drgrph's Comments (215)

“And how is that worse than the current theory of using trickle up economics coupled with massive tax increases on the rich and corporations so we can spread the wealth around. Then let's add a stupendous increase in national debt covered by the Chinese and other world powers.

Funny thing is that when I read this post by Deepak it was my understand that NEITHER the right nor the left have the "answer". So give up blaming everything on the Rs. The govt is wholly D and any failures are on them.”

“I recall that their solution was targeted business tax cuts and a reduction in income taxes - basically the Kennedy-Reagan-W type. We know that it increases government revenues. We know that reducing tax rates put more money in the hands of the people to do as they will - pay down debt, contribute to charities, and, for some, to spend. I know we received a tax cut earlier in the year but I frankly don't see much change in my take home pay.

I think what is treasonous is to continue to propagate the lie that the Republicans, like the Democrats under the Bush administration, are solely obstructionist and not putting forward ideas. It's hard to get the facts out when the media is, shall I say, very selective in what they'll report. Add to that a virtual filibuster-proof Congress and those ideas not in goosestep with the majority party have a tendency to quickly and quietly pass away.

Listen, I'm no economist. Only had a semester of economics in college during the late 70's. The only thing I recall, because it could be visibly graphed, was that tax reductions help an economy. So until this spending spree has a successful conclusion I'm going to stick with what worked for 3 previous presidents (Democrat & Republican) and what the Republicans in Congress have suggested.”

“The human cost of medical errors is high. Based on the findings of one major study, medical errors kill some 44,000 people in U.S. hospitals each year. Another study puts the number much higher, at 98,000. Even using the lower estimate, more people die from medical mistakes each year than from highway accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS.
> Institute of Medicine, 2000

Lakewood, Colo. (July 27, 2004) – An average of 195,000 people in the U.S. died due to potentially preventable, in-hospital medical errors in each of the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to a new study of 37 million patient records that was released today by HealthGrades, the healthcare quality company.

If we were to accept these studies wouldn't it be better to be a non-insured individual? While I cannot vouch for these figures either, as a pharmacist I have seen some past statistics regarding iatrogenic misadventures (aka doctor- or medically-causes mistakes) and know they're significant.

I believe I often agree with the Mark Twain quote, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."”

“I appreciate the link and will review the study this weekend. Thanks!”

“Yes, I can see the difference. BUT what I question is how accurate the 3600 figure is. If it is inaccurate, like I believe, then it IS a scare tactic. Do you see the difference?”

“Exactly how certain are you that 3600 individuals die due to lack of insurance? I hope you are not matching up death statistics with insurance coverage. After all, a lot of people, insured or not, die from automobile accidents. How would their insurance status play into their ER care, provided they lived long enough to make the hospital. Certainly a lot of people, insured or not, die from accidental and intentional gun violence. Would lack of insurance make a difference there? I could go on and on raising scenarios about smokers who do not want to quit, the overweight who won't change their eating or exercise habits, drug addict who won't or can't quit, etc.

Listen, I understand your point that some without insurance or inadequate insurance may forgo treatment of acute or chronic conditions. But you can make that case without the ominous scare tactics using what I believe to be unsupportable figures. All you're doing is the same thing you accuse the Right of. Win your case on the merits, not on fear-mongering.”

“I hope you son is saved because of stem-cell research. This type of research was never banned by the Bush Administration. Bush even allowed for embryonic stem cell research. What he limited was adding new lines, not preventing the use of that already available. That he banned stem cell research is a common misconception (no pun intended....but it is kinda good) people hold. Of course a lot of this is moot since embryonic stem cell can now be created from non-embryonic sources.

Anyway my comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek, building off the Beck-Olbermann 10X's comment above. My intent is more to point out what value their is in intelligence. I've know many a pharmacist who can recall all kinds of facts. But ask them a question requiring them to think through using the facts? Not so much. You don't want someone intelligent, you want one that's smart.”

“Let me see if I understand you correctly. No Democrat should consider the merits of the bill and make a decision, say, like every other time they need to vote. If they chose a position that their constituents have expressed, they should disenfranchise the voter who elected them to represent them. Failure to vote in goose-step with the other progressive Democrats are to be punished by having committee chairs stripped from them, again disenfranchising their constituents.

Thank God that Congress is not a business because I believe the methods you described are commonly referred to as extortion. I think it is incredibly sad that you are unable to "win" this bill on it's merits. I don't think you could - no bill written in this fashion at now over 2000 pages is really even worthy of consideration. This needs to go back to the drawing board and remain focused on the goal which I thought was helping the uninsured. This bill leaves too many uncovered and exposes it as a trojan horse bill meant to regulate further our lives.

So why don't you man up and write/meet/call your Congressman and in bullet-point explain why they should vote yes using solely it's merits. Strong arming may have its place in union or the Mob but it has no place in American politics. At least the pre-Obama politics.”

“Obama's 10 times more intelligent and articulate and he STILL is no better than Bush.”

“It was my understand from the media that single issue parties, like abortion and far-right, are pretty unacceptable. Do you really want to use a litmus test of single payer for where the Democratic Party is? I don't do that with Republicans. If I did then the presence of John McCain on their presidential ticket automatically forces one away from describing the party as far-right.”

“My point was not to compare Herceptin with typical pharmaceuticals. My point was about cost reduction. For one thing reducing overall costs allows for the savings to be redirected. This was one of the original intents of healthcare reform, wasn't it?

Who owns the bulk of generic manufacturers whose products are sold in America? As you would likely say "Big Pharma". The best example I have of this is the birth control pill known as Yasmin. Shortly before the generic product called Ocella hit the market, lo and behold they reduced 1 hormone by 0.01mg, tested for different indications for use, and the product Yaz was born.

But it gets better. Look at a box of these 2 products. Bayer makes Yasmin, Barr distributes Ocella. I state it that way since they are both manufactured in Germany by Bayer. All Barr does it buy it from Bayer.

But it even gets better. I still have patients who insist on buying Yasmin...even when I show them the truth.

That is an example of the American patient and explains why I know that this bill can never reduce costs until incredibly strict measures are put in place. It will hurt the patient and financially hurt this nation.”

“In what I have read so far you are completely overlooking one of the best healthcare professional that can reduce costs - the pharmacist. Indulge me for a moment to explain.

My mother was receiving Tricor as an adjunct to maintain her lipid level (e.g. cholesterol). Under Medicare Part D she was paying $114. I supplied her physician with article regarding how there's no therapeutic difference between TriCor 145mg and fenofibrate 160mg. Know why? The 145mg strength was a "patent extender" release shortly be generic fenofibrate 160mg hit the market. Her new copay became $7 for an annual savings of $428.

Another elderly woman was receiving Lipitor when the insurance company's formulary changed. This resulted in a copay of $70 (for 1 month supply). Fortunately her insurance plan required prior authorization, so I was able to discuss alternative and encourage she contact her physician. She was changed to generic simvastatin with a monthly copay of $5 (or $780 annually).

Do the math - 2 meds and over $1000/yr saved. Imagine if this done every day with every patient. Due to low reimbursement rates a lot of pharmacies just don't do it. It's not "all about the money", but a business (yes, pharmacy is a business as well as a profession) does need to at least break even.”

“The former Democratic Party was center-left. Now it is far-left. At least describe the Democrats accurately.”

“"History in the Making"? Big deal. The Japanese planes on the Hawaiian horizon...that was history in the making, too. And I know how that day ended. Wasn't good.”

“I forgot to mention that I am above the age of 50, have received the seasonal flu vaccine, and previously received the Swine vaccine of 1976. These factors would diminish the concern for receiving H1N1. I have to note, though, as a healthcare professional I am considered in the high priority group.

I'm not sure what you know about vaccines and immunity but there is a concept called "herd immunity". For example, if you are a resident of a nursing home and get about 80% or more vaccinated the remaining 20% have a much lower chance of getting an infection.

This would be true of any "herd" or grouping of individuals. Today the are innoculating middle school students where my wife works. She called me to ask what to do and I said......."definitely". She is not yet 50 and did not receive the '76 vaccine.

I, on the other hand, have but 12 co-workers and a clientele of primarily senior citizens (who are not high risk). So if I don't get the vaccine (and I still may yet) that's 1 more dose of this limited availability vaccine that can be given to someone truly at high risk.”

“I believe you are missing the point why job creation has been poor. It is a fact that the President hates small business. That's right, hates small business. (An obligatory nod to Congressman Grayson)

Seriously, the President doesn't want job recovery unless, maybe, there's a union involved. Upon what do I base my belief? The so-called Stimulus Act. Show me where any consideration was given to small business. No tax reduction or credits, no easing of regulations - nothing.

On the other hand, we had more that enough money and interest to act like fascists and acquire Government Motor and Chrysler. Then effectively hand them over the unions instead of allowing the real owners, those who had invested in their stock), reap the just due.

This wholly partisan President has effectively locked most Americans and the businesses they work for out of what used to be considered "the American Dream". Now we must live "the American nightmare". Maybe my Grayson imitation was on the mark after all.”

“Now I may have missed this, but can anyone point me to where it has been verifiably stated that POTUS and his family have been vaccinated with the H1N1 vaccine? If he hasn't, then he and his family should publicly receive their vaccinations. If that isn't the seal of approval that H1N1 vaccine is both safe and necessary, nothing would be.

I was ready to get mine but now? I'm not sure it will be worth it by the time the supply arrives. This government and private business mixing always fails. That's one reason that Americans are not supportive of fascism.”

“I'm a bit puzzled. Is this "news" or even significant. Seems to me it bears a striking resemblance to the whole Dan Rather phony Bush documents. This would suggest that you can fool some of the people, conservative or liberal, some of the time.”

“Although not a reporter, hasn't Glenn Beck risked his career bringing information to light? Now whether you like the information or interpret it differently isn't the point. The fact is that some of what he has found and shared would never have seen the light of day, preventing you and I the freedom to judge it on their merits. Generally speaking I have been able, in my limited way, to find supporting evidence to what was presented. Now the interpretation? Sometimes I find things of lesser importance than he does.

I know my prior paragraph will not be popular with the average HuffPo poster. But I believe what Mr. Beck has been doing in recent months is admirable - attempting to bring truth to light that no other broadcasters have (including those on Fox itself). To date he has not brought forth, say, documents relating to his service in the Air National Guard. But if he does he'll be as meaningless as Dan Rather now is.”

“Do you know who the newscaster was and what the story was about?”

“As an unabashed conservative I very, very rarely agreed with Dr. Hill. That being said I will miss Dr. Hill's appearances on FNC, especially on "THe O'Reilly Factor". How can I reconcile both statements honestly and truthfully?

First of all, his eloquence and personality were such that I did not find myself developing the reflexive personal hatred others are prone to do when others are holding an opposing point of view. Dr. Hill was also able to actually respond to a question when asked as opposed to many that simply filibuster and repeat non-responsive ideological position(s). Finally, I cannot recall Dr. Hill using half-truths or lies when debating a subject.

I do hope FNC can find an adequate replacement in the mold of Dr. Hill or Kirsten Powers, another FNC commentator able to admit when a conservative does something right or a progressive does something wrong. The cable world is way too full of unbending right- and left-wing ideologues.”

“And your apologies for similar rants against former President Bush would be....?

BTW, isn't it time to get over the President's race? I've seen and judged him solely as a man. Period.

He is not Mr. Obama and he is not a black man. I like to think of him as our President. His race has nothing to do with his failed presidency, it's his lack of experience and progressive agenda. Period.”

“Beck is a patriot. He is honest. He cares for his family and all who live in this formerly great country. Most people would tend to agree that the GM/Government Motors take over was fascism. Exactly how did the GM lose his job? If health care reform, as currently defined by the Congressional bills stand, socialism has been instituted.

I suppose the only idiot here is myself, thinking that fundamentalist Progressives and liberals give a d@mn about the truth. Maybe I should just wait until the day that the Left realizes that truth exists in forms outside of the reality they choose to believe.

God (that's right - not god, G-d, Gawd, or whatever "cool" term is in use here) help this nation.”

“I don't believe that you would receive significant additional financial benefits if the government were allowed to negotiate discounts. Currently it is the insurance company that negotiates pricing and preferred vs. non-preferred formulary status. By current law a pharmacy cannot charge the government above that of the lowest price any single patient receives in the pharmacy. So the government already receives the best price courtesy of the insurance companies. Unless we are planning to fundamentally change America from capitalism to socialism (and some would argue we are) there is only so much lower you can go.

That's why I'm planning to drop Medicare B (supplies, equipment). Unlike the vast majority of other healthcare providers, Congress did not exempt us from several statutory requirements. The resultant extra costs to doing Medicare B business results in loss (v. profit) for each prescription. So I've chosen to stay open for the scores of patients in need by turning away the handful of Medicare B. Certainly no business wants to turn away customers. But with constant financial loss I'd eventually have to close and turn them all away.

Now you may not agree with me, but as I see it the government through low reimbursement and costly regulation have forced my small pharmacy out of the Medicare B business. As they have others. A government option, through actions like I've described, will never create competition. It is anti-competitive at its core and will drive out the private options.”

“Well, if they go to an emergency room they'll be treated. Efficient? No. But they would not go without care.

When they come into my pharmacy I work with them the best that I can. There are Pharma-sponsored programs that can be "tapped". I can work with the physician, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner to find another medication that would be cost efficient and effective (I worked over a decade in long term care and we constantly addressed this concern). I do have room for price overrides, if warranted. Finally, there have been times that I have personally paid for their medication. I know physicians that will do that (for their visit), too.

All it takes, sometimes, is simply being able or responsible enough to admit one's need. Healthcare providers don't go around making a big deal about since one of the reasons we do this work is to help people in their time of need.

So what do I suggest? I believe in increasing capitalistic competition by eliminating state barriers. And tort reform is, sadly, a must.

From experience I could never suggest a government option. Their record with Medicare and Medicaid clearly shows that it would fail fiscally. Plus the barriers to proper care already result in suboptimal treatment.”