AFFORDABLE CARE ACT not!

Take a moment to read

 

Too bad we seniors are such a drag on the Obama Administration!!!

  

---

Subject: Golden years?

  

 

Please take the time to read and pass this on ​ . . . .

 

Letter from a senior gentleman in Mesa , Arizona :

 

Dear Family, Friends, Neighbors, and former Classmates,

 

I just found myself in the middle of a medical situation that made it

very clear that "the Affordable Care Act" is neither affordable, nor

do they care.

 

I'll go back about seven years ago to a fairly radical prostate

surgery that I underwent. The Urologist (a personal Friend) who

performed  the surgery was very concerned that it was cancer, though I

wasn't told this until the lab report revealed it was benign.

 

Since that procedure, I have experienced numerous urinary tract

infections, UTI's.

Since I had never had a "UTI" prior to the prostate surgery, I assumed

that it is one of the side effects from surgery, an assumption since

confirmed by my Family Doctor.

 

The weekend of March 8-9, I was experiencing all the symptoms of

another bout of UTI. By Monday afternoon the infection had hit with

full force.

Knowing that all I needed was an antibiotic, I went to an Urgent Care

Center in  Mesa , AZ , to provide a specimen a requirement for getting

the prescription.

 

After waiting 45 minutes to see the Doctor, I started getting very

nauseous and light headed.

 

I went to the Receptionist to ask where the bathroom was, as I felt

that I  was going to throw up. I was told that I would have to wait for

the Doctor because I would have to leave a specimen and they didn't

want me in the bathroom without first seeing him.

 

That was when the lights went out. My next awareness was that of

finding myself on the floor (in the waiting room) having violent dry

heaves, and very confused. At this point, I tried to stand up but

couldn't make it, and they made it very clear they weren't going to

let me get up until the ambulance got there. By the way, when you're

waiting to see the Doctor and you pass out, you get very prompt

attention.

 

Now, "the rest of the story", and the reason for sending this to so many

of you.

 

I was taken to the nearest hospital, to emergency. Once there, I was

transported to an emergency examination room. Once I had removed my

clothes and donned one of those lovely hospital gowns, I finally got

to see a Doctor.

I asked "what is going on? I'm just having a UTI. Just get me the

proper medication and let me go home." He told me that my symptoms

presented the possibility of sepsis, a potentially deadly migration of

toxins, and that they needed to run several tests to determine how far

the infection had migrated.

 

For the next 3 hours I was subjected to several tests, blood draws,

EKG's, and demands for specimens. At about 7:30 the nurse came back to

my room to inform me that one of the tests takes 1- 2 days to

complete. I asked if they (the results) could be emailed, at which

point she informed me that I wouldn't need them emailed because I

wasn't going anywhere. I started arguing with her, but was told, "If

you don't start behaving, I'll start taking your temperature

rectally," at which point I became a perfect gentleman. I did tell her

I wanted  to see the doctor because I had no intention of  staying

overnight.

 

Now, this is what I want each of you to understand. Please read these

next sentences carefully. The doctor finally came in to inform me that

he was going to admit me. I said, "Are you admitting me for treatment

or for observation?"

He told me that I would be admitted for observation. I said, "Doctor,

correct me if I'm wrong, but if you admit me for observation, my

Medicare will not pay anything. This due to the Affordable Care Act."

He said,"That's right, it won't."

 

I then grabbed for my bag of clothing and said, "Then I'm going home."

He said you're really too sick to be going home, but I understand your

position. This health program is going to hit seniors especially hard.

 

The doctor then left the room and I started getting dressed. I was

just getting ready to put my shoes on when another doctor (the  closer)

came into the room. He saw me dressed and said, "Where do you think

you are going?" I simply said "I'm going home." To which he replied,

quite vociferously, "No you aren't. I  said, "Doc, you and I both know

that under the  "Affordable Care Act" anyone on Medicare who is

admitted to a hospital for observation will be responsible for the

bill. Medicare won't pay a cent."

 

At which point he nodded in affirmation. I said, "You will either

admit me for a specific treatment or you won't admit me." Realizing he

wasn't going to win this one, he said he would prepare my release

papers.

A few minutes later, the discharge nurse came to my room to have me

sign the necessary papers, relieving them from any responsibility. I

told her I wasn't trying to be obstinate, but I wasn't going to be

burdened with the full (financial) responsibility for my hospital stay.

 

After making sure the door was closed, she said, "I don't blame you at

all, I would do the same thing."

She went on to say, "You wouldn't believe the people who elect to

leave for the  same reasons, people who are deathly sick, people who

have to be wheeled out on a gurney." She further said, "The

'Affordable Care Act' is going to be a disaster for seniors. Yet, if

you are in this country illegally, and have no coverage, you will be

covered in  full."

 

This is not internet hype folks, this is real. I just experienced it

personally.

Moving right along, this gets worse.

 

Today I went to a (required) follow up appointment with my Arizona

Family Practitioner. Since my white count was pretty high, the follow

up was important. During the visit, I shared the experience at

emergency, and that I had refused to be admitted. His response was,

"I don't blame you at all, I would have done the same thing." He went on

to say that the  colonoscopy and other procedures are probably going  to

be dropped from coverage for those over 70."

 

I told him that I had heard that the "Affordable Care Act" would no

longer pay for cancer treatment for those 76 and older, is that true?

His understanding is that it is true. The more I hear, and experience

the more I'm beginning to see that we seniors are nothing more than

an inconvenience, and  the sooner they can get rid of us the better 

off they'll be.

 

We can have  an impact on this debacle by letting everyone in Congress

know that their responsibility is to the constituents, not the

president and not the lobbyists. We need to let them ALL know that

they are in office to serve and to look after the BEST INTERESTS of

"we the people," their employers, and not to become self serving

bureaucrats who serve only out of greed. And if they don't seem to

understand this simple logic, we'll fire them.

 

REMEMBER:

Demand your hospital admission is for TREATMENT and NOT for OBSERVATION!

 

SEND THIS TO EVERY SENIOR AND ALL MILITARY (ACTIVE OR VET) AND LET

THEM KNOW THIS IS HOW OUR REPRESENTATIVES ON CAPITOL HILL TREAT THOSE

WHO RISK IT ALL SO THEY CAN SIT UP THERE AND ENJOY ALL THE BENEFITS

THEY EXEMPT FROM  THE REST OF US.

 

WE ARE MAD AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!

  

Click here: FAQ: Hospital Observation Care Can Be Costly For Medicare

Patients | Kaiser Health News

http://kaiserhealthnews.org/ news/observation-care-faq/

  

  

  

Click here:  Colonoscopy for over 70 May Not Be Necessary -  Colorectal

Cancer Screening -AARP_

http://www.aarp.org/health/ conditions-treatments/info-04- 2013/do-you-need-that- colonoscopy.html

Stay  tuned...money saving or sincere????

  

  

  

SEE TRUTH OR FICTION  http:

 

 http://www.truthorfiction. com/rumors/m/Medicare-Under- Observation.htm#.VMf27Fr69gM

  

Prostate cancer disinformation...

Prostate Cancer - Almost everything you've been told is wrong

Posted By: Maryhrt [Send E-Mail]
Date: Wednesday, 10-Apr-2013 14:34:11

http://www.naturalnews.com/039862_prostate_cancer_screening_medical_myths.html Medical announcement reveals: Almost everything you've been told about prostate cancer is wrong (NaturalNews) Men, especially after the age of 50, have long been told they need to be screened regularly for the dreaded disease of prostate cancer with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. The reason? Because if caught early, this common cancer can be treated before it supposedly kills. Sound familiar? If you think these are the facts about prostate cancer, it's time to learn the real truth. None other than a large mainstream medical group, the American College of Physicians (ACP), has just released a statement changing recommendations for prostate cancer screening. And while the official statement emphasizes that the ACP is saying patients need to be better informed and work with doctors to decide on screening, let's take a look at the far more important facts revealed in the announcement. Why is the ACP saying men between the ages of 50 and 69 should discuss PSA tests before submitting to them? Because there are a myriad of problems with the expensive and fear-producing tests. As the ACP media statement says, the PSA test has "limited benefits and substantial harms." Harm outweighs benefits "Only men between the ages of 50 and 69 who express a clear preference for screening should have the PSA test. For most of these men, the harms will outweigh the benefits," said ACP president David L. Bronson, MD, in a media statement. How specific is the PSA when it comes to revealing cancer? Not very. The "Screening for Prostate Cancer: A Guidance Statement from the American College of Physicians" paper just published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, reveals serious problems with the PSA test. For example, PSA test results may be low when there is cancer. But, far more commonly, PSA results may be high because of an enlarged prostate but not because of any life threatening malignancy. In fact, according to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), it is common for the prostate gland to become enlarged as a man ages, a condition known as benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) or benign prostatic hypertrophy. So what is essentially a common change in the body that goes along with aging in many men can set off alarm bells when it causes PSA levels to rise, sending men for more testing and potentially unneeded -- but harmful -- treatment. Most prostate cancers are not serious, never kill Following an elevated PSA test, a prostate biopsy is often ordered and it's not the simple, risk-free procedure many people assume it to be. The new guideline statement says this: "The biopsy involves multiple needles being inserted into the prostate under local anesthesia, and there is a small risk of infection or significant bleeding as well as risk of hospitalization." But isn't it worth the risk if cancer is discovered? In the majority of cases, no. According to Amir Qaseem, MD, PhD, Director of Clinical Policy for the ACP, only a small number of prostate cancers are serious and can cause death. "The vast majority of prostate cancers are slow-growing and do not cause death. It is important to balance the small benefits from screening with harms such as the possibility of incontinence, erectile dysfunction, and other side effects that result from certain forms of aggressive treatment," Dr. Qaseem said in a media statement. Specifically, if cancer is diagnosed (no matter how unlikely the cancer is to ever cause death), it will often be treated with surgery or radiation. The ACP statement points out these treatments include a risk of death with surgery, loss of sexual function (approximately 37 percent higher risk), and loss of control of urination (approximately 11 percent higher risk) compared to no surgery. The new ACP guidelines recommends against PSA testing at all in average-risk men younger than 50, in men older than 69, or in men who have a life expectancy of less than 10 to 15 years because the harms of prostate cancer screening outweigh the benefits. As NaturalNews has previously reported, there is another possible downside to prostate cancer treatments scientists are studying. According to findings by Chawnshang Chang, PhD, director of the George Whipple Laboratory for Cancer Research at the University of Rochester Medical Center, a common form of hormone therapy for prostate cancer may actually spur cancer cells to grow and spread. Sources for this article include: http://www.acponline.org/pressroom/?hp http://kidney.niddk.nih.gov http://www.naturalnews.com/034099_prostate_cancer_treatments.html Cancer

Hip implants leach toxic metals into blood stream...

Toxic metal hip implants 'could affect thousands more people than PIP breast scandal'

A nurse friend sent me this article. You need to read it...

UK regulators knew of risks but did not warn doctors and patients, alleges BMJ investigation

MHRA announces most patients with metal-on-metal hips should have regular MRI scans

By Claire Bates

Last updated at 3:38 PM on 28th February 2012

Tens of thousands of UK patients may have been exposed to dangerously high levels of toxic metals from failing hip implants, according to an investigation published in the British Medical Journal.

This is despite the risks being known for decades.

Hip implants, like breast implants did not have to pass any clinical trials before they were put into patients.

However, the report reveals that cobalt and chromium ions can seep into the tissues of patients with 'metal on metal' hip implants, causing local reactions that destroy muscle and bone, and leaving some patients with long term disability.

Studies have also shown that metal ions can leach into the bloodstream, spreading to the lymph nodes, spleen, liver and kidneys, before leaving the body as urine. There are also concerns about damage to chromosomes, leading to genetic changes.

Local tissue reactions associated with metal ions were first described in detail as long ago as 1975. However, according to the investigation the manufacturers remained silent in the face of mounting evidence of risk.

'This is one very large uncontrolled experiment exposing millions of patients to an unknown risk. We will only find out about the safety of these devices after large numbers of people have already been exposed,' says Michael Carome, Deputy Director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group.

The study by the BMJ in partnership with the BBC, also revealed that some companies changed the design of the metal hips - making the head of the joint larger - without performing safety trials first.

Experts say it is likely that these changes are responsible for the release of high levels of toxic metals into the body.

More...

Man, 27, who had world's first quadruple limb transplant dies days after operation

The BMJ said despite concerns being raised, UK and U.S regulators failed to warn doctors and patients of the potential dangers.

They said evidence was mounting about high metal concentrations in patients with articular surface replacement (ASR) hips as early as 2006. But it was another four years until the UK regulator, the MHRA, issued an official safety alert and the ASR hip was recalled from the market.

Instead, it said the MHRA appointed a committee that included company representatives and several consultants to decide the fate of metal on metal hips.

As a result, the regulator concluded patients should be told about the risks, but no alert was issued to surgeons or patients.

During this time, implant rates peaked. In England and Wales over 20,000 large diameter metal on metal hips were implanted thereafter, while in the US, metal on metal hips are still being marketed to orthopaedic surgeons.

Just two hours before the BMJ report was released today, the MHRA published new guidance for British patients with all metal artificial hips.

The regulator said most patients should be followed up throughout their lifetime with regular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans to check for any potential problems.

The regulator said around 49,000 patients out of 65,000 with all-metal hips were in a high risk category but insisted the scans were a 'precautionary measure.'

Dr Susanne Ludgate, Clinical Director of the MHRA, said: 'Most patients with metal-on-metal hip replacements have well functioning hips and are at a low risk of developing any serious problems.

However, Nick Freemantle, Professor of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics at University College London says: 'We shouldn’t be in this position where we don’t know and there’s so much uncertainty. The stability of a compound should have been ascertained before it was used widely in people. As yet, we don’t know the consequences of this.'

Dr Fiona Godlee, BMJ Editor in Chief says: 'Hip replacements are one of the great successes of modern medicine. But a combination of inadequate regulation and untrammelled commercialism has caused actual and potential harm for large numbers of patients around the world.

'They should have known about the risks, as the manufacturers and regulators did, but they were not told.

'No pre-market system can ensure all devices are safe, but they can certainly make it more likely,' add Dr Carl Heneghan and colleagues in an accompanying article.

'Creating an independent system for post-marketing analysis for implantable medical devices that is robust and increasing international coordination around device alerts and withdrawals should go some way to sorting out the current mess.'

Full details of the investigation will be broadcast on BBC Newsnight tonight

What is a metal on metal implant?

Traditional hip replacements – carried out since the 1950s – used a metal ball and a plastic socket. In the 1990s, however, metal on metal types became popular.

In these products both the femoral ball, which sits on top of the leg, and the acetabular socket it fits into which is attached to the hip, are made of metal.

It was thought these could cope with more wear and tear.

Around 40,000 have them and they are still being fitted.

What is the concern?

In 2010, regulators became worried about the number of patients needing their operations redone because their muscle tissue had been damaged by the metal on metal hips.

It turned out tiny metal particles were getting into the blood, poisoning it and leaving patients in pain and with lasting damage to tissue. If the problem is not identified early enough, further operations can be more difficult.

Are all MoM hips dangerous?

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency ordered two types of hip implant manufactured by DePuy to be taken off the market.

Surgeons say their failure rate could be 50 per cent after just six years for full hip replacements, far higher than previously thought. Other metal on metal implants – of which the most popular is the DePuy Pinnacle – may also have higher than average failure rates, but there is not enough evidence yet to be sure.

What should I do if I have one?

If you have a DePuy ASR or ASR XL implant or do not know whether you do, you are advised to see your doctor and ask for a blood test to check the metal level, even if you are not experiencing any pain.

If you have another brand of metal on metal implant you are advised not to panic, but to have an annual check-up for five years. There is a website for ASR patients at asrrecall.depuy.com. DePuy has a helpline on 0800 2794865.

What is happening now?

The MHRA has issued a new alert for everyone with a metal on metal implant because surgeons fear the devices are more dangerous than had been appreciated. It says most patients should have regular MRI scans to monitor the hip. It can be viewed at mhra.gov.uk

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2107640/Toxic-metal-hip-implants-affect-thousands-people-PIP-breast-scandal.html#ixzz1niouRGwW

Michael K Irwin