posted July 29, 2009 11:27 AM         

They intend to send people home to die without treatment...like in Britain, like in Cuba, like in Canada.

Unfortunately...for these Marxist Socialist conspirators....people have already caught on. At least those who are conscious have caught on and it's not flying as they hoped...under the public's radar.

A Pocketful of Miracles
A Commentary By Tony Blankley
Wednesday, July 29, 2009

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whatever her other capacities, demonstrated last week that she is a master at the poetic art of haiku -- the Japanese poem form that encapsulates in three or fewer lines of 17 or fewer syllables a larger thought or image.

Regarding the Democratic health care bill, she crafted the following haiku to assure the Blue Dog Democrats that they can tell their voters:

"(It) will mean a cap on your costs,

"but no cap on your benefits."

In just two lines of fewer than 17 syllables, the speaker has encapsulated the illogic inherent in the Democratic health care bills. It is a compound proposition that is always untrue for all possible combinations of the true value of its components. Under the Democratic bill, benefits would go up forever, but miraculously, the costs of those ever-increasing benefits never would go up even a cent -- even if our republic lasts for a thousand years.

This is a miracle to match the Lord's provision of loaves and fishes.

"And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude.

"And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full.

"And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children." -- Matthew 14:19-21

Of course, the speaker might retort, it was easy for Jesus because there was no Congressional Budget Office 2,000 years ago. And the CBO has outlawed miracles.

If the miracle had been scored by the CBO: Five thousand men plus 5,000 women plus 12,000 children (2.4 children per man and woman) at five people to a loaf and three people to a fish would require 4,400 loaves at $1 per loaf and 7,333 1/3 fish at $1.50 a fish. Total one-day cost of miracle: $11,001. Assuming daily provision -- annualized rate: $4,015,365. Ten-year budget, assuming no inflation or increase in benefit class: $40,153,650.

I suppose the speaker would argue that if the CBO had been present at the miracle, it would have been delegated to the scene by the Pharisees, who, as Josephus noted, were considered the most expert and accurate expositors of the law.

But perhaps the speaker also would note that the Pharisees were deaf to the teachings of Jesus. After all, "throughout His ministry Jesus violated many of their oral laws. He mixed freely with tax collectors and sinners, making Him ceremonially unclean" (Luke 7:39). "He also freely criticized the Pharisees for their hypocrisy and self righteousness" (Luke 11:37-52).

Obviously, the health care legislation being developed by the president's Democratic allies in Congress all comes down to faith.

While Republicans speak of their faith, the speaker might say, when it comes to providing health care for all the American people, all they can talk about are taxes and costs; they are of little faith.

There is fairness in that charge. They have no faith in miracles to do man's work. (Miracles are for God's work.) And they have no faith in bureaucrats to do a doctor's work. Nor have they faith in government to make decisions for free men. They reserve their faith for God. For the works of man, they measure twice before cutting once.

Of course, when the Lord comes back, should he wish to draft a health care bill for America, I am sure the Republicans would be glad to waive the CBO scoring requirement. Mind you, so much else will be happening at the time -- and there will be no need for out-year cost considerations.

But until that blessed day, neither Republicans nor Democrats may rely on miracles to fund our health care costs. And as to legislation that is premised on the proposition that benefits will be permitted to rise without restraint while costs will not go up at all -- well, that must be submitted to the faithful counters of non-miraculous loaves and fishes at the CBO.

Tony Blankley is executive vice president of Edelman public relations in Washington.

posted July 29, 2009 11:37 AM         

it is not socialized medicine that is collapsing, but our "capitalized" medicine as well. all around the world healthcare is in tatters because of the cost conscious, profit-seeking pharms and insurance brokers.

used to be doctors were in charge of their own practices...

if only you would put your considerable energy and wit into the actual problem and give up thrashing that already dead shoe...

posted August 02, 2009 10:57 AM         

It is a fact 85% of Americans are perfectly happy with their current private health insurance...whether they pay all the insurance premium or have employer paid or co-paid private plans. There's also some large corporations who self insure health insurance...a truly "private" health insurance plan.

It's a total lie that O'BomberCare would insure ALL those who lack health insurance. Numbers produced from many sources say O'BomberCare would only pick up about 16 million of the 47 million uninsured...and cost taxpayers trillions of dollars their children and grandchildren will have to pay off...and continue to pay off forever.

Buried in the O'BomberCare bill are provisions for government payment for abortion services. Buried further are provisions to insure illegal aliens...those in the United States illegally.

Conservatives offered amendments to O'BomberCare to remove government funded abortions and provisions to insure illegal aliens under O'BomberCare...and demoscats voted those amendments down.

As it stands now, this crackpot Marxist health care plan would have Americans paying for health insurance for foreign nationals in this country illegally and paying for abortions most Americans are against.

O'Bomber says he wants to have a public debate about health care but then, the bills are produced and as usual under Marxist, Socialist regimes, the bill(s) are rushed to a vote...before anyone can even begin to read the 1000 plus pages to see what's in there.

In fact, one congressional idiot Socialist admitted he hasn't so much as read the
bill(s)...and if he attempted to do so he wouldn't understand what's in there even if he had two lawyers interpreting the language for him. This is what happens when voters pull the levers for idiots like John Conyers. This idiot doesn't see anything wrong with voting on legislation he hasn't so much as read. They hope voters don't have a chance to read what's in there either because when voters find out..."what's in there"..when they've deciphered the deliberately "tricky language"..they're outraged.

That's the reason many demoscat congressional members are taking a vacation instead of meeting with their constituents during the 5 week congressional recess. They don't want to face their constituents in a public forum.

Another fact about US health care is that outcomes for those with serious illnesses/diseases are far better than in nations with a Socialist health care system.
In spite of so called horror stories about American health care, most of the horror stories in the health care arena come from nations with Socialist health care systems where non medical bureaucrats make medical decisions about who will be treated and what kind of treatment they can get.

This is a duplicate of O'BomberCare. Denying treatment, long waiting lists and health care rationing to see physicians, both primary care and specialists and people dying of otherwise treatable diseases and illnesses.

Citizens of nations with Socialist health care want their health care systems either reformed or scraped...yet, here are the Marxist Socialists in the O'Bomber administration and in Congress attempting to force a failed health care system on Americans. Marxist Socialist Progressives in the White House and in Congress call adopting a health care system which has already failed and continues to fail everywhere it's tried....they call that "progressive".

Let's be clear about that. It's not "progressive" in any way. It's stupidity plain and simple.

Is it any wonder that there's a provision in O'BomberCare exempting members of Congress from O'BomberCare?

August 02, 2009
Debunking myths about our 'lousy' health care system
Rick Moran

The Hoover Institute's Scott Atlas has a list of 10 reasons why our health care system is better than in other countries.

The figures for cancer survivability are astonishing:

1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers. Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

2. Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians. Breast cancer mortality in Canada is 9 percent higher than in the United States, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher, and colon cancer among men is about 10 percent higher.

We also do better with treating chronic disease as well as giving more citizens wider access to preventive care, like screenings for some cancers.

Then there's the familiar fact that we spend less time waiting for health care services than elsewhere as well as being generally more satisfied with our own health care:

6. Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom.

7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."

Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long-sometimes more than a year-to see a specialist, have elective surgery such as hip replacements, or get radiation treatment for cancer. All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada. In Britain, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.

Finally, innovation in medicine begins and ends with America:

10. Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.

The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other developed country. Since the mid- 1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to U.S. residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined. In only five of the past thirty-four years did a scientist living in the United States not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.

There is no reason for massive reform of a system that delivers such miracles. The problems with covering the uninsured and those with pre-existing conditions can be dealt with and not destroy what most people seem satisfied with.

posted August 02, 2009 02:28 PM         

we yanks have certainly been INVOLVED in many of those below, but mostly NOT on our own, but in collaboration with nationals from other countries. medicine is not a nationally-based activity in general.

not trying to run our scientists down but considering the difference in populations of the countries mentioned, those others seem to be well-represented!

ooooh and americans seem to be able to work pretty well with (eeek) SOCIALISTS!!!!!!!!! or are they? i say not, but you insist they are...

2000-2009

2000 - Arvid Carlsson, Sweden, Paul Greengard, United States, and Eric R. Kandel, United States, for their discoveries about signal transduction in the nervous system"[91]
2001 - Leland H. Hartwell, United States, Tim Hunt, United Kingdom, and Sir Paul M. Nurse, United Kingdom, for finding the main controls in the cell cycle[92]
2002 - Sydney Brenner, United Kingdom, H. Robert Horvitz, United States, and John E. Sulston, United Kingdom, for their finding the genetic controls of organ development and programmed cell death[93]
2003 - Paul Lauterbur, United States, and Sir Peter Mansfield, United Kingdom, for inventing magnetic resonance imaging"[94]
2004 - Richard Axel and Linda B. Buck, United States, for finding odorant receptors and the organization of the olfactory system, (how we smell things)[95]
2005 - Barry J. Marshall and J. Robin Warren, Australia, for finding the bacterium Helicobacter pylori that causes gastritis and peptic ulcer disease[96]
2006 - Andrew Z. Fire and Craig C. Mello, United States, for finding how RNA interference can switch genes "on" or "off"[97]
2007 - Mario R. Capecchi, United States, Sir Martin J. Evans, United Kingdom, Oliver Smithies, United States, for finding how to change genes in mice by the use of embryonic stem cells[98]
2008 - Harald zur Hausen, Germany, for finding the human papilloma viruses causing cervical cancer[99]

posted August 03, 2009 09:15 AM         

Of course, there are some here who think the British, Canadian and even the Cuban Socialist health care systems are better than US health care. The see nothing wrong at all with waiting 6 months...or longer to see a primary care doctor...or waiting more than a year to see a specialist...or have needed surgery..or waiting 2 hours or more in an ambulance and another hour or 2 in the emergency ward...with a medical emergency...or dying while you're waiting for your appointment day...or having to pull your own teeth...or being denied medical treatment...surgery or drugs to save your life.

Nope, nothing wrong with any of that even though these citizens had paid their Socialist health care premiums all or most of their lives. Nope, clearly waiting, being denied or dying while you wait is better than being able to get immediate treatment at a walk in clinic, get an appointment to a specialist in a day or 2 and getting surgery the next day if necessary...is clearly inferior to Socialist health care systems...like O'BomberCare.

Patients forced to live in agony after NHS refuses to pay for painkilling injections

Tens of thousands with chronic back pain will be forced to live in agony after a decision to slash the number of painkilling injections issued on the NHS, doctors have warned.

By Laura Donnelly, Health Correspondent
Published: 7:45AM BST 02 Aug 2009

The Government's drug rationing watchdog says "therapeutic" injections of steroids, such as cortisone, which are used to reduce inflammation, should no longer be offered to patients suffering from persistent lower back pain when the cause is not known.

Instead the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is ordering doctors to offer patients remedies like acupuncture and osteopathy.

Specialists fear tens of thousands of people, mainly the elderly and frail, will be left to suffer excruciating levels of pain or pay as much as £500 each for private treatment.

The NHS currently issues more than 60,000 treatments of steroid injections every year. NICE said in its guidance it wants to cut this to just 3,000 treatments a year, a move which would save the NHS £33 million.

But the British Pain Society, which represents specialists in the field, has written to NICE calling for the guidelines to be withdrawn after its members warned that they would lead to many patients having to undergo unnecessary and high-risk spinal surgery.

Dr Christopher Wells, a leading specialist in pain relief medicine and the founder of the NHS' first specialist pain clinic, said it was "entirely unacceptable" that conventional treatments used by thousands of patients would be stopped.

"I don't mind whether some people want to try acupuncture, or osteopathy. What concerns me is that to pay for these treatments, specialist clinics which offer vital services are going to be forced to close, leaving patients in significant pain, with nowhere to go,"

The NICE guidelines admit that evidence was limited for many back pain treatments, including those it recommended. Where scientific proof was lacking, advice was instead taken from its expert group. But specialists are furious that while the group included practitioners of alternative therapies, there was no one with expertise in conventional pain relief medicine to argue against a decision to significantly restrict its use.

Dr Jonathan Richardson, a consultant pain specialist from Bradford Hospitals Trust, is among more than 50 medics who have written to NICE urging the body to reconsider its decision, which was taken in May.

He said: "The consequences of the NICE decision will be devastating for thousands of patients. It will mean more people on opiates, which are addictive, and kill 2,000 a year. It will mean more people having spinal surgery, which is incredibly risky, and has a 50 per cent failure rate."

One in three people are estimated to suffer from lower back pain every year, while one in 15 consult their GP about it. Specialists say therapeutic injections using steroids to reduce inflammation and other injections which can deaden nerve endings, can provide months or even years of respite from pain.

Experts said that if funding was stopped for the injections, many clinics would also struggle to offer other vital services, such as pain management programmes and psychotherapy which is used to manage chronic pain.

Anger among medics has reached such levels that Dr Paul Watson, a physiotherapist who helped draft the guidelines, was last week forced to resign as President of the British Pain Society.

Doctors said he had failed to represent their views when the guidelines were drawn up and refused to support the letter by more than 50 of the group's members which called for the guidelines to be withdrawn.

In response, NICE chairman Professor Sir Michael Rawlins expressed outrage over the vote that forced Dr Watson from his position, describing the actions of the society as "shameful". He accused pain specialists of refusing to accept that there was insufficient scientific evidence to support their practices.

A spokesman for NICE said its guidance did not recommend that injections were stopped for all patients, but only for those who had been in pain for less than a year, where the cause was not known.

Iris Watkins, 80 from Appleton, in Cheshire said her life had been "transformed" by the use of therapeutic injections every two years. The pensioner began to suffer back pain in her 70s. Four years ago, despite physiotherapy treatment and the use of medication, she had reached a stage where she could barely walk.

"It was horrendous, I was spending hours lying on the sofa, or in bed, I couldn't spend a whole evening out. I was referred to a specialist, who decided to give me a set of injections. The difference was tremendous",

Within days, she was able to return to her old life, gardening, caring for her husband Herbert, and enjoying social occasions.

"I just felt fabulous – almost immediately, there was not a twinge. I only had an injection every two years, but it really has transformed my life; if I couldn't have them I would be in despair".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/5955840/Patients-forced-to-live-in-agony-after-NHS-refuses-to-pay-for-painkilling-injections.html

posted August 03, 2009 09:40 AM         

Oh, and if you are a cancer patient under the British Socialist health care system which you've paid for all your life...and if you some how find out about these life entending drugs and decide to pay for them yourself....then, the wonderful Socialist health care system kicks you off the Socialist health care system and you're totally on your own...insurance premiums paid up to date...but you're out.

In my opinion, most people would be far better off to be totally out of any of the Socialist health care systems which are clearly hazardous to your continued existence on earth.

Cancer doctors do not tell patients about drugs which could prolong lives
Cancer doctors are failing to tell their patients about life-extending "top up" drugs which are not available on the NHS, research has found.

By Laura Donnelly, Health Correspondent
Published: 10:58AM BST 09 May 2009

The specialists feel so uncomfortable discussing treatments that their patients may not be able to afford that just one in five routinely disclose the existence of drugs which the health service will not pay for, according to charity Beating Bowel Cancer.

Its findings come as a parliamentary committee prepares to publish a report into changes in Government rules to allow patients who pay for such treatment to continue to be cared for by the NHS.

Until a u-turn last year, patients who bought drugs the health service refused to fund were forced to pay tens of thousands more for their hospital care. The policy had the greatest impact on bowel cancer sufferers, because Avastin and Erbitux, the two main drugs for those with the advanced stages of the disease, are normally denied by the NHS on cost grounds. On Tuesday, the health select committee will examine whether the new rules are working.

But the study of bowel cancer specialists shows many patients are still being denied the option of making "top-up" payments – because doctors do not want to enter into conversation about treatments their patients might not be able to afford.

Specialists said when they did alert terminally-ill patients to the existence of drugs which could extend their lives by months and in some cases years, the patients were often angry to learn that the NHS was unlikely to fund the treatment.

Doctors said they struggled when conversations about a patient's treatment became discussions about whether they should sell their home in order to pay for treatment, or embark on a battle with NHS bureaucracy in an attempt to secure funding.

As a result, just 20 per cent of specialists routinely told patients about treatments which did not have the backing of rationing body the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence....**clinical excellence? They must be insane.**

While five per cent of doctors said they never told their patients about any drug the NHS would not pay for, the majority said they "sometimes" or "rarely" told their patients about drugs like Erbitux, which was rejected by NICE for patients with advanced bowel cancer.

The rationing body said that while trials suggested the drug extended life by six to nine months on average, it cost more per year than the £30,000 value it places on an extra year of life.***That's right, you read it right. The Socialist health care system values your life at 30,000 pounds. If your treatment costs more then shame on you. Your option then is to just go away and die..hopefully without raising a big stink.**

Dr Mark Saunders, a consultant oncologist, said: "When we are having conversations with patients about their treatment we want to offer them hope not despair. It is very difficult to tell a patient that there is a drug, but the NHS won't pay for it."

The specialist from Christie Hospital said: "Personally I think the patient should be told everything, but nearly all of the patients I treat in Manchester cannot afford these drugs, and you have to judge each situation at the time. Since the top-up rules changed, only two of my patients have paid for drugs privately".

He urged NICE to recommend more cancer drugs for use by the NHS, saying the change of rules on top-up drugs affected only a few.

The charity Beating Bowel Cancer, which commissioned the survey of 40 oncologists specialising in the disease, urged doctors to inform patients about all treatments which could help them.

Hilary Whittaker, its chief executive, said: "The vast majority of patients that we speak to say that they want their doctors to inform them about all the treatment options available – whether or not they think they can afford them. It is really worrying to discover that so many patients might not be getting the full picture."

She urged the NHS to produce clearer guidance to help clinicians through sensitive and difficult discussions. The charity said it was impossible to know how many patients had died without ever being offered the choice of life-prolonging treatment, since most would have gone to the grave without realising there was a drug which could have helped them.

Other patients only found out about such treatments when they specifically asked what was available if money was not an issue.

They include a 23-year-old woman with bowel cancer who was only told about Erbitux after her mother told a London specialist that she would sell their home for anything that would help her daughter.

CASE STUDY:

Two years ago, Mary Brewis, 53, from Whitley Bay, was forced to give up work as a primary schoolteacher after bowel cancer spread to her liver.

On her retirement, after 20 years work, she received a letter from Alan Johnson, the then Education Secretary, who said he was sorry to learn of her ill-health and thanked her for the contribution she had made to society.

In April, Mrs Brewis' MP, Ronnie Campbell, wrote to Mr Johnson – now health secretary – to ask why the NHS had refused to fund Erbitux for his constituent, who had been told the drug was the only hope to extend her life, after cancer had spread to her liver and lungs.

Under labyrinthine NHS rules, her consultant had applied for funding on the grounds she was an "exceptional" case, but been turned down. Mrs Brewis received a standard letter of reply from one of Mr Johnson's ministers, setting out how the procedures work, but offering no explanation – nor was one provided by her PCT.

Instead, the teacher has been forced to borrow from her family to spend more than £7,000 on the drugs for the past seven weeks. This week a scan will show whether the treatment is slowing the spread of disease.

Mrs Brewis said: "I felt so helpless when the consultant said Erbitux was my only hope and then that the NHS was very unlikely to fund it.

"I have been treated for cancer for six years, but it just feels like the system has abandoned me – that they are saying 'that's it, we are pulling the plug, you have had enough life'."

She is appealing the NHS' decision to refuse funding for the drug, but is relieved that her doctor told her about its existence.

"I feel like I have had to beg for a shot of extra life, it is so demoralising and so degrading to have to ask family for money, but the idea that I might never have known about this is so much worse. I have a husband, children, and young grandchildren, I have got a lot of living to do."

Looking back at the retirement letter she was proud to receive from Mr Johnson, she says: "The letter said this Government valued my contribution to the wellbeing of society. I feel like I did my bit, but when it comes to my wellbeing, they aren't interested."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/5299490/Cancer-doctors-do-not-tell-patients-about-drugs-which-could-prolong-lives.html

posted August 03, 2009 10:01 AM         

Now, the Socialist British government won't have to pay that retirement check every month and the Socialist health care system has one less patient to treat.

What a great deal.

Now, our government fools are attempting to give America the same system...a Socialist health care system.

That would solve some government funding problems that Socialists have already forced on Americans...like Social Security...social insecurity, Medicare and Medicaid.

Just kill them by withholding treatment for treatable illness and diseases and about 50% of the US federal budget is freed up for other Socialist schemes.

Oh, but be sure to exempt members of Congresss from O'BomberCare. They don't want to die; they just want you to die...to save government money for more Socialist programs.

Cancer patient Linda O'Boyle dies after NHS ends free care over 'top up'
A woman who was refused free NHS cancer treatment after she paid for extra drugs has died, reigniting the debate over whether patients should be allowed to "top up" their care.

By Richard Alleyne
Published: 9:25PM BST 01 Jun 2008

Linda O'Boyle and her husband Brian, both retired health workers, decided to pay for treatment in addition to that available on the NHS in order to prolong her life.

Mrs O'Boyle was told that meant she was considered a private patient and so had to pay for all her treatment.

Related Articles
Patients must be allowed to top up NHS care
Busy NHS 'leaves no time for caring'
'Give second round arthritis drugs'
Cancer patients 'should sue NHS' if they are refused free care after private treatment
Patients on NHS free to use top-up drugs
Ban on NHS top up is cruel rationing, says BMAGovernment guidelines currently ban patients from mixing public and private care.

On Sunday, Mr O'Boyle, of Billericay, Essex, said he was appalled at the treatment of his wife, who was 64.

"We were quite happy to pay for the drug and to give the health service what it costs them to buy it and to deliver the treatment but they said they could not do that," said Mr Boyle, who was an NHS manager for 30 years.

Six other patients have begun a legal action to trigger a test case that they hope will force the NHS to allow "co-payment", as the buying of private treatment while under NHS care is called.

Some cancer drugs not yet available on the NHS can markedly increase the chance of survival.

But Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, claims that co-payment will create a two-tier NHS, with preferential treatment for patients who can afford the extra drugs.

Last year, he issued guidance to NHS trusts telling them not to permit patients to pay for additional medicines.

When Mrs O'Boyle, who had three children and four grandchildren, developed bowel cancer and began having chemotherapy, doctors said she could boost her chances of fighting the disease by adding the drug cetuximab.

It is not routinely funded by the NHS but she decided to use her savings to pay for it.Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust then withdrew her free treatment, including the chemotherapy drug she was receiving.

Mr O'Boyle said: "When she heard there was something that could extend her life, of course my wife jumped at it. It was stressful enough for Linda having cancer without all this stress on top of it."

John Baron, the Tory MP for Billericay, said: "She has been penalised by an NHS system that is grossly unfair. This is morally wrong."

A spokesman for Southend NHS Trust said: "A patient can choose whether to continue with the treatment available under the NHS or opt to go privately for a different treatment regime.

posted August 03, 2009 01:51 PM         

Uncovered Video: Obama Explains How His Health Care Plan Will ‘Eliminate’ Private Insurance
http://www.breitbart.tv/uncovered-video-obama-explains-how-his-health-care-plan-will-eliminate-private-insurance/

posted August 03, 2009 02:13 PM         

once again we are asked to lap up the sensationalist press to make your arguments stick...or maybe you didn't know the telegraph is a "rag"? just like you don't know the people i do who live there and use both systems.

i have mentioned before that it is true that things are not going well in the uk right now, just as they are not going well here.

did you catch farrah fawcett's movie diary of her cancer experience? with all her money she couldn't get the treatment she wanted here...i know people who have survived the same cancer, one on kaiser insurance, the other on medical. seems the more insurance you have the less likely you will get the right treatment!

sorry jwhop but i don't have much time for the medical establishment in any of these systems right now. while the fda pretty much makes it impossible to get ahold of food grade hydrogen peroxide, they allow the marketing of vioxx until sufficient numbers have been harmed by it to raise a public outcry for withdrawal...does that make sense?

posted August 04, 2009 08:56 AM         

I don't give a flying flip where you've lived and I don't give a flying flip that you ignore every report coming out of Canada and Britain about their rotten Socialist health care system. It is what it is and it's killing people...deliberately.

posted August 04, 2009 11:51 AM         

the fact that you bemoan the NHS not doling out painkilling injections for back pain shows that you adhere to the pharmaceutical party line for treating such things. painkillers are temporary at best, and counterproductive or poisonous at worst. just as knee replacements can be avoided by learning yoga and other non-invasive techniques that actually heal knees instead of spending thousands on mechanical solutions.

posted August 16, 2009 11:55 AM         

I feel that the majority that voted are full aware of the roulette wheel that is elected officialdom in America.

The level of trust required to vote and then stop paying attention is long gone. And it didn't find it's genus last year. Or the year before that.

American's have woken up, and are paying allot of attention. The health care issue while at the forefront of mass consciousness might find it's roots in the near collapse of the American, and indeed Global economy.

Security is the umbrella to my mind. And security is an ever larger umbrella. Money is at the heart of it.

There are quite a few things I am disappointed about. But not surprised. This was never to be a honeymoon with this election. Too many hot buttons. It is still, and it will continue. Two wars, near financial collapse, a medical scenario that is bankrupting through a very open back door, long avoided energy focus, and an environment that does not have health care. Everything about our very lives is in Crux.

Pretty scary stuff.

My concern is focused on the financial fiasco. Health Care reform is important to me, yes. But I feel that we already lost the game when Single Payer was never at the forefront, and not written.
So, I keep my eye on the health issue, but am more concerned about the Fed, and Wall Street.