WILL GRANNY JUST LIE THERE AND "DIE" BECAUSE SHE DOESN´T DESERVE A NEW HIP?

According to the GOP, a panel of "Dr. Dooms" will be deciding the fate of "Granny".

...This says it all.

It is getting disgusting having to listen to all the Republican´s negative rhetoric about health care items such as their "Death Panels" and various comments to scare Americans, especially those currently receiving Social Security.

What´s really interesting about these so called "Sarah Palin Death Panels", which is the Republican´s reference to a patient´s "right" (not a mandate) to have end-of-life discussions, such as those regarding "Living Wills", etc, with your doctor every 5 years, and those discussions to be paid for by your Social Security. That´s it. But the conservatives are so scared that Americans might finally get comprehensive health care, they´ve decided that it´s better to just, "scare the pants off of granny".

What´s even more hypocritical about all this is that the Republican´s in the House, who broke all of the House voting rules back during the last Republican Congress when they approved the now bogus and unpaid for, Medicare Plan D prescription bill. They of course fail to mention that those same "end-of-life discussions" were also part of that same bill which was sponsored and approved by these same GOP members of congress.

Then there´s that little know member of congress such as the medical doctor and House Representative Paul Broun (R-GA) that incorrectly states that there will be; "Dr Dooms in the new health care plan." Doctor Brown further states; "These will be the government's own ´human health care calculators´, who will make the calculations to determine if your needed care is cost efficient."

What he is referring to is the panel of health care professionals, (i.e: independent doctors and professionals) that will make the recommendations as to what medical procedures will be included under all future private and public health care plans. Of course, what Dr. / Rep. Brown conveniently fails to mention is that "this is the way that all health care plans, private, public and even Social Security are managed in order to set the guide lines for providing the medically recommended care and coverage."

Oh yes, and it was this same Representative-Doctor Brown that back in February said; "The vague nature of this [bill´s] language will lead to health care rationing for elderly people and handcuffing the development of life-saving drugs to fight infections. All because "Dr. Doom" doesn't deem them to be cost efficient. [Therefore,] when mama falls and breaks her hip, she'll just lie in her bed in pain until she dies with pneumonia because her needed surgery is not cost efficient."

Then, Representative Brown went on to criticize any possible future American public health care plan by claiming that it would be something like the current medical plans in Great Britain, Canada and even Cuba. He of course, then went on reciting the "urban legends" about how those "Socialistic" plans have, "long lines, rationed health care where you wait for hours, days and months for an appointment or surgery, and blah, blah, blah………"

To put the representative / doctor into some kind of perspective, this weekend, the former minister of Great Britain´s health care, Ara Darzi, who also happens to be a practicing National Health Service (NHS) surgeon, the chair of surgery at Imperial College in London, and Britain's ambassador for health and life sciences, co-wrote an article for the Washington Post.

Here is an excerpt from the former minister Darzi´s article:

"Here are a few things Americans should know about the NHS:

Every Briton is registered with his or her own family doctor, whom they can see when they need -- without paying a fee. These doctors are independent contractors to the health service and are recognized and rewarded for quality in their compensation -- so they can focus on what works, not just what pays. Expanding on the facilities that are already in place, by next year every community in England will have a physician's office open from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. every day of the year, and you can simply walk in and see a doctor, for free, regardless of whether you are registered.

In the unfortunate instance that a patient is diagnosed with a dire disease, such as cancer, it often takes only a week or two for a patient to be seen by all the right specialists, complete all the required diagnostic tests and be ready for surgery or other interventions. This rivals the best care in the United States or anywhere else in the world.

Under our NHS constitution, patients have a legal right to choice of provider. That means any provider -- public, private or not-for-profit. By April 2010 our NHS will be the first health system in the world to systematically measure and openly publish the quality of care achieved by every clinical department in every hospital. It means patients will be able to make meaningful, informed choices on what is best for them and their family. Some of this data is already published.

Many of the mischief-making rumors have focused on our National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, the clinically led body, independent of government, that gives advice on the effectiveness of drugs and treatments. Call it fiscal conservatism or old-fashioned common sense, but we think you should pay only for what works. At the same time, it should be remembered that Britain's pharmaceutical industry is second only to the United States in its innovation and the significance of its discoveries. The NHS invents and delivers pioneering treatments, from the first clinical use of MRI in the 1960s to leading developments in robotically enabled scar-free surgery today.

Standing in defense of Britain's health service does not mean that we believe it is the right prescription for the United States. It is not for us to propose the solution for America, but we hope that correcting the record on some of the facts about our NHS will help Americans evaluate the real strengths and challenges of our system, instead of focusing on the misinformation spread by fear-mongers. Indeed, none of the proposals for reform -- from President Obama or anyone else -- would create a system that resembles that in Britain. What we share across the Atlantic are a set of common values: a belief that health care transcends the narrow confines of consumerism and is a moral right to be secured for all; and fidelity to the principle that a good society brings its citizens together in common purpose, where hope can overcome fear.

Fear is the weapon of choice for opponents of reform who have no substantive alternative to offer. America spends five times the share of its national wealth on health as Singapore, and yet life expectancy in each country is roughly the same.

Even allowing for other factors, it is undeniable that the way a health system is organized and operated makes a difference. Americans fear that countries such as Britain and Canada ration care -- and that such rationing could and should never be tolerated in the United States. Yet 47 million uninsured is quite an extreme form of rationing. So at this moment, the burden of proof falls upon those who oppose change -- for they stand in defense of fear."

And in support for the minister´s comments, in recent polls in Canada and Great Britain, (which were taken due to the recent criticism from America's Republican party) over 90% of the citizens of those countries were pleased with their country´s health care plans and not one of those questioned could imagine going bankrupt or losing their homes due to high medical bills.

Why can´t the Republicans just tell the truth?

Copyright G.Ater 2009

Follow me on Twitter: gater01