Posts by Matthew Poole
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
And that BMI is one of the world's dumbest measurements for overweight and obesity anyway
Totally. When the whole All Black front row would be classed as obese, you know there's something wrong with the system being used.
However, there's also something wrong when school uniform stockists routinely carry (instead of specially ordering in) pants in sizes that could fit two of me. I'm not exactly rake-like, either. -
The way it often pans out is you're fine, suddenly you have a heart attack, you die.
Or not. Heart attacks are often not fatal, they just put the patient into hospital for a few days, on medication for years (if not the rest of their life), and are expensive both because of the direct costs of pre- and post-discharge care and through the diminished economic output of the victim during recovery.
Joint replacements and fractures in the elderly are an expensive use of health resources. There are plenty of articles out there about how long the waiting lists are for joint replacements, and ask any orthopaedic nurse about how many of their patients are older people who fell over and broke something (often hips, but not always). The benefits of exercise in relation to bone density and general mobility are well-known. The extra stress that being overweight puts on joints is obvious, or ought to be. We're not robots, joints don't last forever.
-
Obesity, diabetes, smoking are all going to cost us billions down the track. If we can improve lifestyles 20 years earlier, we're going to save money overall, and have a much healthier country.
They already do, and that's before the current generation of ever-increasing-waists even makes it out of their teens. There are many benefits from keeping weight in check, including things like reduced need for joint replacements. Keeping active, which is encouraged both as a weight-control measure and as a result of being less overweight, helps bone density, too, which means that the risk of fractures in old age drops. Those two things alone could mean savings of eight or nine figures a year.
Then there's the secondary health impact of diabetes (extremity gangrene, blindness, renal failure...), which is, if anything, even more scary than the things that being overweight does directly. -
Did you know you can get annual membership for St Johns ?Last I heard it 's about $60 per annum.I found them cost effective:)
ACC is even more cost-effective ;)
St John charge the patient (or their family) for medical-related transports, since it's not covered by ACC. ACC does cover accident-related transports, so no invoices for me :) -
does no one here remember what it was like pre-ACC?
Simple example - in the middle of the 70's oil shock no one would carpool (or even give their friends a ride) to work because they were all dead scared of being sued if they had an accident
And with good reason. Going back to the heady days of Commercial Law 101 yet again, our introduction to torts included some of the personal injury cases brought back in the day, including a car pooling case. It wasn't just an abstract risk.
-
You're like a riding, talking advertisement for not commuting on a bike!
As I said to the ambo who rode in the back with me to the hospital, "I am the statistic." That in the context of me having also had a pedestrian (who's never going to do it again) dash out in front of me while I was coming through Newmarket 10 days prior.
Yes, it can be risky. But I've also had a bad run. Three accidents, two involving transport to hospital, in the space of 10 months is not good numbers. However, I commuted by bicycle over the exact same route for 18 months before that without incident. I'm careful, but sometimes shit happens (as with the latest one), and sometimes people are idiots who shouldn't be allowed near a road.
-
And Americans seem to grasp quickly that it's socialised compulsory insurance, and ask why it doesn't apply to illness too.
Well, in theory it doesn't need to apply to illness because our health system is already socialised.
When you have a common law system, the availability of tort remedies means that people will go after others who cause them inconvenience. It's the nature of the beast. ACC removes that avenue, even though our health system would treat the injured regardless (but with the caveat that non-residents would be billed for treatment, as doesn't happen under ACC).
Illness doesn't offer a cause of action, for the most part, and where it does it's usually covered under ACC. ACC is about keeping the lawyers out of it, rather than about ensuring that everyone is covered for all possible medical-related eventualities.
Consider this: we're the only common law country where you cannot sue for personal injury. That's courtesy of ACC. We're not the only country with socialised health care, though. Not even vaguely close. Not the only common law country with it, either. -
Oh, yeah, and may I say how absolutely thankful I am that this hasn't turned into a thread about rugby. I could barely care less about it, and I know I'm not alone. I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage of rugby-agnostic people on PAS was higher than in the general population, either.
-
Good point, David. There are some horror stories on OverLawyered about lawyers taking their cut. Or for something closer to home, check out this one from Aus. The only people who win under an at-fault system are lawyers.
-
That post got way longer than I anticipated, so I'll now deal to the abolition of ACC.
A month ago, in yet another bicycle accident, I had my front wheel slip into a drain with the result being me doing a superman act over the handlebars before dislocating my shoulder. Courtesy of ACC, I was transported to hospital, dosed up on painkillers, x-rayed, shoulder reduced, x-rayed again, had my chin stitched up, and given a follow-up visit to an orthopaedic surgeon 10 days later, all for free. I'll ignore the exorbitant cost of my post-discharge tramadol prescription.
If I was in the US and self-insuring I'd have faced an invoice for the emergency treatment that came in well over a grand, probably more like two or three. There was entonox, oxygen, tramadol, morphine, fentanyl, medazolam, plus the x-rays, the sutures, the time of the house officer, the consultant who was required during the conscious sedation administered while they did the reduction, and the radiologist and radiographer. Toss in two ambulance officers and the ambulance ride and it was a pretty expensive morning. As a student, even though I work part-time I don't have a huge income. My disposable income for pretty much an entire year would've been blown on that one accident.
If I had medical insurance, the premiums would probably be setting me back $50/month. I'm in good health, but I also commute by bicycle and that makes me a risk. I've been involved in a crash before (see above), and that makes me even riskier. $50/month is a fair chunk of my disposable income. Affordable, but not in any way inexpensive. Oh, and that's based on what medical insurance costs at present, not what it would cost if we went into a situation like the US where it's not really optional and the lack of choice means premiums are much, much higher.
The other side of medical insurance is the potential for it to be voided. What if the carrier decided that I was being reckless by not getting off my bike while going past a sunk grate? It wouldn't be unheard-of for cover to be denied for something like that. So then I'd be back with a large bill, still paying premiums, and up the creek. I could sue the council, because if the grate hadn't been sunk into the road surface I could've gone over it instead of having to try to go around it (which was why my wheel was able to slip in). But me vs the Auckland City Council? Sounds like a Tui billboard.Instead we have this great system where part of my wages are taken away and I get fully covered for what was an entirely legitimate accident. I don't have to worry about how I'll pay for it all, and I don't have to see a lawyer to go and chase the council. I don't have to worry about going broke trying to pay for physio. It's all covered, and I can get on with my physical recovery instead of concerning myself with financial recovery.
So, to your "abolish ACC" nonsense, I say screw you and your lawyer-loving, wannabe-Yank ideas.