Rationing Begins: ObamaCare vs. Breast Cancer Patients

[red states rule]

First the cost of care goes up under Obamacre, polices are cancelled because of Obamacare, and now the care is rationed to control cost

Time to repeal Obamacare






Influenced by the president’s mandate to “bend the health care cost curve,” the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is preparing to deny late-stage breast cancer patients access to the critical, but expensive, life-extending drug Avastin. The FDA wants to “de-label” the drug, a move that would force patients with insurance or Medicare coverage to pay for the drug out of their own pocket in order to survive. Now patients groups are speaking out.

Led by the Susan B. Komen Foundation for a Cure, 15 patient advocacy groups have petitioned the FDA to reverse their effort to ration the drug. In a letter to the FDA, Elizabeth Thompson, the organization’s President, expresses concern over the potential negative impact that the FDA’s decision will have on women who are benefiting from Avastin:

"We know that for some number of women, Avastin works and works well. We have heard from women who are gaining not just months, but years with a high quality of life, from this treatment.

We are concerned about the potential impact on women who are benefiting from Avastin if the FDA ultimately removes its approval for the drug for metastatic breast cancer treatment. We want to be sure that women who are using Avastin, and for whom it is working, can continue to have access to it, and that their insurers will continue to pay for it...

Today, the issue is Avastin. In the coming years, there will be other treatments that may be controversial but will help some number of women and men with breast cancer live longer, high quality lives, and perhaps to ‘beat’ breast cancer altogether…[w]e must make it possible for these treatments to be available to all who will benefit from them. The decision on Avastin is precedent setting and deserves to be considered in a public setting."

The Avastin case is the rationing camel nose under America’s health care tent. Should the FDA successfully introduce cost into the drug approval process, the long-term implications will be enormous. It will not be breast cancer patients alone who will suffer. Avastin is first step on the slippery slope toward rationing. The FDA’s action is dangerous and cannot stand.

http://townhall.com/columnists/garrettmurch/2011/02/26/and_so_rationing_begins_obamacare_vs_breast_cancer _patients

[Psychoblues]

This is another article not so politically driven by an admitted rightwing site. We can't have it all ways folks. This drug has been proven in 4 different studies to be ineffective for fighting breast cancer. It is still available for other forms of cancer on the Government dole but breast cancer is now ruled out not for expense considerations, about $8,000 a month, but because of tried and true testing that rules it out as a credible treatment for breast cancer. Please read the article. It may have something in there that piques a genuine interest in actual science and tending away from political carping and innuendo.

FDA Moves To Revoke Avastin's Approval For Breast Cancer


Source: Washington Post

by: Rob Stein

WASHINGTON — Federal regulators Thursday took the highly unusual step of moving to revoke approval of a drug to treat advanced breast cancer.

The Food and Drug Administration announced plans to withdraw authorization to sell the blockbuster drug Avastin for metastatic breast cancer, saying four new studies indicate the drug's benefits do not outweigh its risks.

"None of the studies demonstrated that patients receiving Avastin lived longer, and patients receiving Avastin experienced a significant increase in serious side effects," said Janet Woodcock, director of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. "The limited effects of Avastin combined with the significant risks led us to this difficult decision."

Avastin is the world's best-selling cancer drug, with global sales of $5.8 billion, and it is the top-selling product for Roche, whose Genentech unit makes it. Its use to treat breast cancer brings in about $855 million in annual revenue in the U.S.

The FDA said Genentech had 15 days to request a hearing to review the decision, and the company immediately said it would request that step. The company maintains the drug does extend the lives of breast-cancer patients.

Avastin, which is prescribed to about 17,500 breast-cancer patients each year, remains approved to treat several other tumors, including those of the colon, lung, kidney and brain, so doctors can continue to prescribe it for breast cancer as an "off-label" use.

But an FDA revocation would likely prompt insurers to stop paying for Avastin for metastatic breast cancer. Avastin is one of the most-expensive cancer drugs, costing about $8,000 a month. Breast-cancer patients also would lose eligibility for a program in which Genentech caps the annual cost of the drug at about $57,000 for women making less than $100,000 a year.

FDA: Cost not a factor

The FDA is not supposed to consider cost in making such decisions, and Woodcock told reporters that cost was not a factor in the decision. But the debate over Avastin has become entangled in the politically explosive struggle over medical spending and effectiveness that flared during the battle to overhaul the health care system............................................ .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..........

More: http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_16880296

Anyone calling this decision by the FDA healthcare rationing by President Barack Hussein Obama or anyone else is simply ill-informed at best but most likely a damned liar and proud of it.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

So now as we find out more about the effects of Obamacare libs have gone from 'there is no ratoning under Obamacare' to 'the government knows what treatments are the best and most cost effecent'

[Psychoblues]

There are those that would have you believe that our food and drugs are inspected and approved by mumbo jumbo South American witch doctor cannibals.

Try this on for something to chew and lots of links from that site:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and redirected from FDA



The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or USFDA) is an agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, one of the United States federal executive departments. The FDA is responsible for protecting and promoting public health through the regulation and supervision of food safety, tobacco products, dietary supplements, prescription and over-the-counter pharmaceutical drugs (medications), vaccines, biopharmaceuticals, blood transfusions, medical devices, electromagnetic radiation emitting devices (ERED), veterinary products, and cosmetics.

The FDA also enforces other laws, notably Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and associated regulations, many of which are not directly related to food or drugs. These include sanitation requirements on interstate travel and control of disease on products ranging from certain household pets to sperm donation for assisted reproduction.

The FDA is led by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Commissioner reports to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The 21st and current Commissioner is Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg. She has served as Commissioner since February 2009.

The FDA has its headquarters at Silver Spring, Maryland and has 223 field offices and 13 laboratories located throughout the 50 states, the United States Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico.[3] In 2008, the FDA started opening offices in foreign countries, including China, India, Costa Rica, Chile, Belgium, and the United Kingdom.[4].................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ............................

Lots More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FDA


Last I checked the FDA has the sole responsibility for inspecting, testing and determining the quality of manufacturing claims of drugs both prescription and over the counter. The FDA was originally created in 1906 and has withstood the tests of time and opposition for over a century. God Bless The Progressive United States of America for this gift to it's people.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

There are those that would have you believe that our food and drugs are inspected and approved by mumbo jumbo South American witch doctor cannibals.

Try this on for something to chew and lots of links from that site:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and redirected from FDA



The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or USFDA) is an agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, one of the United States federal executive departments. The FDA is responsible for protecting and promoting public health through the regulation and supervision of food safety, tobacco products, dietary supplements, prescription and over-the-counter pharmaceutical drugs (medications), vaccines, biopharmaceuticals, blood transfusions, medical devices, electromagnetic radiation emitting devices (ERED), veterinary products, and cosmetics.

The FDA also enforces other laws, notably Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act and associated regulations, many of which are not directly related to food or drugs. These include sanitation requirements on interstate travel and control of disease on products ranging from certain household pets to sperm donation for assisted reproduction.

The FDA is led by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Commissioner reports to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The 21st and current Commissioner is Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg. She has served as Commissioner since February 2009.

The FDA has its headquarters at Silver Spring, Maryland and has 223 field offices and 13 laboratories located throughout the 50 states, the United States Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico.[3] In 2008, the FDA started opening offices in foreign countries, including China, India, Costa Rica, Chile, Belgium, and the United Kingdom.[4].................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ............................

Lots More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FDA


Last I checked the FDA has the sole responsibility for inspecting, testing and determining the quality of manufacturing claims of drugs both prescription and over the counter. The FDA was originally created in 1906 and has withstood the tests of time and opposition for over a century. God Bless The Progressive United States of America for this gift to it's people.

Psychoblues

If Obamacare is so great why were over 700 companies (and Obama's union buddies) given waivers so they are exempt from Obamacare?

Why did the Dems exempt Congress and ther staff from Obamacare?

And why do all the tax increases included in Obamacare take effect now - while the "benefits" of Obamacare do not click in until 2013?

And why is Obama gearig up the IRS to collect those taxes with over 1,000 new IRS agents when the law has been ruled unconstitutional?

[Psychoblues]

I thought we were talking about healthcare/medication rationing for cost considerations? Anyone care to address the facts or is this another snipe hunt for the kids?

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

I thought we were talking about healthcare/medication rationing for cost considerations? Anyone care to address the facts or is this another snipe hunt for the kids?

Psychoblues

So much for trying to have a conversation with you

Based on the facts, Obamacare must ration care. The massive deficits Obamacare will run demands care be rationed as care is other countries where Obamacare is being tried

[Psychoblues]

So much for trying to have a conversation with you

Based on the facts, Obamacare must ration care. The massive deficits Obamacare will run demands care be rationed as care is other countries where Obamacare is being tried

I have produced credible information from the FDA saying your position is shit. If you have something to say your position is still accurate I'd like to see it. I continue to regard you as an opportunist, a liar and intentionally ignorant.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

I have produced credible information from the FDA saying your position is shit. If you have something to say your position is still accurate I'd like to see it. I continue to regard you as an opportunist, a liar and intentionally ignorant.

Psychoblues

Again, so much for trying to have a civil discussion with you PB. You show your incapable of defending your positions without the personal attacks

That is OK. You are alot like Virgil - you are most worried about your party winning plitical battles rather then the results of the policies. Anyone who disagrees with you is an enemy and the facts they present are a menace

[Psychoblues]

Again, so much for trying to have a civil discussion with you PB. You show your incapable of defending your positions without the personal attacks

That is OK. You are alot like Virgil - you are most worried about your party winning plitical battles rather then the results of the policies. Anyone who disagrees with you is an enemy and the facts they present are a menace

There you go with your insanities and your self perceived victim-hood. It was not I that cranked up the bullshit to make stupid and inaccurate points. It was you, red. I tried years ago to have civil discussions with you but you would have none of it. I see you haven't changed. I'll be glad to have a civil conversation with you but you have to promise to stay on topic and not bring into the conversation lies, innuendo, partisan attacks, etc.

Back to the subject. You say the rationing has begun and it is due to costs. You go further to say that the healthcare reform is going to increase the national deficit. Although I don't think I have addressed the deficit facts in this thread so far I have in another earlier today and I will bring them here if you would like. I produced credible information from the principals on the cost and rationing issue and their position is completely opposite yours, red. Do you want to try again or just continue to stamp your feet and whine?

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

There you go with your insanities and your self perceived victim-hood. It was not I that cranked up the bullshit to make stupid and inaccurate points. It was you, red. I tried years ago to have civil discussions with you but you would have none of it. I see you haven't changed. I'll be glad to have a civil conversation with you but you have to promise to stay on topic and not bring into the conversation lies, innuendo, partisan attacks, etc.

Back to the subject. You say the rationing has begun and it is due to costs. You go further to say that the healthcare reform is going to increase the national deficit. Although I don't think I have addressed the deficit facts in this thread so far I have in another earlier today and I will bring them here if you would like. I produced credible information from the principals on the cost and rationing issue and their position is completely opposite yours, red. Do you want to try again or just continue to stamp your feet and whine?

Psychoblues

I will try one last time - please follow

Dems have added 30 million people on the rolls under Obamacare. It is impossible to LOWER costs when add 30 million people to a program

CBO has ssai Obamacre is a budget buster in the second decade. (You see the tax increases have taken effect NOW while Obamacre takes effect 3 years from now)

Care must be limited and rationed if costs are to be contained

Not to mention a CBO rep said in Congressional hearings Obamacare will kill of 800,000 jobs

Obamacre is a total disaster, and people will be denied care - and it has started already

[Psychoblues]

I will try one last time - please follow

Dems have added 30 million people on the rolls under Obamacare. It is impossible to LOWER costs when add 30 million people to a program

CBO has ssai Obamacre is a budget buster in the second decade. (You see the tax increases have taken effect NOW while Obamacre takes effect 3 years from now)

Care must be limited and rationed if costs are to be contained

Not to mention a CBO rep said in Congressional hearings Obamacare will kill of 800,000 jobs

Obamacre is a total disaster, and people will be denied care - and it has started already

I don't take anything you simply say as any kind of truth, red. That ended long ago. Your claims now simply cannot be true. Care to comment a little more on your claims of the cost/care rationing of Avastin by President Barack Hussein Obama or are you going to try and pretend that you didn't tell that lie?

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

I don't take anything you simply say as any kind of truth, red. That ended long ago. Your claims now simply cannot be true. Care to comment a little more on your claims of the cost/care rationing of Avastin by President Barack Hussein Obama or are you going to try and pretend that you didn't tell that lie?

Psychoblues

You probably will not believe the CBO either on this one PB. How about 800,000 jobs wiped away thanks to Obamacare?

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Jskjci1ZL9Q&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Jskjci1ZL9Q&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>


and the tax increases included in Obamacare. Now what was that promise made by Obama not to raise taxes on anyone making less then $250,000/yr (or was it $200,000?)





1.A 10 percent excise tax on indoor tanning services (a boon to beach towns everywhere).

2.Elimination of the tax deduction for employers providing Medicare prescription drug coverage. (This is a big part of why companies like 3M are dropping health coverage for their retirees.)

3.Doubling the penalty for spending money from your tax-free health savings account for non-health-related purposes (as defined by PPACA), to 20 percent.

4.Capping the amount that employers can contribute to your tax-free flexible spending accounts (employer-sponsored HSAs), at $2,500 a year (it was previously limited by your employer’s generosity).

5.Banning the use of funds from HSAs and related accounts for the purchase of over-the-counter medications (now you will have to go to your doctor and get a prescription, a waste of precious health-care resources and doctors’ time).

6.A 0.9 percent Medicare surtax to wages over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for married couples, along with a 3.8% Medicare tax on investment income of these individuals. (The 3.8 percent tax will actually apply to the lesser of unearned income or any excess income above $200,000/$250,000.) Because this tax is applied to pre-tax income, these taxes are equivalent to income tax rate increases of 2 percent and 8 percent respectively.

7.The ability to deduct itemized medical expenses will begin after you spend 10 percent of your income on medical expenses, instead of 7.5 percent.

8.The employer mandate, which requires that all business with more than 50 employees offer PPACA-approved health plans to all of their employees, or pay a tax of $2,000 per employee, excluding the first 30 employees.

9.The “Cadillac tax” on high-value health plans: beginning in 2018, plans costing more than $10,200 for individuals, or $27,500 for families, will be assessed a 40 percent excise tax. Insofar as this tax mimics the elimination of the employer tax exclusion, it is the least offensive of Obamacare’s tax increases, but unfortunately that policy goal—harmonizing the tax treatment of individually-purchased and employer-sponsored health insurance—is neutered by the employer mandate described above.

10.And last, but not least: the individual mandate, which requires everyone to purchase health insurance, or pay a tax: it starts in 2014 at $95 or 1 percent of gross income, whichever is greater; and maxes out in 2016 at the greater of $695 or 2.5 percent of income.


http://www.nationalreview.com/critical-condition/248846/ten-tax-increases-obamacare-avik-roy




Why the tax increases now PB when Obamacare is not set to start until 2013?

and why the new IRS aganets - at a huge cost to the US taxpayer?




The Internal Revenue Service says it will need an battalion of 1,054 new auditors and staffers and new facilities at a cost to taxpayers of more than $359 million in fiscal 2012 just to watch over the initial implementation of President Obama's healthcare reforms. Among the new corps will be 81 workers assigned to make sure tanning salons pay a new 10 percent excise tax. Their cost: $11.5 million.

"The ACA [Affordable Care Act] will require additional resources to build new IT systems; modify existing tax processing systems; provide taxpayer outreach and assistance services; make enhancements to notices, collections, and case management systems to address and resolve taxpayer issues timely and accurately; and conduct focused examinations to encourage compliance," said the newly released IRS budget.

In its request, the IRS explained that the tax changes associated with health reform are huge. "Implementation of the Affordable Care Act of 2010 presents a major challenge to the IRS. ACA represents the largest set of tax law changes in more than 20 years, with more than 40 provisions that amend the tax laws."

Unsaid: The requests are just the beginning, since the new healthcare program is evolving and won't be fully implemented until about 2014.

The detailed IRS budget documents spell out exactly what most of the new workforce will be doing. For example, some 81 will be tasked just to handle the tax reporting of 25,000 tanning salons. They face a new 10 percent excise tax on indoor tanning services. Another 76 will be assigned to make sure businesses engaged in making and imported drugs pay their new fee which is expected to deliver $2.8 billion to the Treasury in 2012 and 2013. The new healthcare corps will also require new facilities and computers.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/02/15/healthcare-reform-law-requires-new-irs-army-of-1054





This all brings us back to the OP PB. Somewhere cuts have to made due to the massive expense of Obamcare. Where can one cut when dealing with a program for the sick?

You cut benefits for the sick of course

[actsnoblemartin]

FDA = F**king Dumb Asses

[red states rule]

Hey PB, have you left the thread?

[Psychoblues]

Hey PB, have you left the thread?

Until you respond with some actual facts to defend your actual lies about rationing Avastin for breast cancer patients due to cost considerations I guess I have left the thread but reserving my positions and possible re-entry into the conversation as you provide new and credible information to defend your OP positions. I believe the truth is sad enough. We don't need lies to overstate the real problems. The lies just tear down the credibility of the truth but they remain lies and the truth remains obscured.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

Until you respond with some actual facts to defend your actual lies about rationing Avastin for breast cancer patients due to cost considerations I guess I have left the thread but reserving my positions and possible re-entry into the conversation as you provide new and credible information to defend your OP positions. I believe the truth is sad enough. We don't need lies to overstate the real problems. The lies just tear down the credibility of the truth but they remain lies and the truth remains obscured.

Psychoblues

In your world PB video of a rep from the CBO admitting jobs will be lost under Obamacare is not a fact

The link showing the tax increases in Obamacare (many hit middle class people BTW) is not a fact

The math showing Obamamacre is a budgetbuster is not a fact

It all goes back to Obamacare cutting care and ratuioning to save money and keep the deficit as low as possible - which you will continue to ignore

IOW, you do not care about anything that paints Obama and Obamacare in a bad light - only advancing the liberal agenda

We do indeed have a new Virgil in our midst

[Psychoblues]

In your world PB video of a rep from the CBO admitting jobs will be lost under Obamacare is not a fact

The link showing the tax increases in Obamacare (many hit middle class people BTW) is not a fact

The math showing Obamamacre is a budgetbuster is not a fact

It all goes back to Obamacare cutting care and ratuioning to save money and keep the deficit as low as possible - which you will continue to ignore

IOW, you do not care about anything that paints Obama and Obamacare in a bad light - only advancing the liberal agenda

We do indeed have a new Virgil in our midst

If you would like to start a thread involving any of that I suggest you do it. This one, titled by YOU, is about Rationing Begins: ObamaCare vs. Brest Cancer Patients. I have furnished information to prove that information completely bullshit lies yet you cling to your juvenile positions. You call yourself a debater. Not in any school I ever went to. Your ass would have been excluded on the first pass.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

If you would like to start a thread involving any of that I suggest you do it. This one, titled by YOU, is about Rationing Begins: ObamaCare vs. Brest Cancer Patients. I have furnished information to prove that information completely bullshit lies yet you cling to your juvenile positions. You call yourself a debater. Not in any school I ever went to. Your ass would have been excluded on the first pass.

Psychoblues

As I said Virgil Jr, they have to costs somehow. You can dismiss facts all you want. You really do not care that more taxes are being collected for a program that has not started. Youi can dismiss a rep from the CBO saying how many jobs will be lost because of the higher costs employers wil lhave to pay due to Obamacare.

You do not give a damn because Obama did it - so who cares about the results?

[red states rule]

If you would like to start a thread involving any of that I suggest you do it. This one, titled by YOU, is about Rationing Begins: ObamaCare vs. Brest Cancer Patients. I have furnished information to prove that information completely bullshit lies yet you cling to your juvenile positions. You call yourself a debater. Not in any school I ever went to. Your ass would have been excluded on the first pass.

Psychoblues

BTW PB, here is how Obamacre will "help" the litt;e guy. Your beloved unions are rationing care to their members thanks to Obamacare

The same union that told its members how damn good they would have it under Obamacare

It is amazing PB unions have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on elections to get Dems elected - but they can't pay the bill Obamacrae sends them





Late last month, the Service Employees International Union informed dues-paying members of its behemoth 1199 affiliate in New York that it was dropping its health-care coverage for children. That’s right. A radical, leftist union — not an evil, Republican corporation — is abandoning the young ’uns to cut costs.

Over 30,000 low-wage families will be affected, according to the Wall Street Journal. Who’s to blame? SEIU 1199 benefits manager Mitra Behroozi singled out oppressive new state and federal regulations, including the much-ballyhooed Obamacare rule forcing insurers to cover dependents well into their 20s.

“New federal health-care-reform legislation requires plans with dependent coverage to expand that coverage up to age 26,” Behroozi explained in an October 22 letter to members. “Our limited resources are already stretched as far as possible, and meeting this new requirement would be financially impossible.”

In a related development, over the past few months several insurers across California, Colorado, Ohio, and Missouri have dropped child-only plans because of Obamacare-induced premium increases. Untold tens of thousands of families who purchase their plans in the private individual health market will be affected.

Let us pause for a moment to ruminate on this wholly man-caused disaster. To sell Obamacare and manufacture support, desperate Democrats pandered to the college set and their parents. Former SEIU chief Andy Stern specifically touted the unfunded kiddie-insurance mandate as a strategic selling point, telling the Washington Post early this year that the lobbying and public-relations campaign would be “helped by which parts of the bill go into effect immediately.” “It’s hard to talk about things that’ll happen in 2019,” Stern admitted. “But if you can say to people that if your kid is 26 years old, you can keep him on your insurance plan? . . . They get that.”

Some 20 states had already passed legislation requiring insurers to cover adult children before the federal rule was imposed. Citing results in New Jersey, Wisconsin, and elsewhere, many critics pointed to how such top-down benefits mandates were driving up the cost of insurance and limiting access instead of expanding it. In response, top SEIU thug Dennis Rivera accused Obamacare opponents of “terrorist tactics” in a conference call earlier this spring with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

Now, confronted with the thorny allocation of scarce resources, profligate money managers at the SEIU are dropping thousands of kids’ health coverage because they, too, can’t afford to foot the bill imposed by the president — whom their union bosses spent more than $60 million to elect. And SEIU’s Rivera is nowhere to be found.

The SEIU also pumped tens of millions of dollars in union funds directly into the campaign for Obamacare. Workers regurgitated White House talking points, hyping increased access, lower premiums, and peace of mind for the working class. SEIU 1199 — which is now cutting off health-care coverage to children whose parents work in the health-care industry, of all industries — was at the forefront of those D.C.-directed “reform” rallies. The same militant leaders of SEIU 1199 sent hordes of their workers on buses to an anti–Tea Party rally convened by Comedy Central clowns in October, while their benefits and pension funds eroded.

Yes, the union road to hell is paved with workers’ own hard-earned dues money. All hail progressivism!

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/254184/little-victims-obamacare-michelle-malkin

[Psychoblues]

BTW PB, here is how Obamacre will "help" the litt;e guy. Your beloved unions are rationing care to their members thanks to Obamacare

The same union that told its members how damn good they would have it under Obamacare

It is amazing PB unions have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on elections to get Dems elected - but they can't pay the bill Obamacrae sends them

You'll never win your argument with that kind of retort, red. How is that research into the Avastin, breast cancer, cost for treatment and rationing going so far? I am confident your search and efforts in collecting, discerning and critically analysing aggregate information to arrive at truth is sincere? sarcasm off

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

You'll never win your argument with that kind of retort, red. How is that research into the Avastin, breast cancer, cost for treatment and rationing going so far? I am confident your search and efforts in collecting, discerning and critically analysing aggregate information to arrive at truth is sincere? sarcasm off

Psychoblues

I know damn well you wil never admit Obamacre is a total clusterf*** PB

So what if the same unions that told thier mebers to back this insance bill are now losing coverage becuase of Obamacare?

You could not care less abut them - they served their purpose in getting the bill assed now they are no longer needed

With libs like you once the pawns on the political chess board are no longer needed get rid of them and take them off the board

Now we know the cost of Obamcare will; be even MORE

Kathleen Sebelius admits they double counted Medicare savings

To you PB you will give us a big "So what"?

Who cares about another $500 billion added to the nations credit card - after all all Obamacare was such a well intended program


<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ukaIZ7pmabo&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ukaIZ7pmabo&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>






In her first appearance before the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee since the health-care law passed, Kathleen Sebelius responded to a line of questioning by Republican Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois about whether $500 billion in Medicare cuts were used to sustain the program or pay for the law.

“There is an issue here on the budget because your own actuary has said you can’t double-count,” said Shimkus. “You can’t count — they’re attacking Medicare on the CR when their bill, your law, cut $500 billion from Medicare.”

He continued: “Then you’re also using the same $500 billion to what? Say your funding health care. Your own actuary says you can’t do both. […] What’s the $500 billion in cuts for? Preserving Medicare or funding the health-care law?

Sebelius’ reply? “Both.”


http://hotair.com/archives/2011/03/04/sebelius-yes-were-double-counting-medicare-savings/

[Psychoblues]

I know damn well you wil never admit Obamacre is a total clusterf*** PB

So what if the same unions that told thier mebers to back this insance bill are now losing coverage becuase of Obamacare?

You could not care less abut them - they served their purpose in getting the bill assed now they are no longer needed

With libs like you once the pawns on the political chess board are no longer needed get rid of them and take them off the board

Now we know the cost of Obamcare will; be even MORE

Kathleen Sebelius admits they double counted Medicare savings

To you PB you will give us a big "So what"?

Who cares about another $500 billion added to the nations credit card - after all all Obamacare was such a well intended program





Howza 'bout us staying on topic, YOUR topic, red? We can address all those other issues in places designed for them. This place was designed by YOU for the conversation or debate on the Avastin, breat cancer, cost cancellation, rationing, etc. issue. You got your ass handed to you on a silver platter and you can't handle it. I'm beginning to remember why I stopped talking to you about 5 tears ago.

Psychochoblues

[red states rule]

Howza 'bout us staying on topic, YOUR topic, red? We can address all those other issues in places designed for them. This place was designed by YOU for the conversation or debate on the Avastin, breat cancer, cost cancellation, rationing, etc. issue. You got your ass handed to you on a silver platter and you can't handle it. I'm beginning to remember why I stopped talking to you about 5 tears ago.

Psychochoblues

I se when boxed into the corner you refuse to comment and try to play dumb once again

As I have posted several times PB, Obamcare MUST lower expenses so the only thing they can do is ration care

The OP shows once again the sick will be the ones who will suffer the most under Obamacare

Followed by the taxpayers

[Psychoblues]

I se when boxed into the corner you refuse to comment and try to play dumb once again

As I have posted several times PB, Obamcare MUST lower expenses so the only thing they can do is ration care

The OP shows once again the sick will be the ones who will suffer the most under Obamacare

Followed by the taxpayers

The OP is a proven total fucking lie, red, and NOTING more. So what does that make you?

Psychochoblues

[red states rule]

The OP is a proven total fucking lie, red, and NOTING more. So what does that make you?

Psychochoblues


Not a liar PB - and informed person - your worst nightmare on any given day

So far you have ignored the actual cost of Obamacare, the higher taxes imoposed on the middle class, the jobs Obamacre will kill off, unions cutting off benfits to its memebrs due to Obamacare, and the double counting of Medicare "savings" by the Dems

BY ingoring all of these facts that makes you a typical footsoldier in the Obama army PB. Blind alligence to the Bamster regardless of how his polcies hurt the very people who claim to care so much about

The middle class and unemployed will have to adjust to their lower standard of living and reduced helathcare - it is for the common good in your world

[Psychoblues]

Not a liar PB - and informed person - your worst nightmare on any given day

So far you have ignored the actual cost of Obamacare, the higher taxes imoposed on the middle class, the jobs Obamacre will kill off, unions cutting off benfits to its memebrs due to Obamacare, and the double counting of Medicare "savings" by the Dems

BY ingoring all of these facts that makes you a typical footsoldier in the Obama army PB. Blind alligence to the Bamster regardless of how his polcies hurt the very people who claim to care so much about

The middle class and unemployed will have to adjust to their lower standard of living and reduced helathcare - it is for the common good in your world

If you believed that shit, red, you'll believe anything and you are by no means a principled or informed person. That is simply delusional thinking on your own part and it covers up something that happened to you a long time ago. A good psyche doc might be able to help you with it. Perhaps you can get in under the Patients Rights and Affordable Care Act programs, red. I really do wish you the very best in that respect.

Psychochoblues

[red states rule]

If you believed that shit, red, you'll believe anything and you are by no means a principled or informed person. That is simply delusional thinking on your own part and it covers up something that happened to you a long time ago. A good psyche doc might be able to help you with it. Perhaps you can get in under the Patients Rights and Affordable Care Act programs, red. I really do wish you the very best in that respect.

Psychochoblues

Well PB so far you have ignored the reasons why a majority want Obamacre repealed

But like a dog at his water bowel you only lap up what the Obama PR staff in the liberal meida tell you

It does not matter to you people are losing their current coverage. If soes not matter to you people are paying higher taxes right now. It does not matter to you the IRS is adding over 1,000 new agents to go after those taxes and costing the taxpayers millions more

What does matter to you is Obamacare passed and regardless of the results - it is a win for the Dems and that is all that matters to you

[Psychoblues]

Well PB so far you have ignored the reasons why a majority want Obamacre repealed

But like a dog at his water bowel you only lap up what the Obama PR staff in the liberal meida tell you

It does not matter to you people are losing their current coverage. If soes not matter to you people are paying higher taxes right now. It does not matter to you the IRS is adding over 1,000 new agents to go after those taxes and costing the taxpayers millions more

What does matter to you is Obamacare passed and regardless of the results - it is a win for the Dems and that is all that matters to you

I just hate to keep going over this stuff time after time. You didn't provide any links to demonstrate the veracity of your arguments so I won't either.

1. A majority does not want the Patients Rights and Affordable Care Act repealed.

2. I don't simply buy off on what is told to me by any administration but it is only to be expected that I will side on the part of the better argument and benefit for me.

3. All of that "does not matter" bullshit paragraph does matter and matters a lot to me. And I don't believe an ounce or a gram of your assertions concerning these "does not matter" issues.

4. Yep. The Patients Care and Affordability Act will go down in history as a Democratic Party ideal and law and our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren will love us for that as well as for starting the ending of our dependence on the resources of our enemies for our own national sustainability. Yep, and I'm damned proud of all that.

Psychochoblues

[red states rule]

I just hate to keep going over this stuff time after time. You didn't provide any links to demonstrate the veracity of your arguments so I won't either.

1. A majority does not want the Patients Rights and Affordable Care Act repealed.

2. I don't simply buy off on what is told to me by any administration but it is only to be expected that I will side on the part of the better argument and benefit for me.

3. All of that "does not matter" bullshit paragraph does matter and matters a lot to me. And I don't believe an ounce or a gram of your assertions concerning these "does not matter" issues.

4. Yep. The Patients Care and Affordability Act will go down in history as a Democratic Party ideal and law and our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren will love us for that as well as for starting the ending of our dependence on the resources of our enemies for our own national sustainability. Yep, and I'm damned proud of all that.

Psychochoblues

Nice dodge on the tax increaes on the mmiddle class, and people losing coverage. It is clear the ONLY thing you care about is a win for your side - and the hell with the results and impact on the folks

Here are polls showing you are worng - as usual




Most voters still want to see the national health care law repealed, and confidence that repeal will actually happen is on the upswing. Belief that repeal will be good for the economy, however, has fallen to its lowest level ever.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 53% of Likely U.S. Voters now at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care law, down three points from last week but consistent with findings since Congress passed the law nearly a year ago. Thirty-nine percent (39%) oppose repeal. These findings include 44% who Strongly Favor repeal of the measure and 25% who are Strongly Opposed. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Support for repeal has ranged from a low of 50% to a high of 63% since Democrats in Congress passed it last March.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of voters say repeal is at least somewhat likely, up seven points from a month ago. This includes 17% who say it is Very Likely. Thirty-nine percent (39%) regard repeal as unlikely, with nine percent (9%) who view it as Not At All Likely. Fourteen percent (14%) are not sure.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law










And today, a new Quinnipiac poll finds that a plurality of voters still want to see the health care law repealed. By 48%-43% voters said Congress should try to repeal the law. A majority, 51%, still disapproves of President Obama’s handling of health care.

Majorities of voters in the Quinnipiac poll still disapprove of the president’s handling of the economy (53%-40%) and on creating jobs (51%-41%), but according to The Wall Street Journal today, President Obama says he’s now interested in “a government-wide review of federal regulations, aiming to eliminate rules that stymie economic growth.” Yet The Journal notes, “Business leaders say an explosion in new regulations stemming from the president's health-care and financial regulatory overhauls has, along with the sluggish economy, made them reluctant to spend on expanding and hiring.”

http://arkansasgopwing.blogspot.com/2011/01/most-americans-still-want-obamacare.html









In U.S., 46% Favor, 40% Oppose Repealing Healthcare LawThree-quarters of Republicans favor repeal; 64% of Democrats oppose itby Jeffrey M. JonesPRINCETON, NJ -- Americans do not strongly endorse the new Republican House majority's efforts to repeal the landmark healthcare legislation passed last year. A new Gallup poll finds that 46% of Americans want their representative in Congress to vote to repeal the healthcare law, 40% want their representative to vote to let the law stand, and 14% have no opinion.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145496/favor-oppose-repealing-healthcare-law.aspx






Need more PB or will you reply you still do not "see" where a majoirty want Obamcare repelaed?

[Psychoblues]

red, I have proven your OP to be 1,000% false and a hateful lie to boot. You have chosen not to address any of that but to try and send me out on wild goose chases to prove your own points. Prove you own points yourself as I have proven your OP a total fraud therefore anything else you have written is this thread or anywhere else on that subject and with that information is simply insane.

Psychochoblues

[red states rule]

red, I have proven your OP to be 1,000% false and a hateful lie to boot. You have chosen not to address any of that but to try and send me out on wild goose chases to prove your own points. Prove you own points yourself as I have proven your OP a total fraud therefore anything else you have written is this thread or anywhere else on that subject and with that information is simply insane.

Psychochoblues

You have proven nothing PB - but in your mind you are master of all

It is clear Obamcare has to limit care and raton services to curb the massive deficits

But you "see" no deficits, no tax increases, no ratoned care, and the unions must be lying when they tell their members benfirts are being reduced

They better get used to it like cancer patients have to

[Psychoblues]

You have proven nothing PB - but in your mind you are master of all

It is clear Obamcare has to limit care and raton services to curb the massive deficits

But you "see" no deficits, no tax increases, no ratoned care, and the unions must be lying when they tell their members benfirts are being reduced

They better get used to it like cancer patients have to

Show me with credible information that there is rationing involved in the case of Avastin being used for a viable medicine in the treatment of breast cancer and that rationing was used to any cost consideration as your OP states. I have proven ALL OF THAT TO BE FALSE. Do you insist that it is true?

Psychochoblues

[red states rule]

Show me with credible information that there is rationing involved in the case of Avastin being used for a viable medicine in the treatment of breast cancer and that rationing was used to any cost consideration as your OP states. I have proven ALL OF THAT TO BE FALSE. Do you insist that it is true?

Psychochoblues

Obamacare is all about rationiong PB

Not that this will mean anything to you. You will dismiss it like the facts on tax increases and budget bsuting numbers related to Obamcare

You will not "see" any rationing here right? :laugh2:





Obama's Health Rationer-in-Chief
White House health-care adviser Ezekiel Emanuel blames the Hippocratic Oath for the 'overuse' of medical care..

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, health adviser to President Barack Obama, is under scrutiny. As a bioethicist, he has written extensively about who should get medical care, who should decide, and whose life is worth saving. Dr. Emanuel is part of a school of thought that redefines a physician’s duty, insisting that it includes working for the greater good of society instead of focusing only on a patient’s needs. Many physicians find that view dangerous, and most Americans are likely to agree.

The health bills being pushed through Congress put important decisions in the hands of presidential appointees like Dr. Emanuel. They will decide what insurance plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have, and what seniors get under Medicare. Dr. Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. He clearly will play a role guiding the White House's health initiative.

Dr. Emanuel says that health reform will not be pain free, and that the usual recommendations for cutting medical spending (often urged by the president) are mere window dressing. As he wrote in the Feb. 27, 2008, issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA): "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality of care are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change."

True reform, he argues, must include redefining doctors' ethical obligations. In the June 18, 2008, issue of JAMA, Dr. Emanuel blames the Hippocratic Oath for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he writes. "This culture is further reinforced by a unique understanding of professional obligations, specifically the Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of cost or effect on others."

In numerous writings, Dr. Emanuel chastises physicians for thinking only about their own patient's needs. He describes it as an intractable problem: "Patients were to receive whatever services they needed, regardless of its cost. Reasoning based on cost has been strenuously resisted; it violated the Hippocratic Oath, was associated with rationing, and derided as putting a price on life. . . . Indeed, many physicians were willing to lie to get patients what they needed from insurance companies that were trying to hold down costs." (JAMA, May 16, 2007).

Of course, patients hope their doctors will have that single-minded devotion. But Dr. Emanuel believes doctors should serve two masters, the patient and society, and that medical students should be trained "to provide socially sustainable, cost-effective care." One sign of progress he sees: "the progression in end-of-life care mentality from 'do everything' to more palliative care shows that change in physician norms and practices is possible." (JAMA, June 18, 2008).

"In the next decade every country will face very hard choices about how to allocate scarce medical resources. There is no consensus about what substantive principles should be used to establish priorities for allocations," he wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine, Sept. 19, 2002. Yet Dr. Emanuel writes at length about who should set the rules, who should get care, and who should be at the back of the line.

"You can't avoid these questions," Dr. Emanuel said in an Aug. 16 Washington Post interview. "We had a big controversy in the United States when there was a limited number of dialysis machines. In Seattle, they appointed what they called a 'God committee' to choose who should get it, and that committee was eventually abandoned. Society ended up paying the whole bill for dialysis instead of having people make those decisions."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574374463280098676.html

[Psychoblues]

Show me a truthful word in your ridiculous OP, red.

Psychochoblues