Repukes say this is proof of death panels. Debunk Please>>>

[goodboy]

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/04/in_fond_memory_of_the_status_q.html

When my mother-in-law was about 80 years old, she started falling. At the time, she was living in a small house next to her daughter. Concerned, they made an appointment with her physician. Suspecting a heart rhythm problem, he had Mom wear a Holter monitor for a couple days at home to record her heart rhythm. In true Murphy's Law fashion, she had nary a spell as long as she was wearing the monitor. Finally, after several appointments and a trip to the ER, the heart rhythm problem was caught on the EKG, and it was obvious that Mom needed a pacemaker. Mom had the surgery, her Medicare Advantage covered it, and that was that.

But Obama's health care reform is all about "evidence-based" medicine. As he told Jane Sturm, he didn't like "subjective" decision-making. HR 3590 in section 3403 establishes a Medicare Advisory Board which, among other things, would:


give priority to recommendations that extend Medicare solvency; ... ‘‘(I) improve the health care delivery system and health outcomes, including by promoting integrated care, care coordination, prevention and wellness, and quality and efficiency improvement; and
‘‘(II) protect and improve Medicare beneficiaries' access to necessary and evidence-based items and services ...


So in the brave new world of Obama non-subjective decision making, how does my mother-in-law measure up? On paper, she was a train wreck waiting to happen: Legally blind. Nearly deaf. Mobility problems. High blood pressure. Forty-pack-a-year smoking history. Three siblings died of heart disease. Crippled with arthritis of the spine. "Wellness" was never going to be part of her picture. If the Medicare Advisory Board is looking to extend Medicare solvency, the last recommendation they'll make is to implant pacemakers in 80-year-old grandmas

[goodboy]

1. .

[ET Awful]

2. What that means is that they will increase access to proven methods and techniques such as

pacemakers, etc. They will NOT increase access to things like faith-healing which has no supporting evidence showing that it works. It also means that if mom has to go into the hospital, she won't receive gourmet meals and a private room paid for by Medicare, instead she might have to share a room. She might also have to accept generic medications instead of name-brands which is a large cost-saver and is equally effective. It means that if doctors ask for a battery of tests that has no real medical necessity but only serves to pad the bill, it won't be covered.

Now, if he wants to see a death panel, have him look at the number of people who have died as a result of their insurance company denying coverage for proven methods and calling them "experimental", or denying them as pre-existing conditions.

Show him the evidence of adjusters receiving bonuses for denying claims.

I wonder why this person who is so opposed to government provided healthcare is so concerned with Medicare anyway, after all, Medicare is socialized medicine. I guarantee you that if this same person were asked if Medicare was efficient and whether steps should be put in place to prevent fraud and make the process more financially sound, he'd say yes. Or, put another way, if he wasn't bitching about this, he'd be bitching because of the amount of fraud and overbilling that has been a problem with Medicare in the past.

[Bluenorthwest]

10. Medicare has never paid for 'gourmet meals and private rooms'

never, ever, ever. Generics have been used whenever the LAW does not disallow them. Such rhetoric will not help anyone in an argument with the right about Medicare. It is like saying we are going to save money at the schools by ending the door to door Rolls Royce transportation for each student. We don't provide that, so we can not cut that. Claiming that Medicare provides 'gourmet meals' and luxury rooms is a foolish thing to do, as most Americans have direct experience with Medicare from parents, grandparents or themselves.
You do understand, for example, that Medicare services are all subject to deductibles and co-pays on top of monthly premiums? So the beneficiaries do not get anything for nothing, and are very interested in keeping the bill low, for they personally cover 20% of that bill, and most of them live on tight economies. The fact is, when an expensive test is ordered, most Medicare patients will ask how much it costs, and make sure it is needed. Because if it was like you suggest, orders of many pointless tests, the patient would be responsible for hundreds if not thousands in co-pays, and precious few of them take that lightly.
Gourmet meals indeed. Geez.

[ET Awful]

11. You should probably re-read what I said, since you obviously didn't comprehend it.

I NEVER once said that those things were currently covered. I said that the language in question did nothing more than prevent such BS from occurring.

I'm thinking perhaps you need one of those generic medications to calm you down.

[Lil Missy]

3. Simple. The Obama Plan is INSURANCE, not medical care. Nothing has changed there.

[Minnesota_Lib]

4. A couple of points....

1.) The idea that this advisory board is going to review and then approve or deny individual claims is ludicrous. That is still the providence of the insurer.

2.) According to his own words, mom didn't get the pacemaker until AFTER there was evidence of her heart problem, and then he turns around and complains that this is what is going to happen under the new system. I really don't see his point.

[goodboy]

13. Won't they say, "and you trust the federal govt. to make that judgement?" (nt)

[LiberalFighter]

15. They can't make the connect.

They fail to understand that before HCR they had to follow certain procedures to justify the necessity.

They probably think that if someone has a leg problem that the leg should be cut off to get rid of the problem. Even though maybe medication, exercise or a minor operation may take care of the problem.

The disconnect problem I think can be explained. Have you ever attended a meeting with questions posed and others ask the same question over and over? For some reason they can't make the connection to answers given and the question they have in their mind.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

5. Evidence-based medicine

Is the process of using the best scientific evidence available to treat patients, and to expedite treatment options from theory to clinical trial to standard of care as quickly as possible while maintaining patient safety. You would be amazed at how many physicians are using medical practices that are more than a decade out-of-date because they're simply unaware of the advancements in their field.

EBM does categorically NOT involve itself with quality-of-life judgements.

[pinboy3niner]

6. Great posts above

Don't worry about Mom's care--she'll get what she needs, and that scary "death panel" won't be part of it.

Best wishes to you and your mom. Hang onto her as long as you can.

[Bitwit1234]

7. Should we get Palin to explain all this

First she is an expert on ALL things. And second she made the so called provisions of the Death Panel the basis of a day she set aside to do just that. April 18, 2008 or 2009. Can't remember just what day. With this on again and then off governor it is hard to remember just when she was in office or out of it.

[lunasun]

12. Should we get Palin to explain all this.....Already done

she has quite recently on her new show....on the Sarah Palin network check it out >death panels and everything explained!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsOBH0ecWA8

:rofl:

[sinkingfeeling]

8. So, we have a 96 yr. old throat cancer survivor in my support group. If we write up his story of

Medicare paying for surgery and then chemo and radiation treatments, do you think we could get it published as 'proof' there are no death panels?

[Jim__]

9. What is the author's basis for her claim?

Specifically, for the claim: If the Medicare Advisory Board is looking to extend Medicare solvency, the last recommendation they'll make is to implant pacemakers in 80-year-old grandmas.

Dopes she have a medical background? Has she worked on Meidcal Advisory Boards? Does she have any expertise in this area? Does she have any actual example that she can poin tot to support her story?

Or, did she just pull this out of her ass?

[TexasObserver]

14. The people who make such arguments OPPOSED universal health care.

That's your starting point, if you feel a need to rebut this kind of asinine argument.

Start with the fact that those who promote this kind of drivel are right wing agents of health care providers and health care insurers. They're the people who have fought universal health care for 70 years. So they have zero credibility when it comes "caring" about blind, broken down, ailing grandmother.

The whole column is full of lies and RW talking points that have no basis in reality.