Search This Blog

Tuesday, September 10, 2024

To ‘Empower Patients’ – First Dispel Seven Myths

 As Vice President Kamala Harris hides her support for Medicare for All, covertly championing her belief that healthcare is a fundamental human right, it becomes increasingly urgent to confront several myths that cloud the healthcare debate.

Harris’s plan, echoing progressive rhetoric of universal coverage, hinges on the assumption that all necessary health care can and should be provided by government to every American, both those legally here as well as illegal immigrants.  Before considering any reform of healthcare, we must address several widely accepted but fundamentally flawed beliefs that undermine our understanding of the healthcare system. After dispelling these myths, we can Empower We the Patients.

  1. Cost is not spending.

A recent headline proclaimed, “healthcare costs are expected to jump by 9% in 2025.” But this isn’t about costs—it’s about spending. The distinction is crucial as we evaluate Harris’s Medicare for All initiative, which, while well-intentioned, risks inflating spending without addressing the underlying inefficiencies that drive these numbers. The U.S. spent $4.8 trillion on healthcare in 2023, but about half of that wasn’t on actual care—it was on the bloated bureaucracy that Harris’s plan would likely expand rather than streamline. The resources needed to produce health care services—the true cost—vastly differ from the inflated spending figures driven by administrative bloat. Real reform requires understanding and addressing this difference, not conflating the two.

  1. Coverage does not equal care.

One of the most persistent myths Harris seems to embrace is the idea that coverage equals care. Her vision for healthcare reform is laser-focused on expanding insurance, yet experience shows that insurance coverage does not guarantee timely or quality care. Patients with government plans like Medicaid often face long waits for treatment, sometimes with fatal consequences. Conversely, those without insurance often receive necessary care under existing laws, revealing the complex reality that coverage does not equate to access. Simply having insurance doesn’t ensure patients receive the care they need. Harris’s Medicare for All proposal, focused on expanding coverage, misses this critical distinction.

  1. Your doctor doesn’t decide your care—an administrator or bureaucrat does.

We like to think that our doctors will always provide the best possible care, but that decision is often out of their hands in today's healthcare system. Harris’s plan would deepen this problem by expanding the role of bureaucrats in deciding what care is approved and provided. Your physician does not choose your medications—a pharmacy benefits manager does. Your primary care doctor does not refer you to the surgeon with the best outcomes—you must go to whomever your insurance company contracts with. As Harris proposes, expanding government control over healthcare decisions would only further distance patients from personalized care decisions.

  1. There is no right to healthcare in a free society.

Harris’s push for Medicare for All is rooted in the belief that healthcare is a basic human right. However, this notion raises serious questions about the implications for patients and providers. Rights, such as free speech or religious freedom, are inherent and do not require someone else’s labor or resources to exercise. Declaring healthcare as a right would effectively compel medical professionals to provide services on demand, regardless of their consent. True rights do not impose obligations on others. Harris’s vision would undermine the autonomy of healthcare providers, reducing their freedom and potentially compromising care quality.

  1. Medical autonomy no longer exists in the U.S.

In the United States, personal freedom, including medical autonomy, is enshrined in the Constitution. However, through the current third-party payment structure, entities like the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and private insurers, which follow federal regulations, effectively decide Americans’ medical care. Harris’s proposal would likely strengthen this system, further eroding patient choice. As Harris pushes for greater government involvement in healthcare, patient choice and autonomy erosion will only accelerate.

  1. Tyranny has returned to the U.S. healthcare system.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the government exerted unprecedented control over medical decisions, from mandating vaccines to restricting treatments. Harris’s approach, which would further centralize healthcare decisions, threatens to entrench this medical tyranny, where government dictates override individual choice and freedoms. The pandemic was a stark reminder of how quickly government overreach can strip away individual freedoms. Harris’s plan risks making tyranny the new norm in healthcare.

  1. There is no such thing as free healthcare.

The promise of “free” healthcare is perhaps the most dangerous myth. Medicaid insurance, for example, may come at no charge to the patient, but it is extremely costly for taxpayers. Healthcare services provided by doctors, nurses, and therapists are not free—unless you believe in slavery, which no free society should. Harris’s Medicare for All proposal, which markets itself as being “free” at the point of service, conveniently ignores the enormous costs that would be imposed on taxpayers. Someone always pays. Under Harris’s plan, taxpayers would bear the massive financial burden of “free” services.

As Harris continues to advocate for Medicare for All, we must dismantle these myths. Doing so can shift the conversation from idealistic but unrealistic promises to practical, effective solutions that truly empower patients and respect the freedoms upon which this country was built. Only then can we hope to create a healthcare system that serves the people rather than expanding government control at the expense of individual choice, market efficiency, and even freedom itself.

Deane Waldman, M.D., MBA is Professor Emeritus of Pediatrics, Pathology, and Decision Science; former Director of Center for Healthcare Policy at Texas Public Policy Foundation; former Director of New Mexico Health Insurance Exchange; and author of 12 books, including multi-award winning, Curing the Cancer in U.S. HealthcareStatesCare and Market-Based Medicine.  Contact him at www.deanewaldman.com.

Vance Ginn, Ph.D., is president of Ginn Economic Consulting, host of the Let People Prosper Show, and previously chief economist of the Trump White House's Office of Management and Budget. Follow him on X.com at @VanceGinn.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/09/to_empower_patients_first_dispel_seven_myths.html

Cuomo called ‘lying sack of s—t’ by families, lawmakers, deflects blame for Covid nursing home deaths

 Ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo was branded a “lying sack of s—t” by furious families and lawmakers as he deflected blame in a heated congressional hearing Tuesday over his disastrous COVID nursing home order which led to thousands of deaths.

Over the course of the more than two-hour hearing on Capitol Hill, Cuomo was asked several times to apologize to the families in the room who lost loved ones during the outbreak — but never did.

“We have family members right here right now that lost their relatives because of that decision,” said Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.). “I think you should admit that it was wrong, and I’d think you would come off a lot better to those families if you’d just turn around and apologize.”

Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo getting sworn in to testify before the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic on Sept. 10, 2024.Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post

“You know I’m just going to say, ‘I’m sorry,’” McCormick went on after Cuomo refused to take him up on it. “I’ll say it. I’m sorry your families were exposed to COVID because people were put in the nursing homes that weren’t tested.”

The video player is currently playing an ad.
Skip Ad

Even when asked by Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell (Mich.) about his callous response — “Who cares?” — to the eventual disclosure of the full death count, the ex-governor declined to say he was sorry.

“I want to say Gov. Cuomo: I care,” Dingell said. “Every member of this committee cares. And more importantly every family member who lost a family member cares. So let’s be very clear about that.”

The “country should have done better,” was all Cuomo had to say to the families in an opening statement that largely shifted the blame to former President Donald Trump.

“He willfully deceived the American people and his lies and denial delayed our response, let the virus spread, and this country never caught up,” Cuomo told members of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.

Cuomo declined to apologize to the families of people who died from COVID-10 due to his nursing home order.Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post

“You’re a liar,” one person heckled Cuomo as he spoke with reporters after the hearing. “You killed my parents and thousands of others. You’re a liar. You’re in denial, a–hole.”

On his way out, Hudson Valley Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) added to The Post: “It just confirmed that Andrew Cuomo is a lying sack of s—t.”

The hearing featured several fiery moments from New York’s members on the House Oversight Committee including an absolute drubbing by North Country Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY).

The House Republican Conference Chairwoman grilled Cuomo over his $5 million book deal, and accused him of blaming his staff.

Rep. Elise Stefanik bashed Cuomo, saying that he would never hold elected office again.Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post

Stefanik also asked Cuomo whether he would stand up and apologize to the COVID-affected families, which he declined.

“You will never hold elected office again,” she boomed. 

It was one of several times that Cuomo played the blame game – pointing fingers at his staff, the feds and nursing homes themselves.

“And they never called me after. You would think if they had a problem with the directive they would’ve called,” Cuomo said, blaming the feds for not pointing out his order — estimated to have led to as many as 9,000 excess COVID deaths — ran counter to their guidance at the time.

“Did you even attempt to ensure that what you were declaring was accurate?” Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) said with exasperation.

“I did not speak with CMS,” Cuomo admitted, referring to the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

Staten Island Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) even joked: “maybe it was that communist spy Linda Sun” who signed off on nursing home order after Cuomo refused to say who did — referring to his and Gov. Kathy Hochul’s former aide recently charged with acting as a foreign agent for China.

“He has doubled down and tripled down on these falsehoods,” Malliotakis told The Post of Cuomo as she left the hearing.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis told The Post that Cuomo “tripled down” on lies about the pandemic.Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post

“I don’t know that he knew about this directive when it went out, but what I do know is Governor Cuomo, after this has blown up in his face, would get to the bottom of who did. So I don’t buy for a minute that he doesn’t know who signed off on that directive,” Malliotakis said, calling Cuomo “dishonest.”

“I took responsibility every day,” Cuomo lamented to a cadre of reporters before quickly pointing the finger back at Trump.

“I screwed up every day and addressed the people of the state and addressed millions of people across the nation. I took responsibility every day, unlike the president.”

Rep. Mike Lawler called Cuomo a “lying sack of s—t.”Getty Images

One thing Cuomo did admit to, was instructing his secretary to write an email to his inner circle referring to the March directive as “the great debacle in the history books”.

“Yes,” he told Comer plainly when asked if his secretary wrote the email on his behalf.

His staffers recounted that they believed that email was part of the impetus to a July 2020 state report that significantly undercounted the number of nursing home deaths, according to earlier testimony provided to the house panel.

The criticism didn’t stop at the Republicans either. The panel’s lead Democrat Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Cali.) said in his opening statement that Cuomo was guilty of having “misrepresented” nursing home fatality data. Ruiz also accused Cuomo and his aides of having “obscured scrutiny” of the statistics.

“Lawler is an eccentric Trump thug is what he is, and that’s what he’s always been. He is a Trump right wing zealot. And his behavior as he demonstrates he is not fit for public office,” Cuomo said.

Republicans on the panel announced they were subpoenaing for records they have yet to receive from the New York Governor’s office, mostly pertaining to internal communications that could shed more light on who authorized the nursing home order and the impetus for handpicking data for the July 2020 report.

A spokesperson for Hochul said they will comply with the subpoena.

https://nypost.com/2024/09/10/us-news/cuomo-branded-lying-sack-of-st-by-families-lawmakers-as-he-deflects-blame-for-ny-covid-nursing-home-deaths/

Novo’s Saxenda Helped Kids as Young as Six Lose Weight in Trial

 

Novo Nordisk A/S’s older weight-loss drug, Saxenda, helped children lose weight in a study, opening up the possibility of powerful obesity medications being prescribed to grade-school-aged kids. 

Children with obesity aged 6 through 11 who got a Saxenda shot daily for 56 weeks saw their body mass index, or BMI, decline by an average of 5.8% in the study, while those who got a placebo experienced an increase of 1.6%, researchers said on Wednesday at the European Association for the Study of Diabetes meeting in Madrid. Side effects were in line with what’s been seen in adults, the researchers said. Novo funded the trial.

The results “provide much-needed evidence” on how the new class of GLP-1 weight-loss drugs affects children, potentially opening up a new treatment for them, according to an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine. The medical journal also published the trial results

Despite the booming market for obesity treatments in adults, and in some cases teenagers, none of the medications are approved for younger children. 

Novo said it has filed the Saxenda data with US and European drug regulators, and it’s already begun a study of its obesity blockbuster Wegovy on children. 

With 82 patients, the Saxenda study is much smaller than the trials with thousands of patients that have been conducted in adults. More research is needed on what happens to kids who take obesity drugs over longer periods, said Claudia Fox, co-director at the Center for Pediatric Obesity Medicine at the University of Minnesota Medical School, who led the study.