PDA

View Full Version : Sen. Dodd has prostate cancer, will have surgery



Eric Johnson
07-31-2009, 04:47 PM
http://tinyurl.com/mh99cg

HARTFORD, Conn. – Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd said Friday that he has been diagnosed with an early stage of prostate cancer and will have surgery in early August, but the prognosis is good and the illness will not affect his plans to seek a sixth term next year.

Dodd said the cancer was detected in June during his annual physical and the results were confirmed by a biopsy. He said he plans to have surgery at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York shortly after Congress adjourns next week and is "very confident we're going to come out of this well."

-more-

My question is, isn't he a bit too old for surgery. Since prostate cancer is so slow progressing, shouldn't he be willing to forgo the surgery at his age? The rest of us will likely have to do so.

Eric

YardleyLabs
07-31-2009, 04:53 PM
He's only 65. Not that old.

road kill
07-31-2009, 04:59 PM
My disdain for Senator Dodd is as strong as anyones.

Being one who has lived thru the HORROR that is cancer (my wife, r.i.p.) I wish this for NO ONE!!

The Bullock family's prayers are with him.

stan b & Elvis


this thread should end here

dnf777
07-31-2009, 07:46 PM
http://tinyurl.com/mh99cg

HARTFORD, Conn. – Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd said Friday that he has been diagnosed with an early stage of prostate cancer and will have surgery in early August, but the prognosis is good and the illness will not affect his plans to seek a sixth term next year.

Dodd said the cancer was detected in June during his annual physical and the results were confirmed by a biopsy. He said he plans to have surgery at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York shortly after Congress adjourns next week and is "very confident we're going to come out of this well."

-more-

My question is, isn't he a bit too old for surgery. Since prostate cancer is so slow progressing, shouldn't he be willing to forgo the surgery at his age? The rest of us will likely have to do so.

Eric

Depends on the stage and grade of the tumor. At 65, radical prostatectomy is reasonable and done quite often. (If that's even the procedure he's going to have.)

Eric Johnson
07-31-2009, 07:48 PM
With prostate cancer, he could live another 10 years. Well...unless he opts for euthanasia. Now that he's 65, he'll have to be counseled in this.

I don't really wish him ill will. I merely point out that at 65 he's entered the marginal area where the current healthcare proposals may well refuse his surgery. However, as a member of Congress he'll probably be exempt from all 1018 pages of the bill. Heck, we (citizens) will probably pay for health care for members of Congress that we only dream of.

Eric

YardleyLabs
07-31-2009, 08:07 PM
With prostate cancer, he could live another 10 years. Well...unless he opts for euthanasia. Now that he's 65, he'll have to be counseled in this.

I don't really wish him ill will. I merely point out that at 65 he's entered the marginal area where the current healthcare proposals may well refuse his surgery. However, as a member of Congress he'll probably be exempt from all 1018 pages of the bill. Heck, we (citizens) will probably pay for health care for members of Congress that we only dream of.

Eric
Can you reference any part of the proposed bills that would do this? You are regurgitating claims that are simply lies. There are any number of legitimate questions that can be raised about the proposed health plans. However, the number of blatant, propagandistic lies being thrown around tells me that those opposing the bills hold the American voter in contempt and are using fear in an effort to overwhelm reason.

dnf777
07-31-2009, 08:32 PM
Can you reference any part of the proposed bills that would do this? You are regurgitating claims that are simply lies. There are any number of legitimate questions that can be raised about the proposed health plans. However, the number of blatant, propagandistic lies being thrown around tells me that those opposing the bills hold the American voter in contempt and are using fear in an effort to overwhelm reason.

Let me help. Its right under the clause offering patients over 65 the choice of arsenic laced elderberry wine, or being set adrift on an ice flow at sea when they become ill.

You gotta give credit to the opposition to healthcare reform. They haven't missed a trick!

hemlock regards,
dave

Eric Johnson
07-31-2009, 09:59 PM
Well... rather than direct you to a summary or position piece, here's the marked up version on H.R. 3200, "America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009."

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

The single most outstanding feature of this bill is that it is unintelligble. There are times when reading it you feel like you are watching a woo-woo bird. The woo-woo bird flies in ever decreasing concentric circles, flies up his own !@@$%^& and cries "Woo! Woo!"

However, the section on life counseling begins on page 424.

I'm particularly sensitive to this whole issue of rationing care. I have bi-lateral benign essential blepharospasm. There is one treatment. I take from 6-8 shots in the vicinity of each of my eyes approximately 5 times a year. The injections are Botox. I started this almost 20 years ago. Botox then cost about $100 a vial. The cost is now about $600 a vial. I now am up to a complete vial. There is no other treatment. If I don't get the treatment, within 2 weeks I am functionally blind. Image driving down the road and suddenly your eyes close and there is no way to open them and there's no way to predict the onset. That's blepharospasm.

My neurologist and I fought a 6 month battle that this was not a cosmetic use of Botox. While that was years ago, I am expecting that we'll have to battle this again. At 65, it is not unreasonable to expect that this expensive treatment for this relatively rare disease will be scorned by a single payer system to save the money for others.

Eric

dnf777
08-01-2009, 07:15 AM
Well... rather than direct you to a summary or position piece, here's the marked up version on H.R. 3200, "America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009."

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

The single most outstanding feature of this bill is that it is unintelligble. There are times when reading it you feel like you are watching a woo-woo bird. The woo-woo bird flies in ever decreasing concentric circles, flies up his own !@@$%^& and cries "Woo! Woo!"

However, the section on life counseling begins on page 424.

I'm particularly sensitive to this whole issue of rationing care. I have bi-lateral benign essential blepharospasm. There is one treatment. I take from 6-8 shots in the vicinity of each of my eyes approximately 5 times a year. The injections are Botox. I started this almost 20 years ago. Botox then cost about $100 a vial. The cost is now about $600 a vial. I now am up to a complete vial. There is no other treatment. If I don't get the treatment, within 2 weeks I am functionally blind. Image driving down the road and suddenly your eyes close and there is no way to open them and there's no way to predict the onset. That's blepharospasm.

My neurologist and I fought a 6 month battle that this was not a cosmetic use of Botox. While that was years ago, I am expecting that we'll have to battle this again. At 65, it is not unreasonable to expect that this expensive treatment for this relatively rare disease will be scorned by a single payer system to save the money for others.

Eric

Eric,
I can assure you that it is MUCH easier to get approval for off-label drug usage (and coverage) from medicare than from most private insurance or corporate coverage programs. Imagine the looks I got when I asked insurance to pay for BOTOX for anal sphincter spasm! Got a big fat, "NO".
Fortunately, the patient was in the process of obtaining medicare, and after a dreaded gov't form, it was payed for within two weeks.

Eric Johnson
08-01-2009, 12:57 PM
While I hear you, that's not the point. First of all, I don't think that the use of Botox for blepharospasm is an off-label use.

http://www.botoxmedical.com/images/pdfs/BOTOX_prescribing_information.pdf

The point is, the government can not run anything well. Much as a I trust the DoD, they're not terribly efficient. I trust doctors. I don't trust legislators or government workers (and I are one). In fact, I trust the paperboy with complex issues before I trust legislators. The paperboy when confronted with a problem he doesn't understand will probably admit as much. Legislators will simply ignore the fact that they don't know and press ahead with a "solution."

Medicare/Medicaid are two good examples. The two have a good bit of fraud and errors associated with them. Now we're expected to expand the government role in our healthcare? YGTBSM!

Eric

dnf777
08-01-2009, 03:08 PM
Medicare/Medicaid are two good examples. The two have a good bit of fraud and errors associated with them. Now we're expected to expand the government role in our healthcare? YGTBSM!

Eric

I hear your point as well. Nobody, including me, accused the gov't of being efficient. But I sure won't accuse private insurance of being without fraud or deciet. The percieved "inefficiency" of private insurance is a carefully calculated bunch of hoops they make patients jump through to get covered, and make docs jump through to get paid. If either one gives up, they happily pocket the dough. We've seen coverage decrease, denials of claims increase, payment to physicians decrease, be bundled, and denied outright under private for-profit health insurance executives. Bill Frist made BILLIONS of such practices. US Healthcare awarded their CEO one billion in stocks when I was a med student in 94.

Please don't think i'm in favor of all public option. I'll get screwed. I wish we had a simple pay-for-service, like every other aspect of American capitalism enjoys. I would gladly provide service to those who couldn't afford to pay, as I do already. But at least those who could afford to pay, would.

YardleyLabs
08-01-2009, 03:41 PM
Well... rather than direct you to a summary or position piece, here's the marked up version on H.R. 3200, "America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009."

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

The single most outstanding feature of this bill is that it is unintelligble. There are times when reading it you feel like you are watching a woo-woo bird. The woo-woo bird flies in ever decreasing concentric circles, flies up his own !@@$%^& and cries "Woo! Woo!"

However, the section on life counseling begins on page 424.

I'm particularly sensitive to this whole issue of rationing care. I have bi-lateral benign essential blepharospasm. There is one treatment. I take from 6-8 shots in the vicinity of each of my eyes approximately 5 times a year. The injections are Botox. I started this almost 20 years ago. Botox then cost about $100 a vial. The cost is now about $600 a vial. I now am up to a complete vial. There is no other treatment. If I don't get the treatment, within 2 weeks I am functionally blind. Image driving down the road and suddenly your eyes close and there is no way to open them and there's no way to predict the onset. That's blepharospasm.

My neurologist and I fought a 6 month battle that this was not a cosmetic use of Botox. While that was years ago, I am expecting that we'll have to battle this again. At 65, it is not unreasonable to expect that this expensive treatment for this relatively rare disease will be scorned by a single payer system to save the money for others.

Eric
Yes, I read the Advance Planning Services section where it provides that under Medicare patients may receive counseling with respect to actions they may take with respect to living wills and durable powers of attorney to halp ensure that their wishes with respect to the care are being carried out even if they are no longer able to direct their care. Do you believe that such information should be withheld? Did you actually read the section or simply believe propaganda pieces stating that the purpose of these services was to advise patients on euthanasia.

Most of the people I know who are facing old age and frailty are much more fearful about what things may be done to keep their bodies alive long after their minds have left the room than they are about receiving services to prolong their lives longer. My father went in the ICU for 10 days after aspirating vomit following minor hernia surgery. The doctors convinced me that if he survived at all he would make a complete recovery. He did and lived another 18 months. The cost for the ten days, paid principally by Medicare, was $250,000. From a personal perspective, I'm glad we got the additional time. From a societal perspective there may be some questions about the wisdom of spending money in that way. I suspect that if he had not had Medicare (a government medical program) he might not have survived the process.

18 months later my father's cancer had advanced much further. During the last six months of his life, he was in greater amounts of pain. The medications to counter the pain -- Fentanyl and Oxycontin -- left him in a zombie-like state for all but a few hours each day. When my Dad lapsed into a state where he ranged from semi-conscious to unconscious, I fulfilled his wishes as he had sworn me to do. We moved him to a residential hospice (coincidentally operated by a Catholic order) where my sister and I could spend his last days with him without having to spend all of our time trying simply to keep him clean. We withheld all drugs except pain killers, all IV nutrients, and all IV fluids. He received food and drink when he was conscious enough to take them. He died peacefully a few days later having had a single 15 minute period where he was semi lucid. He ate scrambled eggs, drank orange juice, and said goodbye to us both. My father had sought out advice on advance planning directives. He thought through his choices carefully. When he made his decisions, he committed them in writing and made my sure my sister and I knew exactly what he wanted and that we had the written documents needed to act on his behalf. I certainly hope that any health plan would make such counseling services available to every adult, not simply those over the age of 65. Our medical system has become too good at preserving our bodies long after our souls have fled.

BTW, the bill reads just like most health insurance policies, with explicit descriptions of what is covered. The biggest difference is not in the services it limits, but in the services that it doesn't limit.