kathyodat

Just curious as to how many hospitals are as dishonest as UIC. Unfortunately, from what I've heard and read, they are hardly alone, though it does seem that teaching/research hospitals are particularly worrisome.

Good for you, iammyself.

ascott, no, my first nursing position was at Stonybrook University Hospital. What's the difference? I will say the level of nursing practice there was the highest standard I've seen anywhere.

kathyodat

I supported and voted for Nader in 2000 when he was there to build the Green Party. Due to Democratic Party incompetence, many voters defected to Gore and the Greens got nothing for their effort.

Nader takes it to corporations, but he stands even less chance of building anything now than he did in 2000. Obama stands a chance of uniting progressives, and that's saying a lot given that uniting progressives is like herding cats. As anti-corporate as I am, I'm holding out some hope that Obama can pull in young people who are willing to work for change, and thus create change. Age may breed cynicism, but cynicism breeds paralysis. It's time to move.

KATHYODAT

Well, you know the problem with research hospitals: to get research money, you need to get guinea pigs. Unfortunately, while nurses, physician's assistants, etc., are too knowledgeable to allow someone to punch a couple holes in their pelvises for no truly good reason, there are people who haven't enough understanding of basic medical matters - and/or, what doctors count on, would never think to question a doctor (gasp!).

You didn't by chance train at UIC, did you?

truthie, the 88th cosponsor has just signed on to HR 676. yes, we have a long way to go, but it's not dead in the water. And I still believe that Obama supports single payer health care based on his own words, but he's a realist and running for President is expensive and risky if you piss of the corporatocrasy. Once in office may be a different matter. For that we must wait and see. I'm willing to take the chance it will be a different matter. I don't expect Obama to throw off his cloak and become a Ralph Nader, but I think he will steer in a new direction. The one we need to be going.

If Obama campaigned like Nader he would be where Nader is, in Siberia, reviled by the corporate media and being blamed for the Democrats losing elections. Which is ridiculous, they've done it to themselves. But the public is gullible and ignorant. Personally I think Obama is playing a cagey game. Of course I could be wrong, but maybe I'm right. What do we have to lose here? It's going to be Hillary, McCain or Obama and we know exactly what we would get from the first two. No question that they will bend over for the corporations. And only Obama is refusing lobbyist and PAC money. So why not take a chance on him? Besides I like the way he handles himself in tight situations. He's not ego driven like Hillary and GW Bush and his mind isn't slipping gears like McCain.

It takes money to get there but doesn't take money to stay there unless you're there for the money. I don't think he is. His history isn't about money.

kathyodat

kathyodat wrote: "I believe if Obama gets elected, and if we dump corrupt Congress people, we will end up with single payer health care. But we have our work cut out too. HR 676 now has 88 cosponsors!"

I know if Obama gets elected he will do no such thing regardless of who is in congress.

How do I know this ? Check this out.

HR 676 never came up for a vote

HR 676 was never brought to the floor of congress for debate

HR 676 originally introduced in 2007 and NOT renewed in 2008

Nearly all of the Single Payer material on the homepage of Michael Moore's website has been taken down.

Me thinks HR 676 no matter how well written, and it was well written, was nothing more than a charade to hoodwink uninformed progressives and funnel them back into the Democrat Party.

Getting back to Obama if you want some revealing information that will open your eyes about where the candidates come from on this issue check this out :

"According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the insurance industry has contributed $525,188 to Hillary Clinton, $414,863 to Barack Obama, and $274,724 to John McCain."

This quote comes from the Navarro Article for which I previously supplied the link.

Yes that is correct, both Democrat Candidates for President have receive far more campaign cash from the Insurance Industry than John McCain.

Do you really think Obama can be pressured into signing Single Payer legislation much less championing it ?

The root of the problem is NOT money. Per capita healthcare spending in the US is 40% higher than it's nearest rival. The problem is the parasitic insurance business that posseses an insatiable lust for money. Give them the boot and redirect the money and the problem is solved. The only candidate that has a proven record of planting his foot in the keester of corporations in these types of matters is Ralph Nader. And it just so happens that Nader has made Single Payer one of the major issues of his campaign. If you want Single Payer Nader is the only game in town.

Please don't give us the line Obama will change once elected to office because the money says otherwise. To insist to the contrary is blatant denial.

Rockerbabe, Hillary was never for single payer. Do your research. Those words have never crossed her lips. And as long as the insurance industry is involved, we will be screwed. It's their job to make a profit and they will always find a way to do that. It's like jack Kemp said, "You can't tax the rich, they will just obfuscate their income". No matter what laws and rules you pass, the insurance industry will find loopholes to maximize profits at our expense - or loss of care - or both.

Don't you get what she is?? Who do you think started the DLC and turned the Democratic party into a corporate whore? Bill and Hillary together. They're carnies, and good at it. They've got the public thinking they created the good old days. The good old days ended in 1976 when the standard of living started dropping and hasn't turned around. George has been such a disaster anything looks better. The fact is the rich got rich faster under Clinton than ever before. Woe is ignorance. It dooms us to keep repeating our mistakes.

kathyodat

truthie, you point is well taken. When I was diagnosed with cancer, I was far more worried about the hospital taking my home (no insurance) than dying of cancer.

Ascott, when I was a nurse in a teaching and research hospital, I walked in one morning and saw gallon collection bottles in every patient's bathroom. I wisecracked that Urology was lecturing on 24 hour urinalysis this week. Obviously they were. I cringe to think of when they study lumbar punctures.

When I went through a retraining program for my nursing license, I needed to demonstrate inserting an IV, so the doctor on the unit wrote an order on a terminal cancer patient who was in hospice care. I refused because it was an unnecessary invasive procedure on a dying woman in extreme pain (pain management in Oregon is very substandard - partly due to draconian laws). I reflect that our system has distanced the formerly close relationship between doctors and their patients and I'm sure that many doctors miss that. The insurance industry has pushed them into the position of trading that for money, but not necessarily their choice. Medical care wasn't a factory type delivery until Kaiser came along. It was the model. I believe we need to go back to the tradition of family doctors, and I believe doctors will be a lot happier in their profession. Specialists have their place but we need doctors who actually know their patients.

kathyodat

kathyodat

The Hippocratic Oath has little to do with dealing with insurance carriers; doctors have always tried to do what is best for their patients, but the fact remains, Americans worship on the alter of profits and patients, like their doctors are being sweezed so much now that, care is being compromised because it isn't affordable or is not covered and the out-of-pocket expenses are not often easy to manage, even for the best of us. As a healthcare provider myself and a patient, I would appreciate a national plan that streamlines and standardizes care and takes the profit motive out of the decision making task of the patient. Hillary was right in the 1990's as she sought to improve the healthcare system; too bad the political will and the other powers to be just didn't get it; too bad the American public let the moneychangers scare them and their employers. . .too bad as everything she said would happen has happened. . .now maybe as a country we are ready to deal with healthcare in a mature, adult-like manner.

You want a national health-care plan?

End the Afghan and Iraq wars, bring everybody home from overseas (including from Germany and Korea), cut military spending drastically, change this country's military policy from offensive to defensive, and cut all the military services in size (possibly, the Marine Corps could be disbanded outright, if this country abandons interventionism as its foreign policy).

In other words, we have to make a choice between GUNS and BUTTER; we cannot have BOTH. If we keep trying to have both, we're going to bankrupt this country sooner or later.

Instead of running from the canards identifying single-payer health care as Socialism (of which we actually need a bit more of for ordinary people and not corporations, the Democratic Party needs to point out the real savings and efficiencies of health care delivery in the mixed economies of Canada and Europe. The info is out there!!

Follow the money: if we have a single payer, single bureaucracy, all with the same data management software and uniformity, developed in the 21st century, that alone will save a tremendous amount. It will displace jobs. And, there will be folks like the heard of United Helath Crae, who retired with $1 BILLION (with a B, none zeros...)in retirement benefits and cash. Man, too bad that money didn't go to some wellness visits, vaccinations, annual check-ups or teeth cleanings.

Are we after care, or insurance, or a balance of both? At what point do we say a level of care and treatment is too much, too expensive, and it is time to reduce pain and suffering but say goodbye?

There are reasons we used to allow controlled monopolies (utilities, etc). Effieciency, cost-effectiveness, bang-for-buck. Free markets do have warts, Uncle Miltie.

I lived in joyeux jolie Canada for three years: single payer single provider auto and health insurance. Everyone MUST pay, MUST play. The rates are low, and everyone gets what they need at the least cost.

We are morons down here for going down swinging in defence of "the market" and "choice" . Gaaad we are smug that the US has the best answer for everything. Yeepers.

The invasion-becoming-a-war certainly siphons off a bit of dough, too, most of it borrowed. aaarrrgghhh

"Too bad the author didn't poll nurses for their opinion on national insurance. Nurses, being on the front line, are more aware than anyone except the beleaguered patients themselves of the brutality of our current system."

"I believe if Obama gets elected, and if we dump corrupt Congress people, we will end up with single payer health care. But we have our work cut out too. HR 676 now has 88 cosponsors!"

kathyodat,

Good points.

I recently saw a public TV show here in Maine that featured 2 nurses with many years experience - one was in some top leadership position representing Maine nurses. When asked what needs to be done to fix the health insurance disaster, they replied: Institute a single-payer system nationwide. Nurses know that their patients are not getting taken care of because of the cut-throat system we now have.

As for Obama supporting single-payer: I hope so. However, he will be up against the same entrenched interests as the rest of them. Only with our support can he do it. We need to get rid of the feckless Democrats in order for ANYTHING to get done. This includes Maine's own Tom Allen - a feckless milquetoast if ever there was one! We need true REPRESENTATIVES with the desire to represent us and the courage of their conviction.

It would be nice if people would stop abusing their bodies and brains and start taking some responsiblilty for their own health. It would be nice for us to stop polluting our air, food, water and help prevent many of the diseases we are plagued with. It would be nice if we slowed down a bit, think a little better, practice safety, and stop blaming others when our conditions become desperate and beyond repair.

Interesting that the reporter, Maggie Fox, glosses over the distinction between "national health insurance" and "national health care." I wonder if she realizes there's a difference.

A former Wal-Mart employee who suffered severe brain damage in a traffic accident won't have to pay back the company for the cost of her medical care, Wal-Mart told the family Tuesday.

Single payer NOW!

Imagine what the $8 Billion Dollars that this Admin left unaccounted in Iraq would do for the Healthcare of every citizen. It's ironic that the Govt officials have not implimented a Universal Healthcare Policy in the United States.

Healthcare for all by all is the most noble approach to this issue. Greed and Ego have dominated this debate for too long.

Truthie, I can think of something more disgraceful. Awhile back I went to a gas station here in NC, and saw a jar asking for a donation to save a young boy's life who had leukemia and needed a bone marrow transplant. Mind you now that his brother was a match and ready to go anytime. He was on the local news begging for 'help' (meaning money). Well, he finally got the 50 grand (the minimum Duke would accept before performing the procedure), but it was too late, and he died.

I've thought long and hard about this state of affairs, and I always wondered why the DOCTORS couldn't have donated their skill to save this young man. On the news, you see how 'generous' they are in helping someone from another country but, of course, only for the glory of the news coverage.

One way to 'fight back' that few people think of is by refusing to be an organ donor. I mean, hey, why should you be an organ donor when you're not even eligible to receive one (if, say, you're uninsured)? Even if you ARE insured, it would be a good way to take a stand. You won't donate your organs (for the profit of a greedy system) until all are covered. I learned that there is a very high profit margin for performing such procedures.

Anyway, it's hard to fathom why so many people are brain dead when it comes to even discussing this issue--that is until something happens to them. Unfortunately, it is usually then too late.

I expect that even more Doctors would support national health care if they were talking privately. Our curent system doesn't work for anyone but the insurance industry.

What's more, as a consultant to corporations, I can assure you that a good many CEOs and Senior Managers in Corporate America do as well. Our current system doesn't work for them either.

The problem is the red/blue culture that prevents a rational national dialogue. Even the Democratic candidates need to mince around the subject. Why they do remains a vexing mystery, but I suspect they are afraid of the power of the lobbies as well ... or maybe as I worry, they fear an idea that they didn't have and whose time has come.

There is less support than ever for our out-moded, inefficient health care system that bankrupts families, leaves too many without medical care and makes our struggling industries non-competitive.

It's doubted at all levels - but we are caught in a kind McCarthy era scenario where people are "labeled" as "socialists" if they speak up or enmdorse such an idea. The fact that the mere suggestion gets shouted down so violently on the msm suggests the defensive posture of the opponents.

It's sort of true at the corner grocery, but it's absolutely true in the board room.

"Off the record" executives speak the truth. In polls they watch their backs.

One more thought: A lot of Progressives denounce WalMart and in many cases for good reason. But they do one socially progressive thing - though I doubt they do it consciously. They refuse coverage to their employees. When they are asked what employess should do they say "Go to the Government" Now that's progressive!

They obvioulsy believe there should be national health care because paying it themselves would make them unprofitable. How may other companies feel this way? Anybody got any ideas how to make the nation's largest retailer an ally in this battle? How may would follow suit behind them?

And while you are at it, any better names for this than (1) "national health care" - (2) "single payer" - or (3) "socialized medicine"? One and three sound too ... socialist and two lacks lustre.

Politics are all about marekting in our time, we need a better brand name for this concept.

Stop talking. (Respectfully)

Mike Corbeil

Don't get 'em in a twist over the Hippocratic Oath. It isn't even given at most medical schools, according to my neighbor, a physician. (Why administer an oath that you've already taught them not to uphold?)

Anybody well-versed in our Medicare system?

Do they hold doctors resposible for screw-ups? Is there any such oversight built into the system?

VOXCLEMANTIS

Thanks for the site. I also make use of the medical library at the state university here. I avoided getting an unnecessary bone marrow biopsy because I did the research in advance. What I learned, when asking the doctor about the results of the intial bloodtests was that only one of six indicated the possibility that I had the problem that they were screening me for (polycythemia). There needed to be indications from several tests, but all beyond that one were normal. That didn't stop the doc from wanting to do a biopsy.

It turns out that the department was desperate for bone marrow samples! (They're in a teaching and research university hospital.) They were offering staff members $100 per sample. I can only conclude that the doctor was trying to secure a sample (or two) - plus save the money. Medical ethics is even lower on their list of priorites than diagnostic competence.

Being well-versed is a good start. But one cannot order the correct tests or write prescriptions for oneself. There, one is still dependent upon getting a doctor that is open to input. In my experience, most are offended by laymen who 'presume to tell them their business.' Their vast ignorance is dwarfed by their arrogance. (Strange how often arrogance has no basis in reality.)

alaskamaid

Where the heck does your daughter go to school? If she would 'settle' for a state univeristy, she could cut those costs tremendously. A medical education doesn't cost much more than any other post-graduate education - say, in a foreign language, or history, or art. And none of those grads, even if they get themselves on a faculty, is going to make the kind of money a doctor will.

By the way, the ivy leagues won't necessarily get one a better education in medicine. I could tell you an interesting story about Yale. (No, it doesn't involve Bush.)

I'm sick to death of the nonsense that a medical education is somehow in a different class.

If your daughter becomes a good doctor, it will have more to do with her than it has with the standards of our medical/medical education system.

Sorry, what we need is a better system of choosing medical school candidates. If an intelligent student gets in, it is a matter of chance, not planning. First, we need to get rid of 'legacies.'

Another side of the coin is the cost of getting a medical education. Doctors get sucked into the system right away in first year med school, when they have to commit to their future profession by taking out big loans to pay their way. It shouldn't cost a medium-sized fortune just to get to the point of being a first-year resident. In Sweden the entire cost to the student is the equivalent of $24 for professional licenses. Here, plan on at least $200,000 (not counting undergrad school) plus living costs. That is a big cloud to start your career under, no wonder they are so territorial.

My daughter is a first year med student, and she will be a good doctor. I only hope she doesn't get disillusioned. We could use more caring people in the health and wellness field.

What we really need is more mid-level health care professionals, like nurse practitioners, to do home visits and take care of routine exams, etc., allowing the doctors to attend to the more complicated stuff. I would like to see a nurse practitioner clinic associated with every (well, okay, maybe just most) elementary school in the nation. Then we would be getting somewhere.

My brother, who doesn't work or pay taxes and is on government assistance due to a psychiatric "disability" can get his eye fixed free of charge. I work hard and pay dearly for my insurance and I get denials from my insurance company for needed eye treatments.
What is going on here?

lizard wrote: "As a doctor, I would hate to work in the US, even for more money......There is much to be unhappy with in Canada's system, but only compared to what could be, not compared to the US. The situation in the US is shameful for such a rich country."

Shameful ? DIG INTO YOUR THESAURUS LIZARD ! How about trying cruel, inhumane, savage, brutal or demonic. Those all fit well.

An excellent article was written by Vincent Navarro and published on the Counterpunch Website March 6, 2008. It is a very long and detailed article outline the Healthcare Crisis in the US, how it came to be the way it is, and a detailed power analysis between the major players in the situation. It outlines in explicit detail how all of the Democrat Presidential Candidates are in debt to the insurance industry and as a result will never advance a Single Payer System.

Be advised that it is 8 pages long and NOT light reading. But when you get finished you will have a far better understanding of what is going on with the US Healthcare System. This article is packed with information. Here is the link: http://www.counterpunch.org/navarro03062008.html

Returning to your point here is a untasty tidbit from the article that will give you the depth to which Healthcare in the US has sunk. Here is the excerpt:

"The inhumanity of this situation is made evident by the fact that nearly 40% of people in the U.S. who are dying because of terminal illness are worrying about paying for care--how their families are going to pay the medical bills, now and after they die."

Yes that is right, 40% of terminally ill patients in the US go to their deaths worrying about how their loved ones are going to pay the bills after they are gone. Now if that isn't disgraceful I don't know what is !

BTW although the Author Bio at the end of the article does not mention it Navarro worked closely with Jessie Jackson in 1988 to get Dukakis to adopt Single Payer as part of his platform. Yes that is right, 20 Years later and we still don't have it.

Ghawar April 1st, 2008 1:11 pm

I dig the picture you paint... but you forgot to mention that no matter how hungry the Doc is, (s)he has to wait at least few weeks to eat. Unless (s)he wants to go to the fast window (E.R.) and pay five times as much.

But really, the Docs are just cogs in the huge medical business wheel. I don't believe they are the center of power any longer. Insurance corps, pharmaceutical corps and the corps that run the for-profit hospitals hold the power AND have plenty of dough to buy the politicos when they need to.

Imagine how much more resources could be poured into actual services to actual people if our health care dollars weren't going to pay millions and millions to the execs of the huge health care corporations.

When I worked in an anti-poverty program, I saw families get churned up trying to get health care. They system is set up to dissuade you from seeking help if you don't have the dough. And as one who does have insurance, I have been totally beaten up by the system and given the care they want to sell me, as opposed to the care I need. Either way it's a system that does not heal nor promote health. Let's dump it!

There is a surprising amount of paranoia and suspicion about physicians expressed on this post. Frankly IMHO it refects, very poor and anachronistic understanding of the profession. The control of medical practice is now in the hands of the insurance companies. Tests have to be authorized, care can and is being denied, it happens regularly. Get real. the people taking your premiums and denying you the Physician recommended care, do not have any quaint Hippocratic oaths. They are hard nosed business people whose only interest is the bottom line.They have your premium and they will fight tooth and nail to keep it There is no relationship between overhead costs and reimbursement, and as long as the General public shares the delusions expressed here, Big Pharma and insurance companies with rip off the providers and patients with equal enthusiasm. The notion of an "Insurance" model, to provide cost effective consistent care to the majority of Americans....is up there with heavenly cloud beings. For those of you who believe more than 50% of Doctors want a single payer because they are all greedy, and egotistical, you are perpetuating the problem.

The push to establish socialized medicine for the politicians, is to deliver masses to easily had medical debotchery for early termination.

For the doctors, it's about getting sure pay.

For the nummies who would walk into this trap it's about getting something for free.

For everyone who is resisting this, you'll be criminalized by laws mandating your purchasing insurance, even if you're by far better qualified to resolve your medical issues than the quacks that represent establishment medicine within this generation.

I broke my knuckle to the bottom of my hand and healed it at home with a splint, having to rub the tendon to detached to relieve the stress on the bone. I have 4 knuckles on that hand today.

My friend broke his knuckle to the bottom of his hand and went to the doctor and now he has 3 knuckles.

I know another guy who fell off a wall, broke 5 bones, went to the hospital and was sent away because he didn't have insurance! All his 5 fractures still busted.

I have a premonition that a lot of doctors from these times are going to wake up as bugs some day in the not too distant future.

Regarding the Hippocratic Oath:
It has been foiled by Doctors studying medical ethics nil, then taking the oath, often greatly diluted from it's original even so far as eliminating patient care above all and in some medical education institutions today going so far as to espouse consideration of money matters in patient care.

Doctors don't at all study the meaning of the oath, they just recite it 1 time when they graduate and some universities have altered it to enhance insurance company profitability. Heap on top of that doctors experience schooling so stressful to incite suicidal tendencies, well explains why Psychologist suicide rates are 6X higher than the general population.

My brother took an oath, graduating with an engineering degree to NOT build weapons of war, then he got a job building the f22. While getting money is a major consideration in your daily routine, you may well expect hellish regularity.

Doctors are saying this because they stand to get paid by the taxman who is guaranteed to deliver, because they control the biggest guns.

This is more about money for doctors than patient care.

I, for one, am wholly uninterested in any manner of establishment medicine.

I heal my own compound fractures at home.

Americans want socialized medicine and the gov. keeps denying it to us.
The government says they have no money. Yet the gov. will rush to bail out the banks and mortgage companies.
The majority of americans do not wish to bail out the banks and mortgages.
We have democracy here?
I do not think it is fair that people like me should pay $500 dollars a month for health care with no evaluation and others are paying much less who are sick.
Why should people in their 50s pay the highest rates to take care of people of the older sicker people.
People in their 20s and 30s should have to pay the same rates.
People I know on ss. are sick of being told by thier drs to take expensive tests that ss does not cover. They always recieve a bill for part of the test.
This is not cost effective because the insurance companies and drs have to bill higher and higher to make more money for themselves.
Meanwhile costs go up to everyone and the politicians and others get their healthcare for free.
As taxpayers the gov. expects us to support everyone and everything except for what we need or want.
I have a problem with one of my feet and no way can I afford $500 a month or qualify for any gov. services. Yet I have to pay for everyone else's free ride.
Common sense should tell the politicans if the taxpayers are not taken care of there will be less tax dollars for their freebies.

Tried to edit my above post, but the timer elapsed, which caused corrections to be lost (I could back-button and then copy+paste, but it'd be far too much duplication, making two lengthy posts, and that's not welcome to do, imo). And I'm not going to go through the effort a second time.

That's a problem with CD not providing decently like discussion forums do; where there is no time limit, and you can edit as many damn f*cking times as you want, until satisfied with your post. NOT at so-called leftist CD, which prefers to impose its rules.

People pay for unfriendly services, eh?

" NateW April 1st, 2008 10:40 am

It would appear as if being on one of the short ends of "managed care" has actually provoked American doctors to remember the Hippocratic Oath."

HO? Who'd want anyone to adhere to such a thing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath

Quote: "I swear by Apollo, Asclepius, Hygieia, and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgment, the following Oath. ..."

Excuse me, but anyone goofy enough to "swear by" NON-EXISTING people, entities, or whatever the heck they are, now these are ODD people. Apollo? Next name for a Ford. Panacea? Does not exist and never will. ...

How about swearing by:

*) Confucious: Do not do to others what you would not done to yourself (sounds good to me); and,

*) Jesus of Nazareth: Do for others that which you would want done for yourself (great).

Inherently, what Jesus said includes what Confucius said, while the opposite is also true enough.

That's all we need are the above principles; really. It's great that neither of them refer to myth. personages too; both speaking directly of [real] life or living.

I don't know if my family's physician thought much, or not, about the HO, but Dr DeNicholas of Fram., Mass., who our family had for MD during the 1960s and 1970s, now he was sound; I'll never forget him. With him, patients could not notice anything other than a doctor who really [cared], and in true-friend terms. The man was very human(e). And we were of very low middle econ. class, while he clearly didn't care about this. We couldn't have received better medical care.

Another I'll not forget was a man who was a [chiropractor] who had served during the I believe Korean war, where he also learned about Asian therapeutic massage, and this man treated me, as well as my father and mother, nearly freely. It was like $5 a session, and the sessions had no time limit. $5, NO time limit!, What?! (Not in the USA, you say? You're right; RARE is this, very!) He was in Bellingham, Mass.; and astounded me, but while we weren't close enough for me to see him except during these treatments.

He eliminated a cist from my mother's wrist (she was seamstress) with serious, though non-painful massage. It was a serious cist, but it was then, quickly too, gone forever; while often recurring when "treated" with surgery.

He did all he could for me, after I had dislocated my hip and shoulder, and screwed up my spine badly enough, from a serious enough football ("American" football, not soccer) ... incident. (Try to tackle someone twice your size and three or more times your strength, and you're bound to be damaged. Ooops! Some of us learn, but some unfortunately [after the fact] too, ... like me, f.e. Duh?; after the prior facts)

That's after having treated my father for his back problems due to being a farmhand and the driving of the tractor(s) (and one flipping over atop of him) causing serious back problems.

ALL for $5 a treatment! DO YOU UNDESTAND THAT?! Yes, $5, per treatment; not time-limited! Where did he come from; heaven, an angel? Generosity; NO ONE could teach that man, or Dr DeNicholas about being generous, certainly not in their work or profession anyway.

I've had such first-hand teachers of true caring, through their professional work; but also from people who've provided caring in other contexts and in non-professional terms, in general, say. The latter often had leaned first-hand, and then taught or passed on what they'd learned (I got some of this sort of learning, and enough times that it has not been forgotten).

My grandmother, mother of mother, she was pregnant, family was [dirt] (literally) poor, southeastern Quebec, Eastern Townships area, no money, dead winter, cold, winter storm, and VOILA; a doctor is willing to risk traveling all the way out to where my grandparents were to try to help her birth a child.

He did, and my grandparents being [dirt] poor said they had no money, but had a bag of potatoes to offer. He just said to forget about it and went on his way.

My grandparents were a very loved people in their area, and I got to later witness this for myself. Poor as they had been, I'd walk into places in the local area and where people didn't know me; all they needed to know was how my grandparents were. Then, as royal, good treatment as could be expected!

There are still such people today; these Drs, my grandparents, and others. WE just need to get rid of all of the damn rapacious criminals trying to screw HUMANITY.

That [is] the fight.

We need PEOPLES' ARMY.

Notice: I said "Peoples'", not "People's". What's the difference? "People's" refers to [a] people, whereas "peoples'" refers to, or is meant to refer to, [all] peoples, world-wide. After all, we speak of a people in Tibet, in ..., ..., ..., ... etc. We need world-wide revolution though.

I consider myself simply human, but we still need wordwide revolution and earthquakingly so.

If we do not achieve that, then whatever grounds we may [seem] to make in terms of health care will be worthless.

WE NEED TO get the damn corruption out of our govts!

I appreciate whatever little the Reuters article provides, but ... BEWARE. First and foremost of all at issue is to decorrupt our damn hellbent govt.

Unless Obama does a serious flip-sode, we're f*cked. Then, neither will he, nor hell-gal traitor Billary (and her hel-... supporters), nor McCain is going to be of any usefulness to [humanity] at all; they'll be worse than 'not at all' too.

Is this health care matter, which is reality-based, the issue to focus on? Seems that it's surely NOT.

'Divide and conquer'! Remember?

WE do not know what's going on and kept secret; we can be sure that there are secrecies that we should know about but don't; and we should therefore know to [beware].

The trickery will be varied and as subtle as they can be made to be; except through incompetence, mistakes. We will not be informed about the whole truth except when it's unwittingly, accidentally done, and there's plenty of oversight for trying to avoid such outcome.

Cheney, however, now he's a peculiar "cat". NEVER has Bush Jr ever acted and spoken in terms like Cheney has and is again doing. Cheney [is] the real president; has been all along, and just made it clear again during his trip to the Middle East.

So there it is; we're in a wicked loop. We talk about national or not health care in the USA, and it's really a distraction. As shown above, I have enough awareness of health care availability, and not; but we're now in a situation in which the health care topic is a very SUB topic of reality.

Iow, WE ARE F*CKED, and it's not health or not system that's going to do us any good whatsoever. The present situation is much [deeper], broader, etc.

9-11 truth movement and Sibel Edmonds, READ,LEARN! 9-11 [was] 'INSIDE JOB'!

Hate to disturb the alseep, but 9-11 did NOT happen without U.S. assurance! NO WAY, Jose! People a damn morons and believe that they're bright. I'm bright, yet barely. At least I KNOW what my reality is, instead of pretending to be something I'm not.

Now when is Ray McGoven going to finally start investigating his own agency, I wonder. Says plenty of bla,sometimes seeming useful, but NEVER anything on the CIA; one of the most hellbent criminal, gangerster shi*t orgs in the world. I wonder when RM's going to finally show a true Christian about himself.

A true Christian would NOT do otherwise!

Everyone go back and read what siouxrose said again.

I've read Dr. Mendelsohn's "Confessions of a Medical Heretic". He nailed it. In addition to what siouxrose quoted, he said modern medicine was a religion . . . Doctors are priests and surgeons are High Priests.

Read what siousrose wrote one more time. Pay attention to proper diet, exercise and above all -- do not stress yourself.

Stress may result from external conditions and actions of others but is self-applied. It's easier to say than to do but DON'T WORRY.

It boggles my brain that you Americans even have to debate this! A single-payer "universal" health care system is by far THE most important social service a country can have.

As a doctor, I would hate to work in the US, even for more money. It is difficult for a doctor to fit the money factor into health. You end up working for free or feeling like a monster. I love not having to worry about expense to my patients. Billing is so incredibly easy, who wants the headaches? There is much to be unhappy with in Canada's system, but only compared to what could be, not compared to the US. The situation in the US is shameful for such a rich country. Look at Cuba for heaven's sake, and that is with the US constantly undermining it. Double shame. We need fewer secretaries, less space and we never have to explain anything to the government. Nobody ever calls to ask why you did this or that or why you ordered anything. All they care about is that you delivered what you charged for, that's it. They send a letter to patients asking them if they saw the doctor that day. if someone is billing suspiciously he gets investigated. In 20 years of practice I have never been investigated or questioned by the government.

Americans worried about one payer system like in Canada.

Canada does not nhave 14 systems, it has one system. Each province can make choices within the system but it is one universally available system. Medicine in Canada is PRIVATE, not government run. What the government provides is not health, it is insurance. It is the insurance companies that are not allowed to compete with the government provided insurance. Doctors, like in the US, bill the only insurance company available: the government. Because of this monopoly, doctors have to accept a reduced fee or opt out of the system (5% DO). The benefit to doctors is that paperwork is greatly diminished and the government does no interfere with the practice the way US insurance companies do. The problem with financing comes from the fact that Canada is reluctant to allow for services outside the system. Europeans combine gov. insurance with other insurance or patient paid services. By being purist Canada has seen its system go from 1st to 14th. France (number 1) has a combination of gov. and private insurance. This is better.

I know a man who broke his hip 3X and was never told by his doctors to monitor his calcium consumption. He was lactose intolerant and unaware humans make a whole new skeleton every 4 years.

I know a person whose severe hip and knee arthritis was resolved in 1 day by eating a whole bag of dried fruit. His doctors recommended replacing his hip with titanium!

I know a man whose whole epidermis was fibroid since he was very young, had been attending a dermatologist for years who told him his condition was his normal skin. He resolved his skin fibroids by bathing in a cup of h2o2 to a whole bath of water 30 minutes daily.

I know a kid who cured his mom of hep-C by spiking her tea, unknownst to her, with h2o2 for a few weeks. Her doctor told her in amazement one day that she was cured, neither of them aware of her sons stealth treatment.

The average American is carrying 2 pounds of parasites that are mostly worms, mites and fungus.

Regarding the US federal government buying your hellth care for you: Katharine the Great got ate out in high style while socializing medicine in Russia. She also made barely a dent in the real problems of the common people and lived extravagantly all the while. Hitler was chief of a socialist party. Wolfs in sheeps clothing, foxes in the hen house, all politicians.

Many large practices rely on part time personnel to minimize benefit requirements, but they do have full time personnel and the health insurance costs are expensive for any business. It must be embarrasing when an employee of a doctor's practice doesn't have health insurance!

Secondly, many doctors are tired of the second guessing and denials of coverage by claims adjusters.

Next, all the paperwork requires additional employees.

Finally, insurance companies are always playing games such as suddenly refusing to reimburse for time spent with patients in the hospital. Large practices, even hospital based practices, find themselves refusing new patients with coverage from a given company because its impossible to make enough money to survive.

Doctors used to hate the concept of "socialized medicine" because it would limit their incomes. Now they are just tired of the stupid games designed to help the insurance company hold on to every nickel.

We need a simple, comprehensive National health care system for EVERYONE.

I do not want to live around sick or damaged people in my country. We are the odd ones out among the industrialized world; all of the others at least attempt to be actual societies.

I am sick of the focus on money that characterizes this current "system" and resent the huge bureaucratic waste and victimization it spawns.

kathyodat (BeForKids) comment, about the fifth comment from the top, was exactly right.

The Doctors want more money and Hillary Clinton's plan gives them more money by forcing everybody to pay premiums. Hillary Clinton's plan does not provide universal coverage, equal coverage, fairness, etc. In fact it allows care to get worse and worse.

The Doctors are NOT your friends folks. STOP referring to them as if they're authorities!!! This reminds me of the peace movement, passing around quotes from Generals when they say they're opposed to the Iraq occupation. Bunch of alligators.

If Obama were for change he'd at least follow---follow, the public. He's no leader. He's actually going in the opposite direction---against single payer.

ascott -

"I could give you a number of examples where laymen were able to diagnose illnesses that had stumped doctors."

The best medical web site is emedicine.com. It's the one medical professionals use when they need to bone up on stuff. You can easily register an account with them, and search up every imaginable thing. And I can assure you that you will know much more about your own specific condition than your md has time to learn. Armed with a little knowledge you can at least prevent these arrogant charlatans from blowing smoke up your ass.

Chessgames56 - You are correct about doctors. I have a Medicare advantage plan that has so far paid for a year of unbelievably expensive diagnostics and doctor visits, with only a series of bothersome co-pays which I can handle ok. I'm alright insurance wise, and I wish everybody could have the same coverage I do. Having cleared that hurdle, I now find you still can't get decent medical care. It is a pure assembly line. My PCP doesn't remember me from one visit to the next, and does not have time to review my medical history before I come in. He is like making an appointment to sit down with a gum machine. I've been to a half dozen robotic, bewildered specialists in as many months, and have seen some erronious, fabricated diagnostics that a PA friend describes as "grotesque". I don't see how even an ethical practitioner could function in a system like ours. The bottom line is that we are all in charge of our own health care. The best we can expect from our overpaid soft mechanics is that they give us the lab tests and referrals we ask of them. Don't expect proactive care. Know your risk areas. Write everything down and keep copies of all your records. Assume your doctor is trying to kill you. I'm surprised the number of patients who die every year from medical mistakes and omissions is as low as it is.

chessgames56

Being a good 'troubleshooter' is *not* something that is common in medicine. Good diagnosticians are very difficult to find.

As for the completeness of medical training: I had a doctor who claimed, when I reminded her about side effects from a medication, first claimed that *the drug rep* claimed never to have heard of it, and then admitted that she did not report the incident to the FDA, as doctors are requested, (but not, apparently, required), to do. This was from an assistent professor of medicine.

I could give you a number of examples where laymen were able to diagnose illnesses that had stumped doctors.

Try to report a resident's errors. Even if you can document it with info from medical journals, all you can expect is the run-around - and that includes for pure negligence. If you have any bad effects/outcome, you are left to suffer with them, unless you can find another physician that will admit that a fellow witch doctor (apologies to real witch doctors) screwed up.

Still have faith in medical training?

Amazing considering that as a rule, doctors are conservative thinking people.

GHAWAR: 20 years ago I met a guy with a brain tumor whose mother was hip enough to pursue the naturopathic route. The guy went on a RIGID diet--mostly juiced vegetables and brown rice and totally healed. I have seen MANY conditions called incurable heal with dietary changes.

A woman friend about my age had incredible stomach pain. They put her through a battery of tests, but the medications cause OTHER side effects. She said to me tearfully, "Sioux, they're just like us. They don't know." My step-mother spent hundreds on medical tests that revealed nothing. My cousin was diagnosed with Lyme disease but I think he had M.S. And the list goes on and on.

Dr. Robert Mendelsohn wrote two important books, "Confessions of a Medical Heretic" and Mal(e) Practice." He speaks of the bloated nature of the doctor's ego, describes the field as an ersatz priesthood with arcane formulas and near deferential status allotted to the MDeity. Until feminism, women were completely deferential to their doctors; and the early councils on studying abortion were composed of men and nuns.

If I am in a car accident I'll take a doctor over a tailor to get stitched up, but mostly I have avoided the field like the plague. Hospitals have more germs than anywhere else, and Nader did a book on all the side effects of various "cures" and the fact that some patients take upwards of 5 of these chemical cocktails daily, and there's never been research done on how these interact in combination. The key is to really eat natural food, get exercise, avoid stress or use exercise/yoga/meditation to balance it and rise aboe it, and practice peace and decency in a world that's mostly gone amok, but for the magic and mystery of the marvels that surround us in Nature.

Let's just take a survey of the different health systems out there. Use a good one as a model, and go with it. Right now we pay twice as much per capita for worse care. The lobby and Congress stand in the way.

Right robertsgt40, and that's the exact scare tactic the insurance industry uses to get us to oppose a single payer health care system. Oh and that's also why Canadians flock here by the zillions to get treated in America (in reality, it's the other way around). So don't believe the propaganda, my man,investigate and discover the truth for yourself.

Ghawar writes:

"The medical part of their education consists primarily of memorization. Their thought processes are nearly nonexistent, and they have no concept of cause and effect. Misdiagnoses are the rule, and the treatments they offer are the ones that they see in advertisements in their professional journals."

While I agree with much of what you say, I do not agree that most doctors are 'incompetent' because being a good 'troubleshooter' is just as important as memorization for their profession. Regardless, I agree that many of them act as if they are gods among men. Nevertheless, there are those who really do care about their patients, though I doubt it's majority.

Also, it is repulsive when you go to a doctor's office and the first thing they do is try to verify whether or not and to what extent you can pay. That's enough to make you sick (or even sicker) right there.

Canada and England have a national healthcare plan. It's cheap. All you have to do is hope you get treated before you die. Why do you think all the doctors are flockinf here from Canada. If you like what the govt did for our veterans you'll love what they'll do for you. Whenever the feds say "I'm with the govt and here to help" run. It's their mettling in busines(banking included) that corners the market for a few. I just want the coverage my congressman gets. I pay for that. Who do you think will pay for this anyway? One more layer of administration certainly won't help.

Doctors Support Universal Health Care...for themselves

The citizen interested in taking individual action for maximum benefit to the individual and society will demand maximum value (outputs over inputs) in each sector. 1/3 of your healthcare dollar is spent on unnecessary, wasteful paperwork. Another 1/6 is spent on various other wastes. But this only assumes that the average value in Canada, UK, and other European countries is actually a good value. The value of Cuban healthcare is 28 times higher than the US, in dollars. Figuring in workforce labor, overall Cuban value is substantially lower but surely greater than the 2x figure in Canada/UK/Europe. Cuba, and the others, prove that the high salaries of US doctors, and the corporate welfare provided to US big pharma and hi-tech medicine, block US citizens from receiving top value. The capitalists avoid the topic of value because value is the real measure of performance. Outputs over inputs. You start demanding best value and you will have found the achilles heel of the Friedmanite "laissez-faire" capitalist rackets.

So cheney, do you really want a new frigging HEART ?

I prefer folk medicine and remedies over Corporate Whore Western Medicine anyday. One great remedy: Cannabis. It's good for people with stomach issues, bipolar issues, cancer recovery issues, etc. Oh that's right America, you believe I belong in jail, how silly of me while the Big Pharma industry maims and kills, and the Managed Care Industry laughs all the way to the bank while stepping on people's graves.

Here's the link to Indian University:

http://www.medicine.indiana.edu/news_releases/viewRelease.php4?art=844

When Canada switched to a national health plan, way back in the dark ages, the Doctors who opposed it all left the country ( i am generalizing here) and guess where they went?.. yup the good old (buck first) USA.

So ask Your doctor if they support national health care.. if they say NO, then you should seek a different doctor, one who puts CARE ahead of the BUCK$$

"More than half of U.S. doctors now favor switching to a national health care plan"

But as Cheney would say, "So?"

"What do you think this is, a friggin democracy??"

kathyodat

I missed you excellent posting while posting mine.

In turn I sense you might be right about voting for Obama in that he cannot appear to be too liberal in order to get elected, but that his true compassion and progressive nature will prevail for the common people over corporate interests once he is elected.

It is all about a new vision for America, and hope is the life blood of democracy.

I want to open a restaurant, the only one in town. When a doctor comes to eat, I'll ask at the door how he intends to pay. I'll demand ID, and I'll need to photocopy his drivers and medical licenses. When the waitress comes to s/his table, she will remind him that, "Food costs money, how the hell are you going to pay?"

They're all Republicans too.

Doctors themselves are a big part of the health care problem in the U.S. They are taught in medical school, as their first and last lessons, that they are more intelligent than everyone else. When they graduate, they take their huge incomes as proof of their superiority.

The medical part of their education consists primarily of memorization. Their thought processes are nearly nonexistent, and they have no concept of cause and effect. Misdiagnoses are the rule, and the treatments they offer are the ones that they see in advertisements in their professional journals.

To see a doctor at all you must first prove that you have money; and whether or not you have insurance, you must fill out a lot of forms. You must give them your social security number - as if they were going to pay you for consulting them.

When the doctor sees you he will tell you how you're feeling. You might point and say, "Doctor, it hurts here," but if the doctor disagrees that you are in pain then he will tell you that it cannot hurt there: "Hmm, I never heard of that." He will order a huge number of very expensive tests to find out what you're really complaining about, and then send you home sick and without hope of a diagnosis.

I could go on and on - but a lot of you already know what I'm talking about.

The solution to this problem of the deification of doctors is - more doctors! Hundreds of thousands more. We should take Cuba as a good example for the U.S. and graduate and license at least a million more doctors. The medical lobbies and schools will object that the U.S. simply does not have a million people intelligent enough to be doctors. Bullshit! Doctors should be as common as waitresses, and they should be forced by competition to provide affordable prices, and they should listen to their patients.

We need at lest a million more doctors so that they will be forced to give competitive service and prices, and to scale their self-images back down to human proportion. Doctors are among the most obnoxious people in the country, just below neocons in repulsiveness. A little humility is needed in this profession, and a million more doctors are the answer.

I just finished reading the 3 chapters on health care in the U.S. in David Cay Johnston's book Free Lunch - Chapter 21 - Unhealthy Economics/Chapter 22 - Less for More/Chapter 23 - Hooked on Drugs. I found these three chapters more informative on our health care system than anything I have read. David Cay Johnston gives an overview on how our country arrived at a for profit health insurance system instead of a health service system. I believe that after reading these three chapters there can be no doubt that continuing a for profit health insurance system is folly & the only solution is single payer health service.

Every politician needs to read these chapters. A business model of health care has & will be forever a travesty to this nation!!!!!

Many doctors see the writing on the wall, and probably feel that the exorbitant medical fee party will soon be coming to an end, especially if the economic downturn is deep and long-lasting. Those days of charging anything they want (as they already do with uninsured consumers)may be quickly approaching an end.

And this is what I've felt needed to happen all along: exposure of medicine in the US for the criminal enterprise it really is. How many have already been fleeced for everything they own? The whole thing must collapse before it can be built anew. Hopefully, we are nearing such a collapse.

Unless doctors can create a lobby that can outgun the pharma and insurance lobbies, their opinions won't count for much.

Although there are a lot of doctors with nice big houses in my neighborhood, the big pharma executives and people with a niche in the insurance business own nicer and bigger houses than the doctors.

There is great clarity of thought in this survey/article for a national health care plan, and by those in the health care field who in good conscience, knows where we we should be going in controllong the cost of health care.

Unfortuantely, as a nation, we have been so brainwashed by the Wall Street and Madison Avenue elite that America has an absurd fear of socialism.

With the disastrous consequences of unregulated capitalism over the past 25 years, including deregulation, privitzation, downsizing of labor, outsourcing of jobs and increasing massive inequality of wealth, it is time America wakes up to the reality of absolute class warfare and the delusions of an oppressive capitalistic culture.

Our corporate culture is solely about bloated corporate bottom lines, not people. It is time the people get just as tough as the corporations.

American society must come to realize that the healthcare insurance industry deserves to be not only downsized or out-sourced, but put entirely out of business. There will be great sqeeling from one the greediest pigs of capitalism (the insurance industry), but it will be a great leap for the common good of America.

National health care is the only answer.

kathyodat, I am prepared to try what you suggest. Nothing else has worked. What do we have to lose?

Congress could not be more corrupt. Not only do they line their pockets with "donations" from insurance companies, but they create socialized medicine for themselves. There should be a law against this.

Calling this government a rule by law has turned into a cruel joke for the poor, and Dubya could not have exercised his sick sense of humor without help.

Are ALL of the three viable candidates still in the running honest and not already bought and paid for?

Let's hope so, because one of them will be our next president. ___ If there's an election.

Why am I so cynical? ___ Wish I weren't. Perhaps it's because we should be, or because of history repeats and we've all heard it all before and nothing changes because money talks.

BeForKids April 1st, 2008 11:26 am:

"The insurance industry has co-opted the term universal insurance just to keep the public confused"

You can say that again, BeForKids. I've often heard Americans argue against universal coverage because "free healthcare is not really free" or some such derivative. Of course your taxes pay for it, or your leader could borrow the money from China if you like. Either way, public insurance is much less expensive than what you pay now. That is a good thing, unless you own an insurance company. You don't, do you?

KEM PATRICK April 1st, 2008 11:45 am:

"How come half don't support a fair system?"

Well KEM PATRICK, one reason I know of is that, in countries where such a system has been proposed, the doctors are a little wary of such a fundamental change in their business practice. Once they get used to it though, they appreciate being able to deal with medicine and not having to turn away patients who can't pay.

I agree with you Poet April however our corporate media journalists will not even raise the issue of universal health care unless they value their jobs. Too many Democrats and Republicans know that any discussion of curbing the runaway MIC is political suicide (in their minds anyway) especially when those funds could be used for health care.

Having said that, whomever is crowned as the Democrat presidential canidate, can then speak about these taboo topics as the MSM would be unable to ignore them. If the Democratic contender though carries on with their usual rhetoric, then it's pretty much a slam dunk that nothing will change if they end up occupying the White House in January.

Single payer is better for your health and cheaper on your wallet than the rest of the brands.

("but the insurance companies don't like it...")

Tell them if they don't like the American Way they can all go to Dubai

The University of Indiana, which is certainly not known to be as a hotbed of progressive political thinking, had the audacity to actually go and ask the people who deliver healthcare what they think of a national organized health carte system and:

"b" Ackermann said in a statement.

The Indiana survey found that 83 percent of psychiatrists, 69 percent of emergency medicine specialists, 65 percent of pediatricians, 64 percent of internists, 60 percent of family physicians and 55 percent of general surgeons favor a national health insurance plan."

My suggtestion to the Universit6y of Indiana researchers is that they ask the general public the same questions. If the results are similar,then it is time to have a talk with our bought and paid for congressional and senatorial representatives.

Question one is: Why have you not passed such a measure? For all the presidential contenders the question should be: Will you sign such a measure once passed?

This ought to be just as important a campaign issue as the Iraqi war because the primary funding must come from the bloated Pentagon war budget.

How come half don't support a fair system?

Waterboard them till they do.

kathyodat: Right on! Hillarycare is Mittcare is expanded "Mangled Care".

To provide comprehensive, universal health care to a nation's citizens on the basis of medical need and NOT the size of one's wallet, a public healthcare system is the most efficient. If for-profit health care could provide comprehensive an universal health care to all a country's citizens more efficiently, I haven't seen the situation or country where that is the case. Or the health economists who claims it can. Health care doesn't fit the market model.

Unfortunatley, Canada's healthcare systems -there are 14 of them - are being methodically attacked by levels of government who are more interested in providing tax cuts after tax cuts that now the ability to finance it properly is being seriously compromised. However, that doesn't change the situation that a publicly funded and publicly operated health care system can more efficiently provide comprehensive and universal health care to a nation's citizens than a for-profit system.

A national health insurance plan does not consist of competing insurance carriers all trying to take in more in premiums than they pay out in claims. It consists of society promising to deliver the most care to individuals that we can collectively afford. For those who have heard Obama say he will not support a "mandate" for individuals to buy private coverage (or be fined in some manner), he is actively denying what the carriers want (ie., a government requirement for individuals to pay tolls to corporations) while delicately dancing around to avoid accusation that what he really wants is a 100% government takeover of medicine---because such a social position is eminently swift-boatable before an election.

The only game plan that is ever gonna work to get single
payer is to first elect Obama and a full slate of Democrats in Congress. Then progressives go into WE SHALL BE HEARD mode and demand the plan they want. This only works AFTER a successful election. It backfires before an election.
Let Obama dance into office, and fear not. Both he and his wife are easy to get on the right side of this--provided you don't demand they tip the hand to much and get defeated first by racists and corporatists.

I noticed that Maggie Fox didn't let the words "single payer" show up once - but perhaps she's from a country where "national insurance" means just that. The insurance industry has co-opted the term universal insurance just to keep the public confused - not too hard to do, since Americans aren't very attentive anyway.

Too bad the author didn't poll nurses for their opinion on national insurance. Nurses, being on the front line, are more aware than anyone except the beleaguered patients themselves of the brutality of our current system.

I am infuriated that Hillary Clinton's solution is to force us into a mandatory insurance plan. They tried that in Massachusetts, it's been a disaster and costs have risen much faster than the national average. So just how is her plan an improvement over theirs?

Obama told a union leader in 2003 that we need single payer health care but we also need the right people in Congress and the White House and the support of the public to make it happen. One advantage of being President is it provides a "bully pulpit" which notables such as FDR and LBJ have used to gain public support for policies.

I believe if Obama gets elected, and if we dump corrupt Congress people, we will end up with single payer health care. But we have our work cut out too. HR 676 now has 88 cosponsors!

kathyodat

USAn : Democrat candidates, are you listening?

Hell no!!! Go against their bread and butter lobbyists? PUH-LEEZE!
Should have been behind President Kucinich....

Having one's health dictated by remote bueaucrats in insurance company cubicles is no longer an option. The insurance industry has behaved so abominably in this regard that healthcare coverage must be taken away from them lock-stock-and-barrell. THEN we can start work on breaking-up the
healthcare oligopolies.

"Mangled" Care has been a patent disaster...and, yes, Democrats, are you listening? Single-payer now, and trust-busting next!

Democrat candidates, are you listening? Doctors are rich people, so you should listen to them even if you don't listen to working stiffs like us.

It would appear as if being on one of the short ends of "managed care" has actually provoked American doctors to remember the Hippocratic Oath. Where once they were largely in cahoots with health insurance companies and HMO's, those corporate entities relentless surge towards the bottom line has forced doctors towards the interests of their patients, where they should have been in the first place.

I favor National Health Insurance as an option for consumers. You can have the national policy, or provide yourself and your family with a private policy. The national policy will cost. Just because you are a citizen and tax payer does not mean that you get free health care.

Let the public and private sectors compete and see who provides the best service at the lowest prices. The administrative overhead in the public sector for health insurance is lower than for private companies. Medicare runs at less than 2% administrative overhead compared to more than 20% in private companies.

If more people feel that they are getting a better value with the public plan than a private plan, then they will stay with the public plan and more people may choose that option as well.

This is what the private insurance companies do not want and why I think that they have been fighting National Health Insurance. They talk about free market competition, but they do not want any of that in their business.