Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (7125)	6/18/2009 7:20:31 PM
From: skinowski	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Quality Adjusted Life-Years. Yeah. This concept is generally questionable, but when used within the language of legislation, it's downright scary. Quality of life means very different things to different people - during different stages of their lives. And who will be doing the "adjustment"? Obviously, this must be related to access to medical procedures and treatments.

To: i-node who wrote (7125)	6/18/2009 8:02:21 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 42652

The Paradox of Government-Run Health Care blog.heritage.org

To: i-node who wrote (7125)	6/23/2009 5:32:01 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Thorley Winston June 23, 2009 11:41 AM I attended a CLE in January put on by Professor M. Gregg Bloche who was one of Obama’s health care reform advisors during the 2008 campaign. He made pretty much the same argument that health care costs were going to eventually consume nearly half of GDP and advocated controlling costs by slowing down the rate of innovation. His logic was that if new (and initially expensive) treatments, drugs, devices and tests don’t exist then patients can’t demand them and no one has to pay for them and technically we won’t have reduced the quality of care since people would still be able to get the treatments that are available today. meganmcardle.theatlantic.com