Obamacare Rationing Has Arrived: Live, or Die, with It

Obamacare Rationing Has Arrived: Live, or Die, with It

It isn’t being called rationing since the president repeatedly pledged that would never happen under Obamacare but, pledge as they might, the Obamians are already busily engaged in restricting Americans’ access to medical testing and treatment, aka rationing.

And, don’t dare even whisper the term “death panels.” Sarah Palin and others were widely ridiculed by the administration for suggesting their existence since, we were promised, Obamacare would never incorporate such a ghastly feature. Instead, they’re called ”ethics panels.”

Years before the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is fully implemented in 2014, measures are being taken nationwide to cut costs and limit access to medical procedures which for decades were considered prudent and necessary for diagnosis and treatment of potentially life-threatening illnesses and diseases.

It’s the old trick of boiling a frog adapted to medicine.

Those interested in boiling frogs know you should never throw the little amphibians into pots of boiling water since they tend to jump out and spoil the fun. Likewise, politicians know they can’t literally throw grannie under a bus, pull the plug on gramp’s respirator, or assign a cancer patient to a death panel since grannie, gramps, and the cancer patient are liable to kick them where it hurts.

You have to boil them gradually and use euphemisms as you do it.

Rationing began in earnest earlier this year when the FDA withdrew approval of Genentech’s highly-effective but expensive breast cancer drug Avastin on the basis that it had ”a marginal effect on tumor growth in breast cancer and in light of Avastin’s severe side effects, the risks outweigh the limited benefit.”

The FDA didn’t directly address that opinion to the thousands of women whose lives have been extended by that “limited benefit” and who scoff at the alleged side effects and risks.

Life, for frogs and human beings, supersedes both the pleasures of boiling water and side effects despite cost savings.

As for mammograms, women only think they should get them annually but that’s another misconception according to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, USPTF, which seems to have been assembled by the Department of Health and Human Services less for the purpose of preventing than for rationing.

The task force of 16 “independent experts” concluded in November, 2009 that it makes no sense for women to either perform breast self-exams or get routine mammograms before reaching the age of 50. Possibly saving your life is purposeless, and it costs money.

After the flak hit the fan and women adopted the frog approach to boiling water, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebellius backtracked and insisted the “experts” were merely recommending, not establishing policy or determining coverage–and Republicans were absolute cads for suggesting otherwise.

Chalk one up for the women-folk.

Again only recommending, in October, 2011, the same task force reported that “Prostate-specific antigen–based screening results in small or no reduction in prostate cancer–specific mortality” despite findings by true independent studies showing such screenings reduce death rates by up to 90%.

Following that money-saving recommendation, the nation’s largest urology group jumped all over the USPTF . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=10765.)