Secy Sebelius re: mammograms: “our policies remain unchanged “

November 18, 2009

Secy Sebelius & Ann Curry (video)

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius put out a statement today to counteract the nuts at the Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), who decided less screening is better preventative medicine for women age 40-49.

USPSTF recommendations

Cost-benefit analysis. How many lives saved vs how many dollars wasted on the statistically non-sick.

And why are women being told to stop examining their breasts?

Because if they find a lump they’re just gonna get all hysterical and cost the insurance companies money.

barry’s looking for a way to not have to pay for healthcare and $100 x women age 40-49 x 10 years is worth funding studies and putting together a task force.

Secy Sebelius:

There is no question that the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations have caused a great deal of confusion and worry among women and their families across this country. I want to address that confusion head on.

The U.S. Preventive Task Force is an outside independent panel of doctors and scientists who make recommendations. They do not set federal policy and they don’t determine what services are covered by the federal government.

Truth: USPSTD is under the Dept of Health and Human Services. The task force’s recommendations are considered the “gold standard”. Who are they? Academics, insurance companies, HMO and of course the CDC, who seems to be everywhere lately. Not a single cancer specialist – breast or otherwise.

Secy Sebelius:

There has been debate in this country for years about the age at which routine screening mammograms should begin, and how often they should be given.

The Task Force has presented some new evidence for consideration but our policies remain unchanged.

Indeed, I would be very surprised if any private insurance company changed its mammography coverage decisions as a result of this action.

What is clear is that there is a great need for more evidence, more research and more scientific innovation to help women prevent, detect, and fight breast cancer, the second leading cause of cancer deaths among women.

My message to women is simple. Mammograms have always been an important life-saving tool in the fight against breast cancer and they still are today. Keep doing what you have been doing for years — talk to your doctor about your individual history, ask questions, and make the decision that is right for you.

Don’t need a task force for that. Just a co-pay.

Tags: AHRQ, breast cancer, breast cancer screening, cancer prevention, cancer screening, Department of Health and Human Services, health care reform, mammogram recommendations, mammograms, mammography, Preventive Services Task Force, secretary of health and human services kathleen sebelius, secretary sebelius, US Preventive Services Task Force, women's cancer treatment,

Secy Sebelius re: mammogram recommendations (video)

November 19, 2009

Secretary Sebelius is put on the spot by Ann Curry about the new USPSTF recommendations.

Sebelius written statement – HHS not changing policies.

Tags: AHRQ, breast cancer, breast cancer screening, cancer prevention, cancer screening, Department of Health and Human Services, health care reform, mammogram recommendations, mammograms, mammography, Preventive Services Task Force, secretary of health and human services kathleen sebelius, secretary sebelius, US Preventive Services Task Force, USPSTF, women's cancer treatment,

Reactions to barry’s press conference

July 25, 2009

[Quotes compiled by ALEX KOPPLEMAN at Salon.]

I’ve always maintained that Howie Fineman will be the first from the NEWSWEEK crew to turn on barry [Altman never] and finally report the truth. After barry’s world tour as a not even nominated candidate, Fineman came clean about barry’s refusal to go to Landstuhl (because there’s be no photo op/video payoff) and also gave insight to barry’s enormous ego.

Here’s his first installment:

Howard Fineman: I’ve been covering Barack Obama for a few years, and it’s usually crystal clear what he is up to. Not last night. This is the first time I’ve asked myself: What was THAT all about?

Even Chris Matthews was upset with barry’s performance.

An honest and perceptive comment.

Chris Cillizza: But, from his opening statement on, it was clear that part of Obama’s goal in the press conference was to directly rebut charges leveled against him and his health care plan by Republicans.

What can one possibly say about Mr Krugman that his words don’t reveal?

Paul Krugman: I found Obama’s health care presentation so impressive — so much command of the issues — that it had me worried. If I really like a politicians’ speech, isn’t that an indication that he lacks the popular touch? (A couple of points off for “incentivize” — what ever happened to “encourage”? — but never mind.) … Seriously, it’s really good to see how much he gets it.

He uses the words “long” and “Obama’s political career” in the same sentence.

Ben Smith: The appearance was striking by its absence of a move that’s long characterized Obama’s political career: When in trouble, go big. Faced with a crisis of confidence or with a political furor, he’s repeatedly shown an ability to rise above the storm, and to broaden the playing field, as when he turned a flap over his pastor into a meditation on race in America … Now, facing his hardest test as President, Obama chose to go small.

And he chose to use the race card like he has routinely done every time his polls drop.

“Actual Americans”?

Digby: Luckily, if actual Americans were listening they likely learned something tonight.

As opposed to what?

Ones who refuse to show their birth certificate or name the hospital they were born in?

And what was the real deal with that reporter “mix up”?

barry approval index: MINUS 8

July 18, 2009

Overall
At least somewhat approve 51%
Disapprove 48%

Strongly approve 28%
Dems 58%

Strongly disapprove 36%
Reps 63%
Inds 43%

And where do you think it is going to go once he heads out of his office (again) to go “on vacation” in Martha’s Vineyard?

Some other tidbits.

Healthcare reform
Oppose in general 49%
At least somewhat favor 46%

Oppose creation of public insurance company 50%
Think reform will lead to middleclass tax hikes 78%

Approve of idea of taxing weathier Americans to finance reform 48%
Disappove 44%

Economy better on one year?
Stronger 45%
Weaker 36%

Here’s July 2nd: approval index minus 2

Man charged, incited by Obama-Hitler mustache sign

July 1, 2009

I wonder how many times a day that evil man’s name is said?

Did you wonder which one I was referring to?

AH of course.

A 66 y/o man in Highland Park (suburb far north of barry’s mansion) goes to the local post office. He sees a man and woman from Chicago holding up signs depicting barry with a AH mustache. (Not clear if AH’s name was also on the sign). They were protesting barry’s healthcare plan. The man has words with the couple and then leaves. Protesters go to local police station and allege the man made a threatening statement. Police call man – he returns – says he was agitated by the sign because he has relatives who in the Holocaust — Highland Park has a sizeable Jewish Community. The protesters decide to press charges and the man is charged with disorderly conduct and given a court date.

Why?

Source: Chicago’s Breaking News Robert Channick

Are doctors really behind barry?

June 25, 2009

The AMA maybe be behind barry but millions of doctors aren’t and neither is the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, who have launched a “TAKE BACK MEDICINE” project in opposition of government run medicine.

Planned is a virtual Townhall Meeting originating in Washington to “explain their opposition to government medicine and discuss ways to take back medicine for patients.” A panel of more than 20 physicians will relate personal stories from their actual practices. Video won’t be available for a couple of days.

Questions to be discussed:

• Why the government plan is bad for patients and doctors
• The horrendous impact a National Health Board would have on access to care
• Why doctors will quit in droves if current plans pass
• Why big medicine doesn’t reflect practicing doctors

Here’s KATHRYN SERKES discussing TakeBackMedicine.com’s opposition to the AMA.

Quote of the day: “I think everybody wishes Obama would just kind of go away for a little bit”

June 18, 2009

Morning Joe – Jim Cramer

Joe refers to the new NY Times poll that shows folks are more worried about reducing the deficit (52%) vs stimulating the economy (41%) and that it’s going to hamper barry’s efforts to pass his healthcare reform. Cramer agrees that healthcare means raising taxes, which isn’t going to help the economy and then says what a lot of folks are thinking.

thinkprogress

JOE: Don’t you think that this puts the Obama administration behind the eight ball on health care?”

KRAMER: …when Americans hear health care reform, it just means tax increases….Until we get the economy moving again, I think everybody wishes that Obama would just kind of go away for a little bit.

It's not for the good of the country - it's barry revenge

November 19, 2008

Yesterday Senator Clinton was appointed by Sen Ted Kennedy to lead a subcomittee task force to expand health insurance coverage. An enticement really. A small bone to tempt her to stay in the senate. She is never going to get to manage the healthcare issue. She had lobbied Kennedy and Reid to create a health-reform subcommittee for her to chair and was turned down. They will make sure that she has nothing to do with it. And today barry named Daschel to be head of the Health and Human Services - effectively blocking her last avenue to healthcare.

So it's secretary of state or going back to the senate where she will have make it look good appointments on the periphery of healthcare. There is no way Sen Kennedy would hand off the issue to Sen Clinton. It would mean decades of struggle culminating with a Clinton name. Never happen. He would rather it take more time than hand it to someone who could get it done faster. Country first?

I don't know why people continue to think barry is this noble guy looking to "gather a team of rivals". He is acting now like he always has and always will. He is doing the same thing he did with the bailout - sitting back and letting it go down. He is looking to destroy the rival who made it possible for him to become president and wants to tarnish the last Democratic president. There is no thought of America first or the real fact that Sen Clinton is perfect for the job. The president-elect had 33 days of overseas travel - one night in Europe and no trips to South or Central America - and his opponent physically visited over 80 countries mostly in official capacity and yet she has no foreign policy experience and he's fit to be president.

Explain that to me obamerized masses. Convince me that he isn't there because of his race, because he is a man and because the press hate "The Clintons". Not possible.

The most important part of foreign policy is diplomacy and the most important part of diplomacy is actually being in the country, eating the food, talking to the people and knowing the customs. She has done that in 80 countries. And she has done it interacting with women as well as dignitaries. They love her outside the US, especially in countries where women are oppressed.

1-Health care is gone in the senate.
2-Healthcare gone in the cabinet.
3-Secretary of state depends on Mr Bill's dealings, which he has every right to not disclose.
4-Once disclosed, barry has the chance to permanently tarnish President Clinton - jeopardizing the future of his Global Initiative and all the people in need - which of course doesn't matter to barry.
5-He can rescind the offer (if he had ever meant it in the first place).
6-By the way it was an intentional leak so the press could demean her even further - just as they did with the VP ruse.
7-She takes the job - she loses her senate seat.
8-After a reasonable amount of time barry fires her, leaving her with nothing to fall back on.
9-He gets away with it because the pro-obama media rejoice instead of challenging him.
10-The pink-faced presidential failures who could have prevented bush and Iraq are off the hook.
11-barry and axelrod laugh and give each other a high-five as Iran, Syria and Hamas bomb Israel.
12-barry doesn't care (he never did) because he accomplished his mission: defeating the Clintons while fraudulently winning the presidency.
13-And those American People so obamerized with what he represents give him a pass because it was THAT woman's fault anyway.

barry's plans are proceeding nicely aren't they?

2008 Election = Cult of personality

November 4, 2008

Here is the sad irony of this election. Hillary routinely polled higher on the economy over barry. She had it as her number one from day one, including the mortgage crisis and bailouts. She was stumping on this before barry even caught on. Barry didn’t have the economy in his top three on March 29, 2008. Think about that. I don’t even recall what the third was. Clinton discussed specifics and laid out concrete plans. Barry was running on hope and Change! and nothing else but Iraq - which I cannot stress enough was the biggest fraud perpetrated on voters in this election. People are still buying it. People don’t care I guess that they have been deceived. Eventually they will. It’s what got him the nomination. Period. And yet, on election day, Iraq is polling at 10% and barry’s positions have changed so many times they reflect exactly what he has done since 2002: talk a big game, lie and do nothing. He had nothing else as evidenced by the “I agree with Hillary on that”.

So Iraq is at the bottom and barry’s positions are no different than Hillary’s. The scam worked and bonus the economy worsened and McCain said the fundamentals were strong as the banks tanked.

Had he picked Romney?

Voters are still concerned about terrorism as they were in 2004 (71-71). And on 10-31-08 barry did not have national security in his top five. So none of it matters. Bush was insurmountable unless a national security crisis happened. Biden’s comments were passed on for the wardrobe inanity. Says a lot of the state of the nation and the power of pro-obama media bias.

Now the economy is the focus (62% ) and Hillary was emphatically thought to be much superior to barry in confidence in handling the economy. So who – another piece of evidence as if we need one - should be president by substance? It’s perfectly clear. And had she still been in the race, the election would not even be a question mark.

This election was a cult of personality, whether anyone wants to admit. Period. A man with a resume so thin he would have been ridiculed had he not have been black and a man. A man not qualified to run a state or even the senate. An inexperienced man chanting nebulous promises and bipartisanship, with no experience of having done so. A man who has never stood up – not once - when it was not politically expedient will be making his first decision of consequence as president.

That is personality and the hope of change. Truth is anything would be change after Bush. Now we wait to see if he can deliver on any promise. Taxes will be increased in six months. Iraq will go one till 2010 and another 2000 brave men and women will be dead and even more damaged. Afghanistan will not be better. Nothing will have been done about energy or healthcare. The budget deficit will be worse. Nothing will have been done about illegal immigration. And we will be in a recession with no halt on unemployment or foreclosures.

How long will it be until that hope turns to disillusionment and anger?