What's new
By:

Death Panels

muff daddy said:
Its called the Complete Lives System. Fathered by Ezekiel Emanuel, health policy advisor to Barack Obama.

emanuels-lives-system.jpg




By utilizing the complete lives system graph we can reduce waste and provide more services for those who are still capable of worthy contributions to society as a whole.
One should feel good that our government has had these discussions regarding early and late life societal contribution as being a future basis for life extending treatments.

This reminds me of a quote:

“From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”
Click to expand...
Yeah but, in Barracks world of health, we'll take from the old fogeys and give it to the youngsters !
 
muff daddy said:
Its called the Complete Lives System. Fathered by Ezekiel Emanuel, health policy advisor to Barack Obama.

emanuels-lives-system.jpg




By utilizing the complete lives system graph we can reduce waste and provide more services for those who are still capable of worthy contributions to society as a whole.
One should feel good that our government has had these discussions regarding early and late life societal contribution as being a future basis for life extending treatments.

This reminds me of a quote:

    “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”
Click to expand...

I do not think he wrote what you think he wrote.
 
You take a passage and quote it out of context. You make no effort to research what it is that he was addressing other than finding info who knows where and you want me to explain it to you? Would it really make a difference?

Seems to me if you were really interested in seeing what the man was writing about you would have made the effort on your own. I am not convinced that my efforts would not be a waste of time.
 
Ms Tree said:
You take a passage and quote it out of context. You make no effort to research what it is that he was addressing other than finding info who knows where and you want me to explain it to you? Would it really make a difference?

Seems to me if you were really interested in seeing what the man was writing about you would have made the effort on your own. I am not convinced that my efforts would not be a waste of time.
Click to expand...

You mean research it like you did the Obama Grandma post??
It was funny how you ranted and raved but were the one who hadn't done the research.
You're not convinced because you are wrong just like you were in the previous post.

Old Zeke been crowing about it since 1996 if you bothered to look. And your HC is being modeled along these lines, remember he's only Obama's Health Policy Adviser at the OMB and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. It's the progressive thought on usefulness to society. You're only as good as you can pay.
 
Ms Tree said:
You take a passage and quote it out of context. You make no effort to research what it is that he was addressing other than finding info who knows where and you want me to explain it to you? Would it really make a difference?

Seems to me if you were really interested in seeing what the man was writing about you would have made the effort on your own. I am not convinced that my efforts would not be a waste of time.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm...this seems the common theme for those who have a bit more intelligence than yourself 😛

...sticks and stones 😛
 
muff daddy said:
You mean research it like you did the Obama Grandma post??
It was funny how you ranted and raved but were the one who hadn't done the research.
You're not convinced because you are wrong just like you were in the previous post.

Old Zeke been crowing about it since 1996 if you bothered to look. And your HC is being modeled along these lines, remember he's only Obama's Health Policy Adviser at the OMB and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. It's the progressive thought on usefulness to society. You're only as good as you can pay.
Click to expand...

Already addressed it. The point of your original post was that Obama was advocating depriving people of health care options. The quote when view in the context of the speech he gave made it painfully obvious what he was saying. Whether his grandmother had or did not have the surgery has nothing to do with what you were implying Obama said or what I posted regarding the intent of his speech. Hell, until I posted it you did not even know the full context of his speech which goes to the fact that you do not research anything you post.


So why should I bother explaining anything to you?

signals said:
Hmmmm...this seems the common theme for those who have a bit more intelligence than yourself 😛

...sticks and stones 😛
Click to expand...

This coming from a person who seems to have difficulty understanding the difference between treatment, remission and cure.
 
Ms Tree said:
Already addressed it. The point of your original post was that Obama was advocating depriving people of health care options. The quote when view in the context of the speech he gave made it painfully obvious what he was saying. Whether his grandmother had or did not have the surgery has nothing to do with what you were implying Obama said or what I posted regarding the intent of his speech. Hell, until I posted it you did not even know the full context of his speech which goes to the fact that you do not research anything you post.


So why should I bother explaining anything to you?



This coming from a person who seems to have difficulty understanding the difference between treatment, remission and cure.
Click to expand...

Nice try. Your attempt at smearing me by claiming you researched what I didn't backfired quite terribly in your face.
My researched reference wasn't even about Obama's Grandmother as you implied.
Not even close.
Back to Zeke Emanuel, you know nothing of him either.
Just try to keep spinning the narrative, its not working anymore.
 
I think it's funny that republicans despise him so much when he is an advocate of portable health insurance (something republicans favor as do I), he is against euthanasia, he is also against single payer insurance.


Also funny is that he presents several arguments that Signals could use to argue against legalization of euthanasia, some of them quite valid in my opinion. I do believe he ignores one basic right, and that is the right of a person to do as they choose regardless of whether or not the choice is well thought out or not. Republicans don't want a nanny state yet have no problems telling me and everyone else what I can and can't do with my own body.


Bottom line is that Ezekiel Emanuel was writing these pieces as case studies, not as endorsements or to advocate a certain idea. He was addressing situations where you have to make decision based on available resources, prognosis and who will benefit the most from certain actions.


Here is a fairly basis break down of his articles and philosophies. I know I said I would not do this and I am under no illusion that you will even consider the facts about what he wrote but what the heck. May be someone else here will read it and understand what he is talking about.




Fact Check


If you want to talk about rationing go ahead and look at the insurance companies and how they ration drugs. You may also wish to look into the The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003. Look at how insurance companies ration care by denying coverage to people with pre existing conditions, spending caps.


The part you left off of his quote which kind of sinks your whole conspiracy is this part:
Without overstating it (and without fully defending it) not only is there a consensus about the need for a conception of the good, there may even be a consensus about the particular conception of the good that should inform policies on these nonconstitutional political issues. Communitarians endorse civic republicanism and a growing number of liberals endorse some version of deliberative democracy. Both envision a need for citizens who are independent and responsible and for public forums that present citizens with opportunities to enter into public deliberations on social policies.



This civic republican or deliberative democratic conception of the good provides both procedural and substantive insights for developing a just allocation of health care resources. Procedurally, it suggests the need for public forums to deliberate about which health services should be considered basic and should be socially guaranteed. Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity-those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations-are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Conversely, services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia. A less obvious example is guaranteeing neuropsychological services to ensure children with learning disabilities can read and learn to reason. Clearly, more needs to be done to elucidate what specific health care services are basic; however, the overlap between liberalism and communitarianism points to a way of introducing the good back into medical ethics and devising a principled way of distinguishing basic from discretionary health care services
Click to expand...


Your post only included the second paragraph which when not posted with the first tends to distort the true intent of his statement but I suspect that was your intent.


Mr Emanual is a bioethics specialist. He deals in theoretical discussions. He deals in 'what if' scenarios.
 
muff daddy said:
Nice try. Your attempt at smearing me by claiming you researched what I didn't backfired quite terribly in your face.
My researched reference wasn't even about Obama's Grandmother as you implied.
Not even close.
Back to Zeke Emanuel, you know nothing of him either.
Just try to keep spinning the narrative, its not working anymore.
Click to expand...

Research? You posted a snipit of an article, left out the essential paragraph prior to your snipit and you call that research?

I never said you refered to his grand mother. What I said was that the quote you took out of context was part of a larger speech where he addressed his grandmother and the medical questions surrounding her. Whether or not she had surgery does not change the fact that he did not and does not advocate depriving anyone of medical care.I

I plodded through two of his pieces. Even took a ethics class in college where we looked at his work.
 
Ms Tree said:
Mr Emanual is a bioethics specialist. He deals in theoretical discussions. He deals in 'what if' scenarios.
Click to expand...

He was addressing situations where you have to make decision based on available resources, prognosis and who will benefit the most from certain actions.

And when HC costs soar with Obamacare your case study " what if scenarios" will become reality.

What you refer to, regarding Emanuel is a medical think tank. He can deny all his assertions now but if you noticed too, there is a growing number of people in the medical community starting to lean this way as an eventuality.
That is what is frightening about his vision.
Bioethics specialist or not, he advises the President, Office of Management and Budget of ways to save on HC costs. "His what ifs" are here, you acknowledge that by your comparison of present rationing by current healthcare providers. Even the President in his sales campaign is on the same page with this by suggesting taking a pill that is a blatant inference to these procedures aren't a good idea for life extending care which will morph into not being covered.
Zeke Emanuels theoretical discussions today will become tomorrows reality in a cost burdened HC system.
Look at Britain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TWU informer
S1113 Information
2
Replies
18
Views
6K
BoeingBoy
BoeingBoy

Latest posts

Back
Top