Skip to comments.The Pro-Diabetes Board Washington state targets modern medicine.
Posted on 03/17/2011 7:49:24 PM PDT by Eva
The future tragedies of government health care will include today's many warnings about how it operates in practice. The subsidize-mandate-over regulate insurance model is imploding in Massachusetts. Then there's Washington state, where a government board may decide that modern medicine is too expensive for kids with diabetes.
Seriously. In 2006, Washington created a board to scrutinize the cost-effectiveness of various surgeries and treatments, known as the Health Technology Assessment program. At a hearing today, the panel will debate glucose monitoring for diabetic children under 18. In other words, the board is targeting the fundamental standard of diabetes care that has been the established medical consensus for at least three decades.
This state issue deserves far more scrutiny, if only because ObamaCare and the stimulus devoted billions of dollars to comparative effectiveness research. As President Obama has so often put it, the idea is to pit Treatment X against Treatment Y and find out "what works and what doesn't." In theory, it sounds great. But the Health Technology Assessment is an example of how comparative effectiveness will work in the real world, as the political system tries to find ways to restrict or limit treatment to control entitlement spending.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The only irony contained in this issue appears to be the fact that the limits of care will apply to "government workers", the very people who have been the biggest supporters of Obamacare.
Hummm, I guess you could call it a............Oh yea, a death panel.
Bump, this is a forewarning of what is coming with Obamacare. It looks as though Governor Gregoire and the Democrat legislature has already established state health care death panels.
Exactly, Gregoire has set up her own death panels and aimed them at children with diabetes. ...oh, and families of government workers.
If we just don’t worry about the glucose level of type 1 children, we will be rid of them by the time they are 20; saving the Obamacare system millions.
For those who claim to hate the media but lap up everything the media tell them if it suits their biases, don't poke the link.
I believe that is the intention. I have to wonder if the effects of the diabetes and multiple hospitalizations could end up being more expensive than the preventative treatment.
But that's just me....
I believe that is exactly what the article says, that the death panel deemed the home monitoring to be inconclusively beneficial.
In the comment section of the article, a physician states that the federal government has already cut the monitoring devices for medicare patients and that he has seen patients die as a result. I guess that is what the government intends.
Your link summarizes the issue exactly the way the WSJ summarized it. They cannot prove the efficacy because it would be unconscionable to create a control group, so the state will simply refuse the preventative device to all.
Like I said before, the feds are already refusing to pay for the device for medicare patients, against the recommendation of doctors.
Frankly, I trust the editorial board at the WSJ a whole lot more than I could ever trust Gregoire. They may not be perfect, but they are not known frauds like Gregoire.
I believe if you read the 152 page paper, you can rely on what they actually said, rather than what a bunch of reporters wants you to see.
Are you just lying because it makes you feel good? Because you are lying.
Knock it off, not everyone here is going to go read your 152 page link.
When someone does, they can post to you.
Who made you king?
I’m not going to dignify that with a response.
Including those yelling the loudest in ignorance of what the report might actually say. It's funny, but alas unsurprising, that a person who could choose a screen name like yours, should defend such behavior.
Then how's about you dignify your ridiculous statement with an actual quote to back it up.
And the answer is: you cannot. You made it up. I'm sick of "conservatives" who behave like that.
r9 is upset because his first link that summarized the findings of the WA state death panel, verified what was in the the WSJ.
NO one has appointed YOU the arbiter of truth, not even me, bozo.
I don’t respond to ad hominem attacks.
Give me the quote, Eva. Or are you just too lazy.
I guess, but blasting people about a 152 page link is just not what Free Republic is about.
I am getting sick of the self appointed high and mighty’s around here.
But, thanks, I appreciate the clarification.
Give me the quote to support your charge, Eva. Your ad hominem charge, you hypocrite.
She told you she won’t respond.
Are you deaf? Or is it blind?
“Modern Medicine” is feckless against all degenerative disease.
The side effects of the drugs that are prescribed are far worse than the disease that is supposedly being treated. Avandia for example is just about a guaranteed heart attack if you take it long enough.
Is avandia a diabetes drug?
What is being denied to the adolescent diabetic patients is a home monitoring device that measures the glucose levels of the kids at various times during the day, preventing attacks. Remember, these are kids we are talking about.
“...the panel will debate glucose monitoring for diabetic children under 18.”
This is truly tragic. These kids will need to monitor their levels closely being types one usually, to have a chance at all.
This is a death sentence for the children who are so unlucky to get this disease.
DeathCare has nothing to do with health. It is about murdering MORE children!
>> “I appreciate the clarification.” <<
It wasn’t a ‘clarification,’ it was a deliberate falsehood.
It’s about murdering children who are on medicaid or are the children of government workers (probably the SEIU contract workers, not regular government workers).
It reminds me of Margaret Sanger’s original intent for abortion, limiting the number of Black children born into poverty.
I have to wonder how many of the medicaid children with diabetes are members of one minority or another, or are children of SEIU day care workers or home care givers.
Type 1 diabetes can be moderated substantially by a more proper diet that eliminates carbohydrates, and boosts animal fats, making the insulin more effective, and response more predictable, allowing monitoring to be reduced.
Monitoring is mostly a huge cash cow for manufacturers, with little benefit to the patient that is on a proper diet.
Avandia is an oral glucose control agent for type II diabetes.
I don’t think you really think that the side effects of insulin are worse than type I diabetes.
Can you read? Do you know English?
What part of BUZZ OFF, wasn’t communicated?
She made herself quite plain.
Perhaps you are confusing Type I with Type II.
That might be true with adults, but the diet of children is more difficult to control. I am well aware of the benefits of low carb diets, but keeping children on a strict diet is often difficult at best.
Diabetes runs in my husband’s family and none of them were over weight, all naturally thin and weight conscious.
It is a deliberate attempt to kill off the less fortunate, and thin out the poor and less able.
Murder by Government, by decree by Pelosi and Ozombie..
The side effects of excessive insulin are blindness, neuropathy, deafness, and loss of general mobility.
proper diet cuts the need for insulin to about 1/4 of what is normally used by those on the suicide diet that the medical establishment pushes.
Monitoring has always been essential, in fact the evidence in the past ten years or more was to increase monitoring.
I was type II when I was pregnant. I did well, but I also monitored. To deny monitoring to children is conscionable.
Type I diabetes is where the patient is UNABLE to make ANY insulin.
You are discussing type II, where diet does help.
When my husband follows a low carb/no carb diet he wastes away, losing so much weight that people think he has cancer.
The side effects of excessive insulin is the bodies loss of insulin sensitivity. IOW’s, when the body looses it’s sensitivity to insulin it looses its’ ability to control insulin. Yes, many in the medical field believe it doesn’t matter how much carbohydrate a diabetic takes in because they will just increase the insulin intake to counter it. Studies are now showing us the increase in insulin causes serious damage to the excretory system, specifically the kidneys.
There is only one study I know of that shows the diet can affect a Type I. It is not widely known and I don’t think that is what you are referring to.
Again, I think you may be confusing Type I and Type II
Monitoring is mostly a huge cash cow for manufacturers, with little benefit to the patient that is on a proper diet.
Can you cite a source on this, or is this just an opinion you pulled from some nether region? Why would insulin be needed at all with no carbs to process? And just how is a child supposed to grow and play without the energy that only carbs can provide?
The WSJ article points out that the purpose of the health panels is to find a one size fits all treatment for various common diseases and conditions, but as any doctor knows, every patient deserves to be treated as an individual.
I think that is the problem with some of the posters here, which surprises me. They seem to think that because controlling diet worked for them, that it works for everyone and I also think that they have bought into the government hype that all diabetes is linked to over eating, which is definitely not true.
I don’t know why you pinged me as I pointed out in both post #34 and #41 the FReeper was confusing Type I and Type II.
Well, you aren’t going to get any government panel to suggest that parents feed their kids more animal fats. Remember the reaction that the government types had to the Atkins diet?
The reason that the increased monitoring is important for kids is because parents cannot always control what kids eat.
Atkins originally developed the diet for diabetics. It works, but not for everyone.
I thought it was excess sugar that caused the nerve damage and retinopathy, not excess insulin?
I’ve often thought an Atkins-type diet would suit type I diabetics best but the medical establishment doesn’t like that for anyone.
Your body will convert fats and proteins to glucose - the Eskimo grew up just fine on an all fish and meat diet.
You do need insulin so that the glucose can get from the blood stream into the cells. The brain takes glucose as its sole energy source. No insulin, no glucose, brain death.
The problem with treating adolescents with type I diabetes is that you cannot always control their diets and at least monitoring at home is like an early warning system.
It may be perfectly true that an Atkins like diet would control the diabetes without monitoring, but what parent would want to take the chance that their kid would not give in to temptation and go off the diet?
Of course, the article doesn’t mention how expensive the devices are.
There don’t seem to be many studies on low-carb diets for type I diabetics, probably because the prevailing wisdom is that the best way to prevent the increased risk of heart disease is to eat a low fat, high complex carb diet.
Anyway, this one showed better glycemic control and less frequent need for monitoring.
Thank you for that information I didn’t know the difference, myself and I don’t know what type of diabetes runs in my husband’s family. I just know that they were all very thin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.