Obama Returns to End-of-Life Plan That Caused Stir

reply to post by St Udio


You are afraid a doctor is going to force you to get a potentially life saving TEST at the VA's expense? That is a worry for you?

reply to post by St Udio


Thank you for sharing your experience and bringing some balance into this discussion. I am a doctor (although not an MD) and worked in hospitals for years. It was a real eye-opener for me. I know first-hand what a scam the medical establishment is. Sure there are people that are trying to help, that is why most of us chose to go into helping professions, but there is a very serious behind-the-scenes agenda and bias when it comes to recommendations. The docs are told what to recommend and rewarded for increasing use of certain meds or procedures, or lack thereof. It's outrageous.

Most people do not realize what takes place behind-the-scenes at a hospital or clinic. Why anyone would think this field would be any less corrupt than any other is beyond me, but we have been brainwashed to idolize the white coats and hang on their every word.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by GirlGenius
Simply wearing a white coat and offering subtle cues will influence behavior.

People get advice from their doctors all the time. They GO TO their doctors, specifically for advice on what might be the problem, what meds they should take, how to live a healthier life, etc. Why should this information be any different?

If people TAKE his advice based on his coat color, that's THEIR issue. You say stop treating us like children and then act like we have no minds of our own and can't make our own decisions. All the doctors are doing is giving options.

So, you think a doctor is going to give advice based on the outcome or their earnings? absolutely not? oh?
The doctor's going to say "you have a 30% chance of living 1 year using this therapy, you have a 10% chance of living 3 years if you use this experimental therapy and a 10% chance of living 1 year without any therapy"?

What would you do, given the chance? Take 1|3 odds for living a year, 1|10 chance living 3 years, or give up and be guaranteed death within a year?

Should your doctor give you his (or her) opinion about the odds (cost analysis included) or just put it on the table and let you decide?

reply to post by St Udio

I , (CT minded as i am) harbor thoughts that this is a very casual policy of encouraging patients
to enter high risk treatments as the first step in a mild form of 'hospice'.
The way i see it...the Doctors bosses must have issued directives, and these VA Doctors
must follow the orders or have their positions & careers in jeopardy.
So far, I have played the forgetful doofus and eluded all these (elective) *suggestions* ...
for riskier treatments...but i don't know how long the current Primary Care Dr. will be
here at the local VA Clinic and a new, aggressive, physician replaces him...and forces me to
get an unneeded biopsy- get a useless colon scan - or some new 'condition'
they will want to address aggressively

My father was "killed" by VA doctors some years ago. No repercussions though, since he was 75, and when you're that old these days, no one cares. He went from being Mr. Healthfood, no smoke, no drink, etc., to a raving lunatic in about 4 short months.

Medication was ridiculous, diagnosis after diagnosis, ridiculous. They initially said he had "Alzheimers". Big surprise, that seems to be a "default" for them, and then they prescribe medication that is supposed to help. Except that's precisely when things really start going down hill, the minute the meds begin.

I wish now that we would have had an autopsy done, who knows what might have come to light. But it was all rather unexpected, he declined so fast, no one really had time to figure anything out.

I have since spoken to others who have been victimized by the VA, so I ten to think there could be a pattern.

Of course, the VA is probably just the worst offender, I actually think the bigger problem is a medical establishment that is really just an unwitting arm of Big Pharma. The whole "medical culture" of today is dangerous to one's health. Which is why we all need to take personal responsibility, and avoid the quacks as much as we can.

JR

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
[

-on top of all those issues, I was never instructed that drinking grapefruit juice was a NO-NO

So, now you're complaining that your Dr. didn't give you enough information and options? Which is it? Do you want MORE information, advice and options or LESS?

[]

no... your missing the point, the Doctor is likely operating under a whispered policy umbrella..
to cull the VA rolls of patients under treatment...
the information was deliberately not told me (and probably many others) of abstinence from grapefruit
for a reason..

i'm not complaining about not being informed, i'm pointing out that there appears to be a deliberate
scheme being played out...and this is a case in point
Oh, an outsider can say this is delusional paranoia, that a protocol was mismanaged, it was only
a rare accidental oversight...


would you or the court of public opinion comment on the other 'risky' interventions that are prompted by my Doctor.
A liver biopsy, said to be 'unneeded' by the VA doctor down in Charleston that runs the Hep C program,
her statement that my endocrine or whatever levels were so low that one Interferon? treatment was all
that would be needed... but my primary physician mildly insisted i submit to a biopsy of the liver to see the
exact level of damage incurred (i think any damage was the result of the 5 months in treatment, and taking Tylenol 2-3X per day---but that's my rationalizations)

when at the Charleston SC hospital for another appointment, there was an emergency in the recovery
room even as i was standing at the counter to set up a time for the colon-scope procedure...
A patient was rolled to ICU from a bad reaction to the knock out drugs administered for the rectal procedure
>> i further looked on the web, about the VA hospitals being amongst the worst places for any intrusive
procedures... but things are turning around swiftly, according to the VA publicists



the cemetaries are filled with patients that had sudden turns for the worse.
i suggest that there is a covert policy in place---with the goal to take-out marginal, chronic people
via easily covered up 'accidents'.


?? will Wikileaks ever produce a cache of memos from the medical industry? or perhaps the VA specifically

reply to post by Sinnthia


Unfortunately many tests will do more harm than good. If you don't believe me, research it and you will be amazed. This includes radiological tests, biopsies and and a host of procedures that all contain some risk and many that result in false-positives.

Not only that, medical tests are a gateway into medical treatments (including medications) that are a much bigger threat to health and life than the diseases or conditions they are meant to cure. I had my whole world turned upside-down when I was a resident and all of this became clear to me. And that was over a decade ago. It's only gotten worse.

Originally posted by St Udio
i suggest that there is a covert policy in place---with the goal to take-out marginal, chronic people
via easily coverd up 'accidents'

As I said, you are entitled to your opinions and suspicions. This is a conspiracy board, after all. If you want to think that doctors would take money to lie to patients and kill them off, then that's fine. I'm sure the number of such doctors is greater than zero, but I doubt it's going to make a difference in the population numbers.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


subtle though the difference may be, lying to a patient is not the same as not telling the patient the truth
where do you draw the line between giving the patient a good prognosis and bad prognosis?
where do you draw the line between telling the patient "X" may work for you but it might not?

Ya know, if your kidneys are failing, would you be against using dialysis to filter your blood in hope you'd lve long enoughfor a cure? Would you let the gov't tell you that 15% chance of a cure isn't enough?

Wouldn't it be in a doctors best interests financially to keep someone alive much much longer than is necessary?

But some people for some reason become terminal. (probably has something to do with us being mortal) Instead of a doctor keeping your limp, broken, rotting corpse alive through artificial means or trying drug after drug after drug to stave off the inevitable, wouldn't it be better to sit down with the person and their family and discuss hospice?

Keep you as comfortable as possible until you finally kick the bucket?

That's what they mean by end of life care, hospice. I don't know about you, but I don't want to live forever, and I certainly don't want to live if my brain is mush or by body is being kept alive artificially.

Originally posted by GirlGenius
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Unfortunately many tests will do more harm than good. If you don't believe me, research it and you will be amazed. This includes radiological tests, biopsies and and a host of procedures that all contain some risk and many that result in false-positives.

Cool, not only do I stand corrected but I feel even better about my first post now.

You are saying that people are not grown up enough to turn down a test so you want to treat us like children and save us all from having them suggested to us. Right, go on about the government stepping in too much to treat us like children then. Please do go on.

Not only that, medical tests are a gateway into medical treatments (including medications) that are a much bigger threat to health and life than the diseases or conditions they are meant to cure. I had my whole world turned upside-down when I was a resident and all of this became clear to me. And that was over a decade ago. It's only gotten worse.

I am sorry but that is just too funny. You are mad at the government for what you call treating us like children for what you can only present as them having doctors provide us with more options.
So you want to treat us all like stupider children and regard us as too brainless to make choices based on MORE options, not less.

Please re-read your thread.

reply to post by JR MacBeth


JR, I am so sorry to hear about your loss. No matter how old your dad was, you and he had a right to those last years.

I can almost guarantee that this cascade of errors took place at a "teaching hospital". Interns are pretty clueless. Supervisors are overwhelmed. God help you if you are in hospital at the end of a month when the shift changes and the interns move on to another rotation and a new batch comes in. There is little continuity of care and meds are often piled one on top of another. Best to stay totally out of the system if at all possible, unless you break a bone or something.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
There's nothing about medical authorities pressuring people about anything.That's how the whole "death panel" BS got started.

No. What started it was the words that came out of Obama's mouth.

“There is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists,” Mr. Obama said. “And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through normal political channels. And that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It’s not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance.”

www.nytimes.com...

Difficult democratic conversations to determine if costs associated with quality of life, at "end-of-life", are economically acceptable. He acknowledges his belief that it is wasteful to give granny a hip replacement, when she is just going to die sometime anyway. When compared to his continuance of the "too big to fail" economic policies and the bailouts, it speaks volumes about how little Obama cares about you and I.

The decision is still the patient's and the family's.

Did you see the words "patient" or "family" in that quote, anywhere? Doctors, scientists, ethicists, normal political channels, independent group... The last two sentences were just throw away comments, commonly known as CYA.

Am I suggesting Obama has plans for firing squads for the infirm and aged? No. But one can not deny he advocates the limitation of health care to the elderly.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Having been in the health care field and Hospice care I can tell you that many people have no plans for end of live including a Will, even families at times won't talk to their loved ones about their wishes. What ends up happening is that the estates go into probate, causes families to fight and in some cases the state ends up getting everything.

Someone passed away recently in my building, they found him after 4-5 days, now the apartment is sealed and there is a pending court case to open the apartment to clean it out so it can be rented again, this kind of thing happens all the time, oh when this can take up to a year. He did have family but who knows where they were.

There is nothing wrong with Doctors telling their patients about their options, the man in the example above was in a wheel chair and was seeing doctors all the time. I don't know if his doctor or family talked to about this or if they did he may not have listened.

reply to post by whatukno


the issue is not with the unfortunate that have a spiraling downward Quality -of-Life....
that's a no brainer...

the issue is about those who might have a genetic history of family dieing at 45 from heart disease,
and the person under review is a 40 year old auto accident victim...
should 100s of man hours of therapy and resources be spent on a candidate that insurance data
indicates has only several 'useful' years left ?



the 'boards' being proposed, would essentially make a cost-basis decision...
the effect might look like the unemployed of today, millions cut off from The American Dream because
of business & economic issues.

reply to post by St Udio


Your argument is a logical fallacy.

Of course you save his life, a person in an auto accident can make a full recovery.

reply to post by abecedarian


If you're talking about a general distrust of doctors and the medical community, then I'm right there with you. I take responsibility for my own health and use herbs most of the time instead of pharmaceuticals. But this program that Obama is doing is not going to make a difference in that one way or another. It's providing information to the patient and family. That's it. Think what you want about it, but there's no need to fear information.

Originally posted by WTFover
Difficult democratic conversations to determine if costs associated with quality of life, at "end-of-life", are economically acceptable. He acknowledges his belief that it is wasteful to give granny a hip replacement, when she is just going to die sometime anyway.

You quoted what he said and proceeded to say that he said something completely different. I can't argue with that nonsense. No where did he talk about determining if the costs were economically acceptable and no where did her acknowledge that it's wasteful to give granny a hip replacement! You made that up. He said it's not determinative, it's for guidance. Do you understand what that means?

Did you see the words "patient" or "family" in that quote, anywhere?

Not in that particular quote, but there are MANY quotes with patient and family in them.

“Advance care planning improves end-of-life care and patient and family satisfaction and reduces stress, anxiety and depression in surviving relatives,” the administration said in the preamble to the Medicare regulation

Source

But one can not deny he advocates the limitation of health care to the elderly.

I deny that. I strongly and firmly deny that. I have seen no evidence whatsoever of that.

no amount of white attire will push them towards making a decision they don't want to make

'white attire' is representative of the 'professional' who delivers 'experiened' and 'knowledgeable' healthcare to the people under thier care. Unless you have a personal or family physician, the 'white attire' can mean a whole different ball game for a patient... the difference being whether the 'white attire' cares about you or not.

If the 'white attire' is a subscriber to Codex Alimentus - the patient can very well turn into a commision check for a job well done statistically.

If the 'white attire' is a subscriber to one or more big pharma agreements - you can be assured that the patient will be perscribed medications by that doctor that have nothing to do with why they are there.

People, especialy sick and scared ones, TRUST that a doctor will abide by thier Hyppocratic Oath. There are many Doctors out there that have a proven track record of violating that oath for the sake of money. These 'professionals' are 'professional criminals', and Obama Care and Death Panels will enable these murderers above and beyond the abuses they are already guilty of.

When the 'white attire' exploits a patient's weaknesses, that makes them predators... amongst those in need the most. That is so pathetic, and what's more, anyone who attempts to refute this knows this already, and are more than likely on the payroll...

SO...

Who's scalpel will YOU trust?

I agree GirlG, stay out of the system if possible, great advice for anyone.

Lots of interesting issues being brought up. The notion of treating patients like "children" seems to be part of the medical culture to begin with, although I'm sure the better doctors out there would never show too much of that attitude.

In a way, it is understandable. A doctor studies many years, has gained experience, and encounters various patients all day long, with probably very few of those patients anywhere near as "qualified" to choose the best health decision. I can almost imagine doctors out there who get tired of hearing nonsense out of some of their patients, who in fact don't know squat. After a time, I can see how the patient's "opinion" wouldn't be given very high status.

Then there is the patient who is incapacitated mentally, for whatever reason, and can't evaluate data to begin with. In my dad's case, his mind degenerated very fast, so fast that it took everyone by surprise. Imagine being thousands of miles away, having a phone conversation with someone you "know", and you hang up wondering w t f happened to him, compared to the last time you talked only two-weeks before? His wife was in the legal position to make decisions, and yet, she was an old lady, suffering from her own conditions, and hardly aware of any medical knowledge worthwhile.

When the doc said, "We need to try this treatment", what would anyone expect her to do? Of course she said, "Yes, whatever you think doctor!"

Doctors, psychologists, clergy...all these people better have some kind of ethical code, because society has people conditioned to very much "trust" these folks.

I'm glad to see someone like St. Udio who is on to the VA's tricks. I absolutely think he is right on with his suspicions. I can see how a "culture" that was gently "herded" in a certain direction by higher ups with an agenda, could easily develop, with most participants not even being aware of the ethical ramifications of their various accepted default treatment procedures. There is motive too, as Udio points out, at least within the VA framework. And not likely that the doctors operating within such a culture would get the chance to have a "Dr. House" come by and call them a moron for some of the things they're doing. The bodies could just stack up, and nothing would look terribly out-of-place.

Add to such an environment some of the things GirlG mentioned, and I can see lots of potential trouble.

Yep. Stay out of the system if at all possible!

JR

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You quoted what he said and proceeded to say that he said something completely different. I can't argue with that nonsense. No where did he talk about determining if the costs were economically acceptable and no where did her acknowledge that it's wasteful to give granny a hip replacement! You made that up. He said it's not determinative, it's for guidance. Do you understand what that means?

I did not "make up" anything. I assumed you would acknowledge the context of the quote or, at least, read the rest of the article, to figure out what that was, if you are not already aware. I didn't think it necessary to post it in its entirety.

But hey, facts are such a nuisance, huh?

What is wrong with a person knowing all his/her options when making a medical decision?

I expect and demand to know all my options since I have been ill for two years.

When I was given my options my doctor told me I had four options and the forth being to do nothing and let the disease take it's course.

I chose treatment. I wanted to live no matter what I had to endure.

My attitude has changed as I am growing tired of twice weekly visits to the hospital and then there is brief but fairly intense pain twice a week.

I'm tired of seeing family and friends looking at me with sad eyes and treating me like it was our last hello.

I believe we should have impartial people to give us all our options and explain all the pain and crap that goes with each decision.

During my visits to hospital twice a week I see many people that look like they are on the cusp of death. They can't walk, they stare blindly at seemingly nothing and have to be cared for 24/7. And they require someone to ferry them everywhere they go. And then there is the cost of keeping a shell of a human alive.

There is no way I'm being cold or unfeeling. I am being reasonable and kind.

I am there. I am at the point where I must make choices concerning my life and death once again.

I refuse to be a burden on my family and I refuse to live my last year or so in pain from treatment that is only prolonging my life.

It is my belief that we should be told all our options in the event we become ill. And we should be allowed to die if we so choose.

The difficulty some members are facing coming to grips with death panels is most understandable. It is reasonable and logical that you should fight this horrible sounding idea with every bit of strength you have within you.

I admire you but disagree.