The Berwick Evasion [Here comes health care rationing]

Here comes health care rationing

More like, here comes the wild alarmist rhetoric.

Stealth recess appointment. But Berwick gave the caper away with his speech in England, praising them for their socialized medicine system.

We need to visit the Heartland Institute to get the video and audio and full transcript of Berwick despicable speech in which he admits to concealing his intentions.

Donald Berwick deserves a thread that starts off with Donald Berwick.

Very important about Barack Obama's coming Health Care rationing and "Death Panels".

Barack Obama once again showed his arrogance and his 'Sneaky' cowardice when he appointed Dr. Donald Berwick to head Medicare and Medicaid Wednesday July 7, 2010, while Congress is in recess, to avoid questions about 'ObamaCare' rationing.

Dr. Donald Berwick is a long time advocate of wealth redistribution and Health Care rationing.

“It’s not a question of whether we will ration care. It is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”
Dr. Donald Berwick

“Any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized and humane must, must redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is by definition redistributional.”
Dr. Donald Berwick

Dr. Donald Berwick also thinks the British Health Care system - NHS - would be a great model for the United States.

Death Panels?

The National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) decides whether new drugs represent value for money for the NHS in England and Wales.

The current ceiling on extending life in the British Health Care system is £30,000 ($37,873.34 dollars as of 7/7/2010) but exceptions are made.

The cost of Open Heart surgery (bypass) in the United States ranges from approximately $60,000 to $200,000.

The costs for a pre-mature baby in the United States costs about $50,000 the first year.

Stroke is the No. 3 cause of death in the U.S., behind heart disease (with which it is closely linked) and cancer.

Stroke affects more than 700,000 individuals annually in the United States (approximately one person every 45 seconds). About 500,000 of these are first attacks, and 200,000 are recurrent attacks.

Someone in the U.S. dies every 3.3 minutes from stroke.

The average cost of care for a patient up to 90 days after stroke is $15,000.

For 10 percent of patients, the cost of care for the first 90 days after a stroke is $35,000.

Barack Obama is going to ration Health Care so he can give 'free' ObamaCare to Illegal Aliens and swell the ranks of his mostly illiterate or functionally illiterate base voters.

Where does this delusional thought process come from?

[quote="AntiTheist, post:21, topic:204594"]
More like, here comes the wild alarmist rhetoric.

[/quote]

Yeah, it's always "wild alarmist rhetoric" until it happens. Then it's either "I told you so" or "Oh my Gawd, how could this have happened?!?", depending on which POV you held before the actual event.

[quote="jjdrury81, post:23, topic:204594"]
Where does this delusional thought process come from?

[/quote]

It's quite remarkable, the insights and clarity you get when you unplug from ObamaThought®.

Try it sometime.

[quote="Wolseley, post:24, topic:204594"]
Yeah, it's always "wild alarmist rhetoric" until it happens. Then it's either "I told you so" or "Oh my Gawd, how could this have happened?!?", depending on which POV you held before the actual event.

[/quote]

This.

I find it humorous to hear people act so naive. "Oh that could never happen here/now/with him." Famous last words.

Have we forgotten what seemingly civilized people are capable of? How about turning people into lamps? Throwing women and children into mass graves alive? Lynch mobs? It doesn't actually take much, and I'm quite sure they'll have a very sensible reason for it.

[quote="jjdrury81, post:23, topic:204594"]
Where does this delusional thought process come from?

[/quote]

History

To whomever changed the title of this thread, I thank you.

[quote="markbrumbaugh, post:1, topic:204594"]
This falls into the "I told you so" category, but unfortunately we right wing folks were right. I hope the USCCB is happy with what they helped bring about. Can anyone say "Death Panels?" Dr. Berwick is Obama's recess appointment to handle Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare. He strongly believes capitalism is wrong and wealth as well as health care must be redistributed.

"In an influential 1996 book "New Rules," Dr. Berwick and a co-author argued that one of "the primary functions" of health regulation is "to constrain decentralized, individual decision making" and "to weigh public welfare against the choices of private consumers."

He then recommended "protocols, guidelines, and algorithms for care," with the "common underlying notion that someone knows or can discover the 'best way' to carry out a task to reach a decision, and that improvement can come from standardizing processes and behaviors to conform to this ideal model." And guess who will determine the "best way"?
....his personal view of the "public welfare" will have the power to trump the mere "choices of private consumers."

online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703636404575352860425050800.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

[/quote]

Health care has been going the way of protocols, guidelines and algorithms for decades now, with the scientific research to back up this approach. The standardization trend covers everything from vaccination schedules to emergency treatment for heart attack and stroke.

Why should 20 different people with the same condition get 10 different types of treatment if research has proven that only 2 of the 10 options are effective? Of course the 'algorithm' approach, is not meant to strip patients of choice, but to ensure that the choices presented make medical/scientific sense.

Whether we like it or not, health has always been very much a social concern (even before the term socialized medicine was coined). No politician or their appointees made it that way: it just is. Long before Nov 2008, flu was spread across the world by dirty hands and coughs, coal dust was blackening miner's lungs and simple childhood infections were causing deformities in the unborn...

If blame must be assigned for health and medical treatment being a social concern rather than an individual one, then we have to go way back to the first chapters of Genesis, I think! Of course, the characters under discussion there might see take as much issue with excessive individualism as some of us take with any word that begins with, or includes, the term 'social'.

[quote="Wolseley, post:24, topic:204594"]
Yeah, it's always "wild alarmist rhetoric" until it happens. Then it's either "I told you so" or "Oh my Gawd, how could this have happened?!?", depending on which POV you held before the actual event.

It's quite remarkable, the insights and clarity you get when you unplug from ObamaThought®.

Try it sometime.

[/quote]

ObamaThought implies exercise of one's rational powers...not necessarily a bad thing. What would be the alternative: Obama Knee-jerkReactions?

Anything good can be taken to an evil extreme: that goes for trends in medicine as well as for political/ideological trends. That makes neither advances in medicine nor political/ideological persuasions necessarily evil in and of themselves.

Only if you assume all thoughts are always rational ones. Then again this kind of assumption would explain perfectly what could lead people to vote for Obama in the first place. :shrug:

This kind of assumption…would be yours - not mine. Engaging the rational processes to me, simply means exercising one’s powers of thought - it says nothing about the nature or quality of the conclusions reached.

[quote="Kuan_Yin, post:15, topic:204594"]
Recycled and Debunked Crazy talk

[/quote]

Really? Berwick refers to "making the tough choices in planning and supply". Would my 80 year old father have been able to get his bypass surgery he needed under Obama care? My guess is the death panel, er, "government rationer" would have said, "sorry, you die". We have a culture of death in this country that engages in euphemisms to hide the truth about what they are doing and what they are proposing. They call snuffing out the life of an unborn child " dealing with an unplanned pregnancy". The death panels will be called "health care supply regulation department" or some such. Either way you slice it, there will be death panels. I prefer to use that term because it tells it like it is rather than mask the truth. The propogators of the culture of death so hate it when the pro-life crowd tells it like it is using blunt language to shed light on what's really happening. (cockroaches, too, prefer to spread their filth around in the dark). Sarah Palin hit it on the nose: death panels are coming, courtesy of "the one we've been waiting for" (or whatever Obama calls himself these days). If good people stand by and do nothing, death panels will come.

Wake up and smell the roses my liberal friends, you will all be old someday.

Ishii

[quote="ishii, post:32, topic:204594"]
Really? Berwick refers to "making the tough choices in planning and supply". Would my 80 year old father have been able to get his bypass surgery he needed under Obama care? My guess is the death panel, er, "government rationer" would have said, "sorry, you die". We have a culture of death in this country that engages in euphemisms to hide the truth about what they are doing and what they are proposing. They call snuffing out the life of an unborn child " dealing with an unplanned pregnancy". The death panels will be called "health care supply regulation department" or some such. Either way you slice it, there will be death panels. I prefer to use that term because it tells it like it is rather than mask the truth. The propogators of the culture of death so hate it when the pro-life crowd tells it like it is using blunt language to shed light on what's really happening. (cockroaches, too, prefer to spread their filth around in the dark). Sarah Palin hit it on the nose: death panels are coming, courtesy of "the one we've been waiting for" (or whatever Obama calls himself these days). If good people stand by and do nothing, death panels will come.

Wake up and smell the roses my liberal friends, you will all be old someday.

Ishii

[/quote]

'Death panels' seem to have gone from being "your guess" in the first part of you post, to your preferred term in the middle part and by the end to an absolute certainty, if "good people stand by and do nothing" - seriously, now. :rolleyes:

Suddenly, the lives/health of the elderly becomes a fear-mongering issue simply because some dislike the government in power. Where were these same voices when the elderly & infirm were being put out to pasture in nursing homes that barely took care of their basic needs (if that)? No, the government is not the entity most likely or able to abuse/neglect the elderly sick...that, like charity, begins at home.

We don't have to guess or suppose or slander authorities to express concern for the elderly - we just have to visit the nearest nursing home and count how many have preventable pressure sores or how many have had a recent visit with a loved one...The way some elderly sick are treated in our society, who needs to worry about death panels?

I could write on about planks and logs, but don't want to derail the thread...

[quote="ishii, post:32, topic:204594"]
Really? Berwick refers to "making the tough choices in planning and supply". Would my 80 year old father have been able to get his bypass surgery he needed under Obama care? My guess is the death panel, er, "government rationer" would have said, "sorry, you die".

Wake up and smell the roses my liberal friends, you will all be old someday.

Ishii

[/quote]

Hm..

When I'm 80 (and btw i'm already "old") would I choose to have a very expensive procedure done which might lengthen my life by a few months or a small handful of years.. or would I choose to let those resources go to children and young parents with their whole lives to live?

Yes, I'd love to be with my grandchildren for the extra time, but at what cost? And yes, We have worked hard and paid for our insurance. We aren't on the public dime... except..as educational facilities, hospitals, etc. are not paid for entirely by the private sector why should my needs automatically be more important than the poor?

Its great that some can work hard and provide for themselves the resources to access the best health care our country has to offer. Is is Christian though, to put a few dollars in the poor box and shrug your shoulders at the poor who can't afford medicine and preventive care and think "Oh well, life isn't fair, I've done my part..." Not everyone lacks access due to bad choices and poor planning. Some people have chronic illnesses that prevent them from working or getting good private insurance. Medicaid and Medicare do not always cover these people.

Food is a commodity too.. except that we can all agree no one should go hungry in a land of plenty. Why should some be without adequate healthcare. The ER is NOT adequate for chronic conditions and complicated diagnoses.

If facilities and resources are limited, choices have to be made.

OR

Efforts can be made to expand access. How about Medical School tuition grants in return for a set number of years of public service instead of crippling student loans?

Over usage of benefits can be addressed by triage and screening. There are solutions, if people are willing.

[quote="markbrumbaugh, post:1, topic:204594"]
This falls into the "I told you so" category, but unfortunately we right wing folks were right. I hope the USCCB is happy with what they helped bring about. Can anyone say "Death Panels?"

[/quote]

I do not know this appointee, but I do know that you are gravely mistaken, almost to the point of slander against our Catholic Bishops. They were very much opposed to this health care bill. Here is the evidence:
usccb.org/comm/archives/2010/10-051.shtml

The U.S. bishops urged the House of Representatives to fix flaws in health care legislation or vote against its passage in a March 20 letter to House members. The letter was signed by Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, chair of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities, Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, New York, chair of the Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, and Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City, chair on the Committee on Migration.

usccb.org/healthcare/

Cardinal George's Statement on Passage of "Profoundly Flawed" Health Care Reform Act (3/23/10)
Bishops to House of Representatives: Fix Flaws or Vote No on Health Reform Bill (3/20/10)
Community Health Centers: Setting the Record Straight (3/17/10)
Washington Post Op-Ed by Cardinal DiNardo, Bishop Murphy & Bishop Wester (3/16/10)
Statement of USCCB President, Cardinal George “The Cost is Too High…” (3/15/10)
Cardinal George's Statement on Passage of "Profoundly Flawed" Health Care Reform Act (3/23/10)
Bishops to House of Representatives: Fix Flaws or Vote No on Health Reform Bill (3/20/10)
Community Health Centers: Setting the Record Straight (3/17/10)
Washington Post Op-Ed by Cardinal DiNardo, Bishop Murphy & Bishop Wester (3/16/10)
Statement of USCCB President, Cardinal George “The Cost is Too High…” (3/15/10)

Indeed and it’s something that EVERY health insurance provider does. Odd that we never hear people screeching about so-called “death panels” that are private insurance companies. Another example of the rank hypocracy; the people who are attacking government health insurance are the same ones wailing about decreases in Medicare funding.

[quote="Black_Rose, post:6, topic:204594"]
I do not regret supporting Obama. BTW, do you know any politician who would have been a better option for me who has left-wing economic views?

[/quote]

Sure, if you can justify left-wing economic views.

I know several black gentlemen who are a. **american, b. are not friends with domestic terrorists, **c. are not closet muslims, d. **have a sense of propriety, **e.would not be beholding to unions, and progressive politicians, f. have humility, e. do not think Mao Tse Tung was where it's at, f. respect the Constitution.

That criteria, to start with, left-wing economics notwithstanding, would be an improvement, and would be fairly easy to find.

[quote="seekerz, post:31, topic:204594"]
Engaging the rational processes to me, simply means exercising one's powers of thought - it says nothing about the nature or quality of the conclusions reached.

[/quote]

I don't know which one of any of these sounds directly interchangeable with simple "thought" but whatever.

ra·tion·al (rhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/abreve.gifshhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/prime.gifhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gif-nhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gifl)adj.*1. * Having or exercising the ability to reason.
*2. * Of sound mind; sane.
*3. * Consistent with or based on reason; logical: rational behavior. See Synonyms at logical.
*4. * Mathematics Capable of being expressed as a quotient of integers.

n. Mathematics A rational number.

rational ˈræʃənəl]adj1. using reason or logic in thinking out a problem
2. in accordance with the principles of logic or reason; reasonable
3. of sound mind; sane the patient seemed quite rational
4. endowed with the capacity to reason; capable of logical thought man is a rational being
5. (Mathematics) Maths expressible as a ratio of two integers or polynomials a rational number; a rational function

n (Mathematics) Maths a rational number

rational*adj* rational ˈraʃənl]1 able to think, reason and judge etc Man is a rational animal.

2 sensible; reasonable; logical; not (over-) influenced by emotions etc There must be a rational explanation for those strange noises

The last one of course being the polar opposite of Obamathought. But fine, split hairs all you want defending doublegoodthink...

[quote="MarysRoses, post:34, topic:204594"]
Hm..

When I'm 80 (and btw i'm already "old") would I choose to have a very expensive procedure done which might lengthen my life by a few months or a small handful of years.. or would I choose to let those resources go to children and young parents with their whole lives to live?
.

[/quote]

Ok fine MarysRoses: you choose for yourself if you don't want this surgery or that procedure, not a bureaucrat on a death panel. Also, what you consider worth doing for yourself, may not be the same as what others consider worth doing, and you have no idea what goes into their decision to get the "expensive procedure". Again, I'd rather choose for myself rather than have a bureaucrat decide my life isn't worth "lengthening by a small handful of years".

Ishii

[quote="seekerz, post:33, topic:204594"]
'Death panels' seem to have gone from being "your guess" in the first part of you post, to your preferred term in the middle part and by the end to an absolute certainty, if "good people stand by and do nothing" - seriously, now. :rolleyes:

Suddenly, the lives/health of the elderly becomes a fear-mongering issue simply because some dislike the government in power. Where were these same voices when the elderly & infirm were being put out to pasture in nursing homes that barely took care of their basic needs (if that)? No, the government is not the entity most likely or able to abuse/neglect the elderly sick...that, like charity, begins at home.

We don't have to guess or suppose or slander authorities to express concern for the elderly - we just have to visit the nearest nursing home and count how many have preventable pressure sores or how many have had a recent visit with a loved one...The way some elderly sick are treated in our society, who needs to worry about death panels?

I could write on about planks and logs, but don't want to derail the thread...

[/quote]

Whatever.

"my guess is that Kagan will support Roe V. Wade" "my guess is that Obama will eliminate or curtail the child tax credit" "my guess is that Obama will likely face more opposition in Senate after the midterms."

"my guess is there are 3,358 m&m's in the jar." See the difference?

Consider: my relative was in the hospital for a gall bladder operation recently. In the bed next to him was a Norweigan man in his 70's there for prostate cancer treatment. My relative asked him why he didn't get the surgery in Norway. He answered that in Norway he couldn't get approval for the surgery because of his age. True story. Now, you mention the conditions in nursing homes around the country and you're right, some of them are pretty bad. However, does that justify death panels who will decide which among the elderly are "worthy" of treatment? Do you think those pushing Obama care will provide themselves with nothing other than the best healthcare until they die? Do you think Harry Reid will ever be denied an operation because he's deemed "too old"? No, but Harry Reid (and others) have ushered in a healthcare system that will ration care throught the use of "death panels". What a bunch of hypocrites.

No, I won't let the conditions in nursing homes keep me from speaking out against Obama "care". Nor should you.

Ishii

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.