Skip to comments.Obama Inc. to Deny Cancer Treatments by Redefining What “Cancer” Is
Posted on 10/01/2013 5:22:12 AM PDT by SJackson
- FrontPage Magazine - http://frontpagemag.com -
Obama Inc. to Deny Cancer Treatments by Redefining What “Cancer” Is
Posted By Daniel Greenfield On September 30, 2013 @ 11:42 am In The Point | 24 Comments
The death panels aren’t going to come through the front door. They’re going to sneak up on you from behind with piano wire.
On July 29, 2013, a working group for the National Cancer Institute (the main government agency for cancer research) published a paper proposing that the term cancer be reserved for lesions with a reasonable likelihood of killing the patient if left untreated. Slower growing tumors would be called a different name such as indolent lesions of epithelial origin (IDLE).
Their justification was that modern medical technology now allows doctors to detect small, slow-growing tumors that likely wouldnt be fatal. Yet once patients are told they have a cancer, many become frightened and seek unnecessary further tests, chemotherapy, radiation, and/or surgery.
By redefining the term cancer, the National Cancer Institute hopes to reduce patient anxiety and reduce the risks and expenses associated with supposedly unnecessary medical procedures. In technical terms, the government hopes to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment of cancer.
And of course compel doctors to stop recommending expensive “overtreatments” for things that are no longer cancers.
Similarly, the American Medical Association recently voted to declare obesity a disease. But as Cato Institute health care analyst Michael Tanner noted, the AMAs move is actually a way for its members to receive more federal dollars, by getting obesity treatments covered under government health plans.
In our Obamacare world, obesity is a serious disease, but cancer isn’t.
With respect to the definition of cancer, downgrading some conditions as no longer being cancer can and will used to justify reducing unnecessary screening tests (e.g., mammograms for women between ages 40-49).
That’s the whole point. The more the government takes over medicine, the more it is driven to reduce costs in order to fund a vast welfare state.
Dr. Milton Wolf, a practicing radiologist who cares for patients with DCIS warns against this Orwellian possibility:
“Health care rationing takes many insidious forms but perhaps the most immoral is for the government to wage a public relations campaign designed specifically to dissuade patients and doctors from seeking available cures for cancer. They scheme to rename cancer, not to cure it, but to deny it exists. These government rationers have calculated that rather than actually treat patients with cancer, its cheaper to simply keep them calm… right up to the very end.”
Aren’t we glad that crazy Sarah Palin lady with her death panel rants didn’t get elected. And instead we live with a wise and sane government that fights new wars while renaming them as interventions and cures cancer by renaming it and denying coverage?
Hope. Change. Death.
DeathCARE provides money for ... Administrators.
They could eliminate cancer by just calling it something else.
This sure sounds like BS to me.
I don’t know anyone who goes to their Doctor and begs for radiation or chemo.
They take it when a Doctor states that they need it.
Under Obamacare they will make some crazed definitions of when it is needed, and force Doctor to follow that.
They are already keep coming up with recommendations that people don’t need so many cancer screenings — if you don’t detect it, you don’t have to treat it, if you detect it too late, people are more likely to die — again, look at the savings!
The first thing the new health czar should do....yes, of course there will be a health czar....is to force our Big Cancer industry to adopt the new, more humane treatment of cancer. Now that DNA based treatment is here, there is absolutely no reason to keep charging patients, insurance and the government outrageous amounts for fifty year old chemotherapy that basically poisons the patient, killing healthy cells in the hunt for cancer cells.
Either our Big Cancer centers should be adopting treatments using monoclonal antibodies, or they should not be in the business, even though it is very lucrative. With the exception of childhood leukemia, cancer survivability rates have not improved substantially, though the price for treatment has soared.
Obama has cured Cancer!
And so the death march begins.
The number of cancers would drop dramatically, Obama is a genius and a miracle worker. lolz
This will affect people with breast and prostate cancers most often and the groups most likely to have those cancers are blacks-—just the people who voted for his eminence. Elections WILL have consequences—until he waives those definitions for those groups anyway.
Hopefully someone will make a list of Congress critters who have been saved by Cancer treatment and start making this an issue.
What about Joe Bidens son. He has had some kind of brain tumor.
Well maybe that wasn’t cancer, maybe it was IDLE... lol
Typical libs, it depends on what the meaning of “is” is...
Hey, Congress AND their families AND their staff
AND all their mistresses, butlers, servants and slaves
WILL CONTINUE to get fine medical care.
Cancer WILL be treated.
Kennedy-level care WILL be given.
For the rest of the American people:
Their early deaths will help the economy
and Obama’s plan for the death of America.
Yep, without screenings by the time it is detected... “Well, there’s not much we can do now...” Yet you can bet the libs and political class will continue to get regular screenings, mammograms, etc. They will reap the benefits of technology while the rest of us suffer the consequences of their actions. For now.
Obamacare priciple # 1: If they be like to die, they had better do it and decrease the surplus population.
It’s time for a second revolution.