Politicizing Medicine, Medicalizing Politics

we know these things are expensive. How, other than for government planned monetary obsolesence by inflation did the things become so incredibly expensive?
As these commodities have a real price can we suppose that the government will just walk in and declare a new price structure and in the light of the reality of markets, (human nature), suppose that it would be proper or functional?
Polititians are also very expensive. Can we imagine Barny or Chucky taking a pay cut or less benefits?

Don't mean to jump on you Lilitu, but you DO say the silliest things sometimes.

Most people just don't quite get it--and lilly is so far out in left field she might as well be on a different planet (Uranus?)

ALL INSURANCE IS A BET, A GAMBLE. At its simplest, term life insurance, is a bet that you will die BEFORE the term expires--if you do, the insurance company pays out and if you don't they get that money "for free." Other insurances are more complex, but they all work the same way.

If you buy any kind of insurance you are betting it's more likely something befalls you than not--otherwise, why would you give the insurance company premiums for nothing in return? Health insurance is no different.

A test for cancer does not "prevent" cancer, it merely detects the cancer. As a cancer is...

The National Cancer Institute does not support the right-wing claim of a connection between abortion and breast cancer.

You want everyone to pay for his own health care? That combo defibrillator-pacemaker that Cheney has now costs $75,000. Recently my husband had a CAT scan that took 45 minutes and cost $9661---$500 of that was for the barium drink. One day on Intensive Care can run to $3000. Few middle-class Americans can afford to pay for their own health care. Fifty years ago my pediatrician made a house call for $7. Now just one blood-draw at the hospital lab can engender $800 worth of tests billed to Blue Cross. What you propose is not realistic.

The recommendations that Sebelius rejected were nothing more then a throw of dice. It was recommended to show President Obama we're with you in cutting cost regardless if there's no research to back it up. Everyone wants to cut cost to help fund President Obama's government health care. Even our troops are going to suffer because the government health care comes first. The safety of the troops and breaking the backs of our enemy comes second or until President Obama comes up with another program that will put our troops further down the line. Name one program that hasn't failed under President Obama. The stimulus failed, the reset button failed, the smart power failed, talking one on one with Ahmadinejad failed, cutting our defense...

9. Avoid exposure to phytoestrogens primarily found in SOY.
10. Avoid sugar (and all simple carbs). Remember "Sugar Feeds Cancer".
11. Boost your vitamin D through appropriate supplements if you can't get healthy sun exposure.

Blackwell has an agenda. Secondly, his pair of doctors have an agenda. And Blackwell has no background in science or journalism that would provide a basis for determining the value of any medical claim.

His agenda shows when he mentions Emanuel but does not show any connection between Emanuel and the report about mammograms.

As well his agenda shows when he mentions abortions and legislation intended to reform health insurance rules. Medicaid has for many years paid for abortions if the pregnancy resulted from incest, from rape or if the mother's life was in danger.

Blackwell knows that. He knows as well that the same is proposed; that the current law is not changed in any way.

He knows as well that Federal...

If we paid for our own healthcare, would it matter that government is recommending when women should have mammograms? If we paid for our own healthcare needs, they can make such a recommendation, but it will still be left to the woman to decide if they will follow their advice or not, won't they? On the other hand, when we allow government to pay for our healthcare needs, then haven't we also given them the right to make those kinds of recommendations? What is their motivation for making such recommendations? The answer should be pretty obvious, they don't want to spend less money to provide the services they say they want to provide.

The prevention strategies you note have one flaw: they are strategies undertaken by individuals and cost no money. Therefore they are useless to politicians.

"Prevention" to them only matters if it's something to pay for: screening, tests, and now counseling people to tell them to do what you've just said- lose weight, don't smoke, etc.

Most of the "greatest generation" had no health insurance til they reached 65 and got medicare. Up til then, they went to the doctor when they needed to, and they paid him. As a friend of mine said lately, after she went on Medicare: "I never had so many tests in my life--now every time I get a twinge, I get an MRI."
Coincidentally, that's when costs started going out of control. Deep...

To all Veterans and U.S. Servicemen/women, Thank you for your sacrifices from a veteran and patriot.

To all out there, Happy Thanksgiving, and Thank God that I was born in the Greatest Country ever devised by Man, under God.

To all you ingrates out there who celebrate the Tyranny of Liberal Fascism and it's current leader, Barack Obama, You need to take a moment and reflect and Give Thanks to God that you live in the United States of America, where even ingrates and disloyal Americans such as yourself and your Supreme Leader, Obama, have a right to Be Free to Speak and Protest, even when your Speaking and Protests are as Jeremiah Wright says to say "Goddammned America." This sorry excuse of a man and his protege, Obama,...

Missed in all this uproar are similar recommendations for prostate cancer a week earlier. The deaths will be just as final but the outcry was not there.

This is exactly the kind of thing we all need to read, Thank You for writing it , Mr. Blackwell.

Government run health care will spend money on abortion; but will restrict spending on preventive procedures that detect early warnings of cancer.

Also when government runs health care a scenario that happened in the Indian state of Bihar is very likely. There 40 people died recently because the Doctor's at Public Hospitals went on strike.

If the US Government takes over Healthcare and government Doctors go on strike who is going to prevent them; and have them return to work? We do not have any leader of the calibre of Reagan, who fired all the Air Traffic Controllers when they went on strike.

My mother died from Breast Cancer. The cancer developed when she was in her late 50's, early 60's - there is no history in our family of breast cancer. My mother back in the 1970's took HRP and that is what we believe caused her cancer. She lived to 72 but she was not always cancer free through out her remaining years. Her cancer would keep popping up else where in her body. Cancer is a stalker always looking for the weakest link. My mom out lived some of my friends who were in their 20's when they found out that they had breast cancer. My friends (who were also young moms) who had breast cancer seem to have only 3 years to live after their cancer was found - only one had a history of breast cancer in her family. Anyone can have...

I have often noted that the idea that some people are not "aware" of breast cancer is ridiculous.

What is appalling, as the author states, is the refusal of establishment medicine to accept the breast-cancer/abortion link.

It is only common sense to realize that if EVERY OTHER VARIABLE in a woman's reproductive life, including age at menarche, age at menopause, number of live births, etc. would impact breast cancer rates, how could induced abortion NOT do so?!?

I suggest people who really care about breast cancer and abortion avoid all the "pink ribbons" and other gimmicks that give money to charities and entities (like Susan G. Komen)that are more committed to pro-abortion policies than to truth.