NYTIMES: HEY, MAYBE NOT USING THE LATEST MEDICAL CARE IS BETTER!

THEIR TRYING TO MAKE A PREEMPTIVE STRIKE ON BEHALF OF OBAMACARE - AND TELL US DEATH PANELS ARE A GOOD THING:

Editorial --- Is Newer Better? Not Always

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that an astonishing half or more of the increased spending for health care in recent decades is due to technological, surgical and clinical advances.

For the most part, such advances are a cause for celebration. But an expensive new drug is not always better than an older, cheaper drug, and sometimes a new technology or treatment that is highly effective for some patients is unnecessary or even dangerous for others.

The system almost seems designed to keep driving up costs.

To win approval, drugs and many devices must undergo tests for safety and effectiveness. For drugs, there is usually no comparison to products already approved. For both, there is no consideration of cost. Once drugs or devices are approved to treat one class of patients or illnesses, doctors can use them for virtually any ailment they please. Manufacturers eagerly promote their most expensive products to doctors and patients.

Patients have few ways to judge what is best for improving health or saving money. They must rely on doctors who may have insufficient information — or economic incentives to pick the costliest treatment.

The new health care reform law makes a start at figuring this out. It sets up a new system to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of drugs, treatments and medical devices. But, after all of the cynical demagoguing about “death panels,” it limits the extent to which the studies can be used to help hold down costs.

No one wants to bar patients from getting the treatment they need. But without curtailing the use of unnecessary, overly costly and even dangerous new technologies and surgical procedures, there is little hope of restraining the relentless rise in health care costs.

... The law says the secretary of health and human services cannot deny Medicare coverage of services “solely” on the basis of comparative effectiveness research, but it does not prevent the use of such findings in conjunction with other factors in making coverage decisions. Those decisions generally influence what private insurers cover as well.

The secretary needs to press the panel to get the research going and then begin including the findings in Medicare coverage and reimbursement decisions. Critics will howl. If the panel does its job right — and politicians have the courage to make the case — both patients and taxpayers will benefit.

YEAH, SURE.

THE TRUTH IS, THERE IS NO OTHER WAY OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS CAN MAKE GOOD ON THEIR CLAIM THAT OBAMACARE WILL LOWER COSTS.

ON THIS COUNT -AND EVERY OTHER - OBAMACARE WILL WORK AS WELL AS ANY OTHER POLITICIAN DESIGNED GOVERNMENT RUN PROGRAM. LIKE CASH FOR CLUNKERS.

ONLY WITH THIS PROGRAM, YOUR LIFE IS AT STAKE.

WE CAN REPEAL OBAMACARE. JUST VOTE GOP THIS NOVEMBER.