Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42

Thread: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

  1. #31
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    I do not see any evidence of any "decreeing".

    I did not see any evidence to support the premise about the how the word 'effective' is being used.
    So I am not so much choosing to overlook it as it doesn't seem to be there.

    If you would please, it would help if you could quote actual text from teh bill that supports your assertions.
    The common usage of the term "effectiveness" is as a synonym to "efficient." "Appropriate" likewise has a similar common usage. As HR3200 contains nothing to suggest an uncommon usage, that is the meaning to be attached to the words.

    It is, as I have stated, an economic consideration. In normal english, it is an economic consideration. When Dear Leader discusses the difference between a red pill and a blue pill, both doing the same thing, with the blue pill costing half as much, he is making an economic argument.
    Transcript: ABC News' Dr. Tim Johnson Interviews President Obama - ABC News
    What I've proposed is that we have a panel of medical experts that are making determinations about what protocols are appropriate for what diseases. There's going to be some disagreement, but if there's broad agreement that, in this situation the blue pill works better than the red pill, and it turns out the blue pills are half as expensive as the red pill, then we want to make sure that doctors and patients have that information available to them
    When he discusses doctors in one state achieving outcomes for less cost than doctors in another state, he is making an economic argument.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/03/ma...ewanted=5&_r=1
    And so if it turns out that doctors in Florida are spending 25 percent more on treating their patients as doctors in Minnesota, and the doctors in Minnesota are getting outcomes that are just as good — then us going down to Florida and pointing out that this is how folks in Minnesota are doing it and they seem to be getting pretty good outcomes, and are there particular reasons why you’re doing what you’re doing? — I think that conversation will ultimately yield some significant savings and some significant benefits.
    When he uses such arguments to support CER, he is defining CER as an economic mechanism. Even the staunchest advocates of CER cannot escape the reality that they are, ultimately, discussing the economics of care and not the particulars of care:
    NEJM -- Does Comparative-Effectiveness Research Threaten Personalized Medicine?
    The deepest concern about CER is that it will be misused, which is why some legislators seek to prohibit information on comparative effectiveness from influencing coverage policy and payment decisions. But surely these decisions will not be improved by discouraging the use of the most relevant and valid information about what works and in whom. CER is not a panacea, but it is a key to individualized care and innovation, not a threat. An initiative to advance our knowledge about the effectiveness of clinical strategies can hasten the day when personalized medicine transforms health care.
    With GovernmentCare defining what insurance coverage is (either through the public option or through the hypermicromanaged exchange), and with GovernmentCare defining what is "effective", CER cannot avoid becoming, at some point, a "death panel" that says treating a patient not yet ready to die is not an "effective" treatment protocol.

  2. #32
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    This section covers what is grandfathered in, not what can or cannot be done in general.
    Here is the actual text of that section. Please note the lack of anything that says what you say it says.:
    SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE.



    • (a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term `grandfathered health insurance coverage' means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:



      • (1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-





        • (A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.






        • (B) DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED- Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day.





      • (2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR CONDITIONS- Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1.




      • (3) RESTRICTIONS ON PREMIUM INCREASES- The issuer cannot vary the percentage increase in the premium for a risk group of enrollees in specific grandfathered health insurance coverage without changing the premium for all enrollees in the same risk group at the same rate, as specified by the Commissioner.

    DIVISION A--AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE CHOICES

    SEC. 100. PURPOSE; TABLE OF CONTENTS OF DIVISION; GENERAL DEFINITIONS.



      • (3) INSURANCE REFORMS- This division--





        • (B) creates a new Health Insurance Exchange, with a public health insurance option alongside private plans;


    Very good. Now go onto the other section I cited, where those "private plans" can only sell the insurance policies authorized by the Health Choice Commissar. It's the health care equivalent of Henry Ford's view of the Model T: You can have whatever health insurance you like, as long as it is what government decrees.

  3. #33
    Advisor Realist1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    11-27-09 @ 09:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    537

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Well, the goal is efficiency and lower costs amid scarce resources.

    Which means that it basically becomes a triage on a national level.

    In a triage, you allocate resources to those who have the best chance of survival . . . and sometimes leave others to die.

    This is standard medical practice.
    Other than the individuals that's being Discarded by the State as a Lost Cause,,,you'll probably have quite a few Folks out here agreeing with you.

    Until it's their Turn to be Judged.

  4. #34
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,945
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    The common usage of the term "effectiveness" is as a synonym to "efficient."
    Doesn't seem to be so all that much
    effective: Definition, Synonyms from Answers.com
    adj.

      1. Having an intended or expected effect.
      2. Producing a strong impression or response; striking: gave an effective performance as Othello.
    1. Operative; in effect: The law is effective immediately.
    2. Existing in fact; actual: a decline in the effective demand.
    3. Prepared for use or action, especially in warfare.
    effective - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
    –adjective 1. adequate to accomplish a purpose; producing the intended or expected result: effective teaching methods; effective steps toward peace. 2. actually in operation or in force; functioning: The law becomes effective at midnight. 3. producing a deep or vivid impression; striking: an effective photograph. 4. prepared and available for service, esp. military service.
    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectiveness]Effectiveness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
    In [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicine"]medicine[/ame], effectiveness relates to how well a treatment works in practice, as opposed to [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficacy"]efficacy[/ame], which measures how well it works in [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_trial"]clinical trials[/ame] or laboratory studies.
    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    "Appropriate" likewise has a similar common usage.
    I did effective. You can provide the definitions that show 'appropriate' means the same things as "cost effective" whenever you get around to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    As HR3200 contains nothing to suggest an uncommon usage, that is the meaning to be attached to the words.
    Granted. But please note that common usage makes a distinction between efficient, effective and appropriate.

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    With GovernmentCare defining what insurance coverage is (either through the public option or through the hypermicromanaged exchange), and with GovernmentCare defining what is "effective", CER cannot avoid becoming, at some point, a "death panel" that says treating a patient not yet ready to die is not an "effective" treatment protocol.
    Please demonstrate that treatment which has an outcome of death is considered an effective treatment.
    I may be wrong.

  5. #35
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,945
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    Very good. Now go onto the other section I cited, where those "private plans" can only sell the insurance policies authorized by the Health Choice Commissar. It's the health care equivalent of Henry Ford's view of the Model T: You can have whatever health insurance you like, as long as it is what government decrees.
    Since you're making the case, it is generally accepted that you should provide the evidence that individuals will not be allowed to purchase health care.
    I may be wrong.

  6. #36
    Educator a777pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Flower Mound, in the basement
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 08:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    815

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    Would you please quote from the source material (one of the actual bills) the relevant section that states that citizens would not be able to purchase their own medical treatments?
    NO!

    Look it up yourself.

    I guess one could go to India to get health Care at their own expense. Go for it.


    READ THE BILL!!!!
    I came into this world fighting, screaming and covered in someone else's blood. I have no problem going out the same way.

  7. #37
    Student JakeFromWI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Stevens Point, WI
    Last Seen
    10-13-10 @ 05:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    282

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Has anyone other than me noticed that the only folks who use such an interpretation of the "end of life care" portion of the bill are the media (and sarah palin). When any reputable polition, namely republicans, are asked about it, they don't mention anything about death panels or euthenasia, however, they don't denounce the idea either. They know its rediculous, but as long as others beleive it, they don't even have to use scare tactics. It's not congresspeople who are saying this stuff...they know theier reputation is on the line.

  8. #38
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,945
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Quote Originally Posted by a777pilot View Post
    NO!
    Look it up yourself.
    I guess one could go to India to get health Care at their own expense. Go for it.
    READ THE BILL!!!!
    I see you're new to debate. No worries. You'll catch on.
    I may be wrong.

  9. #39
    Educator a777pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Flower Mound, in the basement
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 08:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    815

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    I see you're new to debate. No worries. You'll catch on.

    New to debate? No, just won't rise to the bait.
    I came into this world fighting, screaming and covered in someone else's blood. I have no problem going out the same way.

  10. #40
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,945
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Sebelius: Talk of `death panels' is scare tactic

    Quote Originally Posted by a777pilot View Post
    New to debate? No, just won't rise to the bait.
    I actually says we will all be given our own ponies and Lamborghinis.
    Really, it's in there. Just read the bill.

    No, I don't have to support my claims in debate--you do.
    It's always expected that one's debate opponent find and provide the evidence for one's own arguments.
    Just imagine what kind of debating it would be if we had to provide the evidence for our own cases.
    That would just be ridiculous.

    If you think that providing evidence for one's own claims is just too hard for you, then perhaps debating isn't really your cuppa.
    GL
    I may be wrong.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •