A Non Partisan Honest Conversation

Off-Topic Tavern
1

How about talking about a subject based on facts and real life impacts? I could care less why you vote one way or the other, but this is for people that can actually discuss the merits of a subject or policy. Pick any subject you like, but provide actual facts to support your position.

My first take - Health Care

I lost my dad 35 years ago to Kidney Cancer. Back then it was much more difficult to do research. I did anyway as I wanted to know independently if my father was terminally ill or there really was some hope. What I found was that Chemo was not an accepted treatment for Kidney Cancer, yet he was getting Chemo. When I questioned the doctor he said “most people like to feel there is hope”. When I suggested that there are real world impacts to what he was doing, he acted as if he didn’t care. He was promptly thrown over a cart in the hallway as I wanted to beat him into an ink spot. I explained that the Chemo was killing him quicker and he just shrugged. My father died three months shy of retirement and instead of my mother getting half his salary for life 120k, she got 389/mo.

I now have a friend who’s father has Kidney Cancer. I asked him if his father was taking Chemo and he said yes (still not knowing his father was terminal). They are still playing the same games with people selling services that have no chance of curing the patient.

2

Wait, are we supposed to be discussing a topic or giving anecdotes? No matter, my take on the over arching subject of healthcare jives with my recent anecdotes.

Big picture - Our healthcare system supports the world and its had one hell of a run. Fuck anyone who thinks we’d have half the shit we have now if America didn’t have the profit medical system it has. The amount of money thrown into some of the big medical and equipment advancements simply would have never happened. People bragging about how much cheaper their healthcare is, is like kids bragging about their cheap rent living in their parents pool house. Everybody can’t live cheap in the pool house, someone has to pay for the frickin big house its associated with.
That being said, I think we should be reaching a sunset in our system. The big flaw in our system is that its not profitable to “cure” things. Our breakthru’s in other areas have been incredible. But I think at this point, the best course of action is to cash in our chips and move to a universal system. The number of cured conditions have the potential to rise substantially.

Anecdote - My grandma and my favorite uncle died of cancer. I have no idea what type. I just found out this weekend that a girl I used to date in high school is being treated for cancer. Again, I have no idea what type. All I know is that whatever stage she is in, its not the kind where you get treatment and go straight home. She’s living in the hospital right now. One of my supervisors on a project is having surgery Thursday to remove a kidney, because of cancer. We had a meeting trying to figure out how to replace him. The head supervisor said he’d step in for a little bit, but he just found out that his cancer might have returned so he might have to step aside for a little while and take care of it. WTF?

3

Anyone who says that chemo is not for kidney cancer is insane. Chemo works quite well on many kidney tumors. The chemo of 35 years ago was a much more blunt instrument than what we have today.

One of the biggest things about healthcare that people miss today is that health doesn’t work like other types of business where “competition is good” and all the rest. K’zoo almost destroyed it’s healthcare that way when I was there back in the 80’s. The issue is that as tech and advancements increase, so do costs. You can’t compete your way out of that. So that’s a fundamental problem. Then you toss in process, which is another HUGE issue that didn’t exist before and it’s just layer upon layer of BS that kicks up cost.

I have to disagree with Wes on “cure”. If you “cure” someone, ultimately, they will get something else. Believe it or not, you’ll make far more keeping people alive and “healthy” to 100 than you will killing them off at 65 with cancer.

4

so you’re saying…“You didn’t build that”? :wink:

5

There is no question that the US for profit system has created some drugs and procedures that have helped, but it also has created drugs and procedures that have been abusive. The best way to look at HC is outcomes. In the US we have much worse outcomes in terms of cancer survival and many other diseases. While diet and overall health of the patient could be a factor as anyone who has traveled realizes that Americans are generally more overweight than other cultures in Europe. I would agree that regardless of the past the future should be a universal system and the focus should be shifted from a procedure driven reactionary system to a proactive keeping people healthy approach.

6

Chemotherapy may be recommended for patients diagnosed with renal sarcoma, which is an extremely rare form of kidney cancer.

This is what I found regarding Chemo for Kidney Cancer. My friend just questioned the doctors at Mayo and they came clean that it is not a preferred option, but this is being done as a last resort. Alternative cancer treatments are not paid by insurance, but Chemo as a hail mary is fine? Medical corruption for special interests, just business as usual.

7

And this is what you missed (from Wikipedia). See, this is what I mean about a lack of education. Like how you say gravity is “speed”. You cherry pick the most rare type and then complain about last grasp treatment? But as you asked, yes, it’s far more proper on a hail mary with something known to work than an “alternative treatment”. The “medical corruption” line is childish and silly as by definition you’re talking about the last grasp at life. Hardly corruption.

The main types of kidney cancer are renal cell cancer (RCC), transitional cell cancer (TCC), and Wilms tumor.[7] RCC makes up approximately 80% of kidney cancers, and TCC accounts for most of the rest.[8] Risk factors for RCC and TCC include smoking, certain pain medications, previous bladder cancer, being overweight, high blood pressure, certain chemicals, and a family history.[1][2] Risk factors for Wilms tumor include a family history and certain genetic disorders such as WAGR syndrome.[3] Diagnosis maybe suspected based on symptoms, urine testing, and medical imaging.[1][2][3] It is confirmed by tissue biopsy.[1][2][3]

Types[edit]

Micrograph of a kidney cancer (chromophobe renal cell carcinoma, oncocytic variant), that may be challenging to differentiate from a benign kidney tumour (renal oncocytoma). H&E stain.

Micrograph of papillary renal cell carcinoma, a form of kidney cancer. H&E stain.
In addition to renal cell carcinoma and renal pelvis carcinoma, other, less common types of kidney cancer include:
Squamous cell carcinoma
Juxtaglomerular cell tumor (reninoma)
Angiomyolipoma
Bellini duct carcinoma
Clear-cell sarcoma of the kidney
Mesoblastic nephroma
Wilms’ tumor, usually is reported in children under the age of 5.
Mixed epithelial stromal tumor[13]

Rarely, some other types of cancer and potentially cancerous tumors that more usually originate elsewhere can originate in the kidneys. These include:
Clear cell adenocarcinoma
Transitional cell carcinoma
Inverted papilloma
Renal lymphoma
Teratoma[14]
Carcinosarcoma[15]
Carcinoid tumor of the renal pelvis[16][quote=“JRLIONS, post:6, topic:1573, full:true”]
Chemotherapy may be recommended for patients diagnosed with renal sarcoma, which is an extremely rare form of kidney cancer.

This is what I found regarding Chemo for Kidney Cancer. My friend just questioned the doctors at Mayo and they came clean that it is not a preferred option, but this is being done as a last resort. Alternative cancer treatments are not paid by insurance, but Chemo as a hail mary is fine? Medical corruption for special interests, just business as usual.
[/quote]

8

I’m saying pretty much the opposite of that.

9

The US system “helped?” The medical universe is what it is today because of the US. The world needed what we brought to the table. However, I think things have advanced so far that we’ve finally reached the point where diminishing returns no longer meet the price of admission. We arrive at the same place, we just get there in different ways.

10

We certainly drove lots of new drugs and new procedures, but what we have found is that only some of them actually help more than they hurt. If you need a boner pill, yes we have the best. If you need to be told to lose weight, we shove 16 pills down your throat to offset symptoms of bigger problems. For every great medical miracle there is an unintended nightmare including our present Opioid Problem. I don’t think you are giving other countries their due in medical advancements as substantive ones are found throughout Europe.

11

Really? Such as? More BS. Which ones hurt more than help? We shove 16 pills down you for weight loss? Which 16?

Our present opiod problem is due to criminals, not pills.

You have no knowledge of this topic whatsoever, and your inability, as usual, to back up anything you say proves it.