WH Health Care Advisor: Principles for Allocation of Scarce Medical Interventions

It's pretty simple. If you don't like being thought of as an ignorant man in America then don't post ignorant articles on the bbs.

As I pointed out that article has zero to do with any of the health care proposals currently out there. Palin was making idiotic statements as if they did apply to the health care proposals.

Do you defend Palin's statements as rational, on point, accurate and relevant?

 

Josh asks the hard questions --

How long before this nationwide right-wing primal scream gets out of hand?

--Josh Marshall

 

8 posts and already in the D&D. Take your time, grasshopper.

 

Are you one of those people who equates the number of posts someone has on a board with accrued knowledge or wisdom? I hope not, because there are obviously people who have thousands of posts on this board who know very little, and there are other people who have never posted here at all that would be among the smartest people in this community on their very first post.

 

I'm going to wager that, like our buddy Southern Select, he's been here before.

 

I have never been a regular poster on this board. Mostly I have just been a lurker.

I do post on the TexansTalk.com board quite a bit though.

 

Don't take offense. He was giving you advice for your mental health, not attempting to judge your intelligence.

 

This man read my mind. Posting here off the bat can ruin your brain, no matter what side you're on. When in doubt, just post pictures of walruses.

 

Here's some suggested reading to counter those of you on those specially targeted emails:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/euthanasia.asp

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/canada.asp

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/seniordeath.asp

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/50lies.asp

and just for Trader_Mombasa_Jorge

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp

 

based on what?

 

No its going to be more like this
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aclS1pGHp8o&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aclS1pGHp8o&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

 

Euthanizing downs babies and grandmas is sooo last week!

The new wacko meme seems to be that the government will be able to raid your bank account!

these guys are great!

 

It is fascinating the fear so many people have that allow them to believe these blatantly false things. I'm very curious what goes through someone's mind that would lead them to believe all these falsehoods.

 

it depends on the type of people you're "palin around with" hardy har har

 

Exactly. The originators of these lies know that their statements are false.

They also understand that the primary target of their lies do not have the ability nor intellectual curiosity to check for veracity.

Propaganda 101: make the lie big and repeat it over and over

 

True, but very stupid politically for Obama to have been talking about end of life issues. No need to do that now. I attribute this studpidity to the near desperate attempt to keep the insuer middlemen involved which leads to a complicated mess much like Hillary Care. Also makes it easier for the opponents to stop the reform.

Just insure everyone. Cut out the useless middle men or the duplicative paperwork and overhead of the private insurance companies. Medicare for all. YOu like your private insurance and premiums, keep it. Simple.

Any family, medical insurer, government etc. will have to eventually have to decide whether to spend another $1 million to prolong a person's miserable last hours or days on a ventilator or whatever. Obama blew it by beginning this discussion needlessly.

 

"I'd rather be a conservative nut job than a liberal with no nuts and no job"

--Unknown

 

OK. Let's do this explicitly.

This is another instance of wingnuts being beyond parody, for how can you parody what is either massive ignorance and an inability to read with context or deliberate lying?

Here's the summary to Emanuel's piece:

So, he's talking about scarce resources, not general health care.

OK, so again, we're looking at critical needs and how bet to allocate them across society. Not death panels. Not killing off old people just because they are old. In fact, Emanuel was a huge player in arguing against physician-assisted suicide and has a host of articles that make the case against euthanasia.

Moving on to later in the article, after several ways of allocating medical stuff is discussed, the authors say this...

So, how do you combine the best of what we do now and make it more relevant and moral? That's the question Emanuel and his coauthors are asking in this very academic piece on bioethics. So, they come up with a proposal:

They then write this, which is, I think, non-controversial...

The authors discuss a few more items, like prognosis, where some of th heat from the wingers comes. Here's the entire passage:

Again, we're talking health care emergency where scarce resources can make the difference to a large amount of the population... like a swine flu vaccine. We're not talking about daily health care.

Notice that in the winger excepts of this article, they conveniently forget to include the words "public health emergency" and offer it up as if this would be how decisions for everyday would be made? Anyway, here's some more "bad" language...

They go on and identify objections to their proposal and end the segment with this paragraph:

Then, they talk about legitimacy...

The conclusion:

http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/PIIS0140673609601379.pdf

So, the authors critique the current ways we allocate scarce medical resources and put forth a proposal for how we should look at the problem in the future. This is what academics do. It is expected that other academics will read and critique the paper. It is not a policy paper. It's an academic paper about allocation of resources during a public health emergency. It is not the bill before Congress. There's nothing in this article that warrants the hissy-fit on the right.

And for the record, here's Emanuel's published stance on euthanasia: