CPAPtalk.com

I agree with Laurie 1041 she in my opinion has made a very good point,it is basically what your HMO's are goin to do about your coveraged IF they find out that youre changing your Rx prescribed number's.As it is we all know the challenges that some of us face just to have them cover for our treatment,machines,consumables ,etc. This may give them (Provider's) enought cause to drop you from coveraged of treatment. As some have all ready found out over other treatments.It doesn't take much from them(Provider's) just to say (Not Cover ) Her last paragraph on her post made a lot of sense to me, providing that you have a Doctor that would listen to you and is willing to work with you..and therefore document the changes.... Remember Insurances Dont Want to Pay Unless they Have To!!!


Regards: Phil


Regards: Phil

This question is discussed a lot in the past.

One point that is never addressed is the difference in an order and a prescription.

The PAP and Masks refer to an ORDER required, not a PRESCRIPTION.
This implies that PAP etc are under the same laws as penicillin.

There is an important difference.
An Rx would require a pharmacist to dispense it.

The laws are not the same.

tomjax wrote:This question is discussed a lot in the past.

One point that is never addressed is the difference in an order and a prescription.

The PAP and Masks refer to an ORDER required, not a PRESCRIPTION.
This implies that PAP etc are under the same laws as penicillin.

There is an important difference.
An Rx would require a pharmacist to dispense it.

The laws are not the same.

I guess that it has to do with the state or country that you live in, to my knowledged i believe that an Rx is required for penicillin in my state, therefore requiring a pharmacist dispersal.On the other hand the Pap & Mask may be an order but i believe that the setting's for the Pap might be a Rx.

Phil

Hi All

Having just finished watching two seasons of Boston Legal I now consider myself somewhat of an expert in American Law. So it seems to me that what jonquiljo says is correct.

jonquiljo wrote:
the "reality" of the law is that you do what you can get away with - law or not.

The writing of imprecise laws, or leaving out necessary clarification, is well known in Australia, as it appears to be in America. You would think that precisely defining words would be part of any law, but somehow it gets omitted, or fudged.

But even when there is no law in Australia that says I cannot change my pressure, those who want to make money by controlling my pressure changes still insist that I cannot do it. But my Sleep Doctor, who does not make money on this, and is a great Doctor, has absolutely no problem with me deciding what pressure I use. Only the cpap machine providers lie to me about this.

I guess my Doctor figures that I know what I am doing.

In the crazy world that Cpap Therapy lives in, it is no wonder that Boston Legal seems so reasonable, and I guess that both can give us a laugh. (once we stop crying).

cheers

Mars

Edited to reflect Boston Legal "You have a job to do, and so do I."

Mine is self-care.

Sorry, but I have to wonder what the real purpose of this "discussion" was.

The only possible answer seems to be to make people wary of changing their own xPAP settings, or, at the very least, to give them something else to worry about. Either that, or it was another instance of "mental masturbation," which we see here from time to time from those with some "hidden" agenda.

Did you get your law degree from a box of candy?

nobody wrote:Did you get your law degree from a box of candy?

He is so offensive.

nobody wrote:Did you get your law degree from a box of candy?

Like I said, I knew better.

I came into this forum because it seemed people here were interested in open discussion about CPAP and the circumstances surrounding their therapy. I heard time and time again about how "knowledge is power" and how "we need to learn all we can about our therapy and disease".

In reality, the majority in this group is only interested in hearing what they want to hear. If somebody dares to challenge what all of you KNOW is true then those people need to be insulted and ostracized as quickly as possible to prevent them from contaminating the common wisdom around here. Try to inject some new idea or suggestions and you're just engaging in "mental masturbation" or promoting a "hidden agenda".

Ah well. Thanks to those who made thought-out, well reasoned responses and tried to engage in a dialogue. You're an asset to the group and I wish you well trying to help yourselves and the others here who would listen. Hopefully you can knock some sense into those who won't. I just don't have the time and energy to waste arguing with people who think insults are a form of persuasion. Good luck to those of you with a brain.

My law degree, BTW, comes from a top ten law school, Before I entered the business world I had the privilege of representing indigent clients before local and state courts, several federal districts, three US Circuit Courts of Appeal, and two cases on both brief and oral argument before the US Supreme Court. You know that it's a sad state of affairs when they let a guy who got his degree from a box of candy do stuff like that. I'm know that sounds like bragging - and it is. I'm proud of my service to the poor before the courts of this country. If there's one thing that this experience has taught me it's that I need to spend less time on the internet and more time in the free legal clinic I volunteer at. At least there people appreciate it when someone offers them help.

Cheers and luck to all of you in both life and therapy.
XJ.

Is that whiny post supposed to make me feel guilty?

xj220c wrote:

nobody wrote:Did you get your law degree from a box of candy?

In reality, the majority in this group is only interested in hearing what they want to hear. If somebody dares to challenge what all of you KNOW is true then those people need to be insulted and ostracized as quickly as possible to prevent them from contaminating the common wisdom around here. Try to inject some new idea or suggestions and you're just engaging in "mental masturbation" or promoting a "hidden agenda".

I am copying this before it gets deleted. Well said.

NotMuffy wrote:

xj220c wrote:The section of the California regs you quote deals with licensing of clinical workers.

That line is a template that appears in many states' licensure laws:

http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/statutes/T ... 3-39-4.HTM
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/ful ... hapter=091
http://www.legis.state.wv.us/wvcode/cod ... =30&art=34

West Virginia has an interesting line:

§30-34-16. Practice of medicine prohibited.
Nothing in this article may be construed to permit the practice of medicine.

However, given that line's ("Self-care by the patient or the gratuitous care by a friend or member of the family who does not represent or hold himself or herself out to be a respiratory care practitioner") location in the statutes, I believe your interpretation is correct-- if one decides to wing their dials around, they wouldn't get arrested for practicing Respiratory Care without a license.

One last comment to try and clear this issue up.

You're absolutely correct in your interpretation of the statute. If you change your settings in a state with such a law you won't get hassled for practicing without a license. That does not, however, have any impact on any other law regulating medical devices or insurance reimbursements. Laws are separate, not cumulative. The statute cited does not allow you to get around anything but practicing without a license.

Think of it this way, suppose the law said that working on your own car is not considered "repairing a motor vehicle without a license". Does that mean you're allowed to remove your airbags or your seat belts and drive around without them? It sure don't. One law permitting one thing does not trump all the other that prohibit something else.

Cheers,
XJ.

nobody wrote:Is that whiny post supposed to make me feel guilty?

Nope. Guilt has nothing to do with it. I was speaking only to your complete lack of maturity.

Cheers,
XJ.

xj220c wrote:

nobody wrote:Did you get your law degree from a box of candy?

Like I said, I knew better.

Hey, there are spoilers everywhere. Learning to deal with them , or ignore them, is part of the Forum experience.

Reasoned discussions are possible on this Forum, ( ) but you almost always have to work your way around the spoilers. And should you start to use false logic or dishonest arguements, you will be challenged.

As a new cpap user you will probably find it useful to stick around, and I suggest you list your equipment if you do.

cheers

Mars

Edited to avoid unwarranted acrimonious dissention.

Sleepyhead22 wrote:

xj220c wrote:

nobody wrote:Did you get your law degree from a box of candy?

In reality, the majority in this group is only interested in hearing what they want to hear. If somebody dares to challenge what all of you KNOW is true then those people need to be insulted and ostracized as quickly as possible to prevent them from contaminating the common wisdom around here. Try to inject some new idea or suggestions and you're just engaging in "mental masturbation" or promoting a "hidden agenda".

I am copying this before it gets deleted. Well said.

I have a fundamental problem with this on a lot of levels. It's been said a few times that IF a person's goal is to help educate and share their point of view, their METHOD of doing it is paramount to their success. Coming to a forum like this and starting your first post with "patients are stupid" is NOT putting yourself in a position to be well received. I have a hard time understanding why a person would chose to ignore this basic reality. If you want to convince someone of a different point of view, you have to appeal to them on a level that gets them to hear you, not piss them off.

Another forum I participated on was one about discussing discipline styles. Now, I think we can all agree that subject is way more emotional than sleep apnea. There was one man who CLAIMED to be a child development expert. He CLAIMED his goal was to help people find other methods of disciplining their children rather than physical punishments. Sounds good, right? Except the instant a person said they spanked their children, he called them a child abuser and asked how they liked breaking the law and abusing their children. Even people that agreed with his viewpoint (not spanking) tried to get him to see that his METHOD of sharing the information was totally counterproductive to the supposed goal he had. But he was an arrogant man who felt that whatever he said was right and that was that. And he did more harm than good for his cause.

So the comment that the vast majority of people here are only interested in hearing what they want to hear is offensive to me on so many levels. If you want ME to listen to YOU, try having some common decency and respect.

Edited to add: I don't have a problem with the OP on this. I feel the information was provided in a respectful manner and I read it with interest. I'm referring to the blatent statement that was made.

jonquiljo wrote:You've been prescribed the thing and it is yours - you can do whatever you want with it.

You have a prescription. You have a machine. You can do anything you want.

Um...no. You may use it yourself in the manner prescribed. Let's suppose you have a prescription for Oxicontin. Do you really think you may legally sell/give/transfer it to another person? Do you think you can legally use it in any manner or dosage other than what is prescribed? Shoot it, snort it...or, considering your location, shove it?

My prescription has a pressure specified. If your doctor is competent, yours does too. If there IS a specific regulation addressing this, that is where it will lie. Using it in a manner contrary to that prescribed. Sadly, it would appear the lawmakers rely on common sense in this area. Obviously, they overestimate some of us.