Posted on 08/04/2009 12:57:15 PM PDT by jazusamo
As someone who was once rushed to a hospital in the middle of the night, because of taking a medication that millions of people take every day without the slightest problem, I have a special horror of life and death medical decisions being made by bureaucrats in Washington, about patients they have never laid eyes on.
On another occasion, I was told by a doctor that I would have died if I had not gotten to him in time, after an allergic reaction to eating one of the most healthful foods around. On still another occasion, I was treated with a medication that causes many people big problems and was urged to come back to the hospital immediately if I had a really bad reaction. But I had no reaction at all, went home, felt fine and slept soundly through the night.
My point is that everybody is different. Millions of children eat peanut butter sandwiches every day but some children can die from eating peanut butter. Some vaccines and medications that save many lives can also kill some people.
Are decisions made by doctors who have treated the same patient for years to be over-ruled by bureaucrats sitting in front of computer screens in Washington, following guidelines drawn up with the idea of "bringing down the cost of medical care"?
The idea is even more absurd than the idea that you can add millions of people to a government medical care plan without increasing the costs. It is also more dangerous.
What is both dangerous and mindless is rushing a massive new medical care scheme through Congress so fast that members of Congress do not even have time to read it before voting on it. Legislation that is far less sweeping in its effects can get months of hearings before Congressional committees, followed by debates in the Senate and the House of Representatives, with all sorts of people voicing their views in the media and in letters to Congress, while ads from people on both sides of the issue appear in newspapers and on television.
If this new medical scheme is so wonderful, why can't it stand the light of day or a little time to think about it?
The obvious answer is that the administration doesn't want us to know what it is all about or else we would not go along with it. Far better to say that we can't wait, that things are just too urgent. This tactic worked with whizzing the "stimulus" package through Congress, even though the stimulus package itself has not worked.
Any serious discussion of government-run medical care would have to look at other countries where there is government-run medical care. As someone who has done some research on this for my book "Applied Economics," I can tell you that the actual consequences of government-controlled medical care is not a pretty picture, however inspiring the rhetoric that accompanies it.
Thirty thousand Canadians are passing up free medical care at home to go to some other country where they have to pay for it. People don't do that without a reason.
But Canadians are better off than people in some other countries with government-controlled medical care, because they have the United States right next door, in case their medical problems get too serious to rely on their own system.
But where are Americans to turn if we become like Canada? Where are we to go when we need better medical treatment than Washington bureaucrats will let us have? Mexico? The Caribbean?
Many people do not understand that it is not just a question of whether government bureaucrats will agree to pay for particular medical treatments. The same government-control mindset that decides what should and should not be paid for can also decide that the medical technology or pharmaceutical drugs that they control should not be for sale to those who are willing to pay their own money.
Right now, medications or treatments that have not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration are medications or treatments that you are not allowed to buy with your own money, no matter how desperate your medical condition, and no matter how many years these medications or treatments may have been used without dire effects in other countries.
The crucial word is not "care" but "control."
Excellent - thanks for posting!
“Maybe you are better off not having the surgery, uh, but taking the pain killer.” — President Barak Hussein Obama (June 24, 2009)
Now there's a good point. I seem to recall a lot of hearings about steroids in major league baseball, for example. If memory serves, Congress took weeks of evidence on that... but health care they will just enact into law lickety-split???
A (inherently leftist) government committee will control who gets what medical care.
That’s YOU and YOUR KIDS.
So, are you sure you want to go to that anti-government rally, comrade?
This is the real goal, folks.
Correct! Hearings and investigations have gone on for months on various things but Zer0 and his thugs can’t get this through fast enough to suit them.
BTTT!
Along the “care” versus “control” line of thinking...check this out:
£400 million ($668 million) will be spend on installing and monitoring CCTV cameras in the homes of private citizens. Why? To make sure the kids are doing their homework, going to bed early and eating their vegetables.
...
It gets worse. The government is also maintaining a private army, incredibly not called “Thought Police”, which will “be sent round to carry out home checks,” according to the Sunday Express. And in a scheme which firmly cements the nation’s reputation as a “nanny state”, the kids and their families will be forced to sign “behavior contracts” which will “set out parents’ duties to ensure children behave and do their homework.”
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/08/britain-to-put-cctv-cameras-inside-private-homes/
I’d bet Zer0 is taking notes.
Sowell always gets an A+
FR sure has posted some great pictures of Obama ;-)
“. The government’s “children’s secretary” Ed Balls is behind the plan”
I swear to Almighty God you just can’t make this stuff up ;-)
Who administers the punishment?
Ed A$$ ??
Hat tip to smoothsailing for that pic of Dr. Sowell and Obama.
Last May I was diagnosed with colon cancer. Within two weeks I underwent surgery and 11” of my colon was removed along with all of the cancer. My family doctor coordinated the team consisting of a surgeon an internist and an oncologist.
They got it all, but it was very close. Another month and it would have spread to my lymph system. As of now, I do not even have to follow up with chemo. My cost.... a few $10 co-pays and $200 for the hospital co-pay.
Am I happy with my insurance company? You bet I am. Am I happy with my medical care? You bet I am.
From my perspective, there is nothing broken with our current system. If I lived in England or Canada I would probably be dead or well on my way.
I guess we should send this story in to snitch on this opposition.
Thanks for your post and thank the Lord and our medical care system (the best in the world) that they got it all and in time.
I don’t doubt you’re correct about the outcome had you been living in England or Canada.
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.