We already have gov’trun health care, and it’s pretty darned good
With some hesitation I join the health care debate, mostly out of distress at the heap of misinformation that is shouted and thrown back and forth. The choice between a government bureaucrat and an insurance company bureaucrat (standing between us and our health care provider) should be easy: The former is the cheaper option, as his salary is pre-paid out of your taxes. Insurance company bureaucrats are paid to limit exposure to your claims, protecting their bottom line. The second point worth making is that close to 50 percent of the country is already covered by some form of government-run or -financed health care: Count Medicare recipients, government employees in all their flavors, the veterans and prison inmates. Medicare is greatly beloved, government employees have a rich range of choices and veterans are well looked after. If this is “socialized” medicine, let’s have more of it! I admire the creativity of the people to imagine arguments against universal health care. All that talk about “death panels” and “rationing” flies in the face of the realities of health care as practiced in any other advanced country. Outcomes of medical care in Canada, that reviled example, are better on average than any in the United States. GM finds that taking health care out of the hands of corporations makes them more competitive. Looking at Europe, with a diversity of government-run systems, we find that outcomes in almost every area are better than in the United States: child mortality, longevity, preventive care, accessibility, affordability. But why look at any of that if your mind is already made up, and shut tight?
Thilo you should look up the statistics in the UK and Canada for prostate cancer, breast cancer, the long wait for MRI's, and in Canada you may have a 2 year wait just to get to see a primary care physician don't let the facts get in the way of a good opinion. Keep chugging that cool-aid down. By the way Medicare is going broke, Social Security is going broke and the reason is the government couldn't keep their hands off the money that was funding them and kept adding more and more people to them that never paid into the system. When you add legal immigrants into our Social Security system when they never contributed one dime and also take the accrued money out of SS to use for other welfare programs the end result should be crystal clear.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
SCHENECTADY Reforming health care system has no easy answers BY MICHAEL LAMENDOLA Gazette Reporter
Bill Spolyar, director of the Schenectady Free Clinic, would like nothing better than to go out of business. Unfortunately, he says, business is too good. “We probably get five, 10, 15 phone calls a day from people looking to come here,” Spolyar said. “Either they don’t have insurance or they have lost their jobs and can’t afford insurance under COBRA.” The Franklin Street clinic provides free health care to some 3,000 people who have little or no insurance. More than that need the help, but financial constraints keep the clinic from seeing any more patients. It depends on grants and donations and is operating month-to-month, Spolyar said. Run by volunteer medical professionals, the clinic is the local face of federal efforts to reform the nation’s $2.5 trillion health care system. The government wants to mandate health insurance coverage for every American, including the 48 million Americans who, like the clinic’s patients, currently lack coverage. “There is a need for health care reform if there are 48 million people without health insurance. And that is the reason we are here,” Spolyar said. “So right now the need for this kind of clinic is necessary, but our goal is to be out of business.” President Barack Obama has said health care reform is his top priority. He has put out goals for reform without specifics. His goals include a system that allows Americans to obtain health insurance despite pre-existing medical conditions and to keep their health coverage if they change or lose their jobs. .....................>>>>.....................>>>>..............................>>>>..................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....000&ViewMode=GIF
Acting in self-interest, not selfishness, dates to Revolution
In his recent piece on health care “reform,” Carl Strock chose to dissect the motives of those who oppose it. I’m assuming he was talking about average citizens like myself, as well as Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, FreedomWorks, Tea Party Patriots and Fox News, all of whom he took the opportunity to name and excoriate along the way to get to his point. He didn’t let facts stand in his way, either, when he declared there are 45 million Americans uninsured and clamoring for coverage, for example. Never mind that the real number — when one deducts the people who are in this country illegally, those who can afford coverage but choose not to purchase it, and those who are in transition between jobs, many of whom we can assume will have access to coverage when they find work — is closer to 15 million. Strock accuses those who oppose the plan as being less caring and empathetic than our more liberal countrymen. Again, check the facts. In 2006 there was a damning study published by Arthur C. Brooks of Syracuse University that shows quite the opposite. Dr. Brooks found that conservatives donate significantly more time and money to charitable causes than liberals, even though they earn less, by an average of 6 percent. He also found that people rejecting the notion that government should reduce income inequality give an average of four times more than those who accept it, a fact buttressed by the point that libs such as the Kennedys possessing immense wealth is unquestioned because they are so generous with the rest of the taxpayers’ money. At the last White House Correspondents Dinner (the proceeds of which were to benefit the homeless), with 3,000 people in attendance, a mere $90,000 was raised. Thirty bucks a head. Safe to say there were many socalled compassionate libs who could have ponied up $90,00 solo. When Mr. Strock asks, “And why is private enterprise so sacrosanct?” — then answers, “Because it is fundamentally selfish ... and the ‘Angry Ones,’ self-described conservatives approve of selfishness ...” he demonstrates a lack of understanding for not only the fi ner points of what our founders intended but his stock in trade, the English language. I am only a humble truck driver, but I will attempt to enlighten you. Private enterprise, which was established and brought to the colonies long before we were even a nation, runs not on selfi shness but self-interest. Acting in one’s self-interest was generally understood to mean to labor for the betterment and comfort — as determined by each individual — first of one’s self and one’s family. But admonitions and encouragements were also given to treat fairly and compassionately with one’s business associates, colleagues, friends, widows, orphans and the poor — in other words, the ordered civil society at large. And to what economic system should we run? As the philosopher has declared, communism will not work with men and devils, neither will a utopian, government-run, socioeconomic health care system. Dr. Joseph Warren said it best when he longed for a government that would “give every man the greatest liberty to do what he pleases consistent with restraining him from doing injury to another.” We can assume the good doctor was engaged in evil private enterprise as a leading man of medicine in Boston during the Revolution, with not only a practice, but paying medical students as well. As befitting such a man, he was given a general’s command by Congress, a command which had yet to come through officially on June 17, 1775 — the day of the Battle of Bunker Hill. Rushing to the scene of the action, he twice declined the offer to command, telling Col. William Prescott it would be a privilege to fight under him. This selfish, self-centered capitalist (as he would be characterized by the likes of Mr. Strock) gave his life that day — a simple, humble volunteer — dying while the country he longed for lay as yet unborn in its womb. Mr. Strock is either ignorant or naive to think that those who oppose this huge proposed expansion of federal power supported similar legislation of the last administration, just as he is naive and ignorant to think HR 3200 will be “benign” to our liberty.
I hope that Mr. [Rep. Paul] Tonko is finally starting to see our point when at least two-thirds of the questions asked at his Aug. 25 town hall meeting in Delmar were of the anti-government nature. When asked if he would sign onto the same plan that he is trying to jam down our throats, Mr. Tonko bloviated for about 15 minutes, but couldn’t give a simple yes or no answer that was repeatedly asked for by the questioner. Of course he wouldn’t. According to Mr. Tonko, tort reform would hardly save any money. I don’t know where he gets his statistics from, but a 2006 Harvard School of Public Health study found that “four out of every 10 medical malpractice lawsuits filed in America each year were without merit.” You do the math. It’s obvious that this central issue will never be part of their plan when lawyers have always been among the largest contributors to the Democratic Party. It’s called being “paid off” to keep quiet, and unfortunately is how our whole political system operates. Do we really want the government making life-and-death decisions for us when everything it runs turns into a fraud-ridden, wasteful black hole, like Medicaid, Medicare, the VA, Social Security, Amtrak, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the post offi ce — just to name a few?
Prisoners have a better diet than Health Service hospital patients, scientists warn By Daniel Martin Last updated at 10:59 PM on 30th August 2009 Patients in Health Service hospitals are far more likely to go hungry than criminals in jail, scientists warned yesterday. They say frail and elderly patients do not get the help they need with meals, and nobody checks whether they get enough to eat. Despite years of Government promises to tackle poor hospital nutrition, food still arrives cold, and patients often miss out because meal times clash with tests and operations.
Helping hand: But nurses say they are too busy to help every elderly patient with their meals
Meanwhile, prisoners are enjoying carbohydrate-rich, low-fat foods which in many cases are better than they would have been eating on the outside. The Daily Mail has been highlighting the scandal of old people not being fed properly in hospital as part of its Dignity for the Elderly campaign. Hospital meals are often taken away untouched, because they are either unappetising or are placed out of patients' reach. The latest figures show 242 patients died of malnutrition in NHS hospitals in 2007 - the highest toll in a decade. More than 8,000 left hospital under-nourished - double the figure when Labour came to power. The NHS throws away 11million meals every year, and many nurses say they are too busy to help the frail eat. Earlier this year the Mail revealed that some hospitals spend less on meals than the average prison. Ten hospitals spent less on breakfast, lunch and an evening meal than the £2.12 a day allocated for food by the prison service. One spent just £1. Although most hospitals do spend more than £2.12, prisoners end up better nourished than patients, say experts from Bournemouth University. After studying the food offered to inmates and across the NHS, they found patients face more barriers in getting good nutrition. Professor John Edwards said around 40 per cent of patients were already malnourished when they were admitted to hospital, but their condition did not tend to improve while they were there. 'If you are in prison then the diet you get is extremely good in terms of nutritional content,' he said. 'The food that is provided is actually better than most civilians have. 'There's a focus on carbohydrates, then there's the way they prepare the food, it's very healthy. They don't add salt and there's relatively little frying of food - if you have a burger then it goes in the oven. Hospital patients don't consume enough. 'And from the work we've done we know that people who sit round a table eat a lot more, but this doesn't happen in hospitals.' His colleague, Dr Heather Hartwell, said fruit and vegetables were given out in hospitals 'but this doesn't mean it's eaten'. While patients suffer due to a loss of appetite as a result of their illness, they often go hungry because there is no one to help them eat. 'Failure': Liberal Democrat health spokesman Norman Lamb says standards must improve
Dr Hartwell said once food was prepared, it generally hangs around waiting for porters to transport it to patients. Then it may be left on wards until it goes cold.
'Ward staff also don't actually know how much patients are eating because it is domestics who clear the trays away,' she said. 'This is an example of fragmentation in hospitals that does not necessarily happen in prisons.' The research found temperature and texture are among the most important factors in patients' satisfaction with food. It concluded lack of appetite due to a medical problem is probably the main reason for under-nutrition, but said hospitals can make improvements. Liberal Democrat health spokesman Norman Lamb said: 'It's incredible that so many hospitals are failing to serve healthy meals. If prisons can serve good food then so can hospitals.'
The Department of Health said: 'The majority of patients are satisfied with the food they receive in hospitals, and we are working to improve services further. 'The Nutrition Action Plan, Improving Nutritional Care, outlines how nutritional care and hydration can be improved and highlights five key priority areas for NHS and social care staff to work with. 'We have also introduced the concept of "protected mealtimes" where all non-urgent activity on the ward stops, so that patients can enjoy their meals.'
Here they come, the new sons of liberty Tuesday, September 1, 2009 By Carl Strock, Gazette columnist
I enjoyed very much the torrent of e-mails I received last week in response to the brief item I wrote about Rep. Paul Tonko’s health-care town hall meeting in Bethlehem. I didn’t attend the meeting but accepted the word of other media outlets that what occurred there was the same as has occurred elsewhere in our fair country, meaning large numbers of angry opponents of government health care turned out to boo, shout and otherwise disrupt the proceedings, a word that I have no reason to doubt. Some of those who angrily wrote to me insisted that this was done in a fine American tradition of shouting and name-calling going back to the Constitutional Convention. Others insisted, oh, no, we didn’t shout and name-call; we just asked questions. It was the other side that was disruptive. But they all wrote, or else they called. One fellow called from California to take me to task, and when I asked how he got onto me, he said he had been alerted by some “liberty-minded friends,” which made my antennae quiver, since liberty is one of the code words of the angry and belligerent portion of the country that misleadingly calls itself conservative. “We have an e-mail network like you wouldn’t believe,” he said. “Every single thing is watched … the alert went out.” Indeed it did, from something called the NY Liberty Council, which urged recipients of a blast e-mail to call us. “This is where we can directly affect the media and their portrayal of concerned Americans!!” they said. So we got plenty of calls and plenty of e-mails, and as I say, I enjoyed them all, from the few that were soberly discursive to the one that urged me to “get smart and fear God” and labelled me a “liberal” body part that I cannot identify in a family newspaper.......................>>>>..........................>>>>...............http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/sep/01/0901_sonsliberty/
Labor leader warns lawmakers on health care plan BY SAM HANANEL The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — The man expected to become the AFL-CIO’s next president said Monday that lawmakers would pay a political price if they abandon a government-run option in any health care overhaul. “We need to be a labor movement that stands by our friends, punishes its enemies and challenges those who, well, can’t seem to decide which side they’re on,” said Richard Trumka, currently the AFL-CIO’s secretary-treasurer. In remarks to the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, Trumka singled out lawmakers “who say they are all for health care reform, but refuse to stand up for a public system that puts people before profits.” Trumka’s remarks came in a broader speech that outlined his goals for making labor unions more appealing to younger workers and stemming the historic decline of union rolls. Labor unions have been among the most vocal boosters of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul. But Trumka and other labor leaders have expressed frustration with signs that Obama and other lawmakers are wavering in their support of a public option that would cover millions without health care insurance. “I think they need to understand that you can have a bill that guarantees quality, affordable health care for every American, or you can have a bill the Republicans will vote for,” Trumka said. “But you can’t have both.” The warning is consistent with comments that Trumka has made in several recent public appearances. Union support for Democrats is often taken for granted, but Trumka has said the nation’s largest labor federation would do more to hold elected officials accountable if they fail to back labor’s causes.
When one of the largest unions in the country want Obama-care there must be a very big favor in it for the union and I'll bet you it will cost the taxpayer a lot of money.
SURE....more money in the pockets of the union heads!
And actually, if you read this....it is apparently a 'threat' from the union to the politicians. It is either pass it....or 'no more campaign money for you'!!!
But on the flip side.....whoever passes it....will be voted out of office in the next election.
See...that's what happens when politicians are lock step with special interest groups. It clearly makes for strange bedfellows....at our expense!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
President Obama plans to detail his health care demands in a major speech as soon as next week, when Congress returns from the August recess. Aides to President Barack Obama are putting the final touches on a new strategy to help Democrats recover from a brutal August recess by specifying what Obama wants to see in a compromise health care deal and directly confronting other trouble spots, West Wing officials tell POLITICO.
Obama is considering detailing his health-care demands in a major speech as soon as next week, when Congress returns from the August recess. And although House leaders have said their members will demand the inclusion of a public insurance option, Obama has no plans to insist on it himself, the officials said.
“We’re entering a new season,” senior adviser David Axelrod said in a telephone interview. “It’s time to synthesize and harmonize these strands and get this done. We’re confident that we can do that. But obviously it is a different phase. We’re going to approach it in a different way. The president is going to be very active.”
Top officials privately concede the past six weeks have taken their toll on Obama's popularity. But the officials also see the new diminished expectations as an opportunity to prove their critics wrong by signing a health care law, showing progress in Afghanistan, and using this month's anniversary of the fall of Lehman Brothers to push for a crackdown on Wall Street.
On health care, Obama’s willingness to forgo the public option is sure to anger his party’s liberal base. But some administration officials welcome a showdown with liberal lawmakers if they argue they would rather have no health care law than an incremental one. The confrontation would allow Obama to show he is willing to stare down his own party to get things done.
“We have been saying all along that the most important part of this debate is not the public option, but rather ensuring choice and competition,” an aide said. “There are lots of different ways to get there.”
The timing, format, venue and content of Obama's presentation are still being debated in the West Wing. Aides have discussed whether to stick to broad principles, or to send specific legislative language to Capitol Hill. Some hybrid is likely, the officials said.
“I’m not going to put a date on any of this,” Axelrod said. “But I think it’s fairly obvious that we’re not in the second inning. We’re not in the fourth inning. We’re in the eighth or ninth inning here, and so there’s not a lot of time to waste.”
Obama's specifics will include many of the principles he has spelled out before, and aides did not want to telegraph make-or-break demands. But Axelrod and others are making plain that Obama will assert himself more aggressively — a clear sign that the president will start dictating terms to Congress.
"His goal is to create the best possible situation for consumers, create competition and choice," Axelrod said. "We want to bring a measure of security to people who have health insurance today. We want to help those who don't have coverage today, because they can't afford it, get insurance they can afford. And we want to do it in a way that reduces the overall cost of the system as a whole."
Also this fall, Obama wants to slap new regulations on Wall Street firms, a goal that is now considered a higher priority than cap-and-trade energy legislation in the West Wing. White House officials think the legislation will show voters, especially wavering independents, that he is serious about making the culprits of the economic crisis pay. It also helps that it doesn't carry a big price tag, like other Obama priorities.
Those who want 'universal healthcare' without actually knowing what healthcare is....should 'spend down' and hop on that train... go ahead....if the $$ you make at your job, the home you own, rent, the movies you go to see, the nascar jackets you wear, the nike sneakers, the NFL jerseys, the grills in your mouth, the gold earings you wear, the dishwasher you fill, the soap you have in your shower, the trip to the market for any kind of crap you want to fill your belly with, the trips to McDonald's, the Dominos you ordered in, the 12 pack of beer, your cigs etc etc.....give it up and hop on the 'national healthcare gravy train'.....cause that's all you find important.....
so take your job, go tell your boss you quit 'cause you got 'Big Daddy' to take care of you, right up until the end, while your at it dont work to make money for the movies, dishwasher, oven, soap, toothbrush, underwear, socks etc.....someone will just hand the freakin' crap right to ya......and maybe is you are lucky there will be a scratch off in the pile too....and you could have 'a-little-bit-o-luck'........
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Sentenced to death on the NHS Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors warn today.
By Kate Devlin, Medical Correspondent Published: 10:00PM BST 02 Sep 2009
In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.
Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.
But this approach can also mask the signs that their condition is improving, the experts warn.
As a result the scheme is causing a “national crisis” in patient care, the letter states. It has been signed palliative care experts including Professor Peter Millard, Emeritus Professor of Geriatrics, University of London, Dr Peter Hargreaves, a consultant in Palliative Medicine at St Luke’s cancer centre in Guildford, and four others.
“Forecasting death is an inexact science,”they say. Patients are being diagnosed as being close to death “without regard to the fact that the diagnosis could be wrong.
“As a result a national wave of discontent is building up, as family and friends witness the denial of fluids and food to patients."
The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS.
The scheme, called the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP), was designed to reduce patient suffering in their final hours.
Developed by Marie Curie, the cancer charity, in a Liverpool hospice it was initially developed for cancer patients but now includes other life threatening conditions.
It was recommended as a model by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), the Government’s health scrutiny body, in 2004.
It has been gradually adopted nationwide and more than 300 hospitals, 130 hospices and 560 care homes in England currently use the system.
Under the guidelines the decision to diagnose that a patient is close to death is made by the entire medical team treating them, including a senior doctor.
They look for signs that a patient is approaching their final hours, which can include if patients have lost consciousness or whether they are having difficulty swallowing medication.
However, doctors warn that these signs can point to other medical problems.
Patients can become semi-conscious and confused as a side effect of pain-killing drugs such as morphine if they are also dehydrated, for instance.
When a decision has been made to place a patient on the pathway doctors are then recommended to consider removing medication or invasive procedures, such as intravenous drips, which are no longer of benefit.
If a patient is judged to still be able to eat or drink food and water will still be offered to them, as this is considered nursing care rather than medical intervention.
Dr Hargreaves said that this depended, however, on constant assessment of a patient’s condition.
He added that some patients were being “wrongly” put on the pathway, which created a “self-fulfilling prophecy” that they would die.
He said: “I have been practising palliative medicine for more than 20 years and I am getting more concerned about this “death pathway” that is coming in.
“It is supposed to let people die with dignity but it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
“Patients who are allowed to become dehydrated and then become confused can be wrongly put on this pathway.”
He added: “What they are trying to do is stop people being overtreated as they are dying.
“It is a very laudable idea. But the concern is that it is tick box medicine that stops people thinking.”
He said that he had personally taken patients off the pathway who went on to live for “significant” amounts of time and warned that many doctors were not checking the progress of patients enough to notice improvement in their condition.
Prof Millard said that it was “worrying” that patients were being “terminally” sedated, using syringe drivers, which continually empty their contents into a patient over the course of 24 hours.
In 2007-08 16.5 per cent of deaths in Britain came about after continuous deep sedation, according to researchers at the Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, twice as many as in Belgium and the Netherlands.
“If they are sedated it is much harder to see that a patient is getting better,” Prof Millard said.
Katherine Murphy, director of the Patients Association, said: “Even the tiniest things that happen towards the end of a patient’s life can have a huge and lasting affect on patients and their families feelings about their care.
“Guidelines like the LCP can be very helpful but healthcare professionals always need to keep in mind the individual needs of patients.
“There is no one size fits all approach.”
A spokesman for Marie Curie said: “The letter highlights some complex issues related to care of the dying.
“The Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient was developed in response to a societal need to transfer best practice of care of the dying from the hospice to other care settings.
“The LCP is not the answer to all the complex elements of this area of health care but we believe it is a step in the right direction.”
The pathway also includes advice on the spiritual care of the patient and their family both before and after the death.
It has also been used in 800 instances outside care homes, hospices and hospitals, including for people who have died in their own homes.
The letter has also been signed by Dr Anthony Cole, the chairman of the Medical Ethics Alliance, Dr David Hill, an anaesthetist, Dowager Lady Salisbury, chairman of the Choose Life campaign and Dr Elizabeth Negus a lecturer in English at Barking University.
A spokesman for the Department of Health said: “People coming to the end of their lives should have a right to high quality, compassionate and dignified care.
"The Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) is an established and recommended tool that provides clinicians with an evidence-based framework to help delivery of high quality care for people at the end of their lives.
"Many people receive excellent care at the end of their lives. We are investing £286 million over the two years to 2011 to support implementation of the End of Life Care Strategy to help improve end of life care for all adults, regardless of where they live.”
Logged
