Right out of the text of the NPR story ...

"The survey was published online Monday by the New England Journal of Medicine. It was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a health care research organization that favors health reform."

I'm not making accusations, but wording, order of questions, etc. can bias answers.

oh, & ^^ lol

9/15/2009 10:31:17 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/15/AR2009091503716_pf.html

bummer

9/16/2009 1:56:29 AM

^ LOL!



Baucus moving on health care without GOP support
Sep 15 [2009]

Quote :

"WASHINGTON – Caught off guard, congressional Democrats are grappling with President Barack Obama's unexpected call for immediate access to insurance for those with pre-existing medical conditions, as well as richer Medicare drug benefits than envisioned in early versions of health care legislation. Additionally, Obama's pledge in last week's prime-time speech to hold the overall cost of legislation to about $900 billion over a decade has spread concern among House Democrats, who have long contemplated a costlier measure. Yet another late complication, according to several Democrats, is the president's statement that he will not sign a bill 'if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period. And to prove that I'm serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don't materialize.' The $900 billion target is 'very difficult,' Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said Tuesday. 'This is reducing coverage for poor and working people.'"

Quote :

"No details were available about costs, either to the consumer or the government."

Quote :

"Officials in both houses said fulfilling Obama's request on Medicare prescription drug benefits would be considerably more difficult, citing the cost. Nearly a week after Obama's speech, White House aides have not released key details of Obama's various other proposals, including their cost."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul

Where are the details? And I thought. . .

Pelosi and Reid Tell President: We Have the Votes; President Wants Bill Passed Soon
September 08, 2009 (ABC)

http://tinyurl.com/m44cn6

If the Democrats actually have the votes, then what are they waiting for? Republicans can't stop them, right?

[Edited on September 16, 2009 at 3:10 AM. Reason : ]

9/16/2009 3:09:14 AM

Oh, look!

Hacksaw is back to inform us. And he included a catchy political cartoon for more impact. How would we know what to think without his choice bolded and underlined text? Thank you, hacksaw.

9/16/2009 3:20:47 AM

^ Would you mind simply addressing--if you're able--the legitimate info that I posted and not simply attacking me? Thanks.

9/16/2009 3:23:12 AM

Quote :

"As health-care legislation advances through Congress, the young adults who were so vital to President Obama's election are emerging as a significant beneficiary of his top domestic priority, but they are also likely to play a major role in funding any reform. "

This really isn't a secret, but politicians are loathe to bring it up. I can't find the exact article now, but the other week I was reading a piece that estimates that the average 65 y/o will receive $73,000 more out of Social Security and Medicare than they paid in. In contrast, a 25 y/o will pay in approximately $203,000 more than they will receive out, despite the fact that we will be facing much stiffer global competition than our parents and bearing the consequences of a massive federal deficit.

So President Obama referred to Medicare as a "sacred trust" in his speech last week, he essentially sanctified the politicians promise to win current votes at the expense of the future by wealth confiscation and redistribution from the have nots to the have hads.

9/16/2009 8:57:27 AM

LOL

I think you just took the "wealth redistribution" charge to a whole new level.

BARACK OBAMA HATES 25-YEAR-OLDS! HE'S A GENERATIONAL FASCIST!

9/16/2009 9:03:42 AM

^^ that’s how social security was set up and designed to run. It’s not a savings mechanism, it’s just a pyramid scheme. It should be dismantled in its current form.

9/16/2009 9:08:25 AM

It's function should remain, but I agree that its method of funding is sort of dumb.

9/16/2009 9:45:34 AM

"And to prove that I'm serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don't materialize."

Really? From where, exactly, will the cuts in this "provision" come from? Further, if any cuts are appropriate in the future, why are they not appropriate now? This is classic purposeful political ambiguity. The way I see it, you can bet the farm that any cuts will not come in the form of "less" of anything besides the rate of reimbursement to providers, hospitals, and pharmaceutical and medical device companies.

9/16/2009 10:10:47 AM

They could get like $400,000,000,000 if they cut from defense.

But, TERRORISM!

9/16/2009 10:18:53 AM

Quote :

"BARACK OBAMA HATES 25-YEAR-OLDS! HE'S A GENERATIONAL FASCIST!"

Way to extract hyperbole from a perfectly rational statment guy.

I'm sure I'll be forgiven if the idea confiscating nearly a quarter of a million dollars from the projected income of young to middle aged Americans to sustain a generation who lived through the greatest period of economic prosperity in the history of the world strikes me as questionably moral.

Quote :

"that’s how social security was set up and designed to run. It’s not a savings mechanism, it’s just a pyramid scheme. It should be dismantled in its current form."

Which is precisely why I do not trust the government to run health care. It has proven itself largely incompetent by most measures at running efficient operations. I agree that the current private market is screwed up, but it does not follow that the government will do a better job. In fact, the track record shows that it will do a far worse job.

Quote :

"They could get like $400,000,000,000 if they cut from defense."

Defense could use a lot of trimming, without a doubt. However, Eisenhower was right, the military-industrial complex is a rather stout beast, it will take at least as much political willpower to defeat it as it would to defeat the Medicare / Social Security racket. Probably much more.

9/16/2009 11:22:30 AM

Quote :

"It's function should remain, but I agree that its method of funding is sort of dumb."

Sort of dumb? Hell they throw people in jail for doing this sort of shit.

9/16/2009 1:20:57 PM

Quote :

"I'm sure I'll be forgiven if the idea confiscating nearly a quarter of a million dollars from the projected income of young to middle aged Americans to sustain a generation who lived through the greatest period of economic prosperity in the history of the world strikes me as questionably moral."

Did you mean "morally questionable"? or "questionable, morally"?

These people also lived through the rise of nuclear power and subsequent threat of nuclear annhiliation, putting a man on the moon, and the creation of the microprocessor. You can't really judge them based on how current society's view of things.

[Edited on September 16, 2009 at 2:08 PM. Reason : ]

9/16/2009 2:08:37 PM

I haven't had cable for over a year now, so I don't view full news programs as much as I used to; however, at the time that I did, I found it impossible to view any news program on any news channel at any given time of the day that did not have multiple pharmaceutical ads during its commercial breaks.

I suppose it's obvious, or at least was, but I feel that it's worth mentioning. Does anyone think that this would affect the news that we receive regarding health care reform?

I'm not sure that the pharmaceutical industry is at the crux of the issue currently; are there other elements of the health care industry that appear regularly during commercial breaks of most news programs?

9/16/2009 6:18:59 PM

^ pharm companies do more than advertise direct to consumers. they are financing medical journals and in some cases medical education. to answer your question, i've seen many ads for hospitals, of course only for the money makers like cath labs and cancer centers.

[Edited on September 16, 2009 at 11:11 PM. Reason : ]

9/16/2009 11:09:40 PM

Quote :

"These people also lived through the rise of nuclear power and subsequent threat of nuclear annhiliation, putting a man on the moon, and the creation of the microprocessor. You can't really judge them based on how current society's view of things."

Jesus, you're right. I never thought of it that way. Massive technological advancements, increasing life expectancy, massive accumulation of personal wealth. What was I thinking? Yeah, I do feel bad for them.


We're all faced with an uncertain future. The generation before them survived the Great Depression and WWII. The current world crisis is global warming. If you accept the proposition that it is caused by humans then it was likely caused by their excess which we supposedly bear the responsibility of cleaning up. Who knows what else we'll face?

None of this morally justifies state sanctioned theft from one generation to buy the political favor of another.

9/17/2009 12:14:16 AM

45% Of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul
09/15/2009

Quote :

"Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted, a new IBD/TIPP Poll has found. The poll contradicts the claims of not only the White House, but also doctors' own lobby — the powerful American Medical Association — both of which suggest the medical profession is behind the proposed overhaul."

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=506199

9/17/2009 5:35:33 AM

Quote :

"I haven't had cable for over a year now, so I don't view full news programs as much as I used to; however, at the time that I did, I found it impossible to view any news program on any news channel at any given time of the day that did not have multiple pharmaceutical ads during its commercial breaks. "

How much do you think those ads drive up the cost of drugs, too? Simply run the numbers at 1000 per second, 1 ad per commercial break, 4 breaks per 30 minute show, 2 hours a night, 365 nights a year, over 3 networks.

9/17/2009 6:25:51 AM

^^

Those answers are not that surprising. I'd say that the answers to the first and third questions shown probably closely mirror the views of the population working in the health care industry, especially so with respect to the third question. Getting into whether those individuals working in health care "should" be making less money is an entirely different (and mostly futile) discussion, but I think what this reflects is a belief that every provider is going to get squeezed by this legislation. There is also the suspicion, not limited to physicians, of the efficiency and efficacy of government run anything, health care or not.

Regarding the second question, more and more physicians are considering leaving practice, going to work for a hospital or into academia, etc., especially those in primary care. The growing weight of insurance documentation and the staff overhead required is just crushing. When presented with the second question, it would be easy to view this legislation as a straw that could break the camels back.

Granted, the AMA agrees some reform in the health care industry is needed, but, when it comes down to it, the AMA has no choice but to support reform. Public opinion and lobbying power is dependent upon at least being viewed as being on the side of reform. The saying goes something like "show up for dinner early or become part of the meal". What the AMA really wants, tort reform, is entirely missing from the current Senate bill.

9/17/2009 7:50:58 AM

i think we need to find a way to fix the ama cartel

9/17/2009 8:32:51 AM

Quote :

"i think we need to find a way to fix the ama cartel"

jesus

Look at how many doctors are actually members of the AMA anymore, esp once you take out residents. Its under 20%, what a cartel.

9/17/2009 12:19:47 PM

Quote :

"The IBD/TIPP Poll was conducted by mail the past two weeks, with 1,376 practicing physicians chosen randomly throughout the country taking part. Responses are still coming in, and doctors' positions on related topics — including the impact of an overhaul on senior care, medical school applications and drug development — will be covered later in this series."

Seems like their poll is going to be extremely biased towards people who take the initiative to reply to the mailings.

I would trust this poll more: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112818960 which has a better methodology.

Quote :

", conducted a random survey, by mail and by phone, of 2,130 doctors. They surveyed them from June right up to early September. "

[Edited on September 17, 2009 at 12:38 PM. Reason : ]

9/17/2009 12:36:03 PM

Quote :

"by mail and by phone"

seems like this survey is really biased towards those whose took the initiative to reply to the mailing or answer the phone.

9/17/2009 1:33:59 PM

Almost like people who have an agenda to answer the survey...

9/17/2009 1:37:05 PM

Here's what Nate Silver had to say about kooksaw's poll:

Quote :

"1. The survey was conducted by mail, which is unusual. The only other mail-based poll that I'm aware of is that conducted by the Columbus Dispatch, which was associated with an average error of about 7 percentage points -- the highest of any pollster that we tested. 2. At least one of the questions is blatantly biased: "Do you believe the government can cover 47 million more people and it will cost less money and th quality of care will be better?". Holy run-on-sentence, Batman? A pollster who asks a question like this one is not intending to be objective. 3. As we learned during the Presidntial campaign -- when, among other things, they had John McCain winning the youth vote 74-22 -- the IBD/TIPP polling operation has literally no idea what they're doing. I mean, literally none. For example, I don't trust IBD/TIPP to have competently selected anything resembling a random panel, which is harder to do than you'd think. 4. They say, somewhat ambiguously: "Responses are still coming in." This is also highly unorthodox. Professional pollsters generally do not report results before the survey period is compete. 5. There is virtually no disclosure about methodology. For example, IBD doesn't bother to define the term "practicing physician", which could mean almost anything. Nor do they explain how their randomization procedure worked, provide the entire question battery, or anything like that."

[Edited on September 17, 2009 at 1:40 PM. Reason : ]

9/17/2009 1:39:59 PM

ahahahah They've done it again! This time, though, it wasn't too bad...

9/17/2009 3:50:02 PM

9/17/2009 7:00:50 PM

hahah

9/17/2009 7:02:27 PM

well done

9/17/2009 7:25:43 PM

^x5 Nobody cares, Boone-Tard. ObamaCare ain't gonna happen.

9/18/2009 7:26:25 AM

^^^^lol

9/18/2009 7:29:42 AM

^^ Why don't you just put a "QED" at the end of that.

9/18/2009 8:32:30 AM

huffington post reporting that o-reilly supports the public option
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/17/bill-oreilly-backs-public_n_290658.html

Quote :

"O'REILLY: But you know, I want that, Ms. Owcharenko. I want that. I want, not for personally for me, but for working Americans, to have a option, that if they don't like their health insurance, if it's too expensive, they can't afford it, if the government can cobble together a cheaper insurance policy that gives the same benefits, I see that as a plus for the folks. Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/17/bill-oreilly-backs-public_n_290658.html"

that quote was right after he was talking about how it was done, so maybe he was just confused. (maybe his prompter was broken and he was doing it live?)

9/18/2009 9:13:00 AM

^ The problem is that you buffoons lump all conservatives into one stinky stew. O'Reilly is a populist--many true conservatives don't even like him.

Here's on example from noted conservative Mark Levin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1-ZgouoJso

9/18/2009 9:31:24 AM

noted crazy person

9/18/2009 9:36:35 AM

i am not lumping o'reilly into a stew, o'reilly is the one with the giant pot and spoon

9/18/2009 9:42:09 AM

^^ I'm sure Levin would take that as a compliment coming from the likes of you.

Liberty and Tyranny Sells a Million
09/15/2009

Quote :

"Radio host Mark R. Levin's bestselling Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto has sold one million copies, according to publisher Threshold Editions. It is a rare publishing feat, made all the more remarkable by the complete lack of coverage the book has received from major media outlets. Released only six months ago, Levin's book, which has been called 'the modern conservative movement's roadmap back to its principled roots,' spent twelve weeks at #1 on the New York Times bestseller's list despite very little mention by the media, especially the three broadcast networks."

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=33558&page=1

^ Dude, yes, you did--please just STFU.

[Edited on September 18, 2009 at 9:43 AM. Reason : .]

9/18/2009 9:42:14 AM

him, glen beck, and limbaugh are sitting there with their giant black cauldron and giant wooden spoons spicing up the party with a little hate and paranoia

[Edited on September 18, 2009 at 9:44 AM. Reason : and what the hell does your post have to do with anything here?]

9/18/2009 9:44:35 AM

Quote :

"CALLER: I just wanna say, Obama is a lot smarter than you folks give him credit for. You guys were on a roll, I have to admit, with all those tea parties. Everything was rolling along, the Republicans were gaining momentum. And he managed to change your entire conversational focus. And you let those three hundred thousand people — LEVIN: My God. He’s so smart. His own party voted against him on Guantanamo Bay. How stupid was that, Cindy? His own party refused to fund the closing of Guantanamo Bay. CALLER. Yeah but you know he can just move those people over here anyway. He’s already doing it with the one guy. LEVIN: Yeah, sure, he can do whatever he wants. Let me ask you a question. Why do you hate this country? CALLER: No, I love this country. LEVIN: (angrily shouting) I SAID WHY DO YOU HATE MY COUNTRY?WHY DO YOU HATE MY CONSTITUTION? WHY DO YOU HATE MY DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE? You just said it. He can blow off Congress. He can do whatever he wants, right? CALLER: Well, he seems to, he just moved (inaudible). LEVIN: Answer me this, are you a married woman? Yes or no? CALLER: Yes. LEVIN: Well I don’t know why your husband doesn’t put a gun to his temple. Get the hell out of here. "

9/18/2009 9:44:42 AM

And?

9/18/2009 9:48:49 AM

lol

9/18/2009 10:01:31 AM

He's pointing out the rather legitimate fact that the "conservative" leadership in the US has lost the intellectual underpinnings it possessed in the 1970s and has descended into a mass of reaction and emotion instead of rational discourse.

Quote :

"huffington post reporting that o-reilly supports the public option"

For all the shit that O'Reilly gets, he is probably one of the more thoughtful hosts on television, and I say that as a guy who initially assumed that he was a hack like Hannity. I don't deny that he had his moments in the past, but he is one of the few I can stand to watch.

9/18/2009 10:03:41 AM

=



wut?

9/18/2009 11:46:13 AM

Quote :

"Harvard Medical Study Links Lack of Insurance to 45,000 U.S. Deaths a Year By REED ABELSON As the White House and Congress continue debating how best to provide coverage to tens of millions of Americans currently without health insurance, a new study (PDF) is meant to offer a stark reminder of why lawmakers should continue to try. Researchers from Harvard Medical School say the lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States — a toll that is greater than the number of people who die each year from kidney disease."

http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/17/harvard-medical-study-links-lack-of-insurance-to-45000-us-deaths-a-year/


Culture of life, eh?

9/18/2009 12:26:24 PM

most of those deaths could have been prevented by having a healthier lifestyle. most people are going to just blame their problems on the healthcare companies instead of realizing that a big part of staying healthy is by eating relatively healthy and exercising regularly: both of which don't require stacks of money to do.

9/18/2009 12:38:11 PM

Quote :

"The increased risk of death attributable to uninsurance suggests that alternative measures of access to medical care for the uninsured, such as community health centers, do not provide the protection of private health insurance."

with universal healthcare, wouldnt many of the additional facilities proposed be these exact community health centers that the story is saying basically don't work?

9/18/2009 12:38:17 PM

Quote :

"He's pointing out the rather legitimate fact that the "conservative" political leadership in the US has lost the intellectual underpinnings it possessed in the 1970s and has descended into a mass of reaction and emotion instead of rational discourse. "

Fixed it for you.

Quote :

"Harvard Medical Study Links Lack of Insurance to 45,000 U.S. Deaths a Year"

I'd like to propose alternate titles:

Harvard Medical Study Links Uncharitable Doctors to 45,000 U.S. Deaths a Year

Harvard Medical Study Links Stingy Politicians to 45,000 U.S. Deaths a Year

Harvard Medical Study Links Movie Budgets to 45,000 U.S. Deaths a Year

[Edited on September 18, 2009 at 1:55 PM. Reason : sdfg]

9/18/2009 1:37:13 PM

Quote :

"most of those deaths could have been prevented by having a healthier lifestyle. most people are going to just blame their problems on the healthcare companies instead of realizing that a big part of staying healthy is by eating relatively healthy and exercising regularly: both of which don't require stacks of money to do."

Ahh, yes. Because it's so easy to do that when you can barely afford to put food on the table.

9/18/2009 2:35:26 PM

thus, said people are bringing down healthcare statistics, as opposed to our system itself doing so. duuh.

9/18/2009 9:39:01 PM