Why We Must Ration Health Care

[Revmitchell]

You have advanced kidney cancer. It will kill you, probably in the next year or two. A drug called Sutent slows the spread of the cancer and may give you an extra six months, but at a cost of $54,000. Is a few more months worth that much?

If you can afford it, you probably would pay that much, or more, to live longer, even if your quality of life wasn’t going to be good. But suppose it’s not you with the cancer but a stranger covered by your health-insurance fund. If the insurer provides this man — and everyone else like him — with Sutent, your premiums will increase. Do you still think the drug is a good value? Suppose the treatment cost a million dollars. Would it be worth it then? Ten million? Is there any limit to how much you would want your insurer to pay for a drug that adds six months to someone’s life? If there is any point at which you say, “No, an extra six months isn’t worth that much,” then you think that health care should be rationed.

More Here

 

[Revmitchell]

Will health care be rationed?

From iReporter Jason in San Antonio:

“Four years ago my father was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer. [For] 18 months we fought that disease with everything we had because we felt like every day was precious, every day we kept him alive we were one day closer to a cure for that disease. I guess my question is, under a public option or government run health care system, would that type of care be possible? Is it something that 10 years from now we’re going to have to sacrifice or come up with a tremendous amount of cash to pay for it because it would be rationed under our government run health care system?”


Answer by Dr. Gupta

.....................But as you’re saying, Jason, it may come down to numbers and whether estimates of the cost of health care reform are accurate. When Medicare hospital insurance was conceived in 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee projected that in 25 years it would cost 6 billion dollars. The actual cost? 67 billion, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. You can see how far off costs for Medicare were, based on initial projections –much, much higher. Now the president says they’ll add prevention programs and wellness programs, creating a healthier population and that will be a cheaper population with regard to health care costs. But who knows? You’ve got more people that you’re trying to cover; more people, more tests, more screening. How that all adds up, we’re just not sure.


More Here

 

[billreber]

I am reminded that a few decades ago, there was a health craze (my words) about running for your health. It seems that running was supposed to make you heart-healthy and (theoretically) lengthen your life. And then the major proponent of running for your health died of a heart attack, at a relatively early age -- while running!

The truth is we cannot predict ANYTHING about our future demise. Only God is in control. (Oh, wait! I forgot that the "Messiah" is now our President! JUST KIDDING!) My stepdad was diagnosed with congestive heart failure, and given 6 months to live -- and lived for several more years! Those years were NOT a waste of time and money for him or for his family! (In fact, he professed faith in Jesus during that time, AFTER the predicted 6 months was past!) If it happened under the currently-discussed "health plan", would he have even been given any care? I doubt it!

The Democrats who are in leadership in our Congress, Senate, and Executive Branch need to quit "playing God" and consider REAL health-care improvements. One would be tort reform, which would lower malpractice insurance costs, and therefore our costs. Another idea might be to give/continue/expand tax credits to both employers and employees who HAVE a good insurance plan (similar to the so-called California plans that are now pre-tax expenses). They also need to understand that most American citizens already HAVE good health insurance plans, and that changing those plans is the wrong way to "insure" the rest.

Anybody out there have other ideas?

Bill :godisgood:

 

[faithgirl46]

Ration Health Care?? No not by a long shot. It is not man's job to say how long were supposed to live, it is God's. God has a our days numbered and they should not be cut short by some beurocrat who thinks our life is not worth a hill of beans we have a medical condition.
In Addition people's life should not be cut short simply becasue they are older but in good health. That is not what God would want.
If a person has a medical condition that can be fixed for $6,000 and they can go on to live a full, rich life but the goverment feels their life is worthless that is wrong. Those who will be saying what medicines we can or more to the point cannot have will be held accuntable by God on Judgment Day if the lack of care cuts off our life as He intended it by one day etc.
Faithgirl

 

[HankD]

Anybody out there have other ideas?

Bill

How about a specific disease lottery? For instance "low-priority" persons could pay $100.00 for a kidney dialysis lottery ticket, then the winner gets the kidney dialysis machine, heart transplant or whatever.


Pretty heartless? But so seems the current Bill.

HankD

 

[tinytim]

The preventive maintenance that Obama is proposing is not out of Character with his liberal leanings....

Remember, his brand of Christianity is liberation theology.. not evangelical theology. (This is important.. hang on)

Evangelical theology teaches that all are sinners, and are in need of the blood of Jesus to clean us, and save us.. .Evangelical theology teaches that the cure for sin in the world is Jesus.

liberation theology teaches that the cure for sin in the world is to better people's circumstances.. Thus reducing sin... In other words, if we can create an utopia, then there would be no sin... like, the only reason someone steals is because they are poor... so if we get rid of poverty, then no one would steal.


Now with that in mind, look at his healthcare proposal...

He is proposing that if we spend billions of dollars on preventive maintenance and get everyone healthy, then illnesses would be rare.

It doesn't work.. because at some point... EVERYONE DIES FROM SOMETHING.

Just as building an utopia will never get rid of sin... as those in Christianity liberation theology, like Obama, believe...

Neither will preventive maintenance get rid of illnesses. Not on that large of scale...
It just will not do...

God said that the wages of sin is death... that curse is passed on to ALL... jogging, eating right, exercising.. may slow death down... but we will all die.

 

[billwald]

Health care has ALWAYS been rationed . . . at least since Jesus' times. Even Jesus rationed his healing miracles. He could have poofed everyone in the world into good health but he didn't.

The only question is who is doing the rationing. Should it be done by some kind of rational analysis or on the basis of one's assets?

My Old Man was rotten through and through with all kinds of cancer and on Hospice. His AT&T pension paid 100% of all costs. A month before he died they were still cutting on him I suspect because the bills were being paid.

 

[HankD]

Health care has ALWAYS been rationed . . . at least since Jesus' times. Even Jesus rationed his healing miracles. He could have poofed everyone in the world into good health but he didn't.

The only question is who is doing the rationing. Should it be done by some kind of rational analysis or on the basis of one's assets?

My Old Man was rotten through and through with all kinds of cancer and on Hospice. His AT&T pension paid 100% of all costs. A month before he died they were still cutting on him I suspect because the bills were being paid.

Jesus didn't ration His miracles because of greed, power, love of money and a deal with the drug manufacturers.


HankD

 

[Winman]

Well, I think the problem is that the hospitals and pharmacies are gouging everyone. I doubt that drug really costs anywhere near $54,000.

My father died this last February from kidney failure. He got good treatment (or I should say much treatment) because he worked for the military all his life and had government insurance. In Florida he was getting dialysis, when we moved him up to N. Carolina the hospital there said the treatment had been completely unnecessary. My father's condition actually worsened greatly after the kidney treatments. He had not gone in with kidney problems, but came out with them. If you have good insurance, the hospitals will often give you treatments you do not really need to make money.

Here is an article on the problem

Why Cancer Drugs Are So Expensive and Why Medicare Can't Fix the Problem
Media Advisory
January 27, 2009

NEW YORK, NY - A new health policy report suggests that the swift and dramatic rise in cancer-drug spending is due to laws that keep Medicare from managing the use or price of cancer drugs. These laws limit Medicare's actions in cancer far more than they are limited in other areas of healthcare.

Published in the February 5, 2009, issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, the report was written by Peter B. Bach, MD, MAPP, an epidemiologist and pulmonary and critical care physician at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, who in 2005 and 2006 was the Senior Policy Adviser on cancer policy at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in Washington, DC.

According to Dr. Bach, cancer-drug prices and drug utilization are rising faster than other areas of Medicare spending. Medicare is neither able to limit which drugs are given to which patients, nor can it ensure that it reimburses for the use of drugs based on the price for the least costly version of that drug. Medicare has these abilities in its coverage and payment for other types of healthcare, as Dr. Bach outlines in his report.

"Medicare can do very little to ensure that cancer drugs are only used when they are effective, and nothing to ensure that the price they pay for drugs is appropriate," Dr. Bach points out. "It is no surprise that cancer-drug prices and utilization keep rising."

The report points to some studies suggesting that progress in cancer treatment has become less and less cost-effective, even as advances have been made. This "diminishing rate of return" in the war on cancer is fiscally unsustainable, in Dr. Bach's view.

Dr. Bach suggests that policymakers could find ways to slow the upward rise in cancer-drug prices without stifling the pace of scientific innovation. Recommendations include specific changes to the laws that govern Medicare's coverage and payment for cancer drugs, as well as an endorsement of a "center for comparative effectiveness" that could guide Medicare's decisions.

 

[carpro]

From iReporter Jason in San Antonio:

“Four years ago my father was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer. [For] 18 months we fought that disease with everything we had because we felt like every day was precious, every day we kept him alive we were one day closer to a cure for that disease. I guess my question is, under a public option or government run health care system, would that type of care be possible? Is it something that 10 years from now we’re going to have to sacrifice or come up with a tremendous amount of cash to pay for it because it would be rationed under our government run health care system?”


Answer by Dr. Gupta

.....................But as you’re saying, Jason, it may come down to numbers and whether estimates of the cost of health care reform are accurate. When Medicare hospital insurance was conceived in 1965, the House Ways and Means Committee projected that in 25 years it would cost 6 billion dollars. The actual cost? 67 billion, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. You can see how far off costs for Medicare were, based on initial projections –much, much higher. Now the president says they’ll add prevention programs and wellness programs, creating a healthier population and that will be a cheaper population with regard to health care costs. But who knows? You’ve got more people that you’re trying to cover; more people, more tests, more screening. How that all adds up, we’re just not sure.


More Here

It's ironic and more than a little hypocritical that , had Edward Kennedy been dependent on Obamacare, he would have been dead months ago.

 

[billwald]

>Jesus didn't ration His miracles because of greed, power, love of money and a deal with the drug manufacturers.

True! He apparently made a miracle when the details would have made a good story to include in the Gospels 30 years later.

 

[HankD]

>Jesus didn't ration His miracles because of greed, power, love of money and a deal with the drug manufacturers.

True! He apparently made a miracle when the details would have made a good story to include in the Gospels 30 years later.

He did miracles for this reason:

John 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.


HankD​