rebl01's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/197119/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/95981-which-company-should-replace-aig-in-the-dow?source=feed#comment-257302 257302 Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:26:46 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/81246-10-reasons-in-store-clinics-will-succeed?source=feed#comment-187016 187016
Therefore, Wal-Mart, CVS, and Walgreens are much better off pairing with a local health system simply to garner the necessary traffic to support themselves. (Such as Mayo Health System, Harvard Health system, etc.) Retail clinics are not succeeding where they are needed most, underserved poor areas. These individuals could not afford the basic services no matter how cheap they are. Therefore most of the successful walk in clinics are located in surburbs. (Where most of the people already have ins)

I know of too many incidents where patients end up paying more because they go to these non health system affiliated clinics (minute clinic, NOW Care) with problems they are not qualified to treat. by having the NP part of the health system and the patient in the system he or she can better direct them to either their primary care doctor or urgent care / emergency room.

I also know of many primary care clinics that are now fighting back with better hours, (open Sat & Sun), open scheduling, and a number of new services. One even put a minute clinic out of business. Why go to a minute clinic when you have the ability to see your doctor or go to an urgent care?

So the best thing that has come from the clinics is that primary care (Pediatrics, Family Medicine, Internal Medicine) are now becoming more competitive and offering hours and services that the public needs and wants.

If only we could get to a point where all health care was POS (point of sale), But so long as Medicare and Medicaid cost shift onto those of us who are insured we will continue to have to pay much higher healthcare costs. I know if we went to a POS system you could then get a 30 minute appt for probably 50% less than you are paying now. (But that would mean higher costs for medicare and medicaid patients..........ther... it will never happen)


]]> Tue, 17 Jun 2008 09:59:15 -0400
Therefore, Wal-Mart, CVS, and Walgreens are much better off pairing with a local health system simply to garner the necessary traffic to support themselves. (Such as Mayo Health System, Harvard Health system, etc.) Retail clinics are not succeeding where they are needed most, underserved poor areas. These individuals could not afford the basic services no matter how cheap they are. Therefore most of the successful walk in clinics are located in surburbs. (Where most of the people already have ins)

I know of too many incidents where patients end up paying more because they go to these non health system affiliated clinics (minute clinic, NOW Care) with problems they are not qualified to treat. by having the NP part of the health system and the patient in the system he or she can better direct them to either their primary care doctor or urgent care / emergency room.

I also know of many primary care clinics that are now fighting back with better hours, (open Sat & Sun), open scheduling, and a number of new services. One even put a minute clinic out of business. Why go to a minute clinic when you have the ability to see your doctor or go to an urgent care?

So the best thing that has come from the clinics is that primary care (Pediatrics, Family Medicine, Internal Medicine) are now becoming more competitive and offering hours and services that the public needs and wants.

If only we could get to a point where all health care was POS (point of sale), But so long as Medicare and Medicaid cost shift onto those of us who are insured we will continue to have to pay much higher healthcare costs. I know if we went to a POS system you could then get a 30 minute appt for probably 50% less than you are paying now. (But that would mean higher costs for medicare and medicaid patients..........ther... it will never happen)


]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/78183-are-we-at-the-bottom-of-the-ethanol-barrel?source=feed#comment-171391 171391 Wed, 21 May 2008 20:27:05 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/78183-are-we-at-the-bottom-of-the-ethanol-barrel?source=feed#comment-171270 171270
Less than 2 % of the US corn crop is used for human consumption as cereal grain. We use almost as much for pet food as we do for cereal consumption. About 6 to 7% of the corn crop is used to make fructose and sweetners. (It’s cheaper than sugar, and sugar is surplus)

The corn to ethanol industry only uses the starch portion of the kernel. All of the protein, oil, fibers, minerals, vitamins, and other components remain and are available for utilization as food for either human consumption, or for their traditional use as livestock feed. This remaining portion is commonly referred to as DDGS.

In the dry mill ethanol industry, less than 2/3rds of the energy in a bushel of corn ends up as a liquid fuel. The remaining Btu’s/calories are in the protein, fiber, oil, etc. (DDGS). When those products are priced by the marketplace, it pays four times as much for the liquid fuel as it does the food portion.

When you read or hear that it takes almost as much energy to produce ethanol as it yields, the 136,000 Btu’s per bushel remaining in the DDGS is conveniently or mistakenly overlooked.

The amount of water needed continues to decrease.

One needs to look back at the infancy of the oil industry. How efficient were they? As I recall gasoline was a byproduct no one knew what to do with. Do I think corn alone is the answer, no, but we are getting there. While not able to invest in them I look at Range Fuels technology being the great leap forward for this industry.

]]> Wed, 21 May 2008 16:33:10 -0400
Less than 2 % of the US corn crop is used for human consumption as cereal grain. We use almost as much for pet food as we do for cereal consumption. About 6 to 7% of the corn crop is used to make fructose and sweetners. (It’s cheaper than sugar, and sugar is surplus)

The corn to ethanol industry only uses the starch portion of the kernel. All of the protein, oil, fibers, minerals, vitamins, and other components remain and are available for utilization as food for either human consumption, or for their traditional use as livestock feed. This remaining portion is commonly referred to as DDGS.

In the dry mill ethanol industry, less than 2/3rds of the energy in a bushel of corn ends up as a liquid fuel. The remaining Btu’s/calories are in the protein, fiber, oil, etc. (DDGS). When those products are priced by the marketplace, it pays four times as much for the liquid fuel as it does the food portion.

When you read or hear that it takes almost as much energy to produce ethanol as it yields, the 136,000 Btu’s per bushel remaining in the DDGS is conveniently or mistakenly overlooked.

The amount of water needed continues to decrease.

One needs to look back at the infancy of the oil industry. How efficient were they? As I recall gasoline was a byproduct no one knew what to do with. Do I think corn alone is the answer, no, but we are getting there. While not able to invest in them I look at Range Fuels technology being the great leap forward for this industry.

]]>