A majority of the world's nations employ some kind of single-payer, government-run health care system, and they don't have "death panels." Or do they?
Defenders of government-run healthcare assert that there won’t be any rationing, denial of care, or requirements for euthanasia. That’s technically true, but the Obamacare death panel will be determining what’s an acceptable treatment and what’s the government-approved payment schedule.
With the first presidential debate and the only vice presidential debate behind us, it seems pretty clear that so-called “social issues” are not going to get much attention in this year’s presidential politics.
Personalized medicine is the future. It's where the science is going. It's where the technology is going. It's where doctors and patients will want to go. Yet, unfortunately for many of us, this is not where the Obama administration wants to go.
BELFAST, Northern Ireland -- Regardless of how the Supreme Court rules on the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (this was written before the decision), the Obama administration has indicated it will move forward with those parts of the unpopular law it can impose on the country.
Previously, I wrote about a dangerous development: a proposal by former Obama administration officials to give doctors immunity against malpractice lawsuits if they practice medicine according to government sanctioned guidelines. That would give the guideline writers enormous power to ration care.
During the debate over ObamaCare, more than one critic charged that government panels would make life and death decisions affecting patient care.
On the very day that Steve Jobs died a new report suggests that the U.S. health care system is spending too much money on people near the end of their lives. The timing of the two events could not have been more ironic.
A key argument by the states was that the power to require Americans to purchase a product gives the government unlimited powers to regulate all aspects of someone’s life and is thus unconstitutional. The 11th Circuit Court seems to agree by a 2-1 margin: “The government’s position amounts to an argument that the mere fact of an individual’s existence substantially affects interstate commerce, and therefore Congress may regulate them at every point of their life.”
The U.S. House did what its candidates had promised and the voters expected: The House passed 245 to 189 a repeal of ObamaCare, the centerpiece of socialism. Three Democrats joined every single Republican.
I finished Part 1 last week informing you that in just a single year, from 2008-09, Planned Parenthood received $363.2 million in government grants and contracts, a $13.6 million increase from the previous year, which resulted in 324,800 abortions.
My wife, Gena, and I mourn over the murder and maiming of innocent citizens and lawmakers in Arizona this past Saturday morning. It makes us even more passionate in our fight for human life and reminding the world that from the womb to the tomb, human life is precious and should be prized.
They were supposed to be gone. They were supposed never to have existed. Remember the foofaraw over the part of ObamaCare that was going to have Medicare finance, uh, consultations about end-of-life treatment?
The battle over health care took a turn for the better this week, but, unfortunately, things could take a turn for the worse for breast cancer patients by Friday.
The accepted standard for mammograms was, until recently, that women should start receiving them every year beginning at age 40. If my aunt had followed that standard, she might still be alive.
Rationed care is coming, and the death panels will not be far behind.