UHC CEO Gunned Down in Midtown Manhattan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a jail house hottie

Him being attractive and well educated is doing him a lot of favors in the court of public opinion.

And young
And tall
And well read (but mostly newer books out, not classics).

Don’t forget rich. None of his peers have came out and can come up with a negative thing to say about him either and from the outside seems perfectly nice. He would be a perfect boyfriend to the Gen Z girls if he wasn’t a killer.

His peers are saying nice things about him because he was a nice, smart young man.

Something happened after that.

He went through a period of growth, journey, and dislocation; a transformation, whether for good or bad. Lots of people go through this type of transformation and convert, become activists, and commit to a different path. Most of them do not tip over into violence, let alone cold-blooded murder. Whether some kind of mental illness made that additional step possible, I don't know. He may have come to view the CEO as simply one-dimensional, similar to a character in a video game or in a movie, or as a collection of numbers (salary, number of denials, etc.) tied to a position, but not the living and breathing person. In some ways, this is similar to what UHC leadership does, as well as its staff: insurance participants are just a collection of numbers (age, premium, coverage limits, costs, medical codes, etc.). UHC staff and leadership make decisions about who lives and dies, too. They just don't pull the trigger.

And you know, that post about Governor Shapiro writing messages on those bombs has really stayed with me.

Anyway, Luigi murdered a man. He will do his time. There is no way he won't go to prison.

I can actually think of scenarios where he doesn’t go to prison. Jury nullification is one of them. Good luck finding 12 jurors to convict a handsome, educated, young guy who in the eyes of millions is a “modern day Robin Hood.” Fwiw, I don’t agree with that, I’m just stating what I am seeing online, including in comments under articles from reputable newspapers, leaning both left and right. Next to no sympathy for BT and massive amount of support for LM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And the United Healthcare parent co CEO writes an NYT op ed that says nothing. Did he use the free version of ChatGPT?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/13/opinion/united-health-care-brian-thompson-luigi-mangione.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

He lost me at his opening statement about the tremendous “outpouring of support for Brian Thompson and their company too.” What support?! Even I, a 1%er who is happy with her UHC insurance plan and is surrounded by other 1%ers cannot think of three people who feel any fondness for UHC or its leadership. The comments under this article are savage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a jail house hottie

Him being attractive and well educated is doing him a lot of favors in the court of public opinion.

And young
And tall
And well read (but mostly newer books out, not classics).

Don’t forget rich. None of his peers have came out and can come up with a negative thing to say about him either and from the outside seems perfectly nice. He would be a perfect boyfriend to the Gen Z girls if he wasn’t a killer.

His peers are saying nice things about him because he was a nice, smart young man.

Something happened after that.

He went through a period of growth, journey, and dislocation; a transformation, whether for good or bad. Lots of people go through this type of transformation and convert, become activists, and commit to a different path. Most of them do not tip over into violence, let alone cold-blooded murder. Whether some kind of mental illness made that additional step possible, I don't know. He may have come to view the CEO as simply one-dimensional, similar to a character in a video game or in a movie, or as a collection of numbers (salary, number of denials, etc.) tied to a position, but not the living and breathing person. In some ways, this is similar to what UHC leadership does, as well as its staff: insurance participants are just a collection of numbers (age, premium, coverage limits, costs, medical codes, etc.). UHC staff and leadership make decisions about who lives and dies, too. They just don't pull the trigger.

And you know, that post about Governor Shapiro writing messages on those bombs has really stayed with me.

Anyway, Luigi murdered a man. He will do his time. There is no way he won't go to prison.

I can actually think of scenarios where he doesn’t go to prison. Jury nullification is one of them. Good luck finding 12 jurors to convict a handsome, educated, young guy who in the eyes of millions is a “modern day Robin Hood.” Fwiw, I don’t agree with that, I’m just stating what I am seeing online, including in comments under articles from reputable newspapers, leaning both left and right. Next to no sympathy for BT and massive amount of support for LM.

Not everyone thinks he’s handsome nor is he robbing the rich to give to the poor. Stop romanticizing a cold-blooded, cowardly killer. He’ll be found guilty and spend the rest of his life in prison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the United Healthcare parent co CEO writes an NYT op ed that says nothing. Did he use the free version of ChatGPT?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/13/opinion/united-health-care-brian-thompson-luigi-mangione.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

He lost me at his opening statement about the tremendous “outpouring of support for Brian Thompson and their company too.” What support?! Even I, a 1%er who is happy with her UHC insurance plan and is surrounded by other 1%ers cannot think of three people who feel any fondness for UHC or its leadership. The comments under this article are savage.

In his memo to employees, he claimed that he's getting condolence calls from condolence calls from UHC policyholders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone read the CNN article about health insurance denials? On a personal level, they are all terrible stories … but on an economic/policy level, I’m not so sure.

The 70 year old woman from Worcester complains that she pays hundreds of dollars a month but her insurer would not cover more than 6 weeks in a post-acute rehab center after her surgery, although it appears that center cost about 5K a week…..the economics just don’t add up. Most elderly people will have multiple health issues and surgeries are not uncommon. If the insurer is charging hundreds in premiums, yet paying out tens of thousands in provider charges, how can this make sense? It used to be that these large costs were rare so the premiums paid by healthy people covered the costs of the unlucky, but now it seems like almost everyone has some health condition or needs a surgery to improve quality of life. Post-acute in patient care is great but that wasn’t even really a thing 20-30 years ago—you just had to have family that would stay with you to help you post-surgery.

And the young girl with cancer probably picked a cheaper plan with a higher co-pay, figuring she was young and healthy. Should insurance companies not be permitted to offer those types of plans? I really don’t know. The problem is that most health care consumers don’t really adequately assess their potential risks and everyone is operating with insufficient information about what their health needs might be, and what things actually cost.

As far as the paramedic and his MRI….that seems ridiculous and he probably has a good appeal.


https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/12/business/us-health-care-insurance-frustrations/index.html

5% of the population accounts for 50% of healthcare spending. There are a lot of people like me who rarely visit doctors and have no prescriptions. I do screenings, blood work, etc., as recommended, but I'm a healthy 47 yo F who pays about $5K a year in premiums.

Are we talking about the same 5% of people year after year? If not, I'm not sure this is particularly helpful information; it just means that in a given year, 5% of the population gets really sick.

It seems like a small share of the US population have long-term illnesses that require expensive treatment, and those people should definitely get all the help they need. But a good chunk of the expensive patients are just people who like to get the latest tests and treatments for every small health issue, expecting miracles and without doing any of the hard work it takes to stay healthy. For example, for most (not all) people, exercise will resolve back pain, but some people refuse to exercise and just want $$$ surgeries and painkillers. I know someone who goes to the ER (or takes her kids there) many times each year, because she has untreated anxiety and refuses to see a therapist or take anxiety meds. And before you tell me I'm lucky that I'm not seriously ill -- I have a chronic condition that I manage cheaply with drastic changes in diet and exercise, while I know some people spending tens of thousands on medication that allows them to live symptom-free without any adjustment to their diet or exercise. I'm not immortal and I'm sure some day I'll need some expensive round of cancer treatment, but getting expensive treatments when absolutely necessary in old age is not the same as expecting them as a routine matter starting in childhood.

Why should one group "definitely" get expensive on going treatment and another be denied some tests?

In order to ensure a baseline of health for the whole population. If you want every headache test to be paid for, at the expense of not having money left for cancer treatments, you will end up with a society where minor conditions are over treated and life-threatening ones are fatal.

Tell us which age group sucks up most of the resources and how that benefits the whole population.

Excellent equation. And one I think we know the answer too.

End of life
Chronically ill and disabled
Illegal immigrants

Yeah, why shouldn’t insurance companies just become money printing machines?

Something is a gatekeeper either way.

And the PpP still answers the question: the largest segments sucking down resources are end of life, chronically ill/disabled, and illegal immigrant.

All three cohorts pay in zero to the system (illegal aliens) or usually premiums yet are vastly net users .

Good luck getting an anesthesiologist if they’re all tied up. Rationing happens every single day.

Zero?! Really? Illegal immigrants farm the land, raise your babies and clean your toilets, all of which are jobs lazy Americans find beneath them and would never do. I would not call this zero contribution.

Healthcare should be a universal right and free, the way it is in the rest of the developed world.

Zero in to the insurance, welfare, medicaid, hospital system? Yes, it’s zero.

That’s what happens when you country hop to USA and go into labor, use the hospitals, have an anchor baby on welfare, etc. You paid in zero to the system, and took out lots.

Same thing for public education. Arrive and start using.

how are illegal immigrants collecting welfare. Please explain this to me. (Hint, the only place this happens is in your imagination and on Fox News.)

You are in fantasyland. They use the ER by lying about their name and address. They apply for welfare benefits using false social security cards. Schools now provide free breakfast and lunch for all kids, rather than exclude illegal immigrants. They have babies who collect benefits, etc.

Look at this list of "noncitizen" exceptions who can receive SNAP in Maryland: Some people who are not U.S. citizens are not eligible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). There are exceptions for refugees, asylees, immigrants whose deportation has been withheld, Cuban/Haitian entrants, Amerasians and some immigrants legally admitted for permanent residence, parolees, aliens granted conditional entry, and certain battered spouses and children. Border Crossing Native Americans, certain Iraqi and afghan immigrants, victims of human trafficking and Hmong or Laotian tribe members may also be eligible. Even if some members of your household are not eligible, those who are may be able to get food supplement benefits.

And please don't try to argue that asylum seekers are legal. Basically every person who crosses the border claims asylum, and the Biden administration has tried to "parole" as many people as possible during their administration.

The point of the PP above is that you cannot provide extension health, education and welfare benefits and then have an unending stream of immigrants coming to collect them. The math already doesn't work because even Americans draw out much more than they paid into Social Security and Medicare.

So you would rather schools provide free lunch to all children *except* the ones of immigrants? In other words, you’re ok with all kindergartens eating lunch except for say two kids, whose parents did not provide documentation? They get to sit to the side and just watch the rest of their classmate eat lunch while they go hungry? What a story excuse of a human being you are. You need to work on yourself. Living life with so much anger and hatred towards your fellow human beings is sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the United Healthcare parent co CEO writes an NYT op ed that says nothing. Did he use the free version of ChatGPT?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/13/opinion/united-health-care-brian-thompson-luigi-mangione.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

He lost me at his opening statement about the tremendous “outpouring of support for Brian Thompson and their company too.” What support?! Even I, a 1%er who is happy with her UHC insurance plan and is surrounded by other 1%ers cannot think of three people who feel any fondness for UHC or its leadership. The comments under this article are savage.

Whoever is doing their crisis PR has an impossible job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a jail house hottie

Him being attractive and well educated is doing him a lot of favors in the court of public opinion.

And young
And tall
And well read (but mostly newer books out, not classics).

Don’t forget rich. None of his peers have came out and can come up with a negative thing to say about him either and from the outside seems perfectly nice. He would be a perfect boyfriend to the Gen Z girls if he wasn’t a killer.

His peers are saying nice things about him because he was a nice, smart young man.

Something happened after that.

He went through a period of growth, journey, and dislocation; a transformation, whether for good or bad. Lots of people go through this type of transformation and convert, become activists, and commit to a different path. Most of them do not tip over into violence, let alone cold-blooded murder. Whether some kind of mental illness made that additional step possible, I don't know. He may have come to view the CEO as simply one-dimensional, similar to a character in a video game or in a movie, or as a collection of numbers (salary, number of denials, etc.) tied to a position, but not the living and breathing person. In some ways, this is similar to what UHC leadership does, as well as its staff: insurance participants are just a collection of numbers (age, premium, coverage limits, costs, medical codes, etc.). UHC staff and leadership make decisions about who lives and dies, too. They just don't pull the trigger.

And you know, that post about Governor Shapiro writing messages on those bombs has really stayed with me.

Anyway, Luigi murdered a man. He will do his time. There is no way he won't go to prison.

I can actually think of scenarios where he doesn’t go to prison. Jury nullification is one of them. Good luck finding 12 jurors to convict a handsome, educated, young guy who in the eyes of millions is a “modern day Robin Hood.” Fwiw, I don’t agree with that, I’m just stating what I am seeing online, including in comments under articles from reputable newspapers, leaning both left and right. Next to no sympathy for BT and massive amount of support for LM.

Not everyone thinks he’s handsome nor is he robbing the rich to give to the poor. Stop romanticizing a cold-blooded, cowardly killer. He’ll be found guilty and spend the rest of his life in prison.

C’mon now. The guy has been on the run for days, under tremendous stress, not eating, not showering, not sleeping, and still his mugshot looks better than 99% of the men in DC on their best day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone read the CNN article about health insurance denials? On a personal level, they are all terrible stories … but on an economic/policy level, I’m not so sure.

The 70 year old woman from Worcester complains that she pays hundreds of dollars a month but her insurer would not cover more than 6 weeks in a post-acute rehab center after her surgery, although it appears that center cost about 5K a week…..the economics just don’t add up. Most elderly people will have multiple health issues and surgeries are not uncommon. If the insurer is charging hundreds in premiums, yet paying out tens of thousands in provider charges, how can this make sense? It used to be that these large costs were rare so the premiums paid by healthy people covered the costs of the unlucky, but now it seems like almost everyone has some health condition or needs a surgery to improve quality of life. Post-acute in patient care is great but that wasn’t even really a thing 20-30 years ago—you just had to have family that would stay with you to help you post-surgery.

And the young girl with cancer probably picked a cheaper plan with a higher co-pay, figuring she was young and healthy. Should insurance companies not be permitted to offer those types of plans? I really don’t know. The problem is that most health care consumers don’t really adequately assess their potential risks and everyone is operating with insufficient information about what their health needs might be, and what things actually cost.

As far as the paramedic and his MRI….that seems ridiculous and he probably has a good appeal.


https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/12/business/us-health-care-insurance-frustrations/index.html

5% of the population accounts for 50% of healthcare spending. There are a lot of people like me who rarely visit doctors and have no prescriptions. I do screenings, blood work, etc., as recommended, but I'm a healthy 47 yo F who pays about $5K a year in premiums.

Are we talking about the same 5% of people year after year? If not, I'm not sure this is particularly helpful information; it just means that in a given year, 5% of the population gets really sick.

It seems like a small share of the US population have long-term illnesses that require expensive treatment, and those people should definitely get all the help they need. But a good chunk of the expensive patients are just people who like to get the latest tests and treatments for every small health issue, expecting miracles and without doing any of the hard work it takes to stay healthy. For example, for most (not all) people, exercise will resolve back pain, but some people refuse to exercise and just want $$$ surgeries and painkillers. I know someone who goes to the ER (or takes her kids there) many times each year, because she has untreated anxiety and refuses to see a therapist or take anxiety meds. And before you tell me I'm lucky that I'm not seriously ill -- I have a chronic condition that I manage cheaply with drastic changes in diet and exercise, while I know some people spending tens of thousands on medication that allows them to live symptom-free without any adjustment to their diet or exercise. I'm not immortal and I'm sure some day I'll need some expensive round of cancer treatment, but getting expensive treatments when absolutely necessary in old age is not the same as expecting them as a routine matter starting in childhood.

Why should one group "definitely" get expensive on going treatment and another be denied some tests?

In order to ensure a baseline of health for the whole population. If you want every headache test to be paid for, at the expense of not having money left for cancer treatments, you will end up with a society where minor conditions are over treated and life-threatening ones are fatal.

Tell us which age group sucks up most of the resources and how that benefits the whole population.

Excellent equation. And one I think we know the answer too.

End of life
Chronically ill and disabled
Illegal immigrants

Yeah, why shouldn’t insurance companies just become money printing machines?

Something is a gatekeeper either way.

And the PpP still answers the question: the largest segments sucking down resources are end of life, chronically ill/disabled, and illegal immigrant.

All three cohorts pay in zero to the system (illegal aliens) or usually premiums yet are vastly net users .

Good luck getting an anesthesiologist if they’re all tied up. Rationing happens every single day.

Zero?! Really? Illegal immigrants farm the land, raise your babies and clean your toilets, all of which are jobs lazy Americans find beneath them and would never do. I would not call this zero contribution.

Healthcare should be a universal right and free, the way it is in the rest of the developed world.

Zero in to the insurance, welfare, medicaid, hospital system? Yes, it’s zero.

That’s what happens when you country hop to USA and go into labor, use the hospitals, have an anchor baby on welfare, etc. You paid in zero to the system, and took out lots.

Same thing for public education. Arrive and start using.

how are illegal immigrants collecting welfare. Please explain this to me. (Hint, the only place this happens is in your imagination and on Fox News.)

You are in fantasyland. They use the ER by lying about their name and address. They apply for welfare benefits using false social security cards. Schools now provide free breakfast and lunch for all kids, rather than exclude illegal immigrants. They have babies who collect benefits, etc.

Look at this list of "noncitizen" exceptions who can receive SNAP in Maryland: Some people who are not U.S. citizens are not eligible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). There are exceptions for refugees, asylees, immigrants whose deportation has been withheld, Cuban/Haitian entrants, Amerasians and some immigrants legally admitted for permanent residence, parolees, aliens granted conditional entry, and certain battered spouses and children. Border Crossing Native Americans, certain Iraqi and afghan immigrants, victims of human trafficking and Hmong or Laotian tribe members may also be eligible. Even if some members of your household are not eligible, those who are may be able to get food supplement benefits.

And please don't try to argue that asylum seekers are legal. Basically every person who crosses the border claims asylum, and the Biden administration has tried to "parole" as many people as possible during their administration.

The point of the PP above is that you cannot provide extension health, education and welfare benefits and then have an unending stream of immigrants coming to collect them. The math already doesn't work because even Americans draw out much more than they paid into Social Security and Medicare.

So you would rather schools provide free lunch to all children *except* the ones of immigrants? In other words, you’re ok with all kindergartens eating lunch except for say two kids, whose parents did not provide documentation? They get to sit to the side and just watch the rest of their classmate eat lunch while they go hungry? What a story excuse of a human being you are. You need to work on yourself. Living life with so much anger and hatred towards your fellow human beings is sad.

fwiw eligibility for SNAP is not based on citizenship per se, it is based on whether you have legal status if not a citizen. I'm not sure what you are referring to as "Amerasians," someone with American and Asian ancestry sounds to be like a citizen if American in the context means US. Getting asylum is a more complicated matter than just "claiming" it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Millions have back pain and other crippling pain and they don’t become murderers. Come on.

This line of thinking annoys me.
Millions of people smoke and don't get lung cancer, but smokers are 21% more likely to develop one form of lung cancer.
Millions of people use weed and do not develop schizophrenia, but the relative risk of developing schizophrenia from heavy weed use is 2.4% (the average incidence is a bit over 1% of the population).
Millions of people got Covid and did not die. But over a million in the US have died from Covid.
Millions have chronic pain and do not commit suicide, but chronic pain definitely increases suicide risk.
I have no idea whether this was a factor in what he did, and I think it's a tragic waste of life for the young man as well as for the CEO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And the United Healthcare parent co CEO writes an NYT op ed that says nothing. Did he use the free version of ChatGPT?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/13/opinion/united-health-care-brian-thompson-luigi-mangione.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Wow. The comments are savage.

And that isn’t even close to what’s going on in TikTok and Instagram.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a jail house hottie

Him being attractive and well educated is doing him a lot of favors in the court of public opinion.

And young
And tall
And well read (but mostly newer books out, not classics).

Don’t forget rich. None of his peers have came out and can come up with a negative thing to say about him either and from the outside seems perfectly nice. He would be a perfect boyfriend to the Gen Z girls if he wasn’t a killer.

His peers are saying nice things about him because he was a nice, smart young man.

Something happened after that.

Drug usage and it might sound far fetched but maybe a cult or extremist group. If you look at the timeline he was basically unemployed in San Francisco for a year and stopped talking to family in July. That time period seems to be the most critical here and it doesn’t look like he has any friends from that time coming out to talk about him. It has to be something about that last year.

Or more likely just schizophrenia. It develops in young men around that age.

I don’t think so. According to reports from the PA courthouse, he’s alert, makes intelligent remarks, and appears to be totally with it.m

I think he experienced through tremendous pain with his back injury and the botched surgery. Part of the reason why the surgery went wrong is because doctors had to wait too long to perform it, most likely because of insurance issues. I also read reports that his mom went through very painful neuropathy and had issues with her insurance as well.

Experiencing debilitating pain or watching a loved one endure such pain can radicalize even the most gentle of souls.
I feel for him just like I feel for Brian Thompson and both of their families.
A horrible, senseless loss of life that could have been avoided if our country cared more about people and less about money.

This is one of the wealthiest families in Baltimore who had the means to pay out of pocket for healthcare. Why were they putting themselves at the mercy of health insurance decisions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a jail house hottie

Him being attractive and well educated is doing him a lot of favors in the court of public opinion.

And young
And tall
And well read (but mostly newer books out, not classics).

Don’t forget rich. None of his peers have came out and can come up with a negative thing to say about him either and from the outside seems perfectly nice. He would be a perfect boyfriend to the Gen Z girls if he wasn’t a killer.

His peers are saying nice things about him because he was a nice, smart young man.

Something happened after that.

Drug usage and it might sound far fetched but maybe a cult or extremist group. If you look at the timeline he was basically unemployed in San Francisco for a year and stopped talking to family in July. That time period seems to be the most critical here and it doesn’t look like he has any friends from that time coming out to talk about him. It has to be something about that last year.

Or more likely just schizophrenia. It develops in young men around that age.

I don’t think so. According to reports from the PA courthouse, he’s alert, makes intelligent remarks, and appears to be totally with it.m

I think he experienced through tremendous pain with his back injury and the botched surgery. Part of the reason why the surgery went wrong is because doctors had to wait too long to perform it, most likely because of insurance issues. I also read reports that his mom went through very painful neuropathy and had issues with her insurance as well.

Experiencing debilitating pain or watching a loved one endure such pain can radicalize even the most gentle of souls.
I feel for him just like I feel for Brian Thompson and both of their families.
A horrible, senseless loss of life that could have been avoided if our country cared more about people and less about money.

This is one of the wealthiest families in Baltimore who had the means to pay out of pocket for healthcare. Why were they putting themselves at the mercy of health insurance decisions?

NP here. There is no evidence that Luigi even had surgery. He just told people that. There is also no proof that photo circulating around was actually an c-ray of his. He also said a lot of other things that don’t make sense.

He also has never been a member of UHC. There is zero chance of if he did have back surgery that he had to wait for approval. He can self fund. He is not a disgruntled policy holder. Posters are just making up scenarios with zero proof to excuse the behavior. Stop.

[Anonymous]

Insurance delaying back surgery in likely 50% of back pain cases is probably a good thing. If there is not ample evidence to why you have back pain, is not likely to help. Most adults over 30 have herniated discs. If the disc herniation is not at the level of pain (dermatomes), it will not be beneficial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the United Healthcare parent co CEO writes an NYT op ed that says nothing. Did he use the free version of ChatGPT?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/13/opinion/united-health-care-brian-thompson-luigi-mangione.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Wow. The comments are savage.

And that isn’t even close to what’s going on in TikTok and Instagram.

Wow that you for linking tht NYT.

This is being shoved down our throats as if we need to care more about this one rich guy than all the other victims of gun violence in America everyday, including two innocent ES kids shot the same day.

We the public are not buying it, sorry no. He can be mourned by his own family friends and colleagues like every other a average Joe in America

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone read the CNN article about health insurance denials? On a personal level, they are all terrible stories … but on an economic/policy level, I’m not so sure.

The 70 year old woman from Worcester complains that she pays hundreds of dollars a month but her insurer would not cover more than 6 weeks in a post-acute rehab center after her surgery, although it appears that center cost about 5K a week…..the economics just don’t add up. Most elderly people will have multiple health issues and surgeries are not uncommon. If the insurer is charging hundreds in premiums, yet paying out tens of thousands in provider charges, how can this make sense? It used to be that these large costs were rare so the premiums paid by healthy people covered the costs of the unlucky, but now it seems like almost everyone has some health condition or needs a surgery to improve quality of life. Post-acute in patient care is great but that wasn’t even really a thing 20-30 years ago—you just had to have family that would stay with you to help you post-surgery.

And the young girl with cancer probably picked a cheaper plan with a higher co-pay, figuring she was young and healthy. Should insurance companies not be permitted to offer those types of plans? I really don’t know. The problem is that most health care consumers don’t really adequately assess their potential risks and everyone is operating with insufficient information about what their health needs might be, and what things actually cost.

As far as the paramedic and his MRI….that seems ridiculous and he probably has a good appeal.


https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/12/business/us-health-care-insurance-frustrations/index.html

5% of the population accounts for 50% of healthcare spending. There are a lot of people like me who rarely visit doctors and have no prescriptions. I do screenings, blood work, etc., as recommended, but I'm a healthy 47 yo F who pays about $5K a year in premiums.

Are we talking about the same 5% of people year after year? If not, I'm not sure this is particularly helpful information; it just means that in a given year, 5% of the population gets really sick.

It seems like a small share of the US population have long-term illnesses that require expensive treatment, and those people should definitely get all the help they need. But a good chunk of the expensive patients are just people who like to get the latest tests and treatments for every small health issue, expecting miracles and without doing any of the hard work it takes to stay healthy. For example, for most (not all) people, exercise will resolve back pain, but some people refuse to exercise and just want $$$ surgeries and painkillers. I know someone who goes to the ER (or takes her kids there) many times each year, because she has untreated anxiety and refuses to see a therapist or take anxiety meds. And before you tell me I'm lucky that I'm not seriously ill -- I have a chronic condition that I manage cheaply with drastic changes in diet and exercise, while I know some people spending tens of thousands on medication that allows them to live symptom-free without any adjustment to their diet or exercise. I'm not immortal and I'm sure some day I'll need some expensive round of cancer treatment, but getting expensive treatments when absolutely necessary in old age is not the same as expecting them as a routine matter starting in childhood.

Why should one group "definitely" get expensive on going treatment and another be denied some tests?

In order to ensure a baseline of health for the whole population. If you want every headache test to be paid for, at the expense of not having money left for cancer treatments, you will end up with a society where minor conditions are over treated and life-threatening ones are fatal.

Tell us which age group sucks up most of the resources and how that benefits the whole population.

Oh I agree 100%, the ridiculous life-extending care for the oldest cohorts are out of control in this country. Paying $30,000 a month for intensive nursing care for a very sick 90-year old so he can live to 91, all by himself strapped into a bed with a feeding tube.

I fail to see how that person "definitely" needs their care but a younger able bodied person should be shamed and denied for seeking out answers or tests for an issue they are having. Since apparently we have to pick and choose what benefits society as a whole, according to that PP.

You're not reading right. Extending life for the oldest people who are not able to sustain themselves is a waste of money and makes it harder for younger, healthier people to get the care that can actually help them go back to living a normal life.

Well advocate for assisted suicide/euthanasia

+1 I have zero desire to be over 80 and be sick to the point where I’m sitting around waiting to die and all of my family has to sit and watch me whither away and having to tolerate pain. Let the elderly decide after the age of 80 and let people over 65 decide if they have something terminal.

Nurse here. And this is why Advanced Directives and having the conversation with loved ones are so important. We see so much intervention at the end of life that honestly sometimes just looks like torture. And often it is family driven.
I can understand when it’s a young person and there is a hope that person will pull through and make it. But 80-something year old nana with dementia and no quality of life? It happens more often than people realize.

That’s funny because every time one of the older people in my family have entered the hospital, we have been pressured to “let them go”. Even when they were simply dehydrated and needed IV fluids. You aren’t the person to make the decision about whether someone has “quality of life”.

A nurse decided it was time to kill my dad, who had dementia, and gave a lethal dose of morphine.

The nurse didn’t inform anyone in advance that she planned to do this.

Pretty sick.

I don’t believe you. That would be a crime. The amount of morphine is tracked.

Okay. Don’t believe me.

I’m not sure why you think tracking morphine would prevent a nurse from administering morphine to a hospice patient and leaving them alone to die. She did call to say “it won’t be long now.”
But we were hours away.

After the ambulance arrived, narcan was administered.

I hope you never have to be on hospice and that no nurse tries to kill you because you seem unable to believe sick hospice nurses exist in the world.

DP. Because there has to be a doctor’s order for morphine and she has to document how much exactly was given at what time and that needs to match the order. When a patient is in the final stages of death and having aganol breathing, there may be an order to titrate the morphine to comfort. But again, that is to make the patient comfortable- it is not assisted suicide or killing them.

Well, it happened in Montgomery County regardless.

I’m not going to fight with you over how my parent was killed.