1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Oh, yes the

Discussion in 'Off Topic Threads' started by bigdogtx, Mar 10, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    For those of you who want the crap that our government is shoving down our throats,,,,DON'T GET SICK,,,,that is unless you are a "member of a special" class....


    "Sick man faces bankruptcy — or death

    Cancer patient must pay for drug needed to keep him alive
    By MARK BONOKOSKI, Toronto Sun


    Kent Pankow lives in Edmonton, in a province and a country that is trying to either kill him or bankrupt him.
    No sense mincing words.
    Suffering from brain cancer, Kent Pankow was literally forced to go to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. for lifesaving surgery — at a cost to family and friends of $106,000 — after the health-care system in Alberta left him hanging in bureaucratic limbo for 16 crucial days, his tumour meanwhile migrating to an unreachable part of the brain, while it dithered over his case file, ultimately deciding he was not surgery worthy.
    Now, with the Mayo Clinic having done what the Alberta Cancer Board wouldn’t authorize or even explain, but with the tumour unable to be totally removed, the province will now not fund the expensive drug, Avastin, that the Mayo prescribed to keep him alive and keep the remaining tumour from increasing in size — despite the costs of the drug being totally funded by the province for other forms of cancer.
    Kent Pankow, as it turns out, has the right disease but he has it in the wrong place.


    Had he lung cancer, breast cancer, or colon cancer, then the cost of the drug — $4,555 per treatment, two times a month — would be totally covered by Alberta’s version of OHIP.
    But he doesn’t.


    And so he is not only a victim of brain cancer, he is also a victim of arbitrary discrimination.
    Full disclosure. Kent Pankow, a 40-year-old Red Seal sous chef, is a son of the man who married the spouse of my late brother. And it was while vacationing with them at their winter home in Los Cabos, Mexico, recently that this story began to unfold back in their home province of Alberta.


    But do not think, even for a moment, that this could never happen in Toronto or other parts of Ontario.
    Our supposedly universal federal health care system, the pride of most Canadians and the political struggle of America, is only as good as the length of the waiting line and whether you have the right disease at the right time.


    After writing more than 150 letters to everyone from the prime minister to virtually all health authorities both federal and provincial, and being ignored in return, Kent Pankow’s wife, Deborah Hurford, decided to finally go public.


    CTV Edmonton did a major feature on the family’s plight on the 6 o’clock news and, almost before the program ended, Alberta’s health and wellness minister, Gene Zwozdesky, was on the phone to their home — ensuring himself some positive press in the followup that aired later that night.


    Then, when he heard the Pankows had filed a human rights complaint against the province, justifiably citing medicare-based discrimination, Zwozdesky suddenly went mute — stating he could no longer discuss the matter publicly.


    Ten years ago, when first diagnosed with a glioblastoma multiforme brain tumour (GBM), Kent Pankow was given five years to live.
    After beating it down once, however, with his first surgery having been performed in Alberta, he spent nearly seven years in remission until the cancer’s return in 2008.


    And he is not prepared to give up.
    “He’s a fighter,” says his wife, admitting, however, that the cost of the drug has been a significant drain on friends and family who have not only donated large sums of their own money, but have also organized fundraisers to keep hope alive, including school penny drives.



    “When Kent goes for his Avastin IV injection, he sits next to patients who receive the same drug for free because they have another type of cancer — like colon cancer,” Hurford says.



    “Brain tumour patients deserve the same rights as other cancer patients, including access to the same lifesaving treatments — and without additional costs.
    “I can’t begin to tell you how frustrated, angry, disgusted and appalled I am with both the Alberta health system and the individuals within the system who continue to perpetuate such an archaic and inhumane approach to the treatment of patients.” she says. “It seems like they are doing everything in their power to ensure that Kent succumbs to an early and unnecessary death.”


    “The Avastin is working. The size of the remaining tumour has remained static since October,” she says.
    “But how can anyone afford almost $10,000 a month for a drug — even if it is saving a loved one’s life?”
    When Alberta health minister Gene Zwozdesky called the Pankow home on the night CTV Edmonton aired its story, he purportedly blamed the feds, namely Health Canada, for deciding what drugs are covered, and for what.


    Federal Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq, however, in a letter to Deborah Hurford, wrote that “while Health Canada is responsible for the market authorization of drug products, the province and territorial governments are responsible for managing the list of drugs for which public reimbursement from government drug plans is available.”
    This, too, is passing the buck.


    What Aglukkaq would not explain to Hurford — citing confidentiality — was why Avastin received a notice of compliance from Health Canada for other forms of cancer, but not yet for brain cancer as in the United States.


    Nor would she offer any information regarding any application before her department for the use of Avastin in the treatment of brain tumours.
    “Based on Kent’s MRI’s and radiology reports, and analysis by his surgeon at the Mayo Clinic, Avastin is playing a key role in stabilizing Kent’s tumour,” says Hurford.


    “Without it, Kent’s tumour will grow and he will die.
    “So why then,” asks Hurford, “is (everyone) choosing not to help Kent and other brain tumour patients who are forced to go public with their private health issues and fundraise for their lifesaving medical treatments?
    “Where is the dignity in that?”"
     
  2. Ahab

    Ahab Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,650
    And this is the the type of system that they want us to have???????
     
  3. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Eventually universal "free" health care will require rationing at some point.

    Britain has been discussing rationing health care to the elder for the last couple of years or so. They've come to the realization that universal free health care is a burden the government cannot pay for. Not even in a society that has draconian tax rates.
     
  4. Ljutic111

    Ljutic111 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,730
    Fix the real reason in Health Care before forcing it down our throat .
     
  5. Gary Olin

    Gary Olin TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    49
    I have a bit of trouble understanding the point of this thread. First, the health care plan being debated in Congress is nothing like the universal health insurance program offered in Canada. Second, you can find just as many or more examples of Americans who can't get needed health care as you can of Canadians. Third, the Canadian health care system seems to be at least as good as ours. (Clink on the attached link for a meaninful comparison of access to health care in the US and Canada.)
     
  6. Jerbear

    Jerbear TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,588
    Harry Reid snuck in a provision that if this sh!t passes, it can't be repealed... EVER!!!!!

    Ahhh The Deceit Of Harry Reid!

    Does this really surprise us?

    impudent tyranny of Sen. Harry Reid Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is proving once again the maxim that darkness hates the light.

    Buried in his massive amendment to the Senate version of Obamacare is Reid's anti-democratic poison pill designed to prevent any future Congress from repealing the central feature of this monstrous legislation! Beginning on page 1,000 of the measure, Section 3403 reads in part: ". it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection."

    In other words, if President Barack Obama signs this measure into law, no future Senate or House will be able to change a single word of Section 3403, regardless whether future Americans or their representatives in Congress wish otherwise!!

    Note that the subsection at issue here concerns the regulatory power of the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB) to "reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending."

    That is precisely the kind of open-ended grant of regulatory power that effectively establishes the IMAB as the ultimate arbiter of the cost, quality and quantity of health care to be made available to the American people. And Reid wants the decisions of this group of unelected federal bureaucrats to be untouchable for all time.

    No wonder the majority leader tossed aside assurances that senators and the public would have at least 72 hours to study the text of the final Senate version of Obamacare before the critical vote on cloture. And no wonder Reid was so desperate to rush his amendment through the Senate, even scheduling the key tally on it at 1 a.m., while America slept. True to form, Reid wanted to keep his Section 3403 poison pill secret for as long as possible, just as he negotiated his bribes for the votes of Senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Bernie Sanders of Vermont behind closed doors.

    The final Orwellian touch in this subversion of democratic procedure is found in the ruling of the Reid-controlled Senate Parliamentarian that the anti-repeal provision is not a change in Senate rules, but rather of Senate "procedures." Why is that significant?

    Because for 200 years, changes in the Senate's standing rules have required approval by two-thirds of those voting, or 67 votes rather than the 60 Reid's amendment received.

    Reid has flouted two centuries of standing Senate rules to pass a measure in the dead of night that no senator has read, and part of which can never be changed. If this is not tyranny, then what is?

    DON'T SIT BY AND LET THIS HAPPEN IN THE DARK!!! FORWARD TO EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST!


    Jerbear
     
  7. H82MIS

    H82MIS TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,052
    jer, I'll bet they would change it when the revolution starts,,,
     
  8. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    Gary,,,,the purpose of this thread is that the "Canadian healthcare system" has been touted as such a great system yet,,,,how many Americans have gone to Canada for treatment,,,,since they have wonderful "access" and great care,,,,why are the people you cite and "who can't get needed healthcare" running to Canada????

    Do some research and see how long it takes to get an MRI in Canada,,,,how about the expensive drugs for cancer,,,,look at the Mayo Clinic in MN and see how many are from Canada,,,,after all their drugs are "cheaper" there,,,,

    Check out the study that I linked for you and look at: "Turning their attention to the availability of health care resources, the authors examine the use of cancer screenings including mammograms and PAP smears (for women), PSA screenings (for men), and colonoscopies. They find that the use of these tests is more frequent in the U.S. - for example, 86 percent of U.S. women ages 40 to 69 have had a mammogram, compared to 73 percent of Canadian women. The U.S. also is endowed with many more MRI machines and CT scanners per capita. The authors find evidence of the possible effectiveness of higher levels of screening and equipment by examining mortality rates in both countries for five types of cancer that could be affected by early detection and treatment. Because the incidence of cancer may differ for reasons other than the health care system, they compare the ratio of the mortality rate to the incidence rate - a lower ratio corresponds to a lower death rate for those with the disease. They find that the ratio is lower in the U.S. for all types of cancer except cervical cancer, suggesting that the U.S. health care system is generally more successful in the detection and treatment of cancer."

    Please tell us where you get your info of, "Second, you can find just as many or more examples of Americans who can't get needed health care as you can of Canadians" as I have never seen it. What needed healthcare cannot Americans get that Canadians do?

    If you don't believe that our government is not going to try and push a single payer system upon us, you really need to start listening to someone besides MSNBC....
     
  9. Gary Olin

    Gary Olin TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    49
    Actually, bigdog, you should do some research. No Congress has ever tried to pass universal health insurance in the US (public or private or a combination of the two) and probably never will. Re unmet needs for health care, according to Lasser et al., the statistical data show that "US respondents (compared with Canadians) were less likely to have a regular doctor, more likely to have unmet health needs, and more likely to forgo needed medicines. Disparities on the basis of race, income,and immigrant status were present in both countries, but were more extreme in the United States." Do you think that study is flawed? If so, explain what the authors did wrong.

    In reality, the US is the only developed country in the world that doesn't have univeral health insurance. Despite that, we spend at least 50% more than any other country on health care, have 46 million uninsured, another several million underinsured, and rank about 40th in the world in life expectancy, infant mortality and other key measures of a population's health status. Exactly what is it that you like about this system?

    By the way, anytime you want to compare credentials on our respective expertise in health care access, cost and quality, I'll be happy to oblige you.
     
  10. Don S

    Don S Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    287
    If American Health Care is so good, why do so many Americans go to Canada for their prescription drugs? Remember the Republicans were going to fix that 8 years ago? Neither party has the votes to fix it. Nothing meaningful will get done.

    The health care in this country is only good for the upper class.
     
  11. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    Start with the 46 million of "uninsured",,,,Just WHY are they uninsured,,,,how MANY of young adult CHOOSE not to have insurance??? How many of those "uninsured" by your number were BETWEEN jobs or available for "gov't programs"?

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/More-OpEd-Contributors/The_truth_behind_the_Census_Bureaus_insurance_figure.html

    http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/20/the-myth-of-the-46-million

    Tell me WHY we spend more than any other nation,,,,just how much "defensive" tests are done???? Think that may add a little to the cost????

    You want to talk about mortality,,,,how does the US rank with the survival rate of heart disease, cancer and stroke???? You should read this paper regarding your ranking of the US mortality;

    http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&context=psc_working_papers

    As far as your studies go that developed the result that we ranked 40th, read this and see if you can see where your authors may be "flawed";

    http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/html/bp101/bp101index.html


    Why do we rank so low in LE,,,,Just how many drug babies don't make it???? I would also submit that our young inner city gangs decrease our mortality rates and have NOTHING to do with healthcare

    You said, "No Congress has ever tried to pass universal health insurance in the US (public or private or a combination of the two) and probably never will." What rock have you been sleeping under the last 2 years??? Are you in denial??

    Since you wanted me to do some research,,,,here you go, try to read and understand that THEY WANT this,,,,don't be so naive...(notice I am using some liberal sites so you can understand that I am not making this up)

    http://www.examiner.com/x-33854-Portland-Liberal-Examiner~y2010m3d14-The-public-option--health-care-reform-idea-that-just-wont-die--Durbin-signals-it-can-pass-Senate

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-johnson/health-care-public-option_b_212187.html

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/26/health.care/index.html

    I could go on,,,,but go to www.google.com and it can help you quickly with "research",,,,

    BTW,,,,anytime you want to compare ACTUAL facts on healthcare and accessability,,,,I will be happy to oblige you....
     
  12. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    I don't know DonS,,,,do you think it might have ANYTHING to do with the fact that the companies that sell the drugs in Canada didn't have to invest anything in the DEVELOPMENT of the drugs and would need to recoup their costs,,,,do you think that if they don't have to do all the research to determine what side effects might be,,,,do you think that if someone here has a PROBLEM with those "drugs" they get from Canada that they may not have any legal standing and therefore no risk of monetary loss????
     
  13. crusha

    crusha TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,762
    Ah...Gary Olin is a "social justice" liberal, eh?
     
  14. Don S

    Don S Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    287
    If the drug was formulated and manufactured outside the US, Why is it still 1/2 price in Canada?
     
  15. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    Well Don, if all I had to do was make it up after someone else came up with the recipe, how much do you think it would cost? Just think about it....
     
  16. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    Gary this is for you,,,,now you can pull your head out of the sand

    Reconciliation Bill Posted: INCLUDES PUBLIC OPTION!

    http://budget.house.gov/doc-library/FY2010/03.15.2010_reconciliation2010.PDF ^ | 03/16/2010 | Self
    Posted on Tuesday, March 16, 2010 3:27:49 PM by tefis

    A copy of the reconciliation bill was quietly posted over the weekend. In spite of Pelosi's denials, a public option is clearly included.

    The bill can be located at: http://budget.house.gov/doc-library/...iation2010.PDF

    The details can be found at page 116. Also, please see below:
    116

    •J. 55–345 Subtitle B—Public Health 1 Insurance Option 2
    SEC. 221. ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF A 3 PUBLIC HEALTH INSURANCE OPTION AS AN 4 EXCHANGE-QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS 5 PLAN. 6 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—For years beginning with Y1, 7 the Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this sub- 8 title referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall provide for the 9 offering of an Exchange-participating health benefits plan 10 (in this subdivision referred to as the ‘‘public health insur- 11

    (b) OFFERING AS AN EXCHANGE-PARTICIPATING HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN.—

    (1) EXCLUSIVE TO THE EXCHANGE.—The pub- lic health insurance option shall only be made avail- able through the Health Insurance Exchange.

    •J. 55–345 Subtitle B—Public Health 1 Insurance Option 2
    SEC. 221. ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF A 3 PUBLIC HEALTH INSURANCE OPTION AS AN 4 EXCHANGE-QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS 5 PLAN. 6

    (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—For years beginning with Y1, 7 the Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this sub- 8 title referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall provide for the 9 offering of an Exchange-participating health benefits plan 10 (in this subdivision referred to as the ‘‘public health insur- 11 ance option’’) that ensures choice, competition, and sta- 12 bility of affordable, high quality coverage throughout the 13 United States in accordance with this subtitle. In design- 14 ing the option, the Secretary’s primary responsibility is 15 to create a low-cost plan without compromising quality or 16 access to care.
     
  17. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,639
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    2 truths:

    The bill is about control and power, not healthcare.

    And Obama is a Liar. He trots out all these piteous "examples" and has a little boy up on stage to demonstrate his mothers p0light.

    Who happens to have gotten a hundred thousand in FREE health care from the hospital.

    we have some really sick leadreship.

    HM
     
  18. H82MIS

    H82MIS TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,052
    It won't be long now,,,,,hope your all stocked up and prepared,,,,,thought I'd never see it in my lifetime but man I was wrong,,,,,
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Search tags for this page

content