ObamaCare for Thee, but Not for Me

By | December 20, 2012 | 0 Comments

So let me get this straight. This is a long sentence:

We are going to be gifted with a health care plan that we are forced to purchase, and fined if we don’t, which reportedly covers 10 million more people without adding a single new doctor, but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents, written by a committee whose chairman doesn’t understand it, passed by Congress that didn’t read it, but exempted themselves from it, and signed by a president who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn’t pay his taxes, for which we will be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect, by a government which has bankrupted Social Security and Medicare, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that is broke.

So what the blank could possibly go wrong?

 
Illinois State Senate candidate Barbara Bellar, MD, who lost both the election and her job. As Harry Truman’s father said, “Always tell the truth, and no one will believe you.”

TV news reports that Governor Jerry Brown of California has early-stage prostate cancer, which has an excellent chance for cure and will be treated with radiation. How was Brown’s early-stage cancer detected? Did he have symptoms? Did his doctor feel a lump? No, that’s usually the way to detect late-stage prostate cancer. Early-stage cancer often can be detected only by using the PSA blood test. But “experts” now advise that the PSA not be done routinely.
Yes, PSAs do result in many negative biopsies. But if a test is so insensitive that it results in few false positives, it may also result in many false negatives – that is, falsely telling the patient that all is well when in fact he does have cancer. Someday we may have a perfect test that is 100% accurate. But we can’t take care of patients someday – we must take care of them today. We must do the best we can with the tools we have. But will we be allowed to?
What would you bet that ObamaCare will cover annual PSA tests for men over 40 or 50? I wouldn’t bet a penny. But I would bet that the feds will declare the PSA to be an example of the “waste, fraud, and abuse” that President Obama talks about.
Oh, wait, I almost forgot. Jerry Brown is 74 years old. The “experts” also advise that for older men, “watchful waiting” is the treatment of choice. There are arguments on both sides. That’s what they are now – arguments.
But as soon as ObamaCare takes effect, the only opinion that matters will be that of the IPAB, the 15-member Independent Payment Advisory Board. These people will be unelected and unaccountable – their decrees cannot be overturned by Congress or even by the courts. Then-Speaker Pelosi announced blithely that we had to pass the bill to find out what was in it. And now we are finding out. But instead of Santa’s bag of goodies, it is proving to be a time bomb.
In short, 74-year-old Governor Brown probably had his early-stage prostate cancer detected with a PSA test, despite the fact that the PSA is now not recommended for anyone. And the cancer will be treated with radiation, despite the fact that active treatment is now not recommended for the elderly. Of course, Jerry Brown is a staunch supporter of President Obama and ObamaCare. In other words, he is telling the rest of us, “Do as I say, not as I do.”
Many other prominent older men also had their early-stage prostate cancers detected and treated. Among these are Cardinal Roger Mahony, General Norman Schwarzkopf, General Colin Powell, Mayor Rudy Giuliani, actor Robert De Niro, and Senator John Kerry. And they, like many less-prominent men including myself, are still alive. To me, that is a positive outcome. But to those whose chief aim is to cut spending on Social Security and Medicare, that is a negative outcome.
Is this statement too harsh? Recall what President Obama said when asked about cardiac pacemakers for the elderly. He replied, “If we’ve got experts…advising doctors across the board…that it will save money…” That is: (1) “Experts” (not necessarily physicians) will give orders to physicians. (2) These orders will apply “across the board” for all patients, instead of treatment being tailored to individual patients. (3) These orders will be based on how to “save money.” Could it be any clearer?
Of course, treating older patients will cost money. To save money, persons should die as soon as possible after starting to receive Social Security or Medicare. It may be an exaggeration to call this the Final Solution to the Social Security and Medicare problem –. but not much of an exaggeration. Older Americans are slowly but surely coming to be seen as “useless eaters” who are a “drain on the Fatherland.”
Nor is this “cost saving” limited to men. Recommendations for mammograms have been changed so that they are now routinely recommended every two years, and not at all for women under 50 or over 74. And breast self-examination is no longer recommended for anyone, despite the fact that many of us know women who detected their own cancers. Recommendations for pelvic exams and Pap smears have been changed so that they are now routinely advised only every three years. But could you remember to do something every three years? I couldn’t.
Isn’t it odd that President Obama touted his plan as providing more “preventive services”? But just what “preventive services” are to be provided? Not more mammograms, more breast self-examinations, more pelvic exams, more Pap smears, or more PSAs. Perhaps the president was referring to his wife’s recommendations for healthful school lunches – which are also proving unpalatable.
And isn’t it even more odd that for decades, we have been advised to have more cancer screening? But now, just as ObamaCare is coming into effect, “experts” are advising that less cancer screening is best. Is it just a coincidence that the “experts” seem to go along with the political tide? Is it just a coincidence that most of the “experts” receive government funding? As the old saying goes, he who pays the piper calls the tune. But we had best be careful that the tune is not “So Long, It’s Been Good To Know You.”
You still believe that ObamaCare is about health care and not about controlling people? You still believe that bureaucrats who couldn’t manage “Cash for Clunkers” can be trusted to make life-and-death decisions for you and your loved ones? You still believe that health care “cost savings” aren’t the same as rationing? Peer into the near future by checking out these news stories, both of which came out the same day:

Belgium looks at euthanasia for minors, Alzheimer’s sufferers.

Report recommends France legalize “accelerated deaths.”

Revealingly, Congress exempted itself from ObamaCare, and it also exempted most federal employees. Nothing could better illustrate the two-tier system of health care that is being prepared for all of us who are not lucky enough to belong to some “elite” group.
How is this compatible with “equal protection of the laws” that the Constitution mandates? How is this compatible with the most elementary concept of fairness? How is this compatible with the principle that government officials are our representatives and not our masters? How is this compatible with the belief that all people are created equal, and are endowed by the Creator with inalienable rights? It isn’t.
Contact: dstol@prodigy.net. You are welcome to publish or post these articles, provided that you cite the author and website.
www.stolinsky.com

No Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Social Widgets powered by AB-WebLog.com.