Changes coming to the DOT physical....

The problem sometimes is we are asking the wrong people for answers. Asking the CME why this is that way or this way isn't very useful. They generally don't know the full reasons why rules are put in place, simply that they are and it's their job to follow them.


Ed

 

States all have their own insurance commissions and such regulating the insurance industry within each state. There is no need for federal regulations, especially when insurance companies are only allowed to sell to individuals and corporations within the state. One would think that simple fact would render federal regulation of the industry unconstitutional, since the Constitution only granted the federal government the power to regulate interstate commerce, not intrastate. Hell, the current situation with this Obamacare crap, your insurance might not even cover you if you happen to be out of state unless you pay extra for the states you might be in when you need medical treatment. So if you can't buy it across state lines, and you may not be able to use it across state lines, WHERE does the federal government receive its authority to regulate?

And as for your argument that "no alternatives have been suggested", that's bull excrement. There have been GOP proposals that were DOA in the Senate because Harry Reid wouldn't allow them to come up for debate. Of course the left wing media (ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN/AP/etc...) will do everything they can to hide that fact from the general public because it doesn't fit their narrative you've bought into that "there is no alternative". Hell, one such plan was put together by Trump's pick for HHS Secretary...but you wouldn't know that (and others) existed unless you were paying attention.

 

I'm not going to argue with you about what should or shouldn't be. Simple fact, the ACA governs many parts of profitcare. That is a fact, not an opinion. Arguing about whether that is right or wrong is useless. The supreme court has already ruled, move on.

As for alternatives, well sure, many have been bandied about, but if they're not even being discussed in the senate or congress they aren't really valid alternatives are they? I've looked into many of them and they all seem to be in love with the high deductible plan. You can read above how I feel about that. At this point in time, there are NO alternatives being put to a vote or even close to it. The GOP, as I already mentioned, can't even agree to fully repeal the ACA never mind come up with a full plan to replace it. Just because someone has an idea doesn't make it a valid option. Any no brainer can come up with a plan but if they can't sell the plan to their own party, it's not a valid option now is it?

You assume too much my friend. You have no idea what I read or don't read, what I pay attention to or don't.


Edit: And just as an aside, CNN has published many articles on some of the ideas that have been brought up for replacements. So perhaps it's you who aren't looking in the right places? The fact remains, when they're being kicked without discussion or vote they're not really a valid alternative.


Ed

 

This is what sleep apnea looks likes if anybody wants to see, you can see when it happen even when someone is sleeping. You can see every breath someone takes in the top graph, then you can see the line go flat when their not breathing.

 

thats Obstructive Airway, no air movement because airway is block, a person is sleeping and trying to breath but not getting any air in lungs. I believe Central Apnea/CA sleep apnea is when you airway is open but you brain does not send the signal to breath, that the bad one.

 

in 15 years it's going to be almost as regulated as astronauts.