[TexaninVA]

Ezekiel Emanuel (brother of Rahm, Mayor of Chicago) is one of the moving forces and intellectual leaders whose efforts culminated in the recent Affordable Health Care Act. He has come out directly and stated he thinks it would be ideal if he dies at age 75. That got my attention! While he says he is not advocating this for anyone else, I’m thinking … of course you would not come out and advocate this for obvious reasons.

While I can’t find any evidence yet to support it, I think it’s reasonable to ask if that philosophy is thus embedded somewhere in the law? I hope not. But this guy is charmingly chilling in his prescriptions and gives me the creeps.

What do Villagers think of the idea of his idea dying at age 75? I’m curious to see peoples’ reaction to Dr. Emanuel’s” enlightened” views, particular since his fingerprints are all over the new law, and probably in ways we don’t even yet know about.

Ps Here’s a direct quote that I thought was particularly interesting from Dr. Emanuel

“This means colonoscopies and other cancer-screening tests are out—and before 75. If I were diagnosed with cancer now, at 57, I would probably be treated, unless the prognosis was very poor. But 65 will be my last colonoscopy. No screening for prostate cancer at any age. (When a urologist gave me a PSA test even after I said I wasn’t interested and called me with the results, I hung up before he could tell me. He ordered the test for himself, I told him, not for me.) After 75, if I develop cancer, I will refuse treatment. Similarly, no cardiac stress test. No pacemaker and certainly no implantable defibrillator. No heart-valve replacement or bypass surgery. If I develop emphysema or some similar disease that involves frequent exacerbations that would, normally, land me in the hospital, I will accept treatment to ameliorate the discomfort caused by the feeling of suffocation, but will refuse to be hauled off.

What about simple stuff? Flu shots are out. Certainly if there were to be a flu pandemic, a younger person who has yet to live a complete life ought to get the vaccine or any antiviral drugs. A big challenge is antibiotics for pneumonia or skin and urinary infections. Antibiotics are cheap and largely effective in curing infections. It is really hard for us to say no. Indeed, even people who are sure they don’t want life-extending treatments find it hard to refuse antibiotics. But, as Osler reminds us, unlike the decays associated with chronic conditions, death from these infections is quick and relatively painless. So, no to antibiotics.”

Here’s a link to the full article:

Why I Hope to Die at 75 - The Atlantic

[Topspinmo]

IMO the health care act was about money's for the government and Insurance companies. when some idiot says we have to pass to see what's in it. give you idea how clueless majority are! May for an incident it was good idea till greed to over

[Bay Kid]

Biggest tax increase ever. Plus we just gave up control over our own health care to whoever is running the government....

[gomoho]

I wonder if push came to shove if the good Dr. Emmanuel would walk the walk or high tail it to the best doctor he could find to treat his condition and extend his life.

[graciegirl]

Ever wonder why so many older people become more moderate at they age?

Because they learn from life experiences.

[rubicon]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

Ezekiel Emanuel (brother of Rahm, Mayor of Chicago) is one of the moving forces and intellectual leaders whose efforts culminated in the recent Affordable Health Care Act. He has come out directly and stated he thinks it would be ideal if he dies at age 75. That got my attention! While he says he is not advocating this for anyone else, I’m thinking … of course you would not come out and advocate this for obvious reasons.

While I can’t find any evidence yet to support it, I think it’s reasonable to ask if that philosophy is thus embedded somewhere in the law? I hope not. But this guy is charmingly chilling in his prescriptions and gives me the creeps.

What do Villagers think of the idea of his idea dying at age 75? I’m curious to see peoples’ reaction to Dr. Emanuel’s” enlightened” views, particular since his fingerprints are all over the new law, and probably in ways we don’t even yet know about.

Ps Here’s a direct quote that I thought was particularly interesting from Dr. Emanuel

“This means colonoscopies and other cancer-screening tests are out—and before 75. If I were diagnosed with cancer now, at 57, I would probably be treated, unless the prognosis was very poor. But 65 will be my last colonoscopy. No screening for prostate cancer at any age. (When a urologist gave me a PSA test even after I said I wasn’t interested and called me with the results, I hung up before he could tell me. He ordered the test for himself, I told him, not for me.) After 75, if I develop cancer, I will refuse treatment. Similarly, no cardiac stress test. No pacemaker and certainly no implantable defibrillator. No heart-valve replacement or bypass surgery. If I develop emphysema or some similar disease that involves frequent exacerbations that would, normally, land me in the hospital, I will accept treatment to ameliorate the discomfort caused by the feeling of suffocation, but will refuse to be hauled off.

What about simple stuff? Flu shots are out. Certainly if there were to be a flu pandemic, a younger person who has yet to live a complete life ought to get the vaccine or any antiviral drugs. A big challenge is antibiotics for pneumonia or skin and urinary infections. Antibiotics are cheap and largely effective in curing infections. It is really hard for us to say no. Indeed, even people who are sure they don’t want life-extending treatments find it hard to refuse antibiotics. But, as Osler reminds us, unlike the decays associated with chronic conditions, death from these infections is quick and relatively painless. So, no to antibiotics.”

Here’s a link to the full article:

Why I Hope to Die at 75 - The Atlantic

TexasinVA: You are spot on and many stories have been published in various papers about the government attempts to reduce medical care for older people. Of course they denied it but then we learned that we really can't keep our doctor or our insurance plan. Last year my wife and I asked for a pneumonia shot when we got our flu shots at a drug store and were told that people no longer age 65 or older would need them. I will ask again this year and see what they say. Statistically people in the last two years of life use more medical care and you know the government based on their actions concerning medicare billing will do whatever they can to cut back One could go but to what avil. Emanuel is typical of the extreme left leaning liberals very unpleasant and mean people....................................

[Sophie11]

People who are in government jobs are exempt from this insurance.

[janmcn]

One point Emanuel is making is that one in three people age 75 or older will develop Alzheimer's or other dementia. Why take extraordinary measures to end up sitting in soiled diapers in a facility for a decade or two? I can't think of any.

[pbkmaine]

I thought the point he was trying to make is that quality of life is more important to him than longevity. It is to me, too.

[billethkid]

he is either so politically biased it does not matter what he says as long as it backs the plan of the (he was one of the architects of Obamascare).....or

he is just a totally stupid person not knowing the impact of words from his mouth.

As one of the architects he KNOWS Obamascare to be financially viable needs more young people paying in and fewre older people using benefits.

In this day and age of medical and technological advances that have been and continue to extend longevity....how could ANYBODY with even half a brain make such a stupid commentary?

Easy; partyism!

I hope and strive for the day when I am in an audience when any such comparable stupid, brainless, uncaring, biased comments are made.

[chachacha]

just found out my little $8 prescription has now been deemed tier 3 with copay of $95. plus i need preapproval to even be covered. wonder how many thousands of times this scenario will be repeated for seniors...i saw the dr's interview and obviously at 57 it is easy for him to claim life is no longer worthwhile at 75, but for me who will be 70 next month, my life is very enjoyable and valuable, thank you very much! our best defense is a healthy lifestyle so we won't need their rotten healthcare!!!

[TexaninVA]

Originally Posted by rp001

The hca will be remembered in history as a huge breakthrough in the reduction of health care costs. Right wing diatribe will not change it!

Spoken as a true believer indeed. I’m impressed with your zeal.

And, just to be precise, what I posted were direct quotes from the good Doctor himself, not “right wing diatribe” in case that was not clear.

As far as reducing health care costs goes, if everyone is “encouraged” to die at age 75, and at some point the Government starts to enforce that, then you are absolutely right … costs will be reduced. The only problem is that a lot of us old people here in TV will be dead because of reduced access to health care.

Dr. Ezekiel really could not have made it any plainer in terms of what he thinks should happen. Too bad the proponents were not honest about it before the law was voted on however.

[Sable99]

Originally Posted by chachacha

just found out my little $8 prescription has now been deemed tier 3 with copay of $95. plus i need preapproval to even be covered. wonder how many thousands of times this scenario will be repeated for seniors...i saw the dr's interview and obviously at 57 it is easy for him to claim life is no longer worthwhile at 75, but for me who will be 70 next month, my life is very enjoyable and valuable, thank you very much! our best defense is a healthy lifestyle so we won't need their rotten healthcare!!!

I saw the interview too and I couldn't believe the words coming out of his mouth. My 90 year old mother is still living life to the fullest and only takes 4 meds on a daily basis. Her two main health issues are arthritis and restless leg syndrome -- you can have those two issues at any age!

Cha, I had labs in late August and the hospital told me that the basic "standing labs" the doctor ordered 5 years ago are no longer covered. I have to have the standing order re-written. I'm new to Medicare so I'm learning. The hosptal and (since then) a doctor have told me that if Medicare doesn't honor your claim that the secondary insurances are now automatically denying the claim. I'm debating what to do about my secondary insurance before my next open season. Both the hospital and the doctor told me this change started in August.

[blueash]

Originally Posted by Sophie11

People who are in government jobs are exempt from this insurance.

Please, for the billionth time stop lying about the ACA. You are wrong, completely wrong, 1000 times wrong and I suspect most everything you have been taught to believe about this legislation is wrong. And no I won't apologize for being strident. You came here not to offer an opinion on the utility of medical interventions after 75, nor the value of extending life beyond that age. Instead you are lying about a law because you hate it, out of gross ignorance

Congress and an Exemption from ‘Obamacare’?
Did Obama exempt 1,200 groups, including Congress, from Obamacare? - The Washington Post
For the last time: Congress is not exempt from ObamaCare - The Week
Fact Check: Did President Obama exempt members of Congress from Obamacare? – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs
In Obamacare, Congress must buy insurance from marketplaces but president and his administration keep "gold-plated" coverage, Rep. Sean Duffy says | PolitiFact Wisconsin
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-e...153149342.html
Right-Wing Media's Latest Zombie Myth: Congress Is "Exempt" From Obamacare | Research | Media Matters for America

If that is not enough to get you and other ACA bashers (prevaricators) I can continue to list many more links to educate you. There are no death panels, there are no reductions in the type of services Medicare requires etc. And millions, many millions of Americans now have coverage and no longer face bankruptcy should an illness or injury strike their family.

[blueash]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

Spoken as a true believer indeed. I’m impressed with your zeal.

And, just to be precise, what I posted were direct quotes from the good Doctor himself, not “right wing diatribe” in case that was not clear.

As far as reducing health care costs goes, if everyone is “encouraged” to die at age 75, and at some point the Government starts to enforce that, then you are absolutely right … costs will be reduced. The only problem is that a lot of us old people here in TV will be dead because of reduced access to health care.

Dr. Ezekiel really could not have made it any plainer in terms of what he thinks should happen. Too bad the proponents were not honest about it before the law was voted on however.

Well, nice job cherry picking what he said, and his entire history in medical ethics. He has always opposed euthanasia and even physician assisted suicide. His article, and I will give you credit for having read it in its entirety, is a personal statement of what he wants for himself. He absolutely states that he would not support any requirement for anyone else to not have whatever health care they desire. He opposes any rationing other than self imposed rationing (the right to death with dignity).

"And I am not advocating 75 as the official statistic of a complete, good life in order to save resources, ration health care, or address public-policy issues arising from the increases in life expectancy. What I am trying to do is delineate my views for a good life and make my friends and others think about how they want to live as they grow older. I want them to think of an alternative to succumbing to that slow constriction of activities and aspirations imperceptibly imposed by aging. Are we to embrace the “American immortal” or my “75 and no more” view"

Dr. Emanuel simply asserts for himself, and no one else, that his definition of a full life and his reading of studies on the decline of mental and physical function in the elderly has lead to a conclusion for himself that once he reaches 75 he will accept the progress of nature with no medical interventions other than pain control.
"while enduring the physical pain of an elongated dying process."

So you are wrong in suggesting he suggested people be encouraged to die at age 75. He never says that. What he does say is that beyond that age for most, but not all and he acknowledges the exceptions, medical interventions have not been successful in benefiting patients the way he personally feels are worthwhile for HIM. And he concludes that he may change his position on this as he ages.

"My daughters and dear friends will continue to try to convince me that I am wrong and can live a valuable life much longer. And I retain the right to change my mind and offer a vigorous and reasoned defense of living as long as possible. That, after all, would mean still being creative after 75."