Scary Tactics
In the WSJ, Tom Coburn, a doctor and a Republican senator from Oklahoma warns that the health care bill will reduce quality of life and life spans for patients:
My 25 years as a practicing physician have shown me what happens when government attempts to practice medicine: Doctors respond to government coercion instead of patient cues, and patients die prematurely. Even if the public option is eliminated from the bill, these onerous rationing provisions will remain intact....Additionally, the Reid bill depends on the recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in no fewer than 14 places. This task force was responsible for advising women under 50 to not undergo annual mammograms. The administration claims the task force recommendations do not carry the force of law, but the Reid bill itself contradicts them in section 2713. The bill explicitly states, on page 17, that health insurance plans "shall provide coverage for" services approved by the task force. This chilling provision represents the government stepping between doctors and patients. When the government asserts the power to provide care, it also asserts the power to deny care.
...But the most fundamental flaw of the Reid bill is best captured by the story of one my patients I'll call Sheila. When Sheila came to me at the age of 33 with a lump in her breast, traditional tests like a mammogram under the standard of care indicated she had a cyst and nothing more. Because I knew her medical history, I wasn't convinced. I aspirated the cyst and discovered she had a highly malignant form of breast cancer. Sheila fought a heroic battle against breast cancer and enjoyed 12 good years with her family before succumbing to the disease.
If I had been practicing under the Reid bill, the government would have likely told me I couldn't have done the test that discovered Sheila's cancer because it wasn't approved under CER. Under the Reid bill, Sheila may have lived another year instead of 12, and her daughters would have missed a decade with their mom.
The bottom line is that under the Reid bill the majority of America's patients might be fine. But some will be like Sheila--patients whose lives hang in the balance and require the care of a doctor who understands the science and art of medicine, and can make decisions without government interference.
Tom Coburn, a doctor and a radical pro-life Republican senator from Oklahoma
I respect Coburn. He's pretty principled and I assume one can do honest deals with the man (he's not Lieberman, who is only thwarting healthcare reform out of pique). But I don't trust him on these these issues because he's so nutty on abortion and immigration.
Whatever at December 18, 2009 12:50 AM
But I don't trust him on these these issues because he's so nutty on abortion and immigration.
Posted by: Whatever at December 18, 2009 12:50 AM
-------------------------------------------------
Yeh! What a terrible guy! Trying to protect unborn children and protect the country from the costs of illegal immigration. What a nut. (Sarcasm Over)
If anyone has ever heard Dr. Coburn speak on the talk shows or on C-Span you know he is a very bright guy that backs his opinions up with facts, figures, and real life experience. He still goes back to Oklahoma one day a week to practice medicine. This allows him to keep his medical license, not get rusty on his skills, keep in touch with his constituents, and stay current on what is happenning in the medical community.
David M. at December 18, 2009 3:49 AM
@Whatever - you really need to get over yourself.
Or are you willing to finally dismiss the whole global warming thing because all of its most strident supporters stand to benefit financially from all of the proposed "solutions"?
Oh, and at some point in our lifetimes abortion will simply disappear. With science pushing back the frontiers of "viable", at some point it will become obvious to everyone that we're dealing with life and not "an unviable tissue mass". When that happens, we won't need to ban abortion.
brian at December 18, 2009 4:51 AM
Brian, I wish you were right (hope you are) but fear you're not. Abortion is an issue the left will never, ever give up...
I respect Sen. Coburn as having a much more relevant contribution to the discussion than many, being a doctor himself. May his message bear out.
other Beth at December 18, 2009 5:26 AM
Abortion is an isse neither party will give up.
Republicans had the whitehouse, both the senate and the congress, and according to many political comentaters the supreme court, yet they did nothing.
Why? abortion is the issue that gets them a lot of campaign donnations
lujlp at December 18, 2009 5:48 AM
The left may not give it up, but like the citizens in The Emperer has no Clothes, Americans will eventually realize the truth. And, like many are already doing, leave the left in droves.
This Dr is smart, and saying what most of us know. Too bad some are too willfully stupid to listen
momof4 at December 18, 2009 5:48 AM
Focus, people, focus. Coburn's point here is that no set of government one-size-fits-all rules is ever going to work even as well as the system we have now. It doesn't matter what the specific rules are; the fact that not everyone is a 50th-percentile person guarantees that any government regimen will always mis-treat at least a third or so of the population. The mammogram thing is a case in point: some women under 50 don't actually need an annual one. However, other women may need one more often than annually. The individual variability is high. It would be like a government rule stating "All U.S. citizens need to lose 30 pounds by the end of 2010." Try telling that to an anorexic teenage girl.
Cousin Dave at December 18, 2009 6:39 AM
Noone needs a mamogramm technically, we can just emply the same meathod currenty being used to prevent cases of penile cancer
Cut out the possibly self destructing flesh whether or not we really need to
lujlp at December 18, 2009 7:46 AM
Or are you willing to finally dismiss the whole global warming thing because all of its most strident supporters stand to benefit financially from all of the proposed "solutions"?
Do you have any idea how academic scientists are compensated? It's not like they get bonuses when laws are passed because of their research.
Whatever at December 18, 2009 8:09 AM
Case in point, when has government involvement EVER made ANY process more efficient and less costly?
When we're talking of people's health and ultimately their LIVES, it's not just some rhetorical issue...which is why people are so spun up about this.
other Beth at December 18, 2009 8:35 AM
Do you have any idea how academic scientists are compensated? It's not like they get bonuses when laws are passed because of their research.
Have you ever heard of grants funded by corporations? By government? Do you know what happens to academic scientists who can't get their research funded?
kishke at December 18, 2009 8:52 AM
Yeah, you know what? Those Israelis are idiots. They have national health insurance. The Canadians? Bunch of dummies. They have national health insurance. Europeans? All stupid.
Even Thailand offers national health insurance? See, that is why they will never get ahead, like Westerners. .
Because we have no national health insurance. Like the Congo. Like Togo. Like the Banana Republicans we are.
Remember, $10 trillion in the next 10 years for defense (using the world's most lard-butted organization). Somehow the right-wingers believe our defense organizations, totally run by federal bureaucrats and totally funded by taxpayer dollars that are totally controlled by the US Congress, are efficient. Oh, yes, perfect.
But we can't have national health insurance. That would be inefficient.
Terri Schiavo might die early! Before her time!
Mr BS in the Sky at December 18, 2009 9:26 AM
Yeah, you know what? Like medicaid and medicare both government healthcare programs that are trillions in debt. Billions have been fraudulently stolen from the government medicare program. Google integriguard.
You know The IRS? The government agency that consumer reports investigated and found out that 50% of the time when you call your local IRS office you get the wrong answer.
Yes we need another behemoth program run by our illustrious government.
Yeah you know like if you listen to talk radio and you have people who are from England or Canada call and tell you how poor their national healthcare is. How long they wait for 2nd class care. How some, if they can afford to bypass their national health care in their countries, come to the good old USA because they don't want to or can't afford to wait for it in their country.
Even a friend of the Clintons, some VIP lady from Canada, came to the U.S. for breast cancer treatments rather than wait in Canada. Yeah, I guess I do know what.
Also many of those countries take 40-50% of their citizens wages in taxes.
Which people who want national health care could volunteer to give our illustrious government rather than have them confiscate it from you at the risk of a jail sentence.
David M. at December 18, 2009 10:31 AM
Actually, Mr. BS, you're right. They ARE ALL STUPID.
Because they have a system that they KNOW is suboptimal, and is leading to tremendous numbers of premature deaths and miserable lives, and yet they tell themselves that there is no possible way to get a better outcome.
Except that there is, and we're it. Get the government out of the way, and all the "problems" go away too.
Government is not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem.
brian at December 18, 2009 11:16 AM
To Mr. BS Again
Yeah,you know what?
This program is going to be so great- that the politicians promoting it... want to exempt themselves from it. Must be first class if they don't want it.
David M. at December 18, 2009 12:13 PM
Brian-
I have to admit I like the word "suboptimal." Reminds me of my value-engineering days.
However, our current health care system is far from optimized.
We seem to have the worst of both worlds, private and public.
We have private providers billing government. That always leads to huge bills. If an 83-year-old lady comes in, the hospital literally has an incentive to keep her alive for as long as someone--Medicare--is paying.
If the public will pay, yes let's examine every breast in the world, and x-ray it, and take biopsies and blood tests and who knows what--the public will pay.
We should go to single payor and government health care, or purely into private care.
All other advanced democracies have gone to national health insurance, and none have voted to go to private care. Calling entire advanced nations "stupid" may be satisfying, but not instructive.
Sure, there are anecdotal scare stories.
The counter-anecdote is keeping Mary Ann Quinlan alive for 34 years in a vegetative state. Terri Schiavo.
We need "death panels" or people who pull the plug, if the public is paying. Darn tooting. Otherwise, get out your wallets and pay, pay, pay, pay, pay--20 percent of GDP by 2020.
The system we have now is double in price that of a European nation. You can't really call that optimized.
Mr BS in the Sky at December 18, 2009 3:02 PM
The Canadians? Bunch of dummies. They have national health insurance.
I have friends who are Canadian, and one, in particular, is a professor here. She is so, so grateful she is not relying on Canadian health care anymore, and has laid out the differences. Mr. BS is correct in the way he names himself. Because countries have national health care doesn't mean it's good.
France, for example, is place where workers make very little money and are heavily taxed.
Amy Alkon at December 18, 2009 3:02 PM
Have you ever heard of grants funded by corporations? By government? Do you know what happens to academic scientists who can't get their research funded?
Of course I know that - NIH funded my PHD research. I'm totally aware of how that situation works. Most fundamental research is funded by government agencies and large nonprofit foundations; the people who do the evaluation of research proposals for these organizations are generally respected scientists your field; based upon those reviews, your grant is assigned a priority score, and based upon your priority score, an agency either funds or doesn't fund your research.
How it doesn't work is that you get money for things like a carbon-trading market, which is what I assumed Brian was referring to. As I've mentioned before, cap and trade is going to be a very inefficient way of reducing carbon emissions. A pure carbon tax that gradually increases over time would almost certainly be simpler to implement, more effective in reducing emissions, and less subject to being gamed.
France, for example, is place where workers make very little money and are heavily taxed.
They lead much more relaxed lives, too, with their 35-hour work weeks. Let's face it, there's a tradeoff. We have much less of a social safety net, but we have a higher potential to get wealthy by working hard. We have wealthier people and worse poverty.
Whatever at December 18, 2009 4:14 PM
I'm thrilled that all these other countries have such great social services. Maybe their bureaucrats will move here. But I'm not at all excited at the prospect of adding a couple of hundred thousand SEIU workers to the Federal payroll. The IRS and Postal Service are staffed by some of the stupidest people ever to walk the earth. Where are all the really brilliant people going to come from to run the government health programs? And what happens to people who work for Kaiser, Blue Cross, etc. ? Do they go on welfare? Do they automatically get jobs with the new government health authority?
KateC at December 18, 2009 7:55 PM
This is absolute crap. I challenge anyone to find a government-run health care system that would deny a woman an aspiration biopsy of a breast cyst at age 33. I won't comment on the rest of Dr. Coburn's statement, since I don't have a dog in this fight, but falsehoods do not, in my opinion, enhance an argument.
T. Bruce McNeely at December 19, 2009 11:38 AM
And what happens to people who work for Kaiser, Blue Cross, etc. ? Do they go on welfare? Do they automatically get jobs with the new government health authority?
Have you followed this debate at all? Under the current health reform bill, the people who work for Kaiser, Blue Cross and the like will have tremendous job security because the private insurance industry is going to get millions of new customers.
Whatever at December 19, 2009 12:29 PM
> Maybe their bureaucrats will move here.
If they do, they'll still be under the United States' military umbrella, just as they were under the old country (where such considerations did not appear in accounts of public finance).
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at December 19, 2009 4:46 PM
Leave a comment