Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

If you are to have some form of universal health care over there you have to bite the bullet and begin to control the cost side of the equation. The regime of testing to cover off the doctors liability rather than clinical need should be addressed, as should capping liability and restricting the take of the legal profession in medical matters.

---

I agree.

Interestingly enough, they initiated tort reform at the state level in Texas.

The result was significantly lower medical costs for every procedure and an influx of roughly 7500 doctors into the state because of the favorable business environment for doctors.

As I have said before, medical malpractice insurance, the costs of defense against frivolous lawsuits, the costs of paying out to get rid of nuisance suits, and the costs of unnecessary testing as a CYA measure, make up over 60% of the rise in medical costs over the past 20 years. If we lower these costs, as they did in Tx, we lower the costs of medical care across the board.

It can work. It HAS worked. And it could work again.

But Obama won't try it because it is counterproductive to his REAL goal, which has NOTHING to do with health care reform, and everything to do with grabbing power.

Want more proof of that?

If Obama's goal was to lower medical costs, he could do it by making medical expenses pre-tax. That would automatically lower the effective cost of health care by 15-30% (depending on your tax bracket), and wouldn't cost anyone a dime.

Instead he's contemplating taxing the costs of certain medical procedures and taxing the pre-tax portion of medical insurance paid by employers. He's doing the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he should be doing to lower the costs of health care.

Clearly lowering health care costs is NOT his goal. Something else is. And the only possibility of what that could be is a power grab. There is NO OTHER POSSIBLE REASON for him to take the actions he is taking.

Elliot

The Proctologist-in-Chief, the guy that will end doctors cutting off limbs and removing tonsils for fun and profit, has given us the ultimate reason to pass his plan:

Quote:

---

Now, when we pass health insurance reform, insurance companies will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. And we will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because no one in America should go broke because they get sick. (Applause.)

And finally -- this is important -- we will require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies -- (applause) -- because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer and prostate cancer on the front end. That makes sense, it saves lives; it also saves money -- and we need to save money in this health care system.

---

I didn't realize they were doing colonoscopies to check your prostate now but perhaps his plan is something like giving a prostate exam to the country.

According to the Hoover Institute Americans are already screened for such things at a much higher rate than Canadians already:

Quote:

---

4. Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians. Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate, and colon cancer:

* Nine out of ten middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to fewer than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).

* Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a Pap smear, compared to fewer than 90 percent of Canadians.

* More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a prostatespecific antigen (PSA) test, compared to fewer than one in six Canadians (16 percent).

* Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with fewer than one in twenty Canadians (5 percent).

---

I'm sure NK will correct them on that, but I believe it's probably accurate and I'd like to know how Obamacare will improve on those numbers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

The Proctologist-in-Chief, the guy that will end doctors cutting off limbs and removing tonsils for fun and profit,

---

News from the American College of Surgeons: Statement from the American College of Surgeons Regarding Recent Comments from President Obama

Quote:

---

When the President makes statements that are incorrect or not based in fact, we think he does a disservice to the American people at a time when they want clear, understandable facts about health care reform. We want to set the record straight.


Three weeks ago, the President suggested that a surgeon’s decision to remove a child’s tonsils is based on the desire to make a lot of money. That remark was ill-informed and dangerous, and we were dismayed by this characterization of the work surgeons do. Surgeons make decisions about recommending operations based on what’s right for the patient.

We agree with the President that the best thing for patients with diabetes is to manage the disease proactively to avoid the bad consequences that can occur, including blindness, stroke, and amputation. But as is the case for a person who has been treated for cancer and still needs to have a tumor removed, or a person who is in a terrible car crash and needs access to a trauma surgeon, there are times when even a perfectly managed diabetic patient needs a surgeon. The President’s remarks are truly alarming and run the risk of damaging the all-important trust between surgeons and their patients.

We assume that the President made these mistakes unintentionally, but we would urge him to have his facts correct before making another inflammatory and incorrect statement about surgeons and surgical care.

---

First it was the Cambridge cops acting stupidly, now it is the greedy surgeons.
What group will be next in this administrations hit list?


When Sarah Palin made the outrageous "death panel" comment, a lot of folks were taken aback, yet section 1233 of HR 3200 was removed ? The popular media thinks she and those who question Obamacare are spreading "lies," but the reality is Obama cannot even get his facts right. Either Obama is ignorant as to checking the facts or he maliciously makes up things to support his agenda.








G&P

Quote:

---

A small victory?

Finance Committee to drop end-of-life provision

---

The Death Panel ;as Sarah Palin correctly identifies it is already the law as of the bucket list stimulus bill. They snuck it into the bill .It allocates $1.1 billion for it's funding .

It is called the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research. The Council is the brain child of Tom Daschle.

I had forgotten about it ;but former NY Lt. Guv. Betsy McCaughey wrote about it in Feb.



Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey - Bloomberg.com

Quote:

---

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle's book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.


The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle's book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

Hiding health legislation in a stimulus bill is intentional. Daschle supported the Clinton administration's health-care overhaul in 1994, and attributed its failure to debate and delay. A year ago, Daschle wrote that the next president should act quickly before critics mount an opposition. “If that means attaching a health-care plan to the federal budget, so be it,” he said. “The issue is too important to be stalled by Senate protocol.”

---

So there you have it. They can easily remove the Death Panels from the bill... because it has already been passed into law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

So there you have it. They can easily remove the Death Panels from the bill.....because it has already been passed into law.

---

Nice catch tom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The Death Panel ;as Sarah Palin correctly identifies it is already the law as of the bucket list stimulus bill.

---

Hello tom:

I heard they're changing it a little bit. They're going to kill conservatives instead of old people... I'm going to march on Washington, and yell at my congressman...

excon

Hello again:

Let me conclude my participation in this thread with my final post on the subject.

If you tell a lie enough times, it becomes the truth... I can't debate a lie. If you're going to LIE after you've seen the WORDS, then I can't do nothing for you, except to say that you deserve each other... You're a miserable lot.

excon

Ex, I think you like a challenge. I can't help wonder if it were an earlier age if you would attack a windmill just for the fun of it.

(All in good humor!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galveston

Ex, I think you like a challenge. I can't help wonder if it were an earlier age if you would attack a windmill just for the fun of it.

(All in good humor!)

---

He doesn't have to go far these days to find a windmill to tilt at, they are back in vogue you know; dirty great things with 50 metre blades standing on the hillsides like something out of War of the Worlds.

Now what was Ex's position on climate change again?

Perhaps "death panel" is inflammatory rhetoric, but you can trust that tradeoffs with costs as the driver will be the determining factor to the inevidible rationing of care to the elderly decisions by the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research .

my plan for the uninsured and those willing to ask for help
As Jesus reportedly said, "the poor you will always have with you".

Health treatment and care is expensive. Excellent care is even more expensive, but in many cases it is priceless, kind of like life. No matter what system is adopted, the employed and able and the rich will pay for the health care costs for those who are unable.

They do not have to be forced.

If we are able to protect the system that has resulted in the most technologically advanced, ecologically considerate, and free people in the history of life on earth, then we will also continue to have rich people, lots of 'em, and under this meritocracy we have, most of these people will be the finest individuals to walk the earth.

Our system and evolution of our values and beliefs has resulted in the world's most charitable humans.

At present, in our country, no person is ever denied needed care, but it is often inefficiently provided under our economic system.

Everyone has a pre-existing medical condition of some kind.

And of course, thanks to Al Gore, we have the Interwebs. Social networking (used to be called communication) has evolved to a previously unimaginable level of efficiency and ease of use, The needs of our fellow man can be communicated in great detail to vast numbers of people of all levels of income, knowledge, and passion to be helpful.

This leads me to propose a method to deliver the means of solving health care dilemmas in a way that fits the ideals of limited government that have peacefully revolutionized the world. This method includes a highly secure, Internet based, communication network along the models of Facebook, MySpace, Linkedin, etc.

1. Every person may create an individual health savings investment account (HSIA) that can grow through interest and capital gains tax free. This money may only be spent on legitimate medical expenses, safe and medically effective pharmacueticals, treatments and therapies prescribed by doctors.
2. Every person may make tax deductible charitable donations to their own or any one else's HSIA in any amount.
3. Private for profit health insurance companies may continue to deny coverage for treatment of pre-existing conditions. This will result in the most economical insurance premiums for everyone in a very fair way. The luck of the draw cannot be legislated away.
4. Money in HSIA accounts may be spent on medical care for these un-insured conditions at the choice of the individual.
5. Money in the HSIA may be used to pay premiums on any level of insurance policy desired.
6. Every individual that is accepting donations must allow the donors to view his/her medical history and expense receipts.
7. Within the individuals "page", individuals may present the life conditions that they face and with which they deal, along with appropriate evidence, so that donors may feel confident that they are not being scammed and their money is not better spent elsewhere.
8. At an individual's passing from life, the charitable donations and the accrued interest and gain on those donations that remain in his/her's HSIA after reasonable funeral expenses become the property of a fund that the government uses to initialize and manage HSIA's for helpless people.

This plan is dedicated to the memory of the Honorable Jack Kemp.

It is my hope that persons more intelligent than myself will criticize at will so that together we can maybe make it work.

Regards,

Eric R. Forbriger, P.E.