With the endorsements of AARP (an insurance company) and the AMA (who’ve always opposed healthcare in the past) I’m skeptical about this bill and whether it will really make a difference at all. Particularly for middle-class Americans who are above the poverty line, but struggling nonetheless with healthcare costs. Time will tell.

Jed Clampett

It’s an interesting first step.
Having watched congress make this ridiculous dance for the last few months, I’m not convinced anything of value should be read into it. It still has to be mated to a Senate bill and what comes out of that mating will probably be son of Frankenstein; a mish-mash of substandard parts stitched together to make it seem as if they’ve accomplished something, as if they’ve created a beautiful thing, when in reality it’s just a monster inspired by the desire of the old money that controls the drug peddlers who established the current method of ‘healthcare’ in this nation, with the intent to keep making barrelfulls of money while providing as little as possible in return.

I’d love to hear the president come out and say something like…
“I recognize that the health care situation in this country is one of the most pressing issues concerning our nation today.
The numbers of people affected by this crisis and the monopoly imposed by insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies make the attacks on our financial system on September 11, 2001 seem insignificant by comparison.
The situation is drastic, and drastic situations require drastic resolutions.
We recognize that people may prefer to feed the industries that today deny them care when they get sick, deny them care when they’ve been diagnosed with a condition that requires treatment, provide policies that typically make them pay for most of their care themselves with little help and have promoted a system geared to waste, abuse and the constant flow of drugs whose effects, efficacy or safety, have not truly been studied in depth.
As a step towards a solution to the problem we propose for the government, the only ones entrusted with representing the general public, to get into the business of providing proper care for our population as a means of introducing meaningful competition to the monopolies that are now in control.
We propose to do this by providing a viable alternative to the insurance companies defective product which only serves to fill the pockets of insurance company executives. This option will be available to any American citizen, providing subsidies for people who have trouble affording it. It will also be available to anyone who lives in this country at their own expense. We feel this is necessary to ensure a healthy population regardless of provenance, social status or political affiliation.
Second, we will provide for harsh penalties for doctors who don’t perform to reasonable health care standards. Health care should not be about experimenting drugs on the population without truly understanding how they will affect their recipients.
Third, we will build an effective drug regulation regimen that provides independent testing for new products, extensive studies of drug effects and interaction, and severe punishments for companies who abuse the public trust by creating dangerous products and then hiding studies that reveal side effects that would endanger their profits.
Fourth, we will provide ample funding for research into the production of advanced technology that develops non-disruptive, non-radiant means of imaging, strengthening and healing the human body while avoiding causing more harm or creating stronger pathogenic organisms.
Fifth, we will create a program to study in depth the actual causes of disease and the organisms that have been ignored as a cause of disease. Pathogens that affect all forms of life on this planet should not be allowed to thrive merely out of dogmatic blindness and intransigence.
We don’t expect change to happen overnight, nor do we expect those who have profited from the suffering of their compatriots to suddenly step aside and give up on their monopolies. We fully understand that they will bring the extensive profits they have amas.sed to bear against us, they will fund negative PR campaigns, they will disseminate misinformation to confuse and polarize, they will use their cohorts in the legislative branch to manipulate the public into a frenzy against progress.
We ask that you support us in this endeavor and understand the difficulties of providing care for all while attempting to wrestle control of the existing system away from abusers and selfish individuals who have convinced themselves that their personal well being is more important than the well being of their compatriots.
We will need you to be involved and resolute, to not be discouraged by the naysayers and dramatic actors that will be levied against us, to engage yourselves in expressing your dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs and your support for our endeavors, to not get disillusioned by the obscene tactics of our detractors.

This must be a concerted and concentrated effort by the people, the true holders of power, expressed to and through their government, in an effort to make progressive change for the benefit of the majority instead of an elite class that have entrenched themselves in a position to profit from the hardships of their fellow human beings.
Thank you, and may God bless us all.”

Something of this nature would be the logical, humane, step, but I think we’ve all learned by now that humans are not guided by logic or humanity these days, much less politicians.

Have you noticed that Democrats that oppose the bill are called ‘moderates’ in the media, implying that if someone supports it, they are ‘extremist’.

This is conversely implied in republicans like Goosefravva, who are labeled “Moderate Republican”, as if they are unworthy of being “Mainstream Republicans”. Kind of goes with the notion that if you don’t walk in lockstep with Republican leaderships ideology you are a traitor to the party.

Oh, if we could only get the teabaggers to wear brown shirts with red and black armbands, crazy signs and slogans aren’t regimented and un-pluralistic enough.

Not I didn’t notice that, please post the examples. Thanks

@ “by providing a viable alternative to the insurance companies defective product which only serves to fill the pockets of insurance company executives”

How do you explain the higher cancer survival rates in the US? Insurance companies have a lot of room for improvement, but there is no shortage of evidence that demonstrates the US model delivers better care when it comes to the big C. As to all of the other pseudopoints in that self-important manifesto you posted, I can only say that your musings seem to approach health and health care from the perspective of ideology instead of practical knowledge. What is the basis for your ideology? Why should you be the arbiter of appropriate treatments, which organisms are the most dangerous or proper diagnostic equipment? Are you like really really smart?

Jed Clampett

Lets start with fungi and parasites, since it’s evident the doctors ignore those and don’t seem to think that they deserve any attention until it the infection has taken hold and is almost impossible to stop.

A system of health based on profit and following the economic model of abuse enacted by power companies and car companies only serves to fill a few executives pockets.
Very seldom do we see total remission in cancer, typically, medicating and irradiating the ill merely serves to extend survival, ensuring a longer dip into the sufferes pockets.
Read Georges Lakhovsky’s Secret of Life Dco, it’s only 164 pages, surely even a busy doctor will invest a few hours to reading such a short book so full of information and the before and after pictures of what true healers can do when they apply the knowledge they’ve gleaned from observation and experimentation. It at least deserves a look… unless you are satisfied with the current system and feel nothing should be changed. Who cares about advancement and development? Is money that much more important?

We shouldn’t have such high incidences of cancer in the first place, the fact that curable di.seases are allowed to turn chronic and can.cerous is an indication of the failure of a system designed to make profit rather than provide healing. When a chronic illness is much more profitable in the eyes of the providers than keeping the public healthy, then a chronically ill, drug infused population will be the result.

Maybe the waste produced by omnipotent oil companies and chemical corporations are the main vehicle for the destruction of life on this planet…

nytimes dot com/2009/11/10/science/10patch .html

the doctor is in: “How do you explain the higher cancer survival rates in the US?”

That’s easy. Drugs designed to keep people alive. The more sick people there are, the more doctors get paid, either by insurance companies, or the government.

How many people actually get RID of cancer? Or, are you talking about how long it takes people to die of cancer in this country, versus other countries?

Follow the money. Who gets the most? Doctors? Or Insurance companies?

Jed Clampett

How’s this for a shock to the system?

Remember those insurance executives that denied a California teenager access to a kidney transplant because they didn’t want to accept her doctor’s findings?
She died hours before they approved the procedure, after months of wrangling.

In anyone’s mind who has a brain that still thinks, this is accessory to murder, at the very least, negligent homicide. The entire board should be placed under arrest, not house arrest, in prison awaiting trial.
Since they have access to great wealth, they should be incarcerated without bond for risk of escape to a foreign country. Then start reviewing the books of all other insurance companies and ‘health care providers’.

We tried the carrots and they didn’t work, we’re beset by heartless criminals, it’s time to take the gloves off and wield a big stick.
If only we could find a courageous crusader for justice and the downtrodden. Where is the one fearless enough to try and walk on water?