"ALL CAPS IN DEFENSE OF LIBERTY IS NO VICE."

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

IT HAS BEGUN: NYTIMES TELLING ITS READERS THAT LESS HEALTHCARE IS BETTER HEALTHCARE

UPDATED: SCROLL DOWN...

THEY DON'T QUITE ENDORSE DEATH PANELS - YET, BUT BY ALL INDICATIONS THAT'S COMING NEXT YEAR IF THEY CAN HOLD ON TO THE CONGRESS:
Deep down, Americans tend to believe that more care is better care. We recoil from efforts to restrict care.

Managed care became loathed in the 1990s. The recent recommendation to reduce breast cancer screening set off a firestorm. On a personal level, anyone who has made a decision about his or her own care knows the nagging worry that comes from not choosing the most aggressive treatment.

This try-anything-and-everything instinct is ingrained in our culture, and it has some big benefits. But it also has big downsides, including the side effects and risks that come with unnecessary treatment. Consider that a recent study found that 15,000 people were projected to die eventually from the radiation they received from CT scans given in just a single year — and that there was “significant overuse” of such scans.

From an economic perspective, health reform will fail if we can’t sometimes push back against the try-anything instinct. The new agencies will be hounded by accusations of rationing, and Medicare’s long-term budget deficit will grow.

So figuring out how we can say no may be the single toughest and most important task facing the people who will be in charge of carrying out reform.

REPEAT:
So figuring out how we can say no may be the single toughest and most important task facing the people who will be in charge of carrying out reform.

"NO" IS ANOTHER WAY TO SAY "YOU DIE."

SO SARAH PALIN WAS RIGHT AFTER ALL.

OBAMACARE WASN'T JUST ABOUT WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION; IT WAS ABOUT A TYPE OF EUTHANASIA WHERE IT'S THE GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS WHO DECIDE WHICH PATIENT LIVES AND WHICH PATIENT DIES.

I SAY, WE'RE BETTER OFF IF WE "EUTHANIZE" OBAMACARE!

NOTE: The impetus to "reform" our health care industry and health care insurance markets is based on TWO HUGE FREAKIN' LIES:

1) That we spend more than Europe on health care and get a worse result.


And (2) That Europeans get better results disease by disease - also FALSE:


WHY HAS THE LEFT LIED ABOUT OUR HEALTH CARE?

TO GAIN CONTROL. TO MAKE AS MANY PEOPLE DEPENDENT ON GOVERNMENT AND POLITICIANS AND BUREAUCRATS AS POSSIBLE.

That's what makes them powerful - and able to dole out favors for friends.

There's only one way to stop them:

VOTE THEM OUT THIS NOVEMBER!

UPDATE: INSTALANCHE! Please take a look at my other posts. AND: Thanks Glenn! (BTW: He's taken a lot of ribbin' and barbs from me over the years, and always been a gent'! ALL CLASS.)

UPDATE #2: WE SCOOPED THE CRAP OUTTA ALL DESE BLOGGS TOO!

4 comments:

Peter Dengler said...

Congrats on the Instalanche. Great post.

Oskar said...

Not possible to compare all Europeans with Americans when it comes to life expectancy. We have huge differences between different countries, for example the former Soviet parts have much lower life expectancy than western european countries. In the figures I have looked at, Figures from the CIA World Factbook 2009 and from the 2006 revision of the United Nations World Population Prospects report, for 2005-2010, the US comes in place 38, with 19 european countries better ranked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

Reliapundit said...

we have a much more ethnically diverse population.

if you subtract blacks, then our lifespan is 5 years better than europe's.

blacks die average 10 years younger than whites.

due to genetics and life style choices.

i agree the comparison is effected by all sorts of differences - and i remind you hat i am posting about it to dispel the propaganda leftists like you spread that europe is better.

it is false - a lie.

CBDenver said...

Another important point to note is that the decision to deny care is a social decision, not a medical decision. It is one thing for a person to decide, in conjunction with his doctor, to forgo treatment because his chance of recovery is low. It is quite another for medical bureaucrats to decide that the social value of someone's life is low and therefore he doesn't deserve medical care. The British National Health Service (NHS) decides to provide or withhold treatment based on subjective "quality of life" decisions, not medical necessity. The disabled, low IQ, elderly, etc are deemed less worthy of having medical dollars spent on them. Yes, those are "death panels".