The unofficial Obamacare thread...

[CleveRocks]

So he is a good kid, a bit on the nerd herd side, and has always been there. (He chose Case so...Social Skills are not likely his strong suit. Chemistry was his major, and he studies a lot. Not an athlete. Was in Scouts but not all the way through the program. Parents got divorced while he was in High school and it was pretty messy..

In any case I was just asking the question. I am not taking anything away from my doctors. They are generally a pretty good crowd. But I am trying to understand the mechanics. When I was at Case, half my class were premeds the first year, but by the end of my senior year most had become metalurgists. The few that did not get grade crushed got into med schools, and the one I knew with the 4.00 wound up at John Hopkins. I knew another one that got out with a 3.2 and still got into Toledo, but his dad was a doctor.

I know the AMA limits the number of Docs with intent. Maybe that drives up demand for skilled foreigners who want to immigrate. Seems like Doctors would pretty much go to the top of that list. But I would really like to understand it.

 

[Sebastian]

3.95 is excellent. Grades on basic sciences? (Chemistry, Organic Chemistry, physics, biology?)
What was his major?

The MCAT scoring system keeps changing. 92 is what, his percentile?

If he got a 3.95 for classes, all taken at Case, with 3.95 grades in the basic sciences and 92nd percentile in the MCATs, he ought to get into medical school somewhere, certainly a DO school.

Did he apply to every medical school in Ohio? Some outside of Ohio? Is he a resident of Ohio? Any DO schools?

If those are his numbers he should widen his net, apply again and try the top DO schools.

I can't imagine him not getting into DO schools with those numbers. Shit, based off the metrics, he'd get in with a 3.6 and 27 (70th percentile). Medicine is medicine.

 

[jvlgato]

Agree, he should get in. Did you see my post right before the one you answered? Curious how many schools he applied to and which ones?

Hell, we're all geeks by definition. But eventually learned to look passable socially.

 

[Sebastian]

Agree, he should get in. Did you see my post right before the one you answered? Curious how many schools he applied to and which ones?

Everyone wants to go to school in a big city. Many applicants. Lots of good schools in the middle of nowhere with fewer of the same types of applicants.

 

[jvlgato]

True. Med school is med school.

DO school is fine.

Some excellent students figure they'll get in for sure or think it's below them to apply to smaller schools and apply to only 1-2 of the biggies. I applied to every Ohio school plus my own college Northwestern. I was accepted at every Ohuo school but not NU. Go figure ... but I heard after the fact it can be hardest to get into your own school because everyone applies to their own school so you're competing against a much greater pool of applicants. They like to get a diverse student population and want x number from this or that school, x number of this or that major, x number with this or that experience etc ...

So NU gets 500 applicants from NU. But at Case, I was mostly competing with other NU students from Ohio, maybe 10 or less? And of those, they all applied to every other Ohio school just like me.

Again, a big reason why he'd want to apply to a bunch of different schools.

Not sure what happened to @CleveRocks friend.

@CleveRocks I'd be happy to look at his application and transcript if he'd like to forward it to me through you. Maybe I can pick up on something he's doing wrong? Just a thought. I don't mean to trash your friend here. He sounds like a very good applicant. So good, that I don't understand why he couldn't get into ANY medical schools. Maybe he applied to OSU and Case, and Johns Hopkins and Harvard, and figured why bother with anyone else?

What kind of doc does he want to be?

 

[Hurl Bruce]

When can we openly discuss the President and his super awesome first three months on the job?

 

[Hurl Bruce]

If the people who are pro-life believe that life begins at conception is there such thing as a pre-existing condition going forward? Shouldn't everybody be covered as soon as egg meets sperm and everything that happens after the first cells split be a new condition?

 

[David.]

If the people who are pro-life believe that life begins at conception is there such thing as a pre-existing condition going forward? Shouldn't everybody be covered as soon as egg meets sperm and everything that happens after the first cells split be a new condition?

Can you explain a little more? I can sort of understand theres a vein to explore, but can you make a more concrete argument?






..is insurance pointless for me? I dont want to spend 300 a month for premium with a thousand dollar deductible for therapy and rx basically

 

[Hurl Bruce]

Can you explain a little more? I can sort of understand theres a vein to explore, but can you make a more concrete argument?






..is insurance pointless for me? I dont want to spend 300 a month for premium with a thousand dollar deductible for therapy and rx basically

That whole Jimmy Kimmel monologue about his baby almost dying then mentioning that what his son had wrong with his heart at birth would have been labeled a pre-existing condition and wouldn't be covered under Trumpcare. I just thought that it would be wrong for a party that believes life to exist at conception would also call a condition that is there at birth as pre-existing. Shouldn't that baby be covered under its parent's health insurance as soon as conception occurs and everything after that be a new condition?

 

[Wrathe]

If the people who are pro-life believe that life begins at conception is there such thing as a pre-existing condition going forward? Shouldn't everybody be covered as soon as egg meets sperm and everything that happens after the first cells split be a new condition?

I'm pro-life. I believe life begins at conception. What exactly are you asking?

 

[Wrathe]

That whole Jimmy Kimmel monologue about his baby almost dying then mentioning that what his son had wrong with his heart at birth would have been labeled a pre-existing condition and wouldn't be covered under Trumpcare. I just thought that it would be wrong for a party that believes life to exist at conception would also call a condition that is there at birth as pre-existing. Shouldn't that baby be covered under its parent's health insurance as soon as conception occurs and everything after that be a new condition?

It's horseshit. My kids came under my policy as soon as they're born. Pre-existing doesn't count as, "existing at birth". Now, if you're trying to add coverage and you don't have any already for yourself (surely not Kimmel's situation), then I can see w/o pre-existing conditions causing a problem.

All that said, I believe pre-existing should be covered anyways.

 

[David.]

It's horseshit. My kids came under my policy as soon as they're born. Pre-existing doesn't count as, "existing at birth". Now, if you're trying to add coverage and you don't have any already for yourself (surely not Kimmel's situation), then I can see w/o pre-existing conditions causing a problem.

All that said, I believe pre-existing should be covered anyways.

Theres no winning answer.

If you cover p.e. conditions, its not insurance anymore and healthy people subsidize terminally ill people for example.

Its an absolute godsend for terminally ill people. No doubt. But theres a lot of people who cant afford to address debilitating issues as consequence. Itll cost me 25k per annum before i get a dime applied to help with mental health.

 

[Wrathe]

Theres no winning answer.

If you cover p.e. conditions, its not insurance Any More anf healthy people subsidize terminally ill people for example.

Its an absolute godsend for terminally ill people. No doubt. But theres a lot of people who cant afford to address debilitating issues as consequence. Itll cost me 25k per annum before i get a dime applied to help with mental health.

Approaching it from a capitalist mentality, I agree.

This is one where ethically, I think you have to compartmentalize that and cover healthcare (which btw, should include mental health as well).

 

[David.]

Approaching it from a capitalist mentality, I agree.

This is one where ethically, I think you have to compartmentalize that and cover healthcare (which btw, should include mental health as well).

I agree with you, you really have to wrestle around with this. Youre put jn the position where youre the bad guy for wanting to get yout head on straight so you can function in society, and the only way you can get that is if you tell people with cancer to go fuck themselves. It's a difficult position to take obviously. And the flip side of the coin is if you refuse to fight for your own self interest, youre not going to last much time any way, at least without excruciating suffering.

There doesnt seem to be a great answer for everybody. Such is life

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Theres no winning answer.

If you cover p.e. conditions, its not insurance anymore and healthy people subsidize terminally ill people for example.

Its an absolute godsend for terminally ill people. No doubt. But theres a lot of people who cant afford to address debilitating issues as consequence. Itll cost me 25k per annum before i get a dime applied to help with mental health.

The issue isn't really not wanting to cover people with pre-existing conditions. It's not wanting to let people game the system by waiting until they have a major expense to get coverage.

That can be addressed directly, but would require a willingness to say "screw you" to people who did attempt to game the system.