GOP Senator Offers Bill to Prohibit Health-Care Rationing Based on Obama's 'Comparati

While this may seem good in a precautionary way...... it fails to address a very real issue which is at the core of health and health care today........

That is both individual responsibility and professional responsibility.

It is time to recognize that some conditions are 'chronic' and requires medical supervision to stablize or slow the progression. BUT...........

It is also time that medical science admits that it has been studying treatment of disease symptons (be it physiological changes in organ systems or caused by pathological organisms), and has not been actively engaged in the study of contributing causes of changes in the body's adaptive mechanism which leads to diseases and conditions in the first place..... and discovering the diagnosing tests needed and methods to cure.

A good investiment of government dollars would be in discovering the changes and assaults which cause the body's healing and adaption processes to fail in the first place, and then directing treatments designed primarily to cure these conditions. If government wont position itself and its money for such studies.... independant of corporations and business interest, then no one will, nor has the money to do so. There is no money in it for big pharm..... if discoveries in nutrition and dietary deficiencies could help restore the body's recovery mechanisms, but many doctors might find their practices more rewarding helping to restore people to real health instead of just prolonged living with disease. Until medicine is directed first at curing 'whatever ails you' and only if unsuccessful, then at stablizing those with medications or surgeries or chemotherapies for those conditions which will not reverse..... the health of the nation is not being served, even by those who are most invested and sincerely dedicated to this service. Most people would be willing to pay a doctor for his services which have a priority aimed at returning them to health and curing conditions... and only as a reluctant alternative fall back on a 'maintaining stability' for those conditions which are non-responsive.

The drawback of the above? ......There's no money in it for the investors (doctors, insurance companies, you and I) who invest in big pharma who perpetuate treatment over cure..... and there's no money in it for big pharma.

Today, many conditions are lumped together, and studied and treated, with the assumption already made that they are chronic and irreversible. Yet, there are many people alive and well, after having been diagnosed with 'incurable conditions', who give testimony of returns to health after following some treatment or adjustment in lifestyle, directed by a doctor (who was willing to risk stepping away from the 'norm' of standard patient care and proscribed pharmaceuticals), or other health advisor. Unfortunately, these who 'revert' are treated by medical science like annomalys instead of 'the norm', and little advantage is made of whatever might be learned by what they tried or discovered in their research and journey to good health.

It is God that put the mechanism for healing in the body. While some processes are a natural process of aging and cellular deterioration over time with a loss of adaptive processes..... most conditions are treated like there's a deficiency of some medication..... which supplying will eventually contribute to other 'side-effects' or medication deficiencies..... etc., etc., until eventually some deficiency fails to be recognized in time to prevent death. While many medications are prescribe, and many of their efficacy is based upon certain lab indicators that the medication performs in a certain way.... few, if any, are examined to see whether or not the target of their use (such as cholesteral lowering medications) is really the culprit which causes the disease in the first place.... or is the symptom of other processes which were not recognized and corrected..... or even whether those could be reversed or corrected.

 

Medicare should continue to buy viagra for dirty old men?

 

You hit on some interesting points WC... Great post.

Not sure if any of you watched the AMA response to Obama speech yesterday. I didn't understand why they were so in favor of the best practices database but a doctor came on later and explained.

This database minimizes malpractice suits. You see, if the doctor and patient agrees to go with best practices, the doctor is now off the hook for liability if something goes wrong or if that was not the best direction for the individual. He also talked about how much we save from running routine test for the sake of covering the doctors back.

I don't know how I feel about that. I would like it mandatory that the doctor discusses all options and not just push best practice to avoid being sued. All f our bodies are different so what works best for some may not be best for others...

 

This will never do!!

The whole idea behind universal health care is rationing of care as determined by government bureaucrats.

 

Health care will be rationed especially for the elderly!:tear:

 

No, the idea is competition which will bring the cost down.

Also, you say this as if the insurance companies don't currently ration your care or get between you and your doctor. Currently you get the procedure your insurance will pay for. Those are your choices.

 

This morning obamas people were talking about the need to cut out medications and surgeries under his plan to keep costs down.
A clination who doesn't know you and has never examined you will decide your health care needs, not your doctor.

 

Sounds like how the the insurance companies currently do us. What is Obama changing???

Can you link to where Obama's people said these things? I saw earlier where concessions were made with the pharmaceutical industry but didn't see what you said about the need to "cut out" medications or surgeries.