Voice For Liberty

Tag: Health care

  • Canadian health care: a personal story of tragedy

    Here’s a message — much more than that, a heartfelt story — I received from my friend Wendy Aylworth. She cares very deeply about the direction America is headed regarding health care. Now her family has suffered a tragedy caused by government control of medicine. Here’s her story.

    This issue touches close to my heart. Government should not be the entity to decide if you’re worth giving medical care. This Friday I’ll be attending a rally titled “Hands Off My Health Care.” (See Wichita tea party planned to protest government-run health care for details about the Wichita rally.)

    Rallies are being held nationwide in every city where a Senator has a local office. Gather outside the building from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm.

    I’ll attend in memory of my Cousin Leita, who passed away last Thursday at the age of 29 having been neglected and ignored by the “FREE” Health Care in Canada. They say it’s FREE; it only costs you YOUR LIFE!

    My cousins are Canadians. They’ve always told me their health care system is a source of national pride; one they believed in. My cousin is a caring, trusting, compassionate person, and suddenly, acutely, needed help.

    My cousin’s 29 year-old daughter became ill and her mother, my first cousin, took her to the hospital emergency department. After checking with the triage desk, Leita, known to them to be a heart patient, waited five and one-half hours in excruciating abdominal pain in the waiting room before she was finally taken back to be examined. By then she was coughing up blood. She was given something for nausea and pain, and then sent home and told to go get an ultrasound at another location the next day.

    She couldn’t make it through the night and woke her mother early in the morning. Her mom phoned ahead to ask the emergency room workers whether they were busy at that time, and if they could please take her daughter back to be seen just as soon as they arrived. The response was anger that she would say such an “abusive” thing to them. My cousin brought her daughter to the emergency room and found the waiting room completely empty. But the triage person refused to take her back. She was in extreme abdominal pain and had been battling this “cold” for almost two months. Finally they took her back, felt her abdomen and decided perhaps her liver had a mass in it. Later that day she was given a biopsy and told the results would be back in eight days. My cousin told me it was so wonderful they did the biopsy at the hospital because if her daughter had not been admitted she would have had to go on the waiting list for a biopsy — a three month wait.

    An X-ray showed spots on her daughter’s lungs. The personnel told her they suspected liver cancer spread to her lungs.

    She was given a bed. Since the specialist was leaving on vacation, Leita would have to wait until July 6th, 2009 for an appointment with him. I urged my cousin to get her daughter to a hospital with an Oncologist immediately, and began my own search for a place. It turned out, due to the Canadian government’s restrictions on hiring specialists, the nearest Oncologist was a two and one-half hour drive away. This would require a transfer to the other medical facility.

    The government rules in the Canadian health care system did not allow my cousin to do this. Seeing a specialist even in oil-rich Alberta requires a referral from the family doctor. The family doctor had run liver enzyme tests in November 2008 due to the medication my cousin was on, and had not reported any anomaly in the results. She declined to refer Leita elsewhere, but was very nice about it. My cousin stayed at her daughter’s bedside while I attempted to find some location she could go and be seen by an Oncologist, or some way around the family doctor’s blockade.

    My cousin said her daughter could not move and that even trying to speak made her vomit. I asked what they were giving her for nausea and was told when I reached her by phone a couple days later that it was shots.

    I asked why they didn’t just give her anti-nausea medication in her IV because I’d recently had surgery under general anesthesia and the new medicine they put in my IV had completely eliminated nausea. Well, it turns out the hospital did not have her on an IV. I guess this saves on having to also put in a catheter in and empty the catheter bag. So my cousin’s daughter was left to dehydrate, while still battling to keep from vomiting — and no IV even though she was in the hospital with a mass in her liver strongly suspected to be malignant. I gathered info from a website on the necessity of an IV and emailed it to my cousin in Canada. The next day, her daughter got an IV.

    Two days after this the results of the biopsy came back. It was confirmed to be cancer of the liver just as they thought, and a fast-growing type. Again urging help for her, calling, emailing, messaging people in her province, doing everything I could to try and get her somewhere to see an Oncologist — none of that worked. Not only was my cousin’s daughter’s life on the line, but my cousin explained she herself was not well enough to travel, and was on a wait list for heart care and also actually needed to be at the medical center in Calgary where the ONLY Cardiologist for the province was (and also where the Oncologist was).

    But rules are rules and neither could be seen. Logically she should have been taken to the Medical Center in Calgary, hospitalized, and received care. It didn’t happen. The family doctor said my cousin’s daughter could just use the “Cancer Centre” there at the hospital they were already in. No need for a transfer. This is when my cousin discovered there was no Oncologist at all for their Cancer Centre, but only an internist (and he was on vacation). My cousin told me her family doc was a really nice lady. And so my cousin trusted the health system.

    Her daughter’s case would go before the “Cancer Board” the week the internist returned from vacation. My cousin’s daughter passed away the night of July 9, 2009. She was only 29.

    I hope you will please attend the rally to stop government take over of health care, sign many petitions against any expansion of government powers, and email links to petitions and information on to as many of your friends as possible. Also please phone your senators and Congressional representatives. The number to phone is memorable and fitting for the career politician in Congress: 1-877-SOB-USOB. That toll free line is often busy, so you can also find their direct phone numbers at www.house.gov or www.senate.gov.

    I’ve contacted individual citizens in Canada who’ve told me the Province of Alberta has excellent health care. They were comparing it to their own province. So my cousin’s experience was a “GOOD ONE.” This is what we have to look forward to if you let government take control. The federal government already controls 51 cents of every health care dollar spent. The federal government’s controls, red tape, and refusal to allow states, doctors, and we the people our own choices is the TRUE cause of the problems with our health care system.

    The Federal government does not allow YOU to take a deduction from your taxes if you purchase your own health insurance. Politicians deliberately set it up so only your employer can take a tax deduction for buying your health insurance for you. With this arrangement politicians guarantee that you’ll live in fear of losing your job AND your health insurance. And, then they know we will have to cry to them to FIX it.

    Politicians always set things up so there are more problems that only THEY can fix (and they make you believe it with their propaganda). Nearly every American lives in FEAR of losing their health insurance because this keeps us right where politicians want us. They back us into the corner and extract more from us each time, with each created problem. But they WILL NOT fix the actual problem.

    If they’d let you buy your own policy and let you deduct it from your taxes your insurance would be portable. And, for those who cannot afford at the moment to purchase their own policy, politicians could just offer vouchers. In reality there are only 8 million U.S. citizens without their own health insurance policy beyond their own choosing. The 48 million number you’ve been told is an outright lie.

    The maize of government regulations is so great that many physicians and nurses have quit seeing patients. They can make a much higher income as expert witnesses or simply in another field. The Congress and the Administration refuse to place caps on medical malpractice awards for various damages not having anything to do with actual medical expenses or future expenses, and juries do not see the full story.

    This is your life and the life of your children at stake. First it will be the weak who are “expensed.”

    Please attend this rally!

    Thanks,
    Wendy Aylworth

    p.s. If you let government take over your health care there will soon be one growth industry remaining in America: funerals.

    Google “We Surround Them” (click here to perform this search), or look to the 912 groups for a rally near you. The Tea Party Patriots Social Network also has information.

    You can contact Wendy at MorticianForGov@gmail.com.

  • Wichita tea party planned to protest government-run health care

    WICHITA — Healthcare is the focus of another round of tea parties taking place this week across the country. The Kansas chapter of the grassroots group Americans for Prosperity will organize a rally this Friday in Wichita.

    The Wichita protest, at 11 a.m. Friday, July 17 outside Sen. Sam Brownback’s office (245 N. Waco, Wichita), will be held simultaneously with hundreds of other local tea parties nationwide outside the offices of members of Congress.

    (more…)

  • European health care rationing boards: coming to America?

    Following up on a letter in the Wichita Eagle written by Brad Beachy of Wichita: He’s making the case that nationalized health care of the type found in Europe is both cheaper and better than what we have in America.

    Cheaper, yes. Better? Let’s take a look.

    Beachy, in his letter, states: “European countries such as England spend about 8 percent of their gross domestic product on health care while covering every single resident.”

    The eight percent of GDP figure is commonly cited, and that’s about half what the United States spends. So how does England do it?

    Last week I reported on the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, or NICE. The Wall Street Journal reports that this is the board in England founded about 10 years ago as “a body that would ensure that the government-run National Health System used ‘best practices’ in medicine.” (We hear phrases like this from Obama. As if the government would know what are “best practices.”)

    But something different happened: “What NICE has become in practice is a rationing board. As health costs have exploded in Britain as in most developed countries, NICE has become the heavy that reduces spending by limiting the treatments that 61 million citizens are allowed to receive through the NHS.”

    The Journal article details a few examples of care that is denied in England, but most Americans get.

    There are real consequences: “The Concord study published in 2008 showed that cancer survival rates in Britain are among the worst in Europe. Five-year survival rates among U.S. cancer patients are also significantly higher than in Europe: 84% vs. 73% for breast cancer, 92% vs. 57% for prostate cancer. While there is more than one reason for this difference, surely one is medical innovation and the greater U.S. willingness to reimburse for it.”

    One of the reasons used by those in favor of national health care is that sometimes insurance companies won’t cover treatments people feel they should receive. A government rationing board — we will have one in America if Obama’s plans proceed — is likely to be much more harsh.

  • World Health Organization ranking biased, not reliable

    A letter in the Wichita Eagle written by Brad Beachy of Wichita makes the case for “so-called socialized medicine” to be brought to the United States. Part of Beachy’s argument relies on a ranking produced by the World Health Organization. That ranking has a number of problems.

    The ranking Beachy refers to was produced in 2000, and hasn’t been updated since then. So it’s getting a little old. Worse than that, it contains a number of techniques and biases that work against countries that rely on markets instead of government to provide health care.

    A recent paper from the Cato Institute provides some useful analysis of the World Health Organization rankings. (See WHO’s Fooling Who? The World Health Organization’s Problematic Ranking of Health Care Systems)

    For example, there are two sets of rankings. As the Cato report explains: “One ranking claims to measure “overall attainment” (OA) while another claims to measure “overall performance” (OP). These two indices are constructed from the same underlying data, but the OP index is adjusted to reflect a country’s performance relative to how well it theoretically could have performed.”

    Using the OP rankings, the United States is number 37. But using the OA rankings, the United States is 15.

    25% of a country’s ranking is based on “financial fairness,” which is determined by looking at the “dispersion in the percentage of household income spent on health care.” As the reports says “The FF factor is not an objective measure of health attainment, but rather reflects a value judgment that rich people should pay more for health care, even if they consume the same amount.”

    The report notes this introduces a bias against countries that rely on market mechanisms for paying for health care.

    There’s another problem with FF, too: “Put more simply, the FF penalizes a country because some households are especially likely to become impoverished from health costs—but it also penalizes a country because some households are especially unlikely to become impoverished from health costs. In short, the FF factor can cause a country’s rank to suffer because of desirable outcomes.”

    The Cato study goes on to document additional problems with the WHO ranking. Problems with the rankings were noticed earlier, too. An earlier analysis of this report from Cato (We’re Number 37 in Health Care! concluded this:

    Overall, the WHO rankings’ mathematical formulations serve only to distract attention from the authors’ underlying distaste for individual choice in health care. The report largely ignores the extraordinary benefits the American marketplace brings to health care worldwide, such as new drugs, advanced diagnostic instruments such as MRIs and CAT scans, and lifesaving therapies for cancer and heart-disease patients. Under a WHO-style health care system, lifesaving research and innovation would be stifled and individual choice would be discarded in favor of collective control. Bureaucrats would decide who receives care — and who does not — on the basis of statistical tallies that devalue the lives of the elderly, the disabled and the chronically ill.

    By contrast, a free-market health care system upholds the right of every person to make his own decisions. Patients are given choices, not issued numbers, and doctors are freed from impersonal “expert panels” dictating what care they can and cannot provide. The WHO’s idea of government-provided universal health care is a fantasy that masks a system of dangerous, formula-based rationing. If you value your health, don’t trust the WHO.

  • Obama-style health care: the effects in England

    In the debate of what to do about health care, advocates — such as President Obama — cite countries that spend much less than the United States. An example is the United kingdom.

    The president believes that if we can control costs through better medical practice and efficiency gains, we too can have more health care provided at less cost.

    The Wall Street Journal article Of NICE and Men tells us how Great Britain is able to control its costs. It’s through the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, or NICE.

    Originally it was established to “ensure that the government-run National Health System used ‘best practices’ in medicine.” This sounds like a good program, doesn’t it?

    But as the Journal article details, it hasn’t quite worked out that way. The article concludes: “But it [NICE] has by now established the principle that the only way to control health-care costs is for this panel of medical high priests to dictate limits on certain kinds of care to certain classes of patients.”e

  • Articles of interest

    Chemical security, national health care, global warming cost, school order.

    Extending security standards better decision

    A letter in the Montgomery Advertiser makes the case for extending the present Chemical facility anti-terrorism standards. Legislation is under consideration that would give government the ability to regulate processes and technologies.

    “Although we believe CFATS should be reauthorized and made permanent, we do not support current draft legislation that replaces CFATS and extends the power of the DHS to dictate how a product is made. Decisions pertaining to feedstocks, processes and products should be left to the engineers and safety experts at local facilities.”

    The Stealth Single-Payer Agenda

    George F. Will’s column explains that while President Obama and Congress are presently considering a “public option” health care plan, this is just the first step on the road to a single-payer plan. “The puzzle is: Why does the president, who says that were America ‘starting from scratch’ he would favor a ‘single-payer’ — government-run — system, insist that health-care reform include a government insurance plan that competes with private insurers? The simplest answer is that such a plan will lead to a single-payer system.”

    The Big Chill
    Congress shouldn’t fight global warming by freezing the economy.

    In a Wall Street Journal column, Pete Du Pont explains the enormous cost of the Waxman-Markey global warming bill and how little warming it would stop. “Manzi estimates the additional economic costs of the bill would be 0.8% of gross domestic product, while the economic benefits would be just 0.08% — so the costs would be 10 times the benefits. The cost of reducing emissions turns out to be greater than the cost they impose on societies. According to a 1999 Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas estimate, the emissions cuts the Kyoto Protocol would have required in 2010 were likely to reduce America’s GDP by $275 billion to $468 billion, or $921 to $1,565 per person, and of course Kyoto does not apply to fast-growing developing countries such as China and India.”

    Taking back control of the classrooms

    “The dirty little secret of America’s schools is that teachers have lost control of the classroom. Disrespect is commonplace. Disorder is an epidemic — 43 percent of high school teachers say they spend more than half their time maintaining order instead of teaching, according to a Public Agenda survey. Learning is impossible in these conditions. One misbehaving student steals the floor, spoiling the learning opportunity for the other 29 students. ‘You know, it really doesn’t take very many kids to ruin a classroom,’ observed David Adams, superintendent of Shelbyville Central Schools.”

    Phillip K. Howard explains that the problem is too much law: “There is a broad perception — by teachers and students alike — that teachers lack the legal authority to enforce respect and order.”

  • In Wichita, protest of ABC’s Obama coverage

    Here’s a message from a local patriot and activist. She is rightly concerned about ABC News — the national organization, not the local affiliate — and its upcoming coverage of the Obama administration:

    Protest in Wichita in front of ABC affiliate KAKE news TV at 1500 N. West St., Wichita this Wednesday, June 24th starting at 4 p.m. until 6:30 p.m. Please join us! We are protesting how ABC is propagandizing the American public and deceiving them.

    What is she concerned about? The editorial ABC Self-Nationalizes For Obama supplies some background:

    Media Bias: As much of the U.S. private sector, including health care providers, resists government takeovers, what a sorry sight to see ABC News leap forward to make itself a propaganda arm of the government. … This Wednesday, on every show from “Good Morning America” (kicking things off with an interview with the president) to “World News Tonight” (broadcast from the Blue Room) to a prime-time special called “Prescription for America” (and emanating from the East Room), the network will puff the Obama administration’s trillion-dollar plan to nationalize U.S. health care. …

    This isn’t your grandfather’s propaganda. Forget public service announcements. Just as some newspaper ads trick themselves up to look like news stories to enhance their credibility, making a partisan program indistinguishable from the nightly “news” is a propaganda tool in the same vein. … Under the cover of news, ABC can present the president’s side of the health reform issue as “factual” and leave out the real costs and concerns about government control and rationing of health care. …

    The best proof that the public is getting propaganda is that ABC is refusing to take ads from critics who are offering to pay for them. Among those turned away: the Republican National Committee and a group called Conservatives for Patients’ Rights. …

    It all amounts to a sad corruption of American journalism. Once upon a time, people would go into journalism to expose the seamy underbelly of American politics. Today, ABC News, in its abject submission to the Obama administration on health care, has decided to become the seamy underbelly.

    For more information about the event, contact Larry Halloran at LarryHalloran@aol.com. Click to get a Google map to the location.

  • Government health care rations by making patients wait

    David Gratzer, a physician born and raised in Canada, gives us in the United States a preview of what government health care is all about: the waiting.

    His recent Wall Street Journal piece is titled Canada’s ObamaCare Precedent: Governments always ration care by making you wait. That can be deadly.

    He tells this story: “But Canadians wait for practically any procedure or diagnostic test or specialist consultation in the public system. The problems were brought home when a relative had difficulty walking. He was in chronic pain. His doctor suggested a referral to a neurologist; an MRI would need to be done, then possibly a referral to another specialist. The wait would have stretched to roughly a year. If surgery was needed, the wait would be months more. Not wanting to stay confined to his house, he had the surgery done in the U.S., at the Mayo Clinic, and paid for it himself.”

    An Ontario woman with a 40-pound liquid-filled tumor in her abdomen was within weeks of death when an American surgeon — working in Michigan — removed the tumor.

    “Ironically, as the U.S. is on the verge of rushing toward government health care, Canada is reforming its system in the opposite direction.” In 2005, the Canadian Supreme Court “struck down key laws in Quebec that established a government monopoly of health services.” Private-sector health care is growing in Canada, with 50,000 patients per year seeing private doctors in British Columbia. The United Kingdom and Sweden have initiated reforms, moving away from total government control.

    Dr. Gratzer asks “Why are [Americans] rushing into a system of government-dominated health care when the very countries that have experienced it for so long are backing away?”

  • Government-run health care focus of June 6 demonstration

    This Saturday, Wichita-area citizens will have an opportunity to let their fellow citizens and the Obama administration know of the dangers of government control of health care.

    The event will be on Saturday, June 6, 2009, from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm. The location is the pedestrian bridge over Kellogg (US 54/400 highway) at Pattie Street. Meet on the south side of Kellogg. You can click on a Google map of the location.

    Protest event organizers say this is your opportunity to wake up the public, to get people talking to each other about government control of health care, to watch these videos to become informed, and to spread information throughout the country. Please send an email to students@cox.net for more information on the protest event, to ask your questions, and to volunteer to hand out literature, send emails, etc.

    This is a follow-up event to this protest event. More information can be found there.