Women air concerns on government takeover of health care

Published on August 19, 2009 at 5:50 AM

300,000 American women with breast cancer might have died over the last decade, if the US had adopted a British-style, government-run health care system. This shocking figure, from recent studies by the Lewin Group and Lancet Oncology, appears in a TV ad launched today by The Independent Women's Forum, a non-profit organization focused on issues of concern for women. The 60-second spot highlights the deadly risks to women under the "public option" - or co-op - plan currently under consideration in Congress.

"My odds of surviving cancer were high, because my care was the best," says Tracy, a 44 year-old breast cancer survivor featured in the ad, which airs over the next week on cable and broadcast stations and is currently featured on You Tube. "What are your odds if the government takes over your care?" she asks. The IWF is featuring stories similar to Tracy's on its website, and is inviting people to share their own experiences about how they and their families have benefitted from the ability to make their own health care choices.

"Shifting the decision-making authority from the American citizen to government bureaucrats is an offense to who we are as Americans," remarks Heather Richardson Higgins, Chairman of The Independent Women's Forum. "Nothing could be more central to the pursuit of happiness than the ability to control one's own health and health options of loved ones."

Maybe you are not aware of some of the actual restrictions that are in HR3200. If there truly was freedom of choice that would be one thing, but upon reading the bill one can see that freedom of choice is not allowed. Some examples: pg 84 All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange. Pg 145-An employer must auto-enroll employees into the govenment run public plan. Pg 167 Any individual that does not have acceptable healthcare will be taxed 2.5% of income. Pg 341-The government has the authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMO's, etc. Pg 272 has quite a bit to say about cancer patients and how decisions will be made for their treatment. Pg 29-42 talks about the Health Choices Commissioner and Commission. This group will be the decision maker for treatment and our treatment will be based on a formula that uses our age and the statistical averages for survivability to determine if we are a candidate for treatment. This is very similar to GB's plan. Over 90% of Americans are happy with their healthcare plans. The stat is that 1 in 7 are underinsured. If we take out the illegal alien piece, that number goes down significantly. Just fix the 1 in 7. The marketplace does have the answer, but there is more here than just getting people insured. It was in the WSJ this week that about 7 years ago a "special" end of life panel was set up in the Veteran's Admin to "help" veterans make better, "less selfish" choices as they aged. The previous administration rejected it. The current administration has revived it for veterans and it is the model for the rest of the healthcare plan. These are just some of the issues that have brought so many Americans out to the town hall meetings. Maybe these are not a concern to you, but they are for many of us. By the way Medicare is almost bankrupt. I know the president keeps using the UPS/Fedex/Post Office example about choice, but when he says that I hear "UPS/Fedex are privately owned and profitable while the USPS is government run and bankrupt. That is a no-brainer for me. Nearly anything the government runs, fails. Our most recent example is the cash for clunkers program. Less than 2% of dealers have been reimbursed and they were mandated to destroy the engine in the cars they accepted, so now they can't re-sell them. It looks like the government created a program, got everyone on board and then left the bill for someone else to pay. Nothing from the government is free. It is up to regular citizens to decide how much we want to be indebted to this overbloated system.

Brit duped into doing ad

atp2007

says:

August 20, 2009 at 10:27 PM

I have seen the British woman (who was in the commercial) on the BBC saying that she was duped into doing the commercial. She said that while she was not diagnosed quickly in the UK by the NHS she thought the ad was to get women to get tested earlier. She still supported the NHS and did not think that her appearance on the commercial would make it seem like she did not support the NHS.

Reply »

Very tired of hearing of fictitious "government takeover of health care"

Marci Sudlow

August 20, 2009 at 11:41 PM

I am very tired of hearing of this fictitious "government takeover of health care." The public option now being considered would set up a program similar to medicare but for persons of all ages. This option would coexist with private insurance companies. Everyone would have the choice to select a government vs private insurer, just as one can choose whether to send a parcel via a privately owned package carrier such as Fed-Ex or UPS or via the government-run US Postal Service.

Like your private insurance company? Then keep it, and let the rest of us make our own choices.

Maybe You Are Not Aware

Phyllis says:

August 21, 2009 at 11:59 AM

Maybe you are not aware of some of the actual restrictions that are in HR3200. If there truly was freedom of choice that would be one thing, but upon reading the bill one can see that freedom of choice is not allowed. Some examples: pg 84 All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange. Pg 145-An employer must auto-enroll employees into the govenment run public plan. Pg 167 Any individual that does not have acceptable healthcare will be taxed 2.5% of income. Pg 341-The government has the authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMO's, etc. Pg 272 has quite a bit to say about cancer patients and how decisions will be made for their treatment. Pg 29-42 talks about the Health Choices Commissioner and Commission. This group will be the decision maker for treatment and our treatment will be based on a formula that uses our age and the statistical averages for survivability to determine if we are a candidate for treatment. This is very similar to GB's plan. Over 90% of Americans are happy with their healthcare plans. The stat is that 1 in 7 are underinsured. If we take out the illegal alien piece, that number goes down significantly. Just fix the 1 in 7. The marketplace does have the answer, but there is more here than just getting people insured. It was in the WSJ this week that about 7 years ago a "special" end of life panel was set up in the Veteran's Admin to "help" veterans make better, "less selfish" choices as they aged. The previous administration rejected it. The current administration has revived it for veterans and it is the model for the rest of the healthcare plan. These are just some of the issues that have brought so many Americans out to the town hall meetings. Maybe these are not a concern to you, but they are for many of us. By the way Medicare is almost bankrupt. I know the president keeps using the UPS/Fedex/Post Office example about choice, but when he says that I hear "UPS/Fedex are privately owned and profitable while the USPS is government run and bankrupt. That is a no-brainer for me. Nearly anything the government runs, fails. Our most recent example is the cash for clunkers program. Less than 2% of dealers have been reimbursed and they were mandated to destroy the engine in the cars they accepted, so now they can't re-sell them. It looks like the government created a program, got everyone on board and then left the bill for someone else to pay. Nothing from the government is free. It is up to regular citizens to decide how much we want to be indebted to this overbloated system.

Reply »
Dreamer

Pete Fillmore says:

August 21, 2009 at 2:48 PM

What a dreamer, if you think the government can run a health care system,effiently. And will be content to compete with private health care. Once the government gets it foot in the door then it will want the whole pie. Ask you congressmen and women if they will subscibe to this new plan. and also ask them if they will scrape there retirement plam amd join with us in the regular social secuity plan we ae all in. Good luck if any will even give you the time of day let alone answer.

Reply »

Lewin Group is arm of United Health

Hector

August 21, 2009 at 7:17 PM

The Lewin Group is a front for the health care industry who are against any kind of health care bill especially one that has the public option.

Lewin Group is a front for the health care industry

August 21, 2009 at 7:26 PM

Of course the Lewin Group is against any health care bill especially one that has the public option because the health care industry would lose $billions if people had a choice.

It is impossible to RATE a similar drug against another for the same

HARVEY GROVE

August 22, 2009 at 12:33 AM

It is impossible to RATE a similar drug against another for the same disorder because...... When a drug is used on a group of 1000 patients, statistics are gathered to examine what the drug does as to efficacy, safety, side effects (none fatal), drug interactions and a slew of other possible problems. If you test this same drug on another group of 1000 patients you may get a similar picture of efficacy, however, one particular side effect of obesity or drowsiness is virtually non-existent in the second drug. Many patients have discontinued their drug because of obesity or drowsiness. This new one offers the possibility of giving the patient the opportunity to try another drug that works as well but does not have a particular side effect so that the patient stays on the drug. The second drug is essentially the same as the first, however, a single side effect mat be the difference between the two drugs in SOME, NOT ALL, PATIENTS. A drug recently approved for bi-polar disease and schizophrenia (TO BE MARKETED IN THE 4Q) is in the same class of compounds as prior drugs and is a little more effective, however, the side effect of obesity is SO MARKED IN THE EARLIER VERSIONS THAT THIS IS ENOUGH REASON TO SWITCH THE PATIENT FROM ONE TO THE NEEWER VERSION. Also, the incidence of obesity with the increased risks of serious stroke, heart disease, etc. warrants changing all patients to the newer version.

The cost of developing a drug that may turn out to be very little better or not as good as the first drug, however, no company will ever invest in a second drug if their market was limited to only the "left overs" of the first drug. There are many "statin" drugs. Most are no better than the first, however, in my case, the first one caused me so much pain in my thigh muscles that I had to discontinue it. I was lucky that there was a second "statin" available that had no effect on my thigh muscles. It happens that my sister and wife had the same problems and shifted to the sec ond with no side effects.

Front for Health Indutry

August 22, 2009 at 4:52 PM

News-medical.net is relentless in their opposition to any health care bill and they care constantly quoting the Lewin Group which as an arm of the health care industry who are out to lose $billions if there is a public option in the upcoming health care bill.

Lewin's pedigree

Chris

August 22, 2009 at 5:42 PM

The Lewin Group is a part of Ingenix, which is wholly owned by United Healthcare Group, one of the largest health insurance companies in the country. www.cjr.org/.../hiding_the_messenger_1.php

Simplistic math

August 22, 2009 at 5:45 PM

To imply that it's all the fault of England's healthcare system that the breast cancer survival rate is several points less than that in the US ignores the many other variables that can contribute to such a statistical difference. The fact is that the Lewin Group knows this, and so does the organization that used the data for what I think is the most tasteless scare tactic yet to be aired by opponents of reform.

Chris says:

August 22, 2009 at 9:15 PM

There was a 12.4-point difference in the five-year survival rate between white American women and black American women from 1999 to 2005 (90.3% for whites and 77.9% for blacks. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html

What does THAT say about the American health insurance model?

Some opponents of reform might be quick to point out that this is a failure of our already-existing public options of Medicaid and Medicare, as they might assume proportionally more black women are enrolled in a government-funded option than white women.

However, it seems that a genuine LACK of health insurance - and possibly lack of coverage for preventive care and screenings among existing public options - may be more the culprit; and it seems to affect everyone regardless of race or education level.

Women without health insurance across all racial and educational levels, are half as likely to receive timely mammograms, according to a report conducted by the American Cancer Society and published in the society's peer-reviewed journal "CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians." This means diagnosis at later, less treatable stages for many women.
www.huliq.com/.../insurance-status-linked-cancer-outcomes

The article in the above link points out that the disparity between five-year survival rates of uninsured and insured American white women is higher than the disparity between American whites and blacks (13 points vs 12.4). And the disparity is even greater (16 points vs 12.4) between insured and uninsured American black women.

To be clear, the study looked at uninsured and privately (or commercially) insured women.

So please, when you see ads like those put out by the Independent Women's Forum, exercise your own independence to look at the real facts behind the scare tactics.