weight, diet, and exercise are not the source of all the problems. I'm on blood pressure meds, not because I don't eat right. Not because I don't exercise. Not because I'm obese (Overweight yes, obese, no). For me, it's hereditary. I simply can't get the bp down with other methods.

But there are lots of other problems causing health care costs to sky rocket. Tort law needs to be reformed. Most doctors own nothing. Their home, cars, etc are all owned by their spouse so that should they get sued, they won't lose everything. There is a huge need for obstetricians in the US because the risk of getting sued is causing doctors to go into other specialties.

The FDA needs to be torn apart and replaced with a group that uses some intelligence. There are medications that have been on the market in Europe for years that still require additional testing for the US at the cost of billions of dollars. Should the drug companies want to do that testing, the costs are passed on to the consumer. Should they not want to do the testing, then the drugs simply won't be available here. Either way, the public suffers.

I'm not saying Obamacare is the answer. But there are other things that need to be done.


>If you think the government should provide free health care,
>Shouldn't the government then also get to decide what you eat,
>And shouldn't the government also get to force you to exercise daily.
>
>What percentage of healthcare issues are caused by an individual's choices? 75%? 90%?
>
>If you want the freedom to smoke and eat like shit and never exercise why should tax payers pick up the healthcare tab for your choices?
>
>At the same time, what happens to those people who have health-related problems that are not a result of their choices? Shouldn't they be able to get help? Where do you draw the line?
>
>Why does American healthcare continue to treat the symptoms rather than the source of the problem? How many obese people are on countless medications (high blood pressure, high this, high that) when the root of all their health issues is weight, diet, and exercise? Why aren't they prescribed a gym membership and fresh veggies. Why should taxpayers have to pay for their medicines while they spend their money on crappy food and $150/month cable T.V. packages and $100/month iPhone plans?
>
>If you smoke your whole life and get lung cancer why should taxpayers pay your very, very expensive treatment?
>
>If we're not going to force everyone to buy health insurance then don't we have to accept that people will die because they can't afford the treatment that will save them, no matter the cost (cheap or not)? Are we willing to go there? Doesn't that seem draconian?
>
>This is an open-ended diatribe. I have no answers. I am curious of others' opinions though.