“I am from the government, and I am here to help!!!”
Well…………….that is what they say! We must, must, must get our heads out of the sand and stay abreast of what is taking place despite the silence of the mainstream media. There is much to be fearful of in Obamacare…………over 2,000 pages long and more and more rules, boards, IRS agents, and bureaucracies are being uncovered. If it is not repealed or, even better, effectively scrapped it will surely serve to be the final nail in the coffin of our Constitutional Republic.
I have included the following article as well as an excerpt from another: (in fact the second article is even more of an eye opener as it is written by a former Democrat!)
A Bunch of Doctors from the Government Here To Help You
By Hal Scherz
What do you get when you cross 3 pediatricians, 4 internists, 3 family doctors, 2 epidemiologists, 2 nurses, a PhD, an obstetrician, a perinatologist and an occupational medicine doctor? Unfortunately, this is not a joke. You get a Federal Government panel, given the imprimatur as experts on a medical subject that if any one of them individually treated, would be considered malpractice. This would be the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF), an ad hoc committee charged with making recommendations about clinical preventative services. They have just issued their findings that there is no role for routine PSA screening in men to detect prostate cancer. The real question is why do we need such an agency?
There are no doctors on this panel who treat prostate cancer. You would not go to a pediatrician or obstetrician if you had this disease, so how does it make sense to aggregate 16 such people and have them opine on a subject that they know about only from a book?
The conclusions of this committee were reached using a relatively new statistical gimmick called “meta-analysis”. This allows the pooling of small studies to create an enormous one with what statisticians refer to as “strength”, which is based entirely on large numbers of patients. It does not account for the quality of the study itself, and bad methodology of small studies can be concealed by pooling data, which is what happened here.
The American Urological Association (AUA)-the true experts in this area- has denounced these recommendations. It is particularly stinging that these recommendations were released during the largest meeting of urologists in the world- the AUA annual convention in Atlanta, where over a quarter of the program is devoted to discussion about prostate cancer. I know this is true because I attended it.
Some relevant facts about prostate cancer- it is the second most common cancer in men worldwide, but in the US. It is first, and is the second leading cause of death in men. Prostate cancer worldwide has the highest prevalence in the US, where it affects 125 of every 100,000 men, and in African-Americans it is 185. When compared to the rest of the world where PSA testing is not routinely done, the death rate from prostate cancer is the lowest in the US. Here, the 10 year survival of men with prostate cancer has risen from 53% in the pre-PSA testing era to 97% now.
These statistics are just part of the story. Prior to PSA testing, 25% of men who were diagnosed with prostate cancer already had spread of the disease to their bones. Now it is less than 5%.The USPSTF got it completely wrong when they recommend waiting to get a PSA until a man has symptoms of prostate cancer. For many men, these symptoms do not occur until late in the disease, when they can suffer miserably from the side effects of advanced disease. 30,000 men die annually from this disease and this number will rise significantly because of these recommendations. It will set back the advances made in prostate cancer by over 20 years.
This is just the latest attempt by the USPSTF to limit effective screening methods for cancer. In 2010, they made recommendations to significantly curtail screening mammography for breast cancer in women. Now they are recommendations, but soon, when Obamacare is fully implemented, these will be policy, not suggestions, and will have the full force of law behind it. Other screening programs will soon be on the chopping block, like colonoscopy for colon cancer screening.
The reason behind this is simple. It is about money, power and control. On the UTPSTF web site, it states that over 1000 PSA tests were necessary to save a single life from prostate cancer. Someone in Washington has decided what the value of a human life is, and what would be the acceptable cost associated with saving it. This is called “comparative effectiveness” and is what happens in a socialized healthcare system, like in England, where resources need to be allocated prudently, and healthcare is rationed. This is the essence of Obamacare- a system where medical decisions have been taken away from patients and their doctors and transferred to bureaucrats in Washington.
Just two final notes – my friend, a family medicine doctor, sent me an email that 3 of his patients called today to get a PSA before it was unavailable. And for the record, President Obama was screened for prostate cancer with a PSA within the past year.
Hal C. Scherz, MD is the Founder and President of Docs4PatientCare, VP of Georgia Urology, and Associate Clinical Professor Urology- Emory University.
The excerpt below is taken from an article in American Thinker article by Neil Snyder, January 21 2012
Our senior citizens are most at risk under Obamacare — especially those over 70. Rationing of services and death panels (only they’re called “ethics panels” under Obamacare instead of death panels for obvious reasons) are now the rule, not the exception. I have a friend who is a loyal Democrat and a strong Obama supporter. In 2008 when she voted for Obama, she couldn’t imagine that in 2012 she would have a massive heart attack and need a pacemaker. Prior to 2010 and the passage of Obamacare, that would have been a routine procedure, but not anymore. She’s over 70, and under Obamacare people who are over 70 routinely receive “comfort care.” That’s a euphemism. It means that a panel of experts has determined that your life isn’t worth saving beyond 70, so they will try to make you feel good while you die.
Where Obamacare is concerned, we’re beginning to be able to see through the fog, and what we’re learning isn’t good, especially for seniors, and it’s just the tip of the iceberg. If Obama is re-elected and Democrats retain their majority in the Senate, those “ethics panels” will busily go about doing their job and senior citizens will die prematurely from maladies that are easily treatable, and for one reason: they are over 70. That’s it in a nutshell. I’m not trying to frighten anyone. I’m simply presenting a fact.
If you’re a senior citizen and you want to take advantage of the medical technologies that your tax dollars paid to help develop over the years, you should think long and hard before casting a vote for Obama in 2012. For that matter, you should carefully consider the wisdom of voting for Democrats period. I’m not a Republican. In fact, I was a Democrat until 1985, but I saw what the Democratic Party stands for while I served as Virginia Governor Chuck Robb’s Policy Advisor for Regulatory Reform and realized that I can’t support the things that they hold most dear — chief among them being the right of a woman to kill her unborn child without penalty or even criticism and handouts to every group imaginable without regard for morality, our nation’s security, or our ability to pay.
The Republican Party isn’t perfect by a long shot and neither are its candidates, but the party is trying to undo the damage done by Obamacare; it’s the party that supports the right to life; and it’s the party that is attempting to reduce needless spending and trying to solve our deficit and debt problems. President Obama and like-minded Democrats in the House and Senate are principally responsible for creating and exacerbating those problems. Trusting them to solve those problems is ridiculous.