Possible move into playoff position - Jazz at Grizzlies - 3/9/2018 6:00 pm MST

[fishonjazz]

[

It's not really an individual using them too much, it's thousands of individuals being prescribed them and all of them taking 1/3 to 1/2 the amount that was prescribed because they started feeling better or just forgot.

If you use antibiotics you want to kill all the bacteria you're trying to kill. If you kill 80-90% of it the bacteria leftover are the ones that are more resistant to that antibiotic, and so if that heartier segment of the bacterial infection spreads it become more difficult to treat with antibiotics.

I see. Good answer.

 

[framer]

Why did i have to pay a 25 dollar co pay. I have had ear infections all my life. I knew what it was and what the doctor would do about it. He prescribed me amoxicillan just like i knew he would.
And hell, if i must see a doctor then still, why do i have to pay a $25 dollar co pay? Im paying $500 dollars a month for insurance already. How about if I can tell the doctor what he is going to do before i even go see him then there is no co pay. If he tells me something I dont already know then he gets a co pay. What did I pay the doctor for last night? I already knew what the problem was and knew the solution.

You paid a share your doctor's insurance premium in case you are deathly allergic to amoxicillin, you die, then your wife sues his practice for millions. (My daughter is deathly allergic to amoxicillin, doctor caught it really early, she didn't die.)

If they screw up your medical care in Canada, you can sue the system for all its worth, right?

 

[fishonjazz]

[

You paid a share your doctor's insurance premium in case you are deathly allergic to amoxicillin, you die, then your wife sues his practice for millions. (My daughter is deathly allergic to amoxicillin, doctor caught it really early, she didn't die.)

If they screw up your medical care in Canada, you can sue the system for all its worth, right?

I have no idea.
What i do know is that i have taken amoxicillin many times in my life for this exact same ailment and that im not deathly allergic to it though.

You bring up another good point though. Not only is our healthcare system a joke but also our judicial system as well.

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

Why did i have to pay a 25 dollar co pay. I have had ear infections all my life. I knew what it was and what the doctor would do about it. He prescribed me amoxicillan just like i knew he would.
And hell, if i must see a doctor then still, why do i have to pay a $25 dollar co pay? Im paying $500 dollars a month for insurance already. How about if I can tell the doctor what he is going to do before i even go see him then there is no co pay. If he tells me something I dont already know then he gets a co pay. What did I pay the doctor for last night? I already knew what the problem was and knew the solution.

Two things first, why are we talking about health care here?

This is how the world works. They don't just hand out meds, even if it isn't addicting or whatever, and everyone wants to get paid. And damn, you pay a 25$ co-pay. Mine is 10$ for that type of visit. My condolences

 

[fishonjazz]

Two things first, why are we talking about health care here?

This is how the world works. They don't just hand out meds, even if it isn't addicting or whatever, and everyone wants to get paid. And damn, you pay a 25$ co-pay. Mine is 10$ for that type of visit. My condolences

Idk, i feel like it would be like if your batteries in your flashlight died and you knew you needed new batteries but you couldn't buy new batteries until you paid a 25 dollar fee first for someone to look at your flashlight and tell you need to buy new batteries. That wouldn't make sense to me.
And 25 dollars might not seem like much to some people but it is to me. That 25 dollar co pay quite often keeps me from going to the doctor when i maybe really need to.

 

[SCS]

What? You want him taking 2's? Probably too few shots overall. He had the hot hand. Gobert rarely has decent games against Gasol offensively. IMO, Jazz just tried to force it into Rudy too much. And he was Fumbleina tonight. Sometimes Gobert just drives me crazy when he tries to create shots.

It may have been an ugly game, but the Jazz made their shots and defended down the stretch. This was a game that could have turned into a loss earlier in the season.

All that I meant is that ideally we probably don't want Jae taking 11 threes a game. It was fine last night though. He was making them so the Jazz rode the hot hand. It was good that he was making them too because Donovan and Rudy were both struggling offensively.

 

[Ellipse]

What a disgusting game. There was a play where a Jazz player wasn't being pushed and shoved for a full second. Wow, that was an amazing moment.

Yeah, but he missed the 3.

 

[Gameface]

You paid a share your doctor's insurance premium in case you are deathly allergic to amoxicillin, you die, then your wife sues his practice for millions. (My daughter is deathly allergic to amoxicillin, doctor caught it really early, she didn't die.)

If they screw up your medical care in Canada, you can sue the system for all its worth, right?

Being able to sue people who cause you harm directly or through negligence is 100000% the way things should work. People who criticise the ability to be compensated for harm others cause you blow my ****ing mind.

This game thread...

 

[Ellipse]

This game thread...

Ordinarily, I would agree with you, but this game was so bad that the less said about it, the better.

 

[midnight_hwy]

Hitting the ol’ delete button on the dvr now, I don’t think I could ever be desperate enough to watch this game again.
I’m glad the Jazz got the win, but what an ugly game to watch.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Thee Idiotic Minivan K]

Idk, i feel like it would be like if your batteries in your flashlight died and you knew you needed new batteries but you couldn't buy new batteries until you paid a 25 dollar fee first for someone to look at your flashlight and tell you need to buy new batteries. That wouldn't make sense to me.
And 25 dollars might not seem like much to some people but it is to me. That 25 dollar co pay quite often keeps me from going to the doctor when i maybe really need to.

U missed my point that these thieves want to get paid. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[framer]

Being able to sue people who cause you harm directly or through negligence is 100000% the way things should work. People who criticise the ability to be compensated for harm others cause you blow my ****ing mind.

This game thread...

Agreed, but a few things:

1. People sue based on outcomes. Sometimes you can provide the best care and still get a bad outcome.
2. If you want to reserve the right to sue for multiple millions, you will drive up the cost of care substantially. It's a choice we make as a society. You get better care, but it is much more expensive.
3. If you have government run healthcare, your ability to sue "outside of the system" in open court, is severely limited.
4. Memphis season ticket holders should have the right to sue for entertainment malpractice.

 

[franklin]

It's not really an individual using them too much, it's thousands of individuals being prescribed them and all of them taking 1/3 to 1/2 the amount that was prescribed because they started feeling better or just forgot.

If you use antibiotics you want to kill all the bacteria you're trying to kill. If you kill 80-90% of it the bacteria leftover are the ones that are more resistant to that antibiotic, and so if that heartier segment of the bacterial infection spreads it become more difficult to treat with antibiotics.

Underconsumption is the problem.

My issue with this hypothesis is purely statistical. It's not thousands of people it's several billions. By those numbers, super bugs are going to form amoxicillin restance regardless of a doctor prescribing an antibiotic or not.

We could have a system where you are educated by the pharmacy that you must take the entire duration even if you feel better for certain infections like strep throat. Super bugs aren't going to form any faster in overuse situations since we all have an immune system.

Maybe Dr. Dala can correct me on this if I'm wrong.

 

[Gameface]

Agreed, but a few things:

1. People sue based on outcomes. Sometimes you can provide the best care and still get a bad outcome.
2. If you want to reserve the right to sue for multiple millions, you will drive up the cost of care substantially. It's a choice we make as a society. You get better care, but it is much more expensive.
3. If you have government run healthcare, your ability to sue "outside of the system" in open court, is severely limited.
4. Memphis season ticket holders should have the right to sue for entertainment malpractice.

Entertainment malpractice and gross negligence of their record.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

It’s honestly sad seeing how strong healthcare propaganda is in the United States. This **** is simply untrue

My Canadian relatives who travel to the US for healthcare do not agree with you.

 

[Deleted member 848]

My Canadian relatives who travel to the US for healthcare do not agree with you.

the overwhelming body of evidence does not agree with your anecdotes. As the old adage goes, facts > one's opinion.

As for anecdotes-- in 24 years of life, I have yet to come across a friend, relative, peer, or friend's friend, friend's parent, patient (etc.) who has left Canada to go seek US healthcare. The only thing I can think of is someone leaving Canada in order to seek a late-term abortion-- not even sure if she went to the United States. That is genuinely, and seriously it. You have been completely fooled by propaganda. Private healthcare is a ****ing disaster.

Instead, I have heard many instances of the opposite-- namely, Canadians returning home early from Arizona after their health deteriorates.

 

[Deleted member 848]

It's not really an individual using them too much, it's thousands of individuals being prescribed them and all of them taking 1/3 to 1/2 the amount that was prescribed because they started feeling better or just forgot.

If you use antibiotics you want to kill all the bacteria you're trying to kill. If you kill 80-90% of it the bacteria leftover are the ones that are more resistant to that antibiotic, and so if that heartier segment of the bacterial infection spreads it become more difficult to treat with antibiotics.

overuse is a huge, huge problem-- everytime you use antibiotics, you are selecting for resistant bacteria that can now colonize the "real estate" leftover from the now-dead bacteria. This is actually a pretty big thing-- one of the best ways our body stops things like brutal ecoli infections from giving us the runs is just from our gut being lined with healthy bacteria, and not providing any decent real estate for the bacteria to lodge themselves in, and start growing. Unfortunately, antibiotics are rarely specific-- even something as narrow-spec as amoxicillin (beta-lactamase) will destroy all kinds of beneficial bacteria.

Many of the superbugs we now currently have are due to overuse of antibiotics in the healthcare, and agricultural spheres. Even our broad-spec bazookas like carbapenems are now useless against certain types of Enterococcus bacteria because farmers in China have used the drug to feed their chickens.

It's a mess. Antiobiotic-resistant bacterial infections are going to cause incredible public harm towards the end of the 21st century-- some say it'll kill more than cancer.

--

You are correct in that patients are supposed to complete their course of antibiotics as specified by the pharmacist or the physician-- if you don't, there is chance that a resistant bacteria will grow and re-infect you. Correct on that point, Gameface.

 

[Deleted member 848]

You paid a share your doctor's insurance premium in case you are deathly allergic to amoxicillin, you die, then your wife sues his practice for millions. (My daughter is deathly allergic to amoxicillin, doctor caught it really early, she didn't die.)

If they screw up your medical care in Canada, you can sue the system for all its worth, right?

In Canada you sue the college of physicians. Unfortunately, in America, because of the fear of litigation, physicians waste all kinds of money on useless tests in order to minimize their error rates (to no avail-- error rates in the United States are equal at best to those in Canada, generally worse). Another reason why Americans spend more per capita on health care, even though they then get ******** healthcare.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Underconsumption is the problem.

My issue with this hypothesis is purely statistical. It's not thousands of people it's several billions. By those numbers, super bugs are going to form amoxicillin restance regardless of a doctor prescribing an antibiotic or not.

We could have a system where you are educated by the pharmacy that you must take the entire duration even if you feel better for certain infections like strep throat. Super bugs aren't going to form any faster in overuse situations since we all have an immune system.

Maybe Dr. Dala can correct me on this if I'm wrong.

Generally speaking, the prescription of amoxicillin for something like strep throat is actually medically completely unnecessary for that specific strep throat infection.

The only reason physicians in North America (in Germany, they simply don't prescribe Amox for strep throat-- avoid the generation of superbugs as you've implied) prescribe amox for something like a strep throat is out of fear for something called Rheumatic Fever. Basically, there is a one in several thousands chance that if you sustain strep throat infections repeatedly over the course of a lifetime, it can generate an auto-immune response in your body where the valves in your heart are 'attacked', in a sense. Causes stenosis (narrowing) of the various valves of the heart, particularly the mitral valve. This stenosis can sometimes further develop into something called mitral regurgitation-- meaning your blood actually is pumping backwards, not forwards (uh-oh). Generally this will result in heart failure unless you quickly replace the valves.

So yeah, it's a small risk, but it's a pretty disastrous consequence in case it formulates. The reason we rarely see rheumatic fever in north America is because of how quickly strep throat infections are genuinely addressed-- but again, other nations think that the risk doesn't justify the prescription.

 

[franklin]

Generally speaking, the prescription of amoxicillin for something like strep throat is actually medically completely unnecessary for that specific strep throat infection.

The only reason physicians in North America (in Germany, they simply don't prescribe Amox for strep throat-- avoid the generation of superbugs as you've implied) prescribe amox for something like a strep throat is out of fear for something called Rheumatic Fever. Basically, there is a one in several thousands chance that if you sustain strep throat infections repeatedly over the course of a lifetime, it can generate an auto-immune response in your body where the valves in your heart are 'attacked', in a sense. Causes stenosis (narrowing) of the various valves of the heart, particularly the mitral valve. This stenosis can sometimes further develop into something called mitral regurgitation-- meaning your blood actually is pumping backwards, not forwards (uh-oh). Generally this will result in heart failure unless you quickly replace the valves.

So yeah, it's a small risk, but it's a pretty disastrous consequence in case it formulates. The reason we rarely see rheumatic fever in north America is because of how quickly strep throat infections are genuinely addressed-- but again, other nations think that the risk doesn't justify the prescription.

Thanks for the clarity. I was taught in my pre-med degree that strep throat was only cured by antibiotics. That never fully made sense.

When I was a kid we got it a lot and my mother called the doctor and his office called in a prescription, no charge or fee. Things have changed a lot since thwn.