It has already been noted that Medicare and other government-funded health insurance programs pay a premium (15%-20%) for the treatment of any patients testing positive for covid19 because of the added costs of treatment (even if they don't die of it).
Bad News Thread
- Thread starter kickingandscreaming
- Start date
It has already been noted that Medicare and other government-funded health insurance programs pay a premium (15%-20%) for the treatment of any patients testing positive for covid19 because of the added costs of treatment (even if they don't die of it).
Desert Hound
DA
This thread needs a little humor today.
Bruddah IZ
DA
You mean without the garage door pull down noose?
I think that may be at least part of the explanation. I'm just really curious as to how its defined by the State, Medicare etc. To me there is a huge difference between someone in the hospital that has tested positive for Covid, and someone in the hospital that is being treated for Covid "disease".
I don't understand the point.
I'll indulge.
Patient A - Broken leg, tests positive for Covid. No covid symptoms, treated for broken leg.
Patient B - Trouble breathing, tests positive for Covid, has Covid symptoms. Treated for Covid.
Patient A should not be counted as Covid hospitalization, patient B should be.
Does Covid hospitalization = 1) treated for Covid in hospital, or 2) a patient tests positive for Covid regardless of whether they were treated for Covid or something else. If a patient is treated for Covid as well as something else that's fair to be defined as a Covid hospitalization.
Biden Met With Silence While Speaking With Cadets
This is the most cringeworthy President we've ever seen
rumble.com
You seem to be trying for a “this isn’t really happening” story.
Overall deaths worldwide are up by about 10 million compared to expected values. It is happening. At most, you are arguing about which people died from covid, not whether people died from covid.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Why the premium for a cold virus?
Bruddah IZ
DA
Run along now.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Holding back the laughter must have been pure torture.Biden Met With Silence While Speaking With Cadets
This is the most cringeworthy President we've ever seen
It is happening, just not to children. Schools should have been open full time in September (with reasonable precautions) because the overwhelming science supported it. Period, end of story. Anyone that thinks otherwise is incredibly selfish. Now its your choice not to send your kid to school, more power to you. But don't take every kid's right away because of fear mongering and politics.
If the Titanic is sinking, you don't let the adults get in the lifeboats first...or maybe you do.
Until recently, we didn’t have any lifeboats.
What we had were idiots who wanted to drill more holes in the bottom of the boat. They’re still here, if you look around.
And what science supports opening high schools, indoors, while taking no efforts to reduce community transmission?
Most of what I remember was people arguing that we should have closed bars/gyms/restaurants and opened schools. I don’t remember any science saying we should ditch masks and keep everything open.
Schools are a lifeboat for our children.
Your idea of "efforts to reduce community transmission" is to close, shutdown and lockdown. It's the lazy and non-creative solution.
But, again if you didn't miscast others arguments you'd have very little to debate.
You accuse me of miscasting your argument, in exactly the same post as you miscast mine.
I'll play. Did you have any solutions for restaurants, bars and indoor small businesses other than being shut during the middle of the pandemic? I don't recall that you did, but I could be wrong. You only within the last few months were of the opinion that schools should be reopened. In fact, you called the Academy of Pediatrics and the National Academy of Medicine recommendations last year that kids should be in school, BS. I on the other hand never proposed that schools should reopen without precautions, although admittedly, I wouldn't lose any sleep if they opened without precautions, as long as, there were notifications of exposure or outbreaks.
The number one thing is moving risky things outdoors. That could have helped churches, gyms, bars, and restaurants. Schools, too.
For schools, why should a teacher have been willing to teach in person if the rest of the public isn’t willing to skip the restaurants or wear a mask? You were asking the teacher to accept an elevated risk, while you do absolutely nothing to help.
Yes, the risk to a teacher in a well ventilated room of masked kids is low. Now think about what happens as you relax those assumptions. The risk stops being low.
Suppose kids are refusing to wear masks. Is the teacher allowed to kick kids out for not wearing masks? Unless it is private school, probably not. So assume the kids, like their parents, skip masks.
The AAP assumed ventilation. Will anyone actually upgrade the ventilation system in each classroom? Don’t be silly. They can’t even keep the water faucets working. At most, they’ll send out an email asking teachers to open a window.
So, if you require teachers to teach in a well ventilated room of masked kids, you also require teachers to teach in poorly ventilated rooms of unmasked kids. It is no longer a low risk, but it is what will happen.
This is why I supported outdoor school, and school with each teacher teaching a single cohort. School is important, and moving class outside seemed the simplest way to make it safe.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
Yeah, if only soccer were played outdoors the kids wouldn't have missed a year
Many of these smaller businesses tried that in Ca, only to have our Governor shut that down as well.
The reason Patient A is "counted as covid" is because the hospital must follow covid isolation and testing protocols that result in increased costs for the hospital and therefore qualify for the higher reimbursement levels.