Showing posts with label Stop Obamacare Petition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stop Obamacare Petition. Show all posts

Friday, March 5, 2010

No Reconciliation

In a desperate bid to ram a government takeover of America's health care system through Congress, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid have turned to a parliamentary trick known as "reconciliation" that will allow them to ignore all dissenting voices and pass, against bi-partisan opposition, their bill with only 50 Democrat votes instead of the traditional 60.

The reconciliation process was created in 1974 so that Congress could move quickly on budget matters, but the Left wants to use it to pass their big government agenda -- starting with ObamaCare

Read The Full Article and Please Sign Petition

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Fascinating Perspective: Princess Diana's Death Offers Lessons for Health Care Debate, 12 Years Later

In Britain's Beloved Royal's Death, Experts Find Guidance in French Health System

The Mercedes 600 carrying Princess Diana and her companion Dodi Fayed was traveling more than 85 miles per hour when it hit a concrete pillar head-on in the Place D'Alma underpass, crumbling like an accordion.

A look back to the hours after the death of Princess Diana 10 years ago.

Both were killed, as well as the driver, Henri Paul -- later proven to have been under the influence of alcohol.

The Paris accident -- just before 12:30 a.m. local time 12 years ago today -- ended the life of one of Britain's most celebrated royals, unleashing a torrent of emotion in that historically stoic culture and catapulting Diana to near sainthood status.

In the days that followed, she was memorialized as the "People's Princess," as those devastated by her loss turned on the nation's out-of-touch monarchy, whom they blamed for her tragedy.

Conspiracy theories, all unsubstantiated, abounded. Had she been assassinated by the royal family so her estranged husband, Prince Charles, could marry his longtime love Camilla Parker-Bowles? Did the British Secret Intelligence Service bump her off because she was pregnant with Egyptian Fayed's Muslim child?

But the most baffling question was whether doctors could have done more to prevent Diana, 36, from dying.

The horrific accident illustrated the difference between the French and U.S. approaches to emergency care -- a relatively small piece of the French medical system, but deemed by some people to be the best in the world and often cited as a model for U.S. health care overhaul.

When rescue workers arrived, Diana was conscious, uttering, "My God" and "Leave me alone" to the swarming paparazzi. Although she had suffered internal injuries, she did not arrive at the Parisian hospital for 110 minutes -- too late for the surgery that some speculated could have saved her life.

Diana's last hour -- in cardiac arrest and bleeding to death -- was spent in a mobile medical unit parked a few hundred yards from Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, where an emergency team followed French protocol and administered treatment at the scene of the accident and en route to the hospital.

At the time, many people surmised that had a U.S. ambulance responded, Diana would have been rushed to the nearest emergency room, where a full set of professionals and diagnostic equipment might have revived her.

Colloquially known as "scoop and run," the U.S. system is grounded in studies that show a trauma victim's best chance for survival is reaching the operating room within 10 minutes.

Under the French system, "stay and play," a fully equipped medical ambulance with a doctor stabilizes the patient and then directs him or her to a specialized hospital, even if it is miles away.

PHOTO The scene of the car crash which killed Diana Princess of Wales, shown in this file photo, her companion Dodi Al Fayed and their driver Henri Paul is shown, August 31, 1997.

The scene of the car crash that killed Diana, Princess of Wales, in this file photo, her companion, Dodi Fayed, and their driver, Henri Paul, Aug. 31, 1997. (Getty Images)

Car Crash Victims Served 24/7

"When a patient rolls into the American system, they have a level-one trauma center that runs 24/7, with every specialty and myriad resources for a patient in a car crash," said Dr. Preeti Jois-Bilowich, emergency room doctor at the University of Florida's Shands Hospital.

Two or three paramedics focus on the ABCs of first responder care: airway, breathing and circulation. Each state has different licensing requirements for its emergency workers and ambulance services.

In France, the government-run Service d'Aide Médicale d'Urgence (SAMU), or Emergency Medical Assistance Service, provides more uniform care, coordinating the mobile resuscitation units. Teams always include one doctor, usually an anesthesiologist or emergency room physician, and a driver who serves as a technician and a nurse paramedic.

In Diana's case, a doctor who was passing by was the first on the scene and called for the ambulance, which arrived in seven minutes. He saw no visible injuries and treated her for shock with oxygen.

Fayed and Paul both died at the scene and were taken directly to the mortuary.

The SAMU team spent an hour treating her in the tunnel. Then, following French emergency standards aimed at not further injuring the victim, they drove slowly to the hospital about 4 miles away.

Yards from the hospital, her blood pressure dropped and the ambulance stopped again to revive her.

Diana Delayed 110 Minutes Before Death

Diana didn't arrive until after 2 a.m. -- 1 hour and 45 minutes after the crash -- and underwent an emergency thoracotomy. Coroners pronounced her dead from hemorrhaging that resulted from major chest trauma and deceleration that caused a rupture of the left pulmonary vein.

Later, surgeons said that her heart had been displaced from the left to the right side of her chest.

In the 1998 book, "Death of a Princess," Time magazine reporters Thomas Sancton and Scott MacLeod were critical of the French system, arguing that Diana could have been saved in a hospital operating room. SAMU was so upset with the indictment, according to the authors, that they threatened to sue.

But Sancton and MacLeod later rescinded their theory, based on evaluations of the medical records, in a 2004 Vanity Fair piece on the British inquest into Diana's death.

"I have actually revised my conclusions based on a fascinating series of interviews with a trauma specialist in Houston," Sancton wrote in an e-mail to ABCNews.com. "The bottom line is, whatever the merits or demerits of the French emergency medical system, poor Diana was a goner from the beginning because of the particular nature of her deceleration injury."

Defenders of the French system say that major road accidents like Diana's represent only about 12 percent of all emergency calls. Most are falls, domestic accidents, cardiac arrests and neurological problems.

And even Jois-Bilowich of the University of Florida, who did her medical internship with SAMU in Paris in 2006, sees its advantages.

French Emergency Workers Treat and Leave

"A lot of time, you get to the scene and you realize you can treat the patient right there," she said. "You can reassess in about 20 minutes and probably leave. Somebody who has diabetes in the morning and didn't eat and had a hypoglycemic episode -- their sugar comes up and is good and you leave.

PHOTO The Prince of Wales, Prince William and Prince Harry look at floral tributes to Diana, Princess of Wales outside Kensington Palace, in this September 5, 1997 file photo in London, England.

From left, Prince Charles, Prince Harry and Prince William look at floral tributes to Diana, Princess of Wales, outside Kensington Palace, in this Sept. 5, 1997, file photo in London, England. (Anwar Hussein/Getty Images)

Here, they get transported to the emergency department and adds one more patient to an already overburdened emergency room.

"In France, you have physicians available and you treat it right there," she said. "You take the drug bag to the scene, it has just about anything you can imagine. It's a mini-crash cart. It's kind of like a mobile emergency department, with limitations."

But those limitations can be significant without X-ray or sonogram capability onboard. Jois-Bilowich recalled one Paris call during her internship in which a man collapsed at an apartment construction site.

The team set up a mini-emergency room and, for 45 minutes, ran an EKG, did CPR and began medication for a heart attack.

Without full emergency room diagnostics, doctors had to make an educated guess on the drugs. They were right, he survived but, had he ruptured an aorta, the drugs could have caused more problems or death. "You make judgment calls," Jois-Bilowich said.

The French emergency care reflects the overall health attitudes of that nation -- delivering basic primary care and health education to everyone will mean fewer expensive emergency room visits and hospitalizations later on.

Amid the health care debate here, some Americans are taking notice.

The French, at 10.7 percent of the gross domestic product, spend less than Americans do on health care at 16 percent of their GDP, according to 2009 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development health data.

French Health Care Tops World

The World Health Organization recently rated the French system as the best in the world. By comparison, the United States rated 37th. The average life expectancy in France is 79.4 years, two years fewer than in the United States. (Hmmm… the average life expectancy in the U.S. is 81.5 years, two more years than France, and our style of emergency services, in true emergency/trauma situations is the best in the world, yet France is rated the top Health Care System… because it is cheaper? is that what healthcare and the Hippocratic oath is all about?) By the way, part of the new Obama Medical Reform is a process of watering down the Hippocratic Oath. Just makes you feel safe… and warm and fuzzy all over, doesn’t it?

Both countries are struggling with rising drug costs, aging populations and unemployment, but about 65 percent of all French citizens, compared with 40 percent of all Americans, are happy with their medical care, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

The French can choose their own doctors, see specialists and have access to some of the most sophisticated research and medical technology in the world, according to Victor Rodwin, professor of health policy and management at New York University.

"The American and French system share similar dimensions," he told ABCNews.com. "They are both based on fee-for-service practices, there is a large element of private provision and they also have a small equivalent of the gap supplement insurance like Medicare. It's a public-private mix."

In France, everyone is covered, regardless of their ability to pay, with an emphasis on primary care to prevent long-term illness.

"What we do is quite different," Rodwin said. "We take care of people, but not everyone, and we do it once they get very sick. We take diabetics with flare-ups and asthmatics in the emergency room, but we don't do primary care or health education as well for the poor.

"Our population is much sicker compared to France," according to Rodwin, whose research finds that Americans have the highest rates of avoidable hospitalizations -- two and a half times higher than the French -- for treatable conditions like pneumonia, asthma, diabetes and congestive heart failure.

That's according to a 2008 study from the National Institute of Public Health and the Environment. "The French have a term -- solidarity," Rodwin said. "Since World War II, the system is grounded in the philosophy that everyone should have access to health care. That doesn't mean everyone is treated equally. There are those who are more educated or higher socio-economic groups that use more specialty care and probably have access to better quality care, but everyone has access to the minimum."

Mary, a freelance writer who did not want to use her last name, lives in Paris and is a "big booster of the French system."

The school nurse called the fire department after her son had an asthma attack several years ago.

"Soon after, I received a call from a doctor on the scene telling me exactly what was going on and what treatment Luke was getting at the school," she said. "He suggested taking Luke to the hospital for a few hours of observation, after which I could pick him up."

U.S. Emergency Rooms 'Tangle of Forms'

"I find the emergency room responses the most dramatic change from the U.S.," Mary said. "I've always had excellent health insurance in the U.S. and I've found every American emergency room visit a tangle as I fill out form after form and sign over my first born before anyone will even look at an injured or sick kid.

"Here, because everyone is insured, there's never any questions in hospitals that people will be treated, and treated quickly, because there's no worry someone's going to be stiffed with the bill."

Jois-Bilowich agreed that the French system is more cost-effective and that most people admitted to U.S. emergency rooms are treated and then released. But, she argues, the U.S. system of trauma care is superior.

As for the ill-fated accident that took the life of Diana, she won't venture a guess at what her outcome might have been in the United States, noting that even simple trauma cases can "crash" on the operating table.

"I, personally, really hate the retroscope," she said. "We weren't there and we didn't know the circumstances. Every patient is an individual human being and not a computer system, and so many things can confound what you think is a simple situation."

This does example, however, brings us back to the same end as much of the ObamaCare debate. In the end… with the good and bad, there is no better system than the American healthcare system. We survive and virtually everyone gets treated. The cost is too high because there is fraud in several arenas, too many frivolous lawsuits, Big Pharma and the AMA put money before patients is certain instances and line their pockets and they and the Insurance industry is not regulated enough in some areas, like being allowed to exclude people because of previous conditions and over regulated in other areas like not being able to sell insurance across state lines. But fixing those things and insuring everyone except illegals that are truly indigent and not paying for unnecessary elective surgeries and abortions is a heck of a lot cheaper than ObamaCare and keeps the government out of our lives (anymore than it already is) and the crucial medical decisions where they belong…. between doctors and patients and their families.

Let’s Start Over On Health Reform

No on ObamaCare – Yes on Incremental Common Sense Reform

  • No public option of any kind (which includes the new buzz word co-ops, single-payer, or new government run program)
  • No rationing
  • No centralized government database of patients
  • No coverage of illegals – we can’t afford it (and that will get rid of the need to supply free translations services, taxation of citizens and not illegals for services, and forcing ‘legal’ aliens into a government option)
  • No abortions paid for by taxpayer money
  • No cuts in Medicare and Medicaid
  • No Mandatory End or Life or Duty to Die Discussion with the Elderly, Wounded Veterans or Parents of Special Needs Kids/People
  • Yes on Tort Reform
  • Yes on Fraud and Record Duplication reform of Medicare and Medicaid
  • Yes on Fraud and Record Duplication Reform of Veterans and Reservation Programs
  • Yes on Insurance Reform including No more Previous Condition Restrictions
  • Yes on Inter-State Health Insurance Sales
  • Yes on Allowing individuals, the self-employed and small businesses to form and join consortiums to qualify to buy insurance at lower group rates
  • Yes - Payment System based on outcome instead of number of procedures
  • Yes - Inclusion of coverage of natural supplements and holistic methods and procedures

Related Post:

'STOP OBAMACARE' PETITION

HR-3200 - full report

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Dr. & RepTom Price: Americans Need Patient-Centered Reform, Not Democrats’ Costly Government Takeover of Health Care

WASHINGTON, DC - Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) today delivered the weekly Republican address on the need for real health care reform that makes coverage more affordable and accessible for middle-class families and small businesses. In the address, Price – who served Atlanta-area patients as a physician for more than two decades – fact-checks a number of myths about the Democrats’ government takeover of health care and presents the Republicans’ case for reform that keeps patients and doctors – not government bureaucrats – in charge of personal medical decisions. Audio of the address is available here and video of the address will be available here once the embargo is lifted at 6am Saturday.

Following is the text of Rep. Price’s address:

“Hello, I’m Congressman Tom Price. And I have the privilege of representing the Sixth District of Georgia. Before coming to Congress I was a physician, taking care of patients on the north side of Atlanta for more than twenty years.

“Right now, Americans from coast to coast are debating the monumental task of reforming our health system. Folks of every political persuasion understand the imperative of reform. But they want reform that keeps what’s good with our current system – and fixes what’s not working – without destroying our quality of care.

“The status quo in American health care is clearly unacceptable. Rising costs, shrinking access, and third-party decision making are driving patients away from their doctors and the desired care that they seek. The challenge, however, is providing Americans more accessible and affordable care without impairing the quality, innovation, and choices that define American medicine. And this is simply impossible with the one-size-fits-all approach taken by the President and Democrats in charge of Congress.

“Experience tells me that as a doctor, no two patients are exactly alike. While the same diagnosis can be reached for two people, the proper treatment for each may be completely different, based on a countless number of factors that only a patient, their family, and a caring and compassionate physician truly understand. Having navigated federal health care programs for two decades, I can tell you that Washington is incapable of processing the personal and unique circumstances that patients and doctors face each and every day. That is why a positive solution will put power in the hands of patients, not insurance companies or the government.

“Unfortunately, the plan being promoted by the White House would give Washington the power to make highly personal medical decisions on behalf of patients – on behalf of you. Now whether it’s the government choosing what should be in your family’s health care plan, or a bureaucratic board deciding what treatments are appropriate and who should receive them, the President’s plan is a 1,000-page expression supporting the notion that Washington knows best when it comes to your family’s health care. And that’s simply not true.

“As opposition to the Democrats’ government-run health plan is mounting, the President has said he’d like to stamp out some of the disinformation floating around out there. The problem is the President, himself, plays fast and loose with the facts. So as someone who’s taken care of patients, I’d like to take a moment to clear up a couple of the President’s worst offenses.

“On the stump, the President regularly tells Americans that ‘if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.’ But if you read the bill, that just isn’t so. For starters, within five years, every health care plan will have to meet a new federal definition for coverage – one that your current plan might not match, even if you like it.

“What’s more, experts agree that under the House bill, millions of Americans will be forced off their personal, private coverage and shuffled onto the government plan.

“Now the President has also said that he thinks the government should compete with your current health care plan. But we all know that when the government is setting the rules and is backed by tax dollars, it will destroy – not compete – with the private sector. The reality is, whether or not you get to keep your plan, or your doctor, is very much in question under the President’s proposal.

“But perhaps the most striking misinformation the President has put forth is that there are only two options out there for America – that it’s his way or the highway. That it’s either the government running the show – or insurance companies. The truth is there is a third way – a better way, a patient-centered way to reform health care. Rather than allowing insurance companies or the government to call the shots, Republicans want to put patients in charge of their family’s health care. We have plans to increase coverage and lower costs without putting a bureaucrat between you and your doctor. We believe that what’s good for patients is good for American health care.

“If anything has been learned from the debate in August, it’s that the American people think that we can do better. They seek reform, but they reject a government-centered approach. With people on the left, and the right, and everywhere in between dissatisfied with the process, it’s time that we start over to create a truly bipartisan solution that puts patients in charge. Honoring the transparency promised the American people, and the principles of quality care we all hold dear, we can create a patient-centered proposal that all may support. We look forward to working with the President, and on behalf of the American people, to make patient-centered health reform a reality.

“I’m Congressman Tom Price. Thanks so much for listening.”

Related Posts:

    Source: Knowledge Creates Power

    Posted: True Health Is True Wealth

    Sunday, August 23, 2009

    Sign Petition to Stop ObamaCare Before It's Too Late

    Obama and the Democrats in Congress will stop at nothing to nationalize medicine... AMERICA NEEDS YOUR HELP!

    Sign The 'STOP OBAMACARE' PETITION Before It Is Too Late!
    This petition will be delivered to Congress after the August Recess...

    Have you ever stood in a line at the Department of Motor Vehicles or the Post Office? Have you ever tried to read the IRS code? Whenever the government involves itself in areas it has no business, it becomes a big bureaucratic mess. Costs and taxes go up—service and quality goes down. The only thing the government does well is get out of the way.

    If You’d Like One of these Bumper Stickers:

    ORDER YOUR 2 "HEALTH CARE" BUMPER STICKERS NOW!

    (ONLY $1.99 wiht FREE U.S. SHIPPING while supplies last! (2-PACK, SIZE: 4" x 8", Weatherproof / UV protection / Non-residue) – Support the Cause

    Source: NewsMax/Patriot Update

    Posted: True Health Is True Wealth