I don't think enough diabetes sufferers have the iron willpower that you do to successfully execute the lifestyle changes you refer to. As someone with that disease, I have personally made an effort and honestly come up short. If Congress cannot come up with an Obamacare-elimination compromise I see no way it would ever come up with a compromise that did not allow the millions of diabetes sufferers to get some form of continued care.
That which you intentionally do, once informed, is not "suffering." It's choice.
Are you REALLY telling me that cookies, breads and donuts are more important than having your feet or eyesight?
Because that's really what we're talking about here.
And by the way, I eat this way now. Voluntarily, since while I was never diabetic I was surely odds-on to be headed that way just as are MOST Americans.
It's not "iron willpower", it's choice. And by the way, it's tasty too -- FAR MORE SO than the cookies and donuts are.
What would happen if you ran the numbers of your plan without that specific vindictive feature?
It's not vindictive; it's factual.
There is nothing vindictive about telling someone that they cannot bill someone else for a personal decision
to take the most expensive and least effective
choice available when it comes to a particular disorder, along with intentionally exacerbating the condition
on top of it.
If you're Type II diabetic you can change the progression of the disease any time you want
. You can't reverse the cut-off foot or the kidney dialysis you ALREADY NEED but you can CERTAINLY prevent the foot from needing to be cut off NEXT YEAR or the dialysis you WILL need if you keep eating the fast carbs.
I would think that if you got diabetes patients on a plan with the low cost features you advocate, it would not be that expensive to treat them and your plan would still function much better than any other idea currently proposed.
This is a disease that is nearly 100% controllable for life without much if any medication. Without it there is no such thing as "reasonable control" for life; it is progressive, it gets more expensive over time and it ultimately kills you either directly or indirectly.
roughly ONE QUARTER of the federal Medicare+Medicaid expense -- for just ONE disorder!
Yes, it would be cheaper without the monopolist bullshit. But if it's $100 billion instead of $400 billion the fact remains that there is a difference between a disease you have contracted (whether through fault of your own or not) and cannot do anything about
(e.g. HIV, Lupus, etc) and a disorder that you can stop the progression of at any point in time.
On what planet do you get to choose the MOST expensive option and send someone ELSE
the bill? It is EXACTLY this paradigm that has led us to where we are.
Your response is in fact why there's no progress and never will be until it all blows up and then you will DIE for lack of treatment because there's no fucking money to pay for it -- not yours or anyone else's.
Your insistence that you MUST eat those fast carbs and bill someone else
for ever-more expensive drugs that over time inevitably lose their ability to control the condition BECAUSE YOU REFUSE TO STOP MAKING IT WORSE
reason why we are where we are with "health care" in this country.