Everybody knows that if you don't pay to maintain and repair your car, you limit its life. The same is true with human beings. We need medical care to avoid becoming clunkers - disabled, worn out, parked in wheelchairs and nursing homes.

For nearly a half century, Medicare has enabled seniors to get that care. But the Obama administration is changing that by launching a new "efficiency" measure that will discourage hospitals from expending resources on older patients. The measure was announced this week.

Hospitals will be evaluated based on "spending per Medicare beneficiary." Hospitals that spend more than average on a patient with a particular diagnosis get whacked with demerits, starting July 1.

Financial penalties will follow in October 2012. Unfortunately, patients will feel the effects much sooner.

The Obama administration claims the new initiative will reward "efficiency, " but hospitals will earn points for spending less, regardless of what happens to the patient. That could mean rewarding skimpy care.

A new study in the May 25 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association shows that in regions of the U.S. where primary care doctors are in plentiful supply and spending per Medicare beneficiary is higher than average, patients are more likely to survive their illness. Spending more is associated with lower mortality.

President Obama has said he could cut 30 percent from what Medicare spends on a patient without doing harm. But research suggests the dangers.

Read more here:

http://defendyourhealthcare.com/2011/new-medicare-efficiency-measures-deadly-to-seniors/ 

It's critical to stay informed and share information with others regarding what we're learning about President Obama's "Affordable Care Act." This kind of vigilance is going to require loads of people researching and spreading the word, because most media outlets aren't doing a lot of digging.

For instance, over 1,300 waivers from Obamacare have been granted to well over 3 million people. A plurality of those exempted have been union members, whose outfits just happened to be big contributors to Candidate Obama. In fairness, not all were blue collar workers or teachers. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's district got 38 free passes from new regulations. Many went to very upscale restaurants, spas, and hotels. Harry Reid, the law's Senate champion, got his entire state of Nevada off the hook. Ah, how the press must long for the days of Speaker Newt Gingrich, and Republican Senate Leader, Trent Lott. It was so much easier to be a watchdog when the hypocrisy seemed to be coming from the right.

Maybe we're being too harsh on our reporters. It could well be journalism grads weren't properly schooled in reading, comprehending, and interpreting complex legislation. After all the bill was over 2,000 pages, and the regulations being spawned from that "outline" may swell the count to over 100,000 pages. Hey, the administration was giving them briefings, so why bother combing through all that mumbo jumbo. Besides, now, in the nick of time, they have a story they can sink their teeth into. Democrats claim Republicans are trying to destroy Medicare and kill seniors. No, serious study required here. It's a story that fits their template so run with it. Just ignore the fact that Paul Ryan's reform plan has no direct effect on anyone 55 years of age or older.

Another story that seems to be conveniently ignored/forgotten/overlooked is how the "Affordable Care Act" is going to impact Medicaid. Here are some frightening facts gleaned right from our own government agencies. A 2008 actuarial report from the Department of Health and Human Services projected the growth of Medicaid recipients. The figuring went like this. There were an average of 49.1 million enrolled in 2007. Based on a growth of 1.2 % the guesstimate was there would be 55.1 million folks in the program by 2017. Continuing to use the government's own formula, Medicaid would grow to about 56,430,000 people by 2019.

So, you might ask yourself, how is it that there have been all these rosy financial forecasts regarding the "Affordable Health Act" when it just doesn't seem to pass the common sense test? How can you save money while expanding coverage to tens of millions of people and exploding the growth of Medicaid? You simply make implausible assumptions that have to be taken at face value because you say they're true. Then you take 500 billion dollars from Medicare to help balance the books. But that's still not going to do it. Something really needs to be done about the cost of Medicare, and Obamacare does it. The Office of the Medicare Actuary has predicted by 2019 the program will be paying doctors less than Medicaid. Now it's starting to make a little sense, right? It's simple really. The unchecked appetite of one plan will cause it to feed off the other.

Read more here:

http://www.independentsentinel.com/2011/06/obamacare-medicaids-boom-is-medicares-doom-pass-it-on/