Barrasso-Mammogram Panel Would Have Killed My Wife

[TheManSand322]

Americans are a bunch of retards...

[Visfen]

What is it that people don't understand, without rationing trough prices you ration trough government.

I prefer the first because I understand the dynamics of an economy will resolve the problems that occur with those priced out of the market trough competition.

Those that prefer the later do so because they suggest the failures we have in health care today are because of the free market, which is blatantly untrue when we know them to come from mandates, government coverage and such.

[SubmarinerAndroid]

Some medical panel makes a recommendation and it's a great communist conspiracy?

They changed the four food groups to a food pyramid some years ago, I suppose that's a sign of the New World Order?

[carrierexchange]

Barrasso-Mammogram Panel Would Have Killed My Wife, and my dog too

[47f0]

Every health care policy, whether government, or private corporation, will result in someone dying. The report suggests, correctly, that the potential health risk from repeated x-ray exposure within that age group is worse than the risk of missing a tumor. But the report also acknowledges that there are other risk factors, such as family history that are exceptions. Do we do as many potentially damaging tests as possible, or try to maximize the benefit of those tests?

[JamJells]

Boo Fox. You're It.

[kurtdawolf]

YOU LIE!!!!!

[mikebee02]

I don't get why all of the talk about breast cancer is concerning early detection and not more effective prevention. Shouldn't the main focus be on finding the real causes of the rise in breast cancer? Seems to me people should be less afraid of worthless bureaucratic recommendations and worry more about the pollutants, drugs, and food additives (including livestock hormones and GMOs) that are likely causing this and other modern illnesses.

[TrollBuster9090]

"why all the talk about breast cancer is concerning early detection and not more effective prevention."

You know about cervical cancer and the papilloma virus vaccine? Did you SEE what happened when somebody actually PROPOSED an effective cancer prevention strategy???

Conservatives pulled their usual shit about claiming it would encourage promiscuity (since papilloma virus is spread through intercourse) and conspiracy nuts from all sides whined about the danger of vaccines and adjuvants.

[mikebee02]

Point taken. Plus I'm sure chemo probably costs way more than just a few shots or maybe drinking organic milk. The wig lobby is probably against it too.

[KataVideo]

why doesn't barrasso vote to fund mammograms for all American women in that age group in order to prevent breast cancer?

[PersonalJesus348]

no the cancer would've killed her...

AND YOUR RICH ASS IS MORE THAN WELCOME TO PAY FOR IT!

I like how they say private means its best. Well show me...

[freesk8]

I found my first wife's breast cancer tumor when she was under 40 yrs old. When I found it, by manual exam, it was already stage II. She lasted 8 years before she died of cancer. If I had found it a year later, she would not have lasted one year more. My finding her cancer earlier gave her six more years of life.

And these idiots are telling us that breast self exam and early mammograms are not worth it?

This is rationing.

We have a RIGHT to a free market in health care.

[greyflcn]

@freesk8

Healthcare however doesn't function like a classic "free market".

greyfalcon. net/ healthcare2

[freesk8]

Weiner is right in this: there is now no free market in health care. But restoring it is the proper reform, not taking us closer to socialized medicine.

The tax deductibility of employer-based health ins should be removed. This is a special interest subsidy.

People should be able to buy health ins across state lines.

Now, about 50% of HC expenses are already paid by a govt entity, and the pvt ins cos are so massive (due to govt regs that hurt small cos) that they behave like govt depts.

[greyflcn]

@freesk8

If insurance is the act of taking on a liability, in return for money

How would it benefit the public if insurance companies relocated to states with weak legal systems, to more easily dump their liabilities when they come due?

That said, I'd be fine with removing that restriction if we had a system like what Switzerland does:

1. Pre-existing conditions are banned

2. Must offer a highly regulated barebones plan, without profit

3. Price of additional coverage is set by the market

[Visfen]

You keep going on about Switzerland being the model, but that is not the plan, not at all.

And Switzerland is not the model, the model is what the US used to have, an entirely free market system. Switzerland is the stepping stone for European countries to get there, in the US it would only mean switching to a different poison.

We don't even need insurance. In fact, if there was an insurance company that got perfect information, we would all lose on buying that policy.

[greyflcn]

@Visfen

So you're instead advocating for your model that doesn't exist in any country? And has never existed in a macroeconomic market.

Me,

I'm not terribly fond of ideologically driven leaps of faith like that with a 6th of the US economy at stake.

That said, the Swiss model works because the market is very good at managing Wants. But it fails at managing Needs.

The Market also fails at avoiding creating externalities in liability management markets. (i.e. Insurance)

[Visfen]

It has existed, and it worked the best. It existed in the US before, and at that time in history the development was that medicine was getting cheaper and basically everyone was covered.

Then the government got involved.

The same will be true with Switzerland.

The best system the government could model would be to stop innovation or to shift costs to other sectors of the economy.

The idea that the market is bad at managing needs is absurd, look around you you daft tool.

[Visfen]

What possible externalities could you be talking about, insurance is stupid in its' very design. The idea to model a system around is with government mandates, involvement, laws, is ridiculous.

We could just as well force people to play the lottery.

Without the elementary understanding of economic theory, no economic understanding can be modeled that is cohesive, and that is the problem, those that model these system with managed capitalism, such as yourself, don't understand economic theory

[greyflcn]

@freesk8

Oh, and

4. An insurance mandate on the consumer.

(Since it'd be unfair to have a mandate only the Supply side with #1)

[WKaliberr]

dumb republicunts

[crtnyevans]

This is not even a panel of government officials, its a panel of people from the American Cancer Society

[JBeatty17]

GOP- The Party of Fear. They can always be counted upon to prey upon the cowardice and selfishness of the conservative base.

[LynnTTT]

The panel says that as a matter of economics, mammograms for everyone under 50 is not necessary ;further says this is something you should discuss with your doctor. Be realistic: women get breast cancer in their 30's also, but the numbers don't warrant routine mammograms at that age. Full body scans at age 5 might turn up some bone cancer, but again it isn't warranted. Compare to a relative who died of breast cancer at 55- she had no health care and never got a mammogram.

[Phyrexious]

Repeat after me:

Fox is not news.

[tbgx1]

Fools on the left think we are going to be set free by this health care. It is merely a first step to our total enslavement.

Fools breed fools breed fools.

Maybe a little NWO population control IS in order.

[guaporuiz]

Dude, we are already enslaved... by the damn insurance industry. They got us by the balls. Either reform health insurance or bust!

[junkforkaryn]

good God, we ask for a little competition in the free market, and that's your idea of "total enslavement"?? i'd say you were already on the short list to extinction mr. "NWO population control". (eyeroll)

[moregravyplease]

@tbgx1 Health insurance reform is the first step to total enslavement? What's the second step? Campaign finance reform?

[tbgx1]

There will never be Campaign finance reform. Elected positions will never by open to the general public. The public will always choose one of two people that they're allowed to. A few rouge candidates sneek in now, but that will stop.

If we dont open to a third party now, we never will. As it is we are down to 1 party because both parties have the same agenda. They sold their souls for power now they want to sell ours.

[jennined]

Rogue, dude, not rouge. Although it'd be ballin if we had more pink candidates.

Our system isn't conducive to having more than two parties. For that you need something more like the various European parliaments (just not the Germans', because it's impossible to understand).

Now, it'd be nice to have two parties that weren't in the pockets of international corporations, but that seems like too much to ask these days.

[freesk8]

Most campaign finance reform violates free speech.

McCain-Feingold does.

So, yes, campaign finance "reform" is another step in the violation of our rights, and ultimately, this is leading in the direction of our enslavement.

[bigc028282]

HOPE IN ONE HAND, BUSH IN THE OTHER.

[cryan71]

So let me get this straight, without healthcare reform we are already currently rationing?

So why is this a complaint of the wingnuts?

[mintvagoo]

Fox- news for the beholden.

[Innize]

God, the Republican congressmen are just as dumb as their constituents.

[gamoonbat]

This is a load of crap. The report on breast cancer and pap smear procedures has little or nothing to do with the proposed health care reforms. It is actually a report from folks nominated by George W. Bush.

[bigc028282]

You obviously have no read the bills.

Make sure to check out the death of the crap in trade/carbon tax. The emails of the scientists, that skewed the research on "climate change" have exposed the SCAM. BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA DIPSH!TS.

[gamoonbat]

Although I disagree with the report, the recommendations are based on limiting the X-ray dose and other hazards of medical procedures. It is not about the cost at all.

[bigc028282]

READ THE LOBBYIST WRITTEN BILLS

[MooseOfReason]

gamoonbat, Read the article "Mammogram Debate Took Group by Surprise" in the NY Times.

"They also said they never thought of themselves as being political appointees, much less being Bush appointees."

It's disingenuous to say they were Bush appointees.

[gamoonbat]

Whatever they may think about it, they were appointed by President Bush as opposed to congress or President Obama.

[MooseOfReason]

gamoonbat, You didn't read the article.

"Medical experts become members of the task force by nominating themselves or, as usually happens, by being nominated by colleagues and professional organizations."

"They are vetted by Health and Human Services to be sure they have no conflicts of interest, their names are published in the Federal Register, and they are appointed by the head of the Agency for Health Care Quality and Research, which is part of Health and Human Services."

[gamoonbat]

The current head of HHS stated that she regarded this panel as a vestige of the last administration. Tommy Thompson, the previous head of HHS, took a great interest in breast cancer and mammography after his wife developed the condition.

[jonr7007]

His wife "Bobby"???

[NATEandtheMONKEY]

thats all he could come up with "on the spot".

lol