<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Two Thoughts on Health Reform</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2009/06/two-thoughts-on-health-reform/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2009/06/two-thoughts-on-health-reform/</link>
	<description>A blog from inside the emergency department</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:35:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: DefendUSA</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2009/06/two-thoughts-on-health-reform/#comment-8916</link>
		<dc:creator>DefendUSA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:58:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=2816#comment-8916</guid>
		<description>Judd Gregg had this to say:

&quot;To be effective, health care reform must include insurance coverage for everyone, encourage prevention measures, and reform the inefficiencies in our system to ensure the future strength of our economy. CPR—Coverage, Prevention, Reform—is a plan I have proposed that sets up a system where every American will be required to purchase MEANINGFUL health insurance to ensure each family will be protected against bankruptcy if a family member becomes seriously ill or injured.&quot;

How is the Government going to define &quot;meaningful&quot;? Seriously?

Is everyone supposed to get the same &quot;healthcare&quot; that Bill Gates can afford? If not, why not?

Where&#039;s the line between &quot;meaningful&quot; and &quot;luxurious&quot;?

Where&#039;s the line between &quot;meaningful&quot; and &quot;not enough&quot;?
I say follow the Constitution. And there is not a word in it that says the gov&#039;t can mandate that I be forced to pay for something they get to define in terms of me.
Are we going to have sliding scales based on salary and will I be forced to pay for someone else to get better than what I have? 

Here is an analysis of the bill by Keith Hennesy:

http://keithhennessey.com/2009/06/08/kennedy-health-bill/


Here is a funny cartoon....
http://www.tobydials.com/td/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Judd Gregg had this to say:</p>
<p>&#8220;To be effective, health care reform must include insurance coverage for everyone, encourage prevention measures, and reform the inefficiencies in our system to ensure the future strength of our economy. CPR—Coverage, Prevention, Reform—is a plan I have proposed that sets up a system where every American will be required to purchase MEANINGFUL health insurance to ensure each family will be protected against bankruptcy if a family member becomes seriously ill or injured.&#8221;</p>
<p>How is the Government going to define &#8220;meaningful&#8221;? Seriously?</p>
<p>Is everyone supposed to get the same &#8220;healthcare&#8221; that Bill Gates can afford? If not, why not?</p>
<p>Where&#8217;s the line between &#8220;meaningful&#8221; and &#8220;luxurious&#8221;?</p>
<p>Where&#8217;s the line between &#8220;meaningful&#8221; and &#8220;not enough&#8221;?<br />
I say follow the Constitution. And there is not a word in it that says the gov&#8217;t can mandate that I be forced to pay for something they get to define in terms of me.<br />
Are we going to have sliding scales based on salary and will I be forced to pay for someone else to get better than what I have? </p>
<p>Here is an analysis of the bill by Keith Hennesy:</p>
<p><a href="http://keithhennessey.com/2009/06/08/kennedy-health-bill/" rel="nofollow">http://keithhennessey.com/2009/06/08/kennedy-health-bill/</a></p>
<p>Here is a funny cartoon&#8230;.<br />
<a href="http://www.tobydials.com/td/" rel="nofollow">http://www.tobydials.com/td/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2009/06/two-thoughts-on-health-reform/#comment-8894</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 05:47:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=2816#comment-8894</guid>
		<description>The current White House and Congress are not contemplating health care reform. They are simply re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The same players who got us where we are now, i.e., the insurance plans/HMO&#039;s, and the pharmaceutical companies have given more money to recent congressional campaigns and the presidential campaign than any other groups. These guys &quot;own&quot; the decision makers. And this is why we will not see true reform of health care in the next eight years.

True health care reform in this country will need to do three things that cannot be done by our current politicians:
1. tort reform--take medical malpractice and medical injuries out of the tort system. 
2. Implement a patient safety system that uses a &quot;no-fault&quot; error reporting system similar to that used by the airlines.
3.Ration health care according to well-publicized criteria and insulate providers from liability when they follow these criteria. 

&quot;Health care reform&quot; sounds great doesn&#039;t it? Obama is a smart guy who is using this smoke screen of &quot;health care reform&quot; to jockey for re-election.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The current White House and Congress are not contemplating health care reform. They are simply re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The same players who got us where we are now, i.e., the insurance plans/HMO&#8217;s, and the pharmaceutical companies have given more money to recent congressional campaigns and the presidential campaign than any other groups. These guys &#8220;own&#8221; the decision makers. And this is why we will not see true reform of health care in the next eight years.</p>
<p>True health care reform in this country will need to do three things that cannot be done by our current politicians:<br />
1. tort reform&#8211;take medical malpractice and medical injuries out of the tort system.<br />
2. Implement a patient safety system that uses a &#8220;no-fault&#8221; error reporting system similar to that used by the airlines.<br />
3.Ration health care according to well-publicized criteria and insulate providers from liability when they follow these criteria. </p>
<p>&#8220;Health care reform&#8221; sounds great doesn&#8217;t it? Obama is a smart guy who is using this smoke screen of &#8220;health care reform&#8221; to jockey for re-election.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2009/06/two-thoughts-on-health-reform/#comment-8892</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:53:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=2816#comment-8892</guid>
		<description>&quot;Uwe&quot; is such an awesome name.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Uwe&#8221; is such an awesome name.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Griffin3</title>
		<link>http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2009/06/two-thoughts-on-health-reform/#comment-8890</link>
		<dc:creator>Griffin3</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 01:23:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=2816#comment-8890</guid>
		<description>Hrmm.  PERITONEAL ADHESION - SURGICAL TREATMENT is not covered, that would have killed my aunt at 38 (in a virgin abdomen, too).  But we&#039;re cheerfully paying for OBSESSIVE-COMPULSIVE DISORDERS - MEDICAL/PSYCHOTHERAPY and SIMPLE AND SOCIAL PHOBIAS - MEDICAL/PSYCHOTHERAPY.  

And, am I not understanding this?  OPEN WOUND OF EAR DRUM - TYMPANOPLASTY is covered, but the associated MEDICAL THERAPY is not?  Oregon will pay to glue or stitch the eardrum back up, but not cover the associated antibiotics?

It looks like a bright young economics intern came up with a really nice spreadsheet, that somehow got published as a standard, without anyone checking to see if it would pass the political stink test.  The first time some (well-off) kid is left deaf, or otherwise scarred by this list, it will just dissolve ... into what it really is.  The hospitals will still have to treat these conditions, under threat of EMTALA and lawsuit, but won&#039;t be paid.

Gee, citizen, better not to get any of the conditions past line 503.  They&#039;re &quot;never events&quot;, don&#039;tcha know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hrmm.  PERITONEAL ADHESION &#8211; SURGICAL TREATMENT is not covered, that would have killed my aunt at 38 (in a virgin abdomen, too).  But we&#8217;re cheerfully paying for OBSESSIVE-COMPULSIVE DISORDERS &#8211; MEDICAL/PSYCHOTHERAPY and SIMPLE AND SOCIAL PHOBIAS &#8211; MEDICAL/PSYCHOTHERAPY.  </p>
<p>And, am I not understanding this?  OPEN WOUND OF EAR DRUM &#8211; TYMPANOPLASTY is covered, but the associated MEDICAL THERAPY is not?  Oregon will pay to glue or stitch the eardrum back up, but not cover the associated antibiotics?</p>
<p>It looks like a bright young economics intern came up with a really nice spreadsheet, that somehow got published as a standard, without anyone checking to see if it would pass the political stink test.  The first time some (well-off) kid is left deaf, or otherwise scarred by this list, it will just dissolve &#8230; into what it really is.  The hospitals will still have to treat these conditions, under threat of EMTALA and lawsuit, but won&#8217;t be paid.</p>
<p>Gee, citizen, better not to get any of the conditions past line 503.  They&#8217;re &#8220;never events&#8221;, don&#8217;tcha know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

