mathematics that they can't be a scam? You did bold my scam comment. Maybe you don't like the term, but some of the best scams in the world use high levels of math and stats. Im not talking about a back alley shell game. Either way.

The reason those companies are a scam is rather simple, they have employees and advertising costs they have to pay, which means that they have to take money out of the insurance pool to pay themselves and their other costs which means the clients lose a percentage of the money they put it. It really is that simple and a you don't need calculus to figure that out. Maybe you don't like the term "scam", but that would just be a semantics argument and those kinds of discussions are useless.

Also as to your last paragraph, I have no idea of what you are talking about with chakra medicine to heal obvious trauma and the point youre trying to make. As well as your questions its hard to get what your point is. Likewise I do agree that treatment coverage under insurance plans with their corporate model can cause some problems. Also doctors use meds for off label use all of the time where I'm at, sometimes they have to fill out a special form or sometimes patients pay out of pocket, but they can still get treatment. I understand the gray zone, trust me, I deal with insurance companies everyday trying to get treatment plans to work. Likewise I was premed before I became a nurse so have have taken higher level calculus and even business cal. I do understand a lot if how this works, though there are gaps in my knowledge.

I still don't get how you misunderstand me. These people dedicate a huge chunk of their lives so that they can be employed in a very rigorous field of mathematics that is actuarial field. Am I questioning that doctors charge you so much for an hour of you time ? Both are professionals and both deserve being payed more than a forklift operator. Yeah one of basics you learn in the freshman years is that you calculate how to charge α*policy for some 0<α<1 to make up for employee cost. Don't really see anything wrong with that.

Judging which field is scam from a low level perspective is quite judgemental and I all I did was present you what it's like from my point of view(that is other side) in which I was as much educated as you were in medical field. Unless you're a high level boss that works in and know exactly how medical&actuarial field interesects, then perhaps you know a lot more than I do. Until then I still don't understand you point.

All I did was present you with other side of the information that you have presented and questioned your reasoning, which leaned towards bias in your field, without claiming utmost knowledge in areas which were absolute(ie medicine is good insurance is bad). Not that I think one or another but certainly there's a huge grey area that can't be reduced by simple reasoning.

 

[universecannon]

you and alpha both come off sounding harsh often and rude towards other members. Just saying..The rules are the rules but how you come off is going to change how people respond. Instead of calling people hippies sputing off new bs etc you might try address them differently..you might be better recieved.

i agree, and definitely think this is relevant to how this thread and others have unfolded

 

[The Traveler]

you and alpha both come off sounding harsh often and rude towards other members. Just saying..The rules are the rules but how you come off is going to change how people respond. Instead of calling people hippies sputing off new bs etc you might try address them differently..you might be better recieved.

i agree, and definitely think this is relevant to how this thread and others have unfolded

I agree too and therefor that discussion is already continued in the moderators section in a very serious tone.

I would like to ask people to keep this thread about medical emergencies and how to handle them and not to put more oil on this fire.


Kind regards,

The Traveler