Capitol Confidential
BigGovernment.com
9/13/2010
With the FDA preparing to initiate cost-based rationing of late stage cancer drugs, the intellectual giants at the New York Times have decided to lay down a gauntlet to defend rationing of medical care. Welcome to the Brave New World of ObamaCare.
To the Times, it is an outrage that drugs are approved with “no consideration of cost,” begging the question, which bureaucrat will determine what is the value of life? We have already seen evidence that $8,000 for an average six months of more life for breast cancer patients is too much for some bureaucrats to bear.
The opinion writers at the Times show sympathy for the sick by suggesting in that they don’t want to “bar patients from getting the treatment they need. But without curtailing the use of unnecessary, overly costly and even dangerous new technologies and surgical procedures, there is little hope of restraining the relentless rise in health care costs. That is a truth that American politicians and taxpayers cannot afford to ignore for much longer.”
There you have it. In one subjective packed paragraph, the proponents of rationing within the administration have called in air support from the New York Times.
Voters will not forget that Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother to the president’s chief of staff and a presidential appointee has written extensively, as Betsy McCaughey reminded us, about who should get medical care, who should decide, and whose life is worth saving. Dr. Emanuel is part of a school of thought that redefines a physician’s duty, insisting that it includes working for the greater good of society instead of focusing only on a patient’s needs.
The article continues at BigGovernment.com
