<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: health care rationing</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'health care rationing'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22health+care+rationing%22&t=%22health+care+rationing%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:42:09 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>My Overdue Response to Jesse Larner</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3980813&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FOxPvcALESeg%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonBack in August of 2007, I issued a challenge to Jesse Larner, who blogs at HuffingtonPost.  One week later, Larner took up my challenge in a post that I&amp;#8217;ve just finished reading.
Larner very graciously admitted to a couple of misstatements, and I must reciprocate.  I wrote, &amp;#8220;I challenge Larner to show where a Cato scholar &amp;#8230; describes America&amp;#8217;s as a &amp;#8216;free-enterprise system of health care.&amp;#8217;&amp;#8221;  Sure enough, Larner found an oped where one of my colleagues wrote, &amp;#8220;I live in a country with a free-market health-care system.&amp;#8221;  Obviously, I disagree with that claim.  But Larner was right, and I will have to look into this.
A few remaining areas of disagreement:

I wrote that Larner &amp;#8220;claims that people don&amp;#8217;t di...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3980813</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 15:56:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3980813</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medicare Fraud: 1, Anti-Fraud Measures: 0</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3420444&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fi7lTLQjYZf8%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonAs the nation contemplates the new health care entitlements that Congress and President Obama just created, it is worth noting an article in today&amp;#8217;s Washington Post, which reports on the performance of past efforts to eliminate fraud in another health care entitlement:
More than a decade ago, Congress set out to squeeze the fraud out of Medicare billing at nursing homes, requiring more precise justifications for costs. It created new &amp;#8220;ultra-high&amp;#8221; billing categories intended to be used for only 5 percent of the patients needing highly specialized care and rehabilitation.
But within a few years, nursing homes flooded the ultra-high categories with patients, contributing to $542 million a year in potential overpayments, federal analysts found.
Since then,...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3420444</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:48:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3420444</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Cost of Health Care</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2464098&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FHmV7-vt55Qc%2F</link>
            <description>From a patient&amp;#8217;s point of view, the ideal health insurance policy would offer unlimited access to medical services at no charge. Unfortunately, it is not feasible to offer this to everyone.
The key to sustainable health care reform is restraining the use of services that have high costs and low benefits, says Cato adjunct scholar Arnold Kling.  In the video below, Kling examines the challenges facing health reformers and the feasibility of alternative proposals. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2464098</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:11:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2464098</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Pushing Health Care Rationing by Misdirection</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2405104&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34825&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wesleyjsmith.com%2Fblog%2F2009%2F05%2Fpushing-health-care-rationing-by.html</link>
            <description>I have noticed lately that the political left, which most supports health care rationing (and which, ironically, yells the loudest about HMO care restrictions), argues disingenuously for the agenda through the time-tested tactic of blatant misdirection.Classic example, the always reliably fuzzy and emotive Boston Globe columnist Ellen Goodman. In her most recent column, &quot;A Rational Talk About Rationing Care,&quot; Goodman illustrates her thesis by citing the the non-rationing example of President Obama's late grandmother, who decided to receive a hip replacement after a fall even though she was terminally ill. From Goodman's column:I was also struck by the way the president framed Toot's treatment as one of the &quot;difficult moral issues&quot; surrounding healthcare costs. Indeed, folks on the right sa...</description>
            <author>Secondhand Smoke</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2405104</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 16:40:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2405104</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Pushing Doctors into a &quot;Dual Mandate&quot; and the &quot;Attack on Doctors' Hippocratic Oath&quot;</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2382300&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34825&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wesleyjsmith.com%2Fblog%2F2009%2F05%2Fpushing-doctors-into-dual-mandate-and.html</link>
            <description>Physicians are being pushed steadily into an untenable position. On one hand, they are professionally obligated to render optimal care to each patient based on individual need. On the other hand, they are increasingly being looked to by bureaucrats and bioethicists as serving another role--for society--as the rationing arms of cost control.The effect of this would require doctors to give optimal care to some patients but not others, probably based on mandatory invidiously discriminatory categories of age, disability, perhaps even politically incorrect lifestyles such as smoking and obesity (but never, for example culturally acceptable risky behaviors like promiscuity). This dual mandate, if adopted, would place doctors and other health care professionals in a terrible conflict of interest-...</description>
            <author>Secondhand Smoke</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2382300</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 16:23:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2382300</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Get You Some!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2182702&amp;cid=t_215767_140_f&amp;fid=35448&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fseemedlikeagoodideathetime.com%2F2009%2F02%2F12%2Fget-you-some%2F</link>
            <description>Awesome!
I gettin&amp;#8217; my 13 bucks/week extra mine.
Hey why not?
Chicago Pay to Play politics have gone national; and since  evil people in D.C. have decided to not stimulate the economy by giving us more of our money to spend, and businesses more of their money to invest and to be able to grow*that would =hiring [...] (Source: bipolar chicks blogging)</description>
            <author>bipolar chicks blogging</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2182702</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:09:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2182702</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Myth of Canadian Health Care Nirvana</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2177435&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34825&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wesleyjsmith.com%2Fblog%2F2009%2F02%2Fmyth-of-canadian-health-care-nirvana.html</link>
            <description>For years we have been told--and I sure used to believe--that the Canadians had the best approach to health care. Single payer funding, privately employed doctors--seemingly, a good mix. Except it's not. From a column by Nadeem Esmail in yesterday's Wall Street Journal:Canadians often wait months or even years for necessary care. For some, the status quo has become so dire that they have turned to the courts for recourse. Several cases currently before provincial courts provide studies in what Americans could expect from government-run health insurance.In Ontario, Lindsay McCreith was suffering from headaches and seizures yet faced a four and a half month wait for an MRI scan in January of 2006. Deciding that the wait was untenable, Mr. McCreith did what a lot of Canadians do: He went sout...</description>
            <author>Secondhand Smoke</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2177435</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:57:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2177435</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health care rationing : a bloody good try</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2011052&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34595&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fnhsblogdoc.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F12%2Fhealth-care-rationing-bloody-good-try.html</link>
            <description>The only decision to be made about health-care rationing is how we want to control it. Health care has always been rationed. In the UK by waiting lists; by post-code; by luck and by wealth, or, more correctly, lack of wealth. It is different in the USA where health care has been rationed primarily by wealth. Some USA citizens get virtually no health care at all. More recently it has been rationed by the insurance companies who are beginning to have the same level of control as UK government exercises over the NHS.Now, St Obama approacheth. For it is he. And with him comes, once again, what many Americans see as the threat of socialized medicine (always with a “z”). They can relax. There is not going to be an American NHS. But St Obama may well widen the safety net to bring in many of t...</description>
            <author>NHS Blog Doctor</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2011052</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 12:09:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2011052</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NHS Meltdown: Kidney Cancer Patient Have to Wait Months to Decide Whether They Can Receive New Chemotherapy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1920886&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34825&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wesleyjsmith.com%2Fblog%2F2008%2F10%2Fnhs-meltdown-kidney-cancer-patient-have.html</link>
            <description>This is the way things go with socialized medicine. The health care rationers are going to take months to decide whether to cover a new chemotherapy. From the story:Kidney cancer patients will have to wait months for the NHS drugs rationing body to decide if they can have new drugs after guidance was delayed.In one of its most criticised decisions so far, the National Institute for health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) said in draft guidance that patients with advanced kidney cancer should not receive new drugs that could extend their lives. During the consultation on the draft guidance new evidence has been submitted and now Nice has delayed issuing another draft until well into 2009.Imagine yourself with the cancer having to wait until the big brained decide whether your quality of life ...</description>
            <author>Secondhand Smoke</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1920886</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:06:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1920886</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NHS Meltdown: Doctors Withhold Information on Treatments from Patients</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1733736&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34825&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wesleyjsmith.com%2Fblog%2F2008%2F08%2Fnhs-meltdown-doctors-withhold.html</link>
            <description>So now some UK doctors are withholding information from patients about possible cancer treatments due to NHS funding polices. From the story: Cancer patients are being denied information about treatments that could help them live longer by their own doctors, a new survey has disclosed. A quarter of specialists in myeloma, a bone marrow cancer that claims 2,600 lives in the UK each year, admitted keeping their patients in the dark about possible therapies.They believed it was better not to talk about certain treatments not yet approved by the health service's rationing watchdog to avoid raising false hope. Primary care trusts are generally reluctant to pay for drugs not already passed by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice).NICE is the Orwellian-named utilitarian...</description>
            <author>Secondhand Smoke</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1733736</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 04:21:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1733736</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Another Assisted Suicide Abuse in Oregon: No Money to Help Live--Will Pay to Make Dead</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1664093&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34825&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wesleyjsmith.com%2Fblog%2F2008%2F07%2Fanother-assisted-suicide-abuse-in.html</link>
            <description>First, I predicted it in Forced Exit. Then, it happened. And now, it has happened again: An very ill Oregon man has been denied treatment under Medicaid in Oregon to fight his prostate cancer--but has been told that the state will happily pay for his assisted suicide. From the story:Since the spread of his prostate cancer, 53-year-old Randy Stroup of Dexter, Ore., has been in a fight for his life. Uninsured and unable to pay for expensive chemotherapy, he applied to Oregon's state-run health plan for help.Lane Individual Practice Association (LIPA), which administers the Oregon Health Plan in Lane County, responded to Stroup's request with a letter saying the state would not cover Stroup's pricey treatment, but would pay for the cost of physician-assisted suicide. &quot;It dropped my chin to th...</description>
            <author>Secondhand Smoke</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1664093</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:51:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1664093</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cancer Patient Commits Suicide When Told NHS Will Not Cover Chemo</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1542990&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34825&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wesleyjsmith.com%2Fblog%2F2008%2F06%2Fcancer-patient-commits-suicide-when.html</link>
            <description>This is a crucial issue involving the assisted suicide debate. We have already seen in Oregon a woman denied coverage for chemotherapy to extend her life, but told that Medicaid will pay for her assisted suicide. Now, that scenario played out in the UK. The melting down NHS denied a chemotherapy treatment and the man, in despair, killed himself. From the story:A cancer patient killed himself a day after being told he had been refused a wonder drug by his local primary care trust.Terminally-ill Albert Baxter, 75, committed suicide hours after learning he had been turned down for a drug which could have prolonged his life and shrunk his tumour.In desperation, the cancer sufferer offered to pay for the drug, only to be told that he would have to foot the bill for his entire treatment which he...</description>
            <author>Secondhand Smoke</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1542990</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:03:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1542990</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Covering the Cost of Assisted Suicide but Not Chemotherapy in Oregon</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1491955&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34825&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wesleyjsmith.com%2Fblog%2F2008%2F06%2Fcovering-cost-of-assisted-suicide-but.html</link>
            <description>We have been warning for years that this was a possibility in Oregon. Medicaid is rationed, meaning that some treatments are not covered. But assisted suicide is always covered. And now, Barbara Wagner was faced with that very scenario. From the story: Last month, she found out that her lung cancer, which had been in remission for about two years, had come back. After her oncologist prescribed a cancer drug that could slow the cancer growth and extend her life, Wagner was notified that the Oregon Health Plan wouldn't cover the treatment, but that it would cover palliative, or comfort, care, including, if she chose, doctor-assisted suicide.No thanks to the bureaucrats in Oregon--but rather, thanks to an evil drug company--she will receive the treatment after all: Then, on Monday morning, a ...</description>
            <author>Secondhand Smoke</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1491955</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 21:46:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1491955</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Mike Wallace Had Triple Bypass Surgery</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1188509&amp;cid=t_215767_87_f&amp;fid=34825&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wesleyjsmith.com%2Fblog%2F2008%2F01%2Fmike-wallace-had-triple-bypass-surgery.html</link>
            <description>Newsman Mike Wallace is recovering from a triple bypass surgery. Why is this a matter of interest to SHS other than to wish him well? Because under age-dictated health care rationing of the kind practiced in the UK and urged upon us by some very notable bioethicists here in America, Wallace would not have been eligible for the surgery. (Forget for a moment that elites like him would almost surely not be limited by rationing protocols.) Instead, the decision to provide the treatment was based on his individual circumstances. That's the way it should be. (Source: Secondhand Smoke)</description>
            <author>Secondhand Smoke</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1188509</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:13:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1188509</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

