Conservative policies kill more veterans than Al Qaeda

[RandomGuy]

Over 2,200 veterans died in 2008 due to lack of health insurance


A research team at Harvard Medical School estimates 2,266 U.S. military veterans under the age of 65 died last year because they lacked health insurance and thus had reduced access to care. That figure is more than 14 times the number of deaths (155) suffered by U.S. troops in Afghanistan in 2008, and more than twice as many as have died (911 as of Oct. 31) since the war began in 2001.

The researchers, who released their analysis today [Tuesday], pointedly say the health reform legislation pending in the House and Senate will not significantly affect this grim picture.

The Harvard group analyzed data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s March 2009 Current Population Survey, which surveyed Americans about their insurance coverage and veteran status, and found that 1,461,615 veterans between the ages of 18 and 64 were uninsured in 2008. Veterans were only classified as uninsured if they neither had health insurance nor received ongoing care at Veterans Health Administration (VA) hospitals or clinics.

Using their recently published findings in the American Journal of Public Health that show being uninsured raises an individual’s odds of dying by 40 percent (causing 44,798 deaths in the United States annually among those aged 17 to 64), they arrived at their estimate of 2,266 preventable deaths of non-elderly veterans in 2008. (See table.)

“Like other uninsured Americans, most uninsured vets are working people - too poor to afford private coverage but not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid or means-tested VA care,” said Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a professor at Harvard Medical School who testified before Congress about uninsured veterans in 2007 and carried out the analysis released today [Tuesday]. “As a result, veterans go without the care they need every day in the U.S., and thousands die each year. It’s a disgrace.”

Dr. David Himmelstein, the co-author of the analysis and associate professor of medicine at Harvard, commented, “On this Veterans Day we should not only honor the nearly 500 soldiers who have died this year in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also the more than 2,200 veterans who were killed by our broken health insurance system. That’s six preventable deaths a day.”

He continued: “These unnecessary deaths will continue under the legislation now before the House and Senate. Those bills would do virtually nothing for the uninsured until 2013, and leave at least 17 million uninsured over the long run. We need a solution that works for all veterans - and for all Americans - single-payer national health insurance.”

While many Americans believe that all veterans can get care from the VA, even combat veterans may not be able to obtain VA care, Woolhandler said. As a rule, VA facilities provide care for any veteran who is disabled by a condition connected to his or her military service and care for specific medical conditions acquired during military service.

Woolhandler said veterans who pass a means test are eligible for care in VA facilities, but have lower priority status (Priority 5 or 7, depending upon income level). Veterans with higher incomes are classified in the lowest priority group and are not eligible for VA enrollment.

*****

http://spurstalk.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=195&pictureid=1659

Some sources for possible patient stories are available upon request. Please contact Mark Almberg at (312) 782-6006 or [email protected].

Physicians for a National Health Program (www.pnhp.org) is an organization of 17,000 doctors who support single-payer national health insurance, often called an improved Medicare for All. To speak with a physician/spokesperson in your area, visit www.pnhp.org/stateactions or call (312) 782-6006.

---------------------------------------------------------

It is fairly easy to draw a straight line from these deaths to conservative opposition to a single payor system that might provide health insurance and preventive/pallative care as opposed to burdening ERs with dying veterans, or simple opposition to fuding the VA with enough to take care of veterans.

[RandomGuy]

Forgot link:
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/november/over_2200_veterans_.php

[DarrinS]

Let's see:

Conservatives are:

Anti-intellectual (they "embrace simpletons")
Anti-science
Pro-rape (ask Joe Biden)
Racists
Want children to go hungry
Want elderly to eat dog food

And now, they want veterans to die

Got it. :toast


By the way, that study was very scientific.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Most conservatives are white so i guess we can lump whitey into this too, huh?
Seems scientific to me.......

[spursncowboys]

i don't think this is an accurate research. Just my opinion though.

[Winehole23]

Seems to me we have the system the last round of health care reform in the 1990s left us, partially to credit for the result. Policies do have consequences, but so do institutions, which are letting older veterans slip through the cracks.


(Or who knows, maybe they were happy to escape...)

[Stringer_Bell]

I think the big difference that isn't being highlighted here is that AQ really does want to kill us, whereas Conservatives don't really want to kill uninsured veterans. It just happens like that sometimes. If you can't afford a insurance or don't get it through your employer, get a better job - the solutions are out there if you try! Now gather around, everybody...team on 3. 1, 2...

[TeyshaBlue]

It is fairly easy to draw a straight line from these deaths to conservative opposition to a single payor system that might provide health insurance and preventive/pallative care as opposed to burdening ERs with dying veterans, or simple opposition to fuding the VA with enough to take care of veterans.

If its so easy, one wonders why the "research" doesnt bother to connect the dots.

[TeyshaBlue]

....Other than to say "tis so."

[coyotes_geek]

The far bigger scandal here is why isn't anyone pointing out how 100% of people with health insurance die? And now Obama wants to give poor people health insurance? Are you kidding me? It's genocide!

[TeyshaBlue]

Health Insurance kills! Also, research shows that damn near every person that died this year breaths a mixture of oxygen! Oxygen kilks!

[TeyshaBlue]

Oxygen dependence is obviously a conservative plot.

[TeyshaBlue]

I mean, look man! Its soooo obvious!

[Winehole23]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1386703/

[TeyshaBlue]

Welcome to another episode of Weaksauce Analysis.

[Winehole23]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_vj2e1m7Hlgw/TAXXJeLM1_I/AAAAAAAAmbs/lyherC4oPhE/s1600/629-1.jpg

[CosmicCowboy]

The researchers, who released their analysis today [Tuesday], pointedly say the health reform legislation pending in the House and Senate will not significantly affect this grim picture.

This article/study was apparently from 2009

The pending legislation passed.

So, Obamacare kills veterans too?

[boutons_deux]

"AQ really does want to kill us, whereas Conservatives don't really want to kill uninsured veterans."

Repugs are blindly ideological and often stupid, but they should know by now that policies have real consequences (like the 1% amassing $Ts in wealth) and 10Ks babies and moms in US dying every year from lack of perinatal care, for 20K more unwanted pregancies in TX due to Repugs killing family planning clinics (free contraception, condoms)

[TeyshaBlue]

Lots of dots...bd...no lines.

[Obstructed_View]

Al Qaeda is targeting veterans now?

[ElNono]

Al Qaeda is targeting veterans now?

Can't catch a break...

[Wild Cobra]

Over 2,200 veterans died in 2008 due to lack of health insurance
OK, what is the percentage of veterans in this nation. What is the percentage of of that 2,200 from those who died in 2008?

This is meaningless without more clarity.

[Parker2112]

RG. Come on man. Come on.

(Admission: I just deleted a ton of cursing and shit from that previous sentence.)

[DMC]

If the libs didn't squeeze military pay so much, most of those vets would still be active duty imo.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It would be nice if people were to stop pointing fingers and start discussing solutions. The two party system sucks my ass.

[Winehole23]

you first

[boutons_deux]

"If the libs didn't squeeze military pay so much,"

It's the Repugs who want to totally redo and reduce military retirement plan.

It was under Clinton that the VA (and FEMA) got fixed and strengthened such the vets' approval rating of VA is higher than Human-Americans' approval rating of for-profit insurance scammers.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

you first

I am going to write a letter proposing state senators to change their state laws to institute proportional representation. I have talked to a law professor and a federal judge and they have confirmed there is not Constitutional basis or federal dictate for districts as they are drawn up and instituted beyond equal power in individuals votes.

I am figuring there are about 2000 or so state reps across the country but only one legislature hast o try it. See if I can stir any interest. If not then at least I can say that I tried.

As for the VA. My commentary was more about how the article was thinly veiled partisan bullshit and how they could really give a fuck about veterans.

[ElNono]

OK, what is the percentage of veterans in this nation. What is the percentage of of that 2,200 from those who died in 2008?

This is meaningless without more clarity.

Really?

What percentage of veterans dead due to lack of health insurance is acceptable?

[Winehole23]

As for the VA. My commentary was more about how the article was thinly veiled partisan bullshit and how they could really give a fuck about veterans.Nothing but nonpartisan finger-pointing? Way to rise above.

[johnsmith]

I am going to write a letter proposing state senators to change their state laws to institute proportional representation. I have talked to a law professor and a federal judge and they have confirmed there is not Constitutional basis or federal dictate for districts as they are drawn up and instituted beyond equal power in individuals votes.

I am figuring there are about 2000 or so state reps across the country but only one legislature hast o try it. See if I can stir any interest. If not then at least I can say that I tried.

As for the VA. My commentary was more about how the article was thinly veiled partisan bullshit and how they could really give a fuck about veterans.

Make sure you sign the letter:

Regards,
FuzzyLumpkins

That should get their attention.

[RandomGuy]

Let's see:

Conservatives are:

Anti-intellectual (they "embrace simpletons")
Anti-science
Pro-rape (ask Joe Biden)
Racists
Want children to go hungry
Want elderly to eat dog food

And now, they want veterans to die

Got it. :toast


By the way, that study was very scientific.

I would not color all conservatives with the same brush. There are reasonable moderates.

But hell, let's go down the list.
Anti-intellectual

See how long it takes you to find the word "elite" or "elitist" on fox news commentary, or for that matter in any of the websites you seem to frequent. Sarah Palin. Herman Cain. 'nuff said.

Anti-science

Anti-evolution, anti-global warming, anti-birth control, when anything approaching scientific evidence contradicts your pre-existing beliefs, you ignore it. You yourself have directly questioned the integrity of every climate scientist who has concluded that AGW is true. So you can fuck off if you want to pretend you don't contribute to this perception.

Pro-rape (ask Joe Biden)

That is silly, and wasn't meant in much seriousness. Biden is a goober for having said it..

Racists

Most conservatives are not racists. Most racists are conservative. Deal with that reality.

Want children to go hungry

When you cite anecdotal evidence of abuse of social welfare programs, while ignoring studies showing that there is little overall abuse, then use that anecdote as a reason to advocate getting rid of "handouts", you would punish children for their parents faults. see "anti-science" above.

Want elderly to eat dog food

When you advocate getting rid of social safety nets under the illusion that charity has the capacity to pick up the slack, this will happen. Cut back on Medicaid/Medicare benefits as has been directly proposed this year, and you will force seniors to choose between food and medicine.

Does this sound a bit polemic?

Yes. I have come to the conclusion, after long years of dealing with dishonest hacks like yourself, that there is a rather strong undercurrent of all of this in conservative politics.

There are indeed moderate conservatives who realize the depths of ignorance and stupidity on that end of the political spectrum. Sadly, they are being driven out of power by the screaming asshats like you, Yonivore, et al.

The more moderates are demonized and marginalized, the more true this polemic becomes of the GOP itself.

I try not to be cynical about this, but this primary season brings out the rather stark reality that the GOP has veered too far to the right. Playing to the base is one thing, but some of the things being said to cater to the tea party are out right insane, as is the fact that this extremist rhetoric and pushing of phoney/empty ideas is far and away something I have not seen in my adult lifetime.

If you are not appalled, you are either not paying attention or doing the screaming yourself.

[Winehole23]

as is the fact that this extremist rhetoric and pushing of phoney/empty ideas is far and away something I have not seen in my adult lifetime.it's typical of the last thirty years imho. a bit more extreme, but not much different in tone or emphasis.

[Winehole23]

there was a world before Obama was elected

[RandomGuy]

My commentary was more about how the article was thinly veiled partisan bullshit and how they could really give a fuck about veterans.

Single payor isn't really "partisan" per se, although it can be said to be a complete anathema to the tea party crowd.

I also wouldn't say that someone who says "veterans without health insurance seem to die at much greater rates than those who do have it, we should give them health insurance and access to better health care" is someone who "doesn't give a shit about veterans."

It *is* a bit manipulative on an emotional level though.

The underlying data jibe with other studies of uninsured populations.

Lack of access to preventive/pallative care will make you more likely to die of preventable causes.

That is not exactly an earthshaking revelation, but it is a conclusion based on what evidence we do have.

It *is* an uncomfortable reality for people who like to say "our free market health care system is the best in the world".

[RandomGuy]

Make sure you sign the letter:

Regards,
FuzzyLumpkins

That should get their attention.

:lol


Well played, sir.

[RandomGuy]

i don't think this is an accurate research. Just my opinion though.

Feel free to examine the actuarial data and do your own analyis. :)

As I said, it seems to jibe with other studies I have seen, and I have not seen any contervaling studies from the Cato institute, as much as I have looked for some.

Despite what some would think, I do troll around those kinds of websites looking at their analysis when it come to health care, and have actually found some pretty darn good solutions/data and arguments on occasion. I do like to see the conservative critiques of some liberal arguments on the matter.


Health care is pretty important to me, and I am for what works. Give me some fairly put together data saying somethign doesn't work, and I will give a policy solution less credence.

[TeyshaBlue]

The asinine title of the OP remains the elephant in the room that you seem to not notice.

[Winehole23]

a little good natured ribbing never hurt anyone

[Winehole23]

where's your sense of humor, gloomy gus? that's just RG's high spirits...

[TeyshaBlue]

where's your sense of humor, gloomy gus? that's just RG's high spirits...

*crumudgeon stare*

[RandomGuy]

The asinine title of the OP remains the elephant in the room that you seem to not notice.

Guilty as charged.

Hey, I can't constrain my inner-boutons all the time.

FWIW, you are among the crowd that keeps me from getting too cynical about conservatives in general.

Hyperbolic as the title is, consider this:

Given:

1) The data seems fairly clear, i.e. lack of insurance = increased mortality.

and

2) Conservative stance of "no new/increased taxes" as the new Norquistian dogma.

If the choice is raising taxes to pay for the additional health care for veterans, be it vouchers/VA whatever, or the "no new taxes" alternative, AND not having a viable option of your own for fixing the problem, is it altogether a baseless conclusion or statement?

I am perfectly open to a "free market, no tax" solution to the problem. I have seen none to date.

I can only conclude therefore, that the conservative policy above is actually killing people, if I accept the data and that the "no tax increases at all, ever" mantra seems to be the general consensus among conservatives.

To be clear: not all conservatives toe this line. The ones that don't aren't brave enough to buck the herd that I have seen.


If you can honestly say this is a completely irrational conclusion, I will take it all back, AND apologize unreservedly.

[TeyshaBlue]

Guilty as charged.

Hey, I can't constrain my inner-boutons all the time.

FWIW, you are among the crowd that keeps me from getting too cynical about conservatives in general.

Hyperbolic as the title is, consider this:

Given:

1) The data seems fairly clear, i.e. lack of insurance = increased mortality.

and

2) Conservative stance of "no new/increased taxes" as the new Norquistian dogma.

If the choice is raising taxes to pay for the additional health care for veterans, be it vouchers/VA whatever, or the "no new taxes" alternative, AND not having a viable option of your own for fixing the problem, is it altogether a baseless conclusion or statement?

I am perfectly open to a "free market, no tax" solution to the problem. I have seen none to date.

I can only conclude therefore, that the conservative policy above is actually killing people, if I accept the data and that the "no tax increases at all, ever" mantra seems to be the general consensus among conservatives.

To be clear: not all conservatives toe this line. The ones that don't aren't brave enough to buck the herd that I have seen.


If you can honestly say this is a completely irrational conclusion, I will take it all back, AND apologize unreservedly.

If you restrict the solution set to taxes, then I guess its a target rich environment for your narrative....and conclusions are largely unnecessary since they basically become tacit, fait accompli.

I can't believe conservatives allow any taxes to be collected!:lol

[RandomGuy]

If you restrict the solution set to taxes, then I guess its a target rich environment for your narrative....and conclusions are largely unnecessary since they basically become tacit, fait accompli.

I can't believe conservatives allow any taxes to be collected!:lol

Is there an alternative to ramping up funding to the VA and providing coverage to vets that weren't coverd before?

I haven't heard of any. That restriction is what I understand the policy solutions to be ATM.

[RandomGuy]

If it needs to be done, it needs to be done.

I don't buy the "cut somewhere else, so we don't ahve to deficit spend" argument. This is something that should exist independent of other things. At least that is my opinion.

I suppose we could avoid raising taxes if you don't mind borrowing more.

(sighs()

politics. I wish reality and solutions were more simple.