This is a response one of many “healthcare scare emails” making the rounds lately, this one with a video featuring Dr. David Junda. It not too long ago with another email scare campaign regarding articles written by Dr. Janda. I have been doing some research on this for awhile and one of the reasons I AM doing research is that I have changed my major for going back to college in January from nursing to Information Technology Healthcare Informatics which deals with the gathering and compiling of electronic healthcare records. This is simply my consensus of this video and his articles. I have a few options when I am sent some of these scare emails:
1. I can refuse to read opposing ideas and simply delete them but I prefer to stay informed about the different viewpoints.
2. I can forward the misinformation to others and thus perpetuating the lies and scare tactics.
3. I can smile and nod and pretend to agree with others and especially family members and pretend I feel the same way to have harmony.
4. I can take the information sent to me, research different viewpoints with different agendas and come to my own conclusions and make an attempt to set the record straight.
I have tried several of these and most of them are a lose/lose for me as I feel it is important to stand for what I feel is right and true even though I will receive the coming email lashing for doing so. I have been compiling some of this for my blog and it may be wordy but I will try and shorten it some. I am hoping than rather than some, who simply refuse to look at an opposing view and or who feel only limited sources are valid, you will at least read this.
Who is Dr. David Janda?
He is a doctor and author of sports injuries and was even appointed (not elected but appointed as were the members on the committee is is blasting in this video) by Bush Sr. to the “Board of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. He seems to be an expert on sports injuries and medicine and NOT medical care policy on a macro-level. It appears that one of his books was also part of a religious awakening and the others were on preventative care and cost containment in the field of Sports Injuries. He often in articles mentions his presentations on “Health Care Reform” but this is also misleading as the presentations (one has a hard time finding the actual dates of these presentations) were related to his field only. I won’t go into here but suffice to say this may qualify him for personal opinions on healthcare reform but NOT for national healthcare policy making. He pads his credentials like anyone else pads a resume’ sort of and kind of true but not really.
ObamaCare objectives secretly hidden in 2 parts starting with the stimlulus.
Page 152 of the bill and the section on “Restrictions on Certain Disclosures and Sales of Health Information” is, and I quote: ” about disclosures that are required if the hospital of medical facility uses electronic healthcare records’ health records. This has absolutely nothing to do with the creation of a new arm of the U.S. Government called the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research” or FCCCER, which is established by the Stimulus, he means that they are this first part of the Health Care bill and NOT buried in a secret 2nd section of it. The FCCCER has NO POWER TO MANDATE ANYTHING AT ALL but his articles and video simply seem to be adding to the paranoia.
What IS Comparative Effective Research and what ISN’T it?
The problem I see with the bill is how we are going to pay for it, but rationing of healthcare will happen no matter WHAT is in place and in fact it is happening now. RIGHT NOW healthcare IS rationed away from people who are not rich and get sick and sadly, this is most people. Health insurance companies go out of their way to do things to get out of actually paying for healthcare (rationing) like not covering pre-existing conditions, lifetime caps, and more. These companies have NO regard for the morality and responsibility of their role. The group is essentially a data-gathering and disseminating unit. How does that inhibit development and research?
Right now, the current system is a rationing system that simply puts everyone at risk by being subject to “death by denied claims.”
Who are the 15 members of the FCCCER?
The bill actually states:
“The Council shall be composed of not more than 15 members, all of whom are senior Federal officers or employees with responsibility for health related programs, appointed by the President, acting through the Secretary of Health and Human Services.”
All but 2 of the members have M.D.’s. The qualifications also require that and I quote: “[a]t least half of the members of the Council shall be physicians or other experts with clinical expertise” with senior members from seven various health care-related agencies including the VA. Clearly his claim that these members are random bureaucrats is false. The bill states that at least ”half of the members of the council must have M.D.’s” and at least half must be “physicians or other experts with clinical expertise.”
Their sole purpose is to fund research based on what they believe is most important to doctors and do NOT have the power to mandate ANY kind of care of procedure.
The Secret Formula for the rationing of death.
First, there is NO FORMULA that doctors punch into a handheld computer to determine if you live or die. Dr. Janda cites in his articles that this is part of the section 9201 H.R.1 Version 1 of the Stimulus Bill…..BUT…..THERE IS NO SECTION 9201 IN THE BILL AND THE PHRASE FEDERAL COUNCIL IS ALSO NOT THERE AND THERE IS NO FORMULA IN THE BILL OR CAN BE FOUND ON THE INTERNET…..ONLY IN HIS VIDEOS AND CHAIN EMAIL!
Coordinating research for the better effectiveness of medicine is good BUT THERE IS NO MENTION OF A FORMULA FOR PREVENTING CARE FOR THE ELDERLY. This is simply a scare tactic (probably promoted by the insurance companies who a stake in stopping their “death by denial” tactics.
Quote:
The Council cannot force anybody to do anything to any patient, because the last thing the Stimulus section that established it has to say about it is this:
(1) COVERAGE. — Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the Council to mandate coverage, reimbursement, or other policies for any public or private payer.
(2) REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. — None of the reports submitted under this section or recommendations made by the Council shall be construed as mandates.
NONE of the things he says about this council can happen because of 1 & 2 above. The council CANNOT force anyone to buy coverage, or a policy, or can mandate anything.
The Scare about Electronic Health Records.
OK, so everyone if freaked out about having their healthcare records computerized. There is the fear that ‘something incorrect might get in there” or “someone might get access to them that is not authorized” or “they will use these to determine what treatment I receive.” Here is part of the bill below.
From page 414 A nationwide health information technology infrastructure that allows for the electronic use and accurate exchange of health information. ‘‘(iii) The utilization of a certified electronic health record for each person in the United States by 2014. ‘‘(iv) Technologies that as a part of a qualified electronic health record allow for an accounting of disclosures made by a covered entity (as defined for purposes of regulations promulgated under section 264(c) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) for purposes of treatment, payment, and health care operations.
Now, think about this. Do you honestly think we can manage ANY healthcare system effectively for millions of people with legal pads and bic ball point pens? Ok, back in the stone age when we all lived in the same small communities for years and had the same doctor….sure, it worked and when we went to the hospital our doctor came right away and knew what to do. Now, we do NOT live in the same communities and more mobile and seriously……if you are ill, injured, or unconscious and need treatment…..how do you think they will get access to your records which might have vital live saving information in them? Do they call around and find your home town and ask who your doctor is and see if he can fax his legal pads to them…..and possibly send a translation because his writing sucks? Seriously?
We will have more accurate records, treatments, and lives saved by having quick access to records. How many millions of patient records do you think can be stored in a tall file cabinet?
Specific Claims about the Bill.
Janda claims that the Stimulus Bill p. 116, 442, 446, guides decisions at the time and place of care and defines penalties for not “doing things their way,”
Quote;
Page 116 is about the promotion of heath information technology.
Page 366 is about how hospitals can report their data using.
None of these talk in any way about guiding medical decisions.
Section 102 is on page 16 of the bill itself (which is here). It basically says that insurers’ plans don’t have to follow the health care rules (on cost, care, etc.) if the plan is grandfathered in by being active for 1 year beforehand. Dependents are allowed to be grandfathered in with the primary insured person. The insurer also can’t jack up their grandfathered insurance plan coverage rates or reduce benefits after they’re grandfathered in.
Death by Panel!
Janda and others claims that 1223 HC bill “mandates counselling every 5 years (annual if chronic illness), and designed to end life sooner. Also claims topics of these sessions include how to deny hydration, nutrition and initiating hospice care. I won’t really go into this whole “death panel” thing much, because it has been disproven and discussed over and over and and is simply a scare tactic nothing more. I can only hope that if and when I am either chronically ill or near the end I can have a caring compassionate discussion about my options.
The Healthcare Bill is Fascist!
Fascism is a lot of things. In short, it’s highly eugenic, emphasizes government power, is corporate, and aggressive. Since Dr. Janda clearly has such a distorted and insane view of what the healthcare bill is and isn’t, I can see how he comes to the conclusion that the bill is fascist. UNFORTUNATELY, his views ARE as distorted
In Summary
While there may or may not be valid issues regarding the healthcare bill, these constant unhinged, distorted, and sometimes insane characterizations do nothing except scare people and possibly hurt them. Many people will believe anything if it is said often enough and validates their fears.
If you want to be a patriot, do some research and forward the FACTS to the people who send you scare emails.
I found this online and thought it broke down some of the hype into an easy format.
A list of some of the of pros and cons to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare)
Pros:
1. No more pre-existing conditions. Insurers can’t weasel out of paying for things they promised they’d pay for (this was getting so bad that children had “pre-existing” conditions).
2. There is going to be a single network for moving medical data around, which will get rid of untold forests of duplicate paperwork and government/medical industry inefficiency.
3. A similar system will be devoted to moving medical research data around, for the same reason.
4. A lot of money was put into directly funding research (although this was through the stimulus, not the health care bill), which, at least theoretically, will help solve some of the medical problems the country faces.
5. Not being able to deny coverage/payment makes it more financially sound for insurers to emphasize preventative care, instead of their previous practice of saving money by not paying whenever possible.
6. There will be more competition between insurers (and therefore, theoretically, better prices and care) because of the exchange system.
7. Reduces the national debt by somewhere between $0 and $130 Billion (few credible sources claim it will increase the debt). The CBO has a fairly comprehensive report that it puts out I think annually. Then again: The CBO came up with both figures (in different contexts).
8. It’s a godsend for the self-employed who can use the exchange to get the same rates as companies.
9. Allows states to create their own exchanges, again to create more competition.
10. No health care plan would be required to offer abortion coverage. States could pass legislation choosing to opt out of offering abortion coverage through the exchange
11. .Finally addresses the problem of the uninsured using emergency rooms for any number of non-emergency conditions, clogging them and costing hospitals and taxpayers billions (they all now have insurance).
Cons
1. Insurers had enough time to write new and exciting screw-you-over policies and premium rates before legislation took effect.
2. While it’s not a bad idea to try to stomp out the most egregious practices of any industry (such as the protections in place for coal miners), it can devolve to a game of whack-a-mole, depending on the industry’s incentives.
3. Creates several new agencies of unelected personnel.
4. Does not address the problem of how bad employer-based insurance is for competition, nor the oligarchical nature of the insurance companies.
5. The ever-present danger of unintended consequences arising from complicated legislation.
6. Prohibitively low reimbursement rates and administrative hassles could prevent physicians from accepting patients (think Medicare).
7. Requires insurance of all citizens (to avoid the emergency room situation above).
