patrick.net

elliemae says

She might be an alcoholic, or a drug addict, or someone who possesses a unique ability to emulate the makeup of Tammy Fay Bakker, or any number of things.

She might BE an alcoholic or a drug addict, but she's probably also schizophrenic. Schizophrenia is a better match with paranoid delusions than alcoholism. I think your diagnosis sucks. Mine is better.

Homeboy says

she's probably also schizophrenic.

Three strikes and you're out. HomeAlone, you don't know what that woman's troubles might be, and your insistence on schizophrenia illustrates precisely elliemae's comment that you objected to - which she didn't even address to you, but which you took personally anyway. You don't know whether the woman in the photo has paranoid delusions or not, you don't know what events she's seeing and describing in her calls, but I do see one person whose comments show a tendency towards paranoia: you, Homefool. Read about clinical paranoia, it is a cognitive failure involving delusions but generally distinct from hallucinations (e.g. voices in the head, which you alone claim she's hearing and the article does not mention). Try reading, instead of ignoring. And read beyond the paid verbiage extolling your favorite SSRIs - who knows what those things have done to your brain. You can't stand anyone suggesting even indirectly that you might be ignorant of something, but you respond by proving your ignorance and wallowing in it. (Together with the occasional strawman.) BTW, SSRIs can cause hallucinations and suicidality, maybe she was diagnosed with depression and was put on those pills you advocate and defend, and the 911 calls resulted from the side effects. SSRIs also cause nausea and impotence and flatulence, which might explain why a certain troll sits home alone all the time picking fights with everyone on PatNet. And, frankly, I don't know how you manage to get into fights with elliemae, but you troll the site relentlessly picking fights with everyone so I guess it's inevitable that you would eventually drag even her into your dysfunction.

Returning to the original topic, one thing Obamacare supporters insist on is that putting more people on chronic pills will somehow reduce emergency visits and thus costs. In fact, RomneyCare showed the opposite. SSRIs cause emergency visits, and Medicare reports that most of its emergency hospitalizations among seniors result from four legal drugs.

curious2 says

Returning to the original topic, one thing Obamacare supporters insist on is that putting more people on chronic pills will somehow reduce emergency visits and thus costs.

It's not putting people on chronic meds that will reduce er visits - it's giving them access to healthcare that will allow them the opportunity to be treated before it becomes emergent. It also allows them to be treated by a primary rather than an er doc who has better things to do than diagnose and treat chronic conditions.

I do agree that there is the tendency to throw a pill at everything in order to treat it - and that's not always the answer.

Homeboy says

I think your diagnosis sucks. Mine is better.

I guess since you're the one with schizophrenia you would know whether or not your diagnosis sucks. I didn't diagnose anyone, although I do believe that your MD is spot on with his.

Curious2, homeboy can't hear you because he has his hands over his ears and is screaming "lalalalalalala"

elliemae says

I do agree that there is the tendency to throw a pill at everything in order to treat it - and that's not always the answer.

Thanks Elliemae, and this reminds me of a message I received from another user. He tried to post it but couldn't at that time, and besides due to the context it wasn't the right time to mention it, but this thread seems a good spot. It isn't my place to diagnose anyone over the interwebs much less give them medical advice, but here is information that emergency rooms (and most doctors) won't tell you:

[update - supplemented below in response to an editorial regarding multivitamins]

Role of vitamin D deficiency in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)....Costs 5 cents a day.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14730601

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17967727

http://www.molmed.org/pdfstore/11_410_Laragione.pdf

Role of vegan, gluten free diet in RA

http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/ar2388.pdf

http://www.webmd.com/rheumatoid-arthritis/news/20080321/ra-heart-tip-try-gluten-free-vegan-diet

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11600749

Omega 3 reduces NSAID dependency with miniscule 2.7 g/day dose over 3 month period. Some research may suggest the ratio of omega 6-omega 3 should be 4:1.

http://rheumatology.oxfordjournals.org/content/47/5/665.short

http://www.webmd.com/rheumatoid-arthritis/guide/can-your-diet-help-relieve-rheumatoid-arthritis

Potassium deficiency in RA sufferers-foods rich in potassium

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/17349.php

http://www.healthaliciousness.com/articles/food-sources-of-potassium.php

Probiotics (eating fermented foods best way/supplements) for RA functionality

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21629190

All the studies are done in a vacuum of one another, but compounds in the diet work synergistically. Very few diseases can be addressed with a single compound.

There is research out there. We each live in our own bodies, and to recommend to anyone else is hard, but especially for vitamin D and the vegan, gluten free diet the evidence is strong. These are cost effective, but diet can be sometimes difficult.

The most expensive approach tends to be the most heavily promoted, but is often not the most effective. Cheaper approaches are often better, but because they cost less they lack the legions of lobbyists and salesmen pushing something more expensive and worse. I wish you well.

elliemae says

It's not putting people on chronic meds that will reduce er visits - it's giving them access to healthcare that will allow them the opportunity to be treated before it becomes emergent. It also allows them to be treated by a primary rather than an er doc who has better things to do than diagnose and treat chronic conditions.

Again, RomneyCare increased emergency visits, so I think the claim of reducing them is disproved. As for emergency doctors, so much of their time goes to prolonging the self-destruction of alcoholics that some practitioners advocate reinstating Prohibition. The success rates for rehab being in single digit percentages, the $ spent does not prevent enough emergency visits to offset the increase in pill-driven emergencies.

One other thing emergency rooms won't tell you is how much pressure they might be facing from executives at the hospital corporation to increase lucrative admissions, putting patients at risk of "medical misadventures."

elliemae says

I guess since you're the one with schizophrenia you would know whether or not your diagnosis sucks. I didn't diagnose anyone, although I do believe that your MD is spot on with his.

Uh, huh - nice name-calling. You're doing a great job sinking to the level of your new buddy curious2. Obviously you failed at coming up with any more likely guess than schizophrenia, yet you inexplicably still believe yourself to be qualified to criticize ME. "Maybe she's an alcoholic or drug addict". Wow, so lame. I take back anything good I said about you. Have fun in trollville. Population: You and Curious2.

Homeboy says

Uh, huh - nice name-calling.

Me? Name calling? Homeboy says

I think your diagnosis sucks. Mine is better.

It's your diagnosis. Glad you feel secure enough here to admit it.

So far as the woman in the story you continue to insist you possess far more than enough information to diagnose, I'm sticking with the time travel theory.

Having commented above about Vitamin D, Omega 3, and diet, I should add a link acknowledging an editorial published today that has received widespread attention, sometimes overstated. The editorial says most people should avoid most vitamin supplements, but it notes a possible exception for vitamin D, where some studies show benefit. The editorial does not state a position regarding Omega 3 fatty acids, which research shows may help with specific conditions including RA. The editorial states that, for most people, a healthy diet is better than relying on supplements. That's true, but people with a specific concern may want to try supplementing a healthy diet with Vitamin D and Omega 3, and nothing in today's editorial disagrees with that assertion.

In general, if something helps some people but harms others, it may appear to have no effect overall even though it is having an effect in both groups. For example, consider a matter of taste: if some people love peanut butter and an equal number hate it, then on balance it might be rated neutral, even though it elicits strong reactions from both groups. For healthy people who have no symptoms, today's editorial says the research shows multivitamins confer no benefit. I can believe that, but even so, people who are experiencing symptoms may benefit from changing their diet and possibly from supplementing it with vitamin D and/or Omega 3. And no, I don't sell either of those products - or have any financial stake in them as far as I know.

elliemae says

It's your diagnosis. Glad you feel secure enough here to admit it.

So far as the woman in the story you continue to insist you possess far more than enough information to diagnose, I'm sticking with the time travel theory.

Uh, huh. Right down to curious2's level. Enjoy rock bottom. I see you went with an asinine sarcastic response because you don't have a good answer. "Maybe she's an alcoholic or a drug addict". LOL.

Ah, homeboy. I do have a good answer. I've given it many times. I will spell it out for you one more time, if only because I'm finishing up some work and have a bit of time- and even though I realize you lack the ability to comprehend the issue at hand, I'll give it one more go:

In the story that's quoted there are 268 words. About 2/3 of them mention the woman in question, stating that she's called 911 multiple times and a guy who was interviewed suspects that she might suffer from a type of mental issue. She wasn't interviewed for the story nor were the tapes reviewed by the reporter, so it's an uneducated guess at best when attempting to understand what's going on in her head.

You have asserted time & time again that you possess the unique ability to diagnose this person based on the information provided by a reporter who hasn't actually met the woman but has gained his information third-hand. You have included tidbits such as there being voices in her head, and that she suffers from both hallucinations and delusions. Neither of these things were mentioned in the story - they appear to be based on factoids you pulled out of your ass.

You assert that your "educated guess" of this woman's diagnosis is that she suffers from schizophrenia, and attempt to defend your diagnosis in multiple posts even though there is absolutely no evidence to support it.

You fail to understand the flaws in your argument(s), so instead you attack the people who question your qualifications (it appears that you have none) and your methodology (again, none). All that you continue to do is assert that you have somehow "won" the imaginary argument without appearing to comprehend that with each attempt at attacking me and Curious2 you appear to be more & more stupid.

Calling us names and condescendingly adding "LOL" at the end of your post doesn't help your case at all.

While I admire your persistence, I do realize that it's impossible for me to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

elliemae says

Calling us names and condescendingly adding "LOL" at the end of your post doesn't help your case at all.

While I admire your persistence, I do realize that it's impossible for me to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

Oh, but throwing insults at me helps YOUR case? LOL.

Fact is, you wrote that long post claiming to have a "better answer", yet that "better answer" never comes. There are some very telling things in the article, which it appears you didn't read, or at least didn't read carefully. "She was reporting these various, imagined crimes..." She was IMAGINING that crimes had occurred. Those are DELUSIONS. Getting drunk doesn't generally cause a person to imagine that crimes have been committed. Then there's the mug shot - it certainly doesn't prove anything taken by itself, but it is consistent with the look of a mentally ill person, and the person quoted in the article thought she had a mental illness as well. What mental illness does she have? Since she suffers from delusions, schizophrenia is a good guess. Not sure why you're getting your panties so bunched up about that; it's just my opinion. And since you don't have a differing opinion, I don't know what you're trying to accomplish here. Seems like you're just here to tell me I'm not allowed to express my opinion. As I said, I expect Curious2 to engage in that kind of trolling activity, which is why I have him/her on ignore (which seems to amuse you for some unknown reason). But I expected better from you. Obviously I was wrong to do so.

My original point was that levying fines on mentally ill people isn't going to make them stop being mentally ill. All this other stuff is just you and curious2 being silly and pedantic.

elliemae says

Until the Affordable Healthcare Act is implemented, people with potential mental illnesses such as this have no options for treatment and are turned out on the streets. Whether her issues are organic and treatable, or are due to substances the patient has ingested, as long as there is no avenue for treatment patients will have limited choices as to available treatments.

Elie I here by place an official referendum on such remarks.
Obamacare has for the most part been proved a dismal failure and every naysayer has been exonerated as upstanding citizens only intention is getting to the truth.

So "WHEN", "IF", IF by chance" Obamacare sputters and sparks and then starts to run like some sound engine you folks think that heap of junk is capable of doing. Then you can post this stuff. Otherwise save it for the fairytales and Princesses returning from the netherworld story time.

elliemae says

You're pissed about this NOW? Mugshots have long been available as part of public record. Go to The Smoking Gun website and there are hundreds of mugshots to gawk

Not just NOW it's never been right and has only been used in the past to bring fugitives to justice.

A few year joy ride with the Lefty insane and the Rigid right trouncing every right the American public has, is not that fucking long, stop it. I don't know about you, but your parents wouldn't have put up with this shit, not with out a proper Washington November cleaning, dusting and waxing, to vote every no good son of a commie bitch mother out of office.

CaptainShuddup says

So "WHEN", "IF", IF by chance" Obamacare sputters and sparks and then starts to run like some sound engine you folks think that heap of junk is capable of doing. Then you can post this stuff. Otherwise save it for the fairytales and Princesses returning from the netherworld story time.

If you imply that there many be anything positive at all that comes from the ACA, you should expect to hear from this guy, that it's a terrible abomination and that not a single person will benefit in any way from it.

CaptainShuddup says

Obamacare has for the most part been proved a dismal failure and every naysayer has been exonerated as upstanding citizens only intention is getting to the truth.

So, the website is fucked up and in your opinion ACA has been proven to be a failure? The press is spoon feeding you info, and you're lapping it up.

Homeboy says

Fact is, you wrote that long post claiming to have a "better answer", yet that "better answer" never comes.

FYI, when you use quotation marks it means you are actually quoting someone. It doesn't count if you are quoting yourself from earlier in a sentence.

My answer was and always will be that you lack the qualifications, knowledge and the amount of information sufficient to diagnose a person with schizophrenia based on a short story on the interwebs.

I wasn't attempting to insult you when I stated you are unarmed in the wits department. You've proven that over & over simply by posting inane comments about this woman. You have proven your lack of ability to understand that there were no "facts" in the story - simply statements by some guy saying her calls were about imagined crimes.

My point was, and will continue to be, that you are one of those people who insist that they understand the intricacies of mental illness diagnoses and believe themselves to be educated simply because they read a little bit about it on the interwebs.

Homeboy says

it's just my opinion.

You've made it abundantly clear that you have opinions and that you believe that they're important enough to share with the people of patnet. I notice that you seem to brand those people who take the time to call you on your bullshit as trolls...

Since you believe that this woman's appearance is reflective of the diagnosis of schizophrenia, why don't you post your own personal photo and we'll have a contest as to which mental illness you appear to suffer from.

elliemae says

So, the website is fucked up and in your opinion ACA has been proven to be a failure? The press is spoon feeding you info, and you're lapping it up.

Website access aside Sweetie, people wont be able to swing high fucking mandated premiums, and still be standing after the sticker shock of the multiple never ending bills, that results from just one doctor visit, that required more than a tongue depressor.

If this thing sticks around, I wouldn't be surprised if only 5% of those not eligible for "Free Premiums" insurance, will actually buy it them selves, if their employer doesn't offer it. And for those who will have subsidized insurance. Will be scared to death to use it, because they wont have any idea what bills they will end up with.

There's going to be a whole class of poor people who's credit is going to be riddled with medical collections records on their credit report, sealing their fate to never get ahead, because everything in life that is a positive life changing experience, requires a spotless credit report.

You can fool those that don't know to ask the right questions, Ellie, but you can't bullshit people who's been around the block a time or two. Especially those that have been paying medical bills as described for the last two years, and doesn't see anything different in language of Obamacare that changes that.

All will be revealed around March 1st, when everyone who uses Obamcare services will get bankrupting bills, that will destroy households and depress the middle class and lower economy 5 fold worse than it is now.

Capn Krunch's supposition is that everyone will be visiting the MD on the first of January or going to the hospital, that the bills will be processed and people will be in arrears by March 1.

The sky will fall and the earth will stop turning and all of the rainbows will turn to black on March 1st, if only because an anonymous poster on the interwebs says so.

I'm selling out on tinfoil hats if anyone wants to buy one. I'll be raising the price as March 1 sneaks up on us

Yeah Ellie, if Obamacare is so great, then why did Nancy Pelosi answer every question with "don't worry about it, it's already baked in."

Everything was already baked into those high premium payments, and the Coinsurance payments that would equal or greater to any classic healthcare costs with out insurance at all.

"It's already baked IN!"

elliemae says

January or going to the hospital, that the bills will be processed and people will be in arrears by March 1.

You know Ellie, I have tried like hell, I've have searched and searched and stared at those hospital bills until my eyeballs bled.

There just isn't any undo button.

People wont have to wait until a judge says they are bankrupt, they will damn fucking well know their health need wrote a check that their ass can't Cash. As soon as the bills start comming. Which usually takes 3 months or more for the suspious ones that you have no way to deny and the Insurance company has no way of verifying. The ones that are a given like the lab and clinic fees, will be in you mailbox before you drive home from the clinic. It's the suspicious ones that needs more time to confuse the justification.

The wife just got a "Collections" bill for a bill we've never seen in our life, for a procedure that we were most certain our insurance would cover, but yet we saw over $3500 in bills on it. She paid them all, and was ontop of every bill that she was sent.
We got a 5 day notice for a bill we've never seen from a collection agency.

The horrors will have even greater horrors associated with them.

Don't take my word for it. But I wouldn't want to admit you work in the Healthcare industry by May 2014, it just wouldn't be a proper thing to say in polite company.

And even worse to admit you voted for Obama TWICE.

Homeboy says

Nitpick much?

Homeboy says

No, I don't consider myself an expert by any means, but I obviously know more than you do, since you failed to come up with a better guess that made any kind of sense.

I don't have to have a better guess. I simply have to possess sufficient reasoning powers to understand why, with each post, you appear to be an idiot.

We've been beating this dead horse for the better part of a week. We can continue to beat it, but it's still gonna be dead and you're still gonna appear to be an idiot.

But it's been fun.

Emergency rooms won't tell you that, with over $1 million/year in revenue to be gained, they might take custody of your child. "The battle over Justina’s future was one of five cases involving Children’s in the last 18 months where a disputed diagnosis led to parents losing custody or being threatened with that extreme step." With "no lifetime caps," each kid is worth over $60 million. Justina has been stuck in a locked ward for 10 months, and will remain locked there through Christmas and into the New Year. "Thanks, Obamacare."

Affordable Healthcare has nothing to do with this case - and there are always examples of the medical "professionals" who make decisions on behalf of a child. A few years back there was one in Utah where the child was moved out of state because the treatment plan was chemo family didn't want it.

Sure, you can attempt to link it to the lack of lifetime cap, but you can link pretty much any type of care to that. The medical community makes decisions about the care someone should receive and some asshole runs with it.

You can do better than that, curious2. Every article about our fucked up medical system can be the fault of Affordable Healthcare - even though it hasn't kicked in yet.

elliemae says

even though it hasn't kicked in yet.

That particular hospital is in Massachusetts, where Obamacare has been operating for several years, dba Romneycare. In any event, Obamacare begins next month, so you can't seriously argue that the decisionmakers in this case aren't factoring it into their calculations. I never claimed that Obamacare all by itself created every single problem, it merely worsened an already bad system. The hospital corporations that have figured out how to manipulate Romneycare for maximum revenue can now take those models nationwide, thanks to Obamacare. I encourage you to read The Good Nurse, about a serial killer who was moved from hospital to hospital like a priest molesting children in one parish after another, to get a glimpse into the psychology of the people who wrote Obamacare. At least dozens, and probably hundreds, of patients were murdered because executives at every hospital that employed that serial killer chose to protect their own financial interests rather than patients. It's just one example of how 20% of hospital visits lead to "medical misadventures." That also happened before Obamacare, but it would be tragically naive to trust that rewarding the same executives with more money and power than ever before will somehow change their nature or their response to the same incentives.