theheart.org sent an article this morning about the US health care reform bill with its tax on cardiac devices and its impact on manufacturers.
http://www.theheart.org/article/1033123.do
You may have to create a membership and log in to see the article, but membership is free and they don't spam you.

p.s. no political discussion!!!! I just found the article interesting and it'll impact many of us

 

 

This topic I'm afraid is inherently political. Politics should not be taboo in any forum so long as the discussion is mature and respectful. Actually for politics to be taboo anywhere in a democracy is a bit of an oxymoron. The only taboo should be disrespect.

The article IS political and perhaps slightly misleading. It cites the $20 billion figure repeatedly which I think is a bit of a red herring. They never really tell us exactly where the $20 billion figure comes from but I would surmise it is an estimate of the industry wide cost of the levy over the next 10 years. If you break it down that's not the huge cash grab device makers would love us to believe it is.

From the article we don't know very much beyond the fact that there will be a new tax of 2.25% introduced on the sale of medical devices. The tax is 2.25% not $20 billion. It may be a nuanced distinction but it is telling that the REAL figure (2.25%) appears only once in the article while $20 billion (speculation) appears 4 times. Now, we know that it will cost the entire industry an estimated $2 billion a year ($20 billion over 10 years). Let's not forget that we're talking about the cost to the entire industry, not one company. Consider that for example, Medtronic's profit forecast for 2010 is in the range of 3.17 to 3.22 billion dollars (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704779704574555470133882620.html). Medtronic alone could afford to pay the tax for the entire industry and still be in the black. Now that would obviously be unreasonable but the point is, this article is not entirely honest or candid about this tax.

Every industry flinches at the slightest threat to their profits no matter how harmless, so I am inherently skeptical of their whining. I also resent the threat that they would compensate by reducing R & D. Tax or no tax they have billions of dollars of profit to work with and if they're willing to do that it is clear that their shareholders are more important to them than we are.

This is a bit of a tangent but, I have long been conflicted about the profit motive in medicine. Now obviously for us in particular it works pretty well. Pacemaker's are life savers and the device makers make a tidy profit. So far its really a win win scenario. But I do wonder if it will stifle future advances. Pacemakers are great as a profit making enterprise because they wear out and need replacing. That's great for now because there is no better alternative, but if there's a way I can avoid going back every 6-10 years for a replacement I want it. That's great for me, but bad for medical device makers. A longer lasting device is obviously the best from a medical standpoint but it doesn't make good business sense.

Jesse

 

I misquoted the tax rate as 2.25%, it is actually 2.5% according to the article.

Jesse

 

No matter what the tax may be, we all know who will pay that tax. The device manufacturers will only serve as tax collectors for this as they will pass the tax on to the people that are unfortunate enough to have to have one of the products. I can hardly wait to hear more of BS from the politicians on how Obamacare will not cost us more than our current health care.

I will have to say the timing was perfect for Tracey's message. Yesterday I got notice that my Medicare supplement insurance cost was increasing by about 10% and this is from a not-for-profit HMO. Today I got notice that my social security benefit will not increase this year because the government says there was no increase in the cost of living in 2009. I wish they would tell me what part of our country they used to arrive at conclusion as it sure as heck didn't happen where I live.

For some reason I have this asinine feeling that my out going is steadily out pacing my incoming in spite of what I hear from Washington each day.

 

Here we go again with the right wing lackeys of the wealthy corporations trying to frighten poor working people who can't afford decent medical care into believing that the world is comming to an end if we get "Obamacare". Why do you folks insist on contaminating this fine group with your conservative politics. It's not about free speech. There are pleanty of other forums you can use to peddle your irrational fears.

 

Ted, I don't think the article is conservative or liberal, it's simply written from the pov of the manufacturers. Which is why I posted it, it's not what we see in the news and just another piece of information for us to file away. I don't want the news media to tell me what to think, I want to read as much as I can and form my own opinions.

And I find your word choice- lacky, contaminating, irrational- offensive. You're not discussing the issue, you're lobbing insults. You didn't offer a single fact or worthwhile tidbit to the discussion, just insults to anyone you don't agree with. Talk about contaminating the group. I'm full of political opinions, but you'll notice I haven't offered a single one here. This is not the place for it.

 

Jesse, this would be why I said no politics, see above. :o) An intelligent discussion about a political subject is not the same thing as discussing politics, maybe that's just my own personal distinction, lol. This board isn't a democracy, it's a privately owned informative message board and I was trying to show respect for Blake in asking to keep controversial discussion off the board. I'm all for your insight, I just wanted to keep the personal opinions out of it because they tend to cause discussions to degenerate quickly. Ted's post is exactly what I was trying to avoid.

Of course it's all about the profit, that's why these companies do what they do. Why does any company make a product? Employees go to work for them with the hope of drawing a good salary, shareholders invest with the hope of getting a return on their investment. One of my friends is a chemical engineer who works on nicotine patches. He does the work because he loves it, but he also knows that if he comes up with a great patent that he'll get a big bonus, that's incentive for those late nights and weekends.

It sucks that it has to come down to money, but what's the alternative? If you don't have a business striving to make a profit, no one will take on the research and make the advances. I think some companies are more moral than others but being in it for the profit doesn't make them inherently all bad.

 

If you post a political article you're going to get political discussion. The artical is VERY political and has a political intent - to get the reader on the side of manufacturers. The act of posting an article like that is the start of a political discussion.

I agree entirely with your last point. I'm not questioning the morality of companies in the medical industry. The trouble is, the best treatment isn't necessarily the most profitable. I'm not saying I know what's better, its just troubling because right now we turn to the market for just about everything and its not the panacea we like to think it is.

Jesse

 

Jesse, I wasn't really even looking at it if I agreed or not or it was political or not, my point for posting was just that if the mfr's are ready to pack up their toys and go home, it will affect us. Doesn't matter if they're right or wrong, if they cut back on research because the field is no longer as profitable, we'll be the ones to suffer for it. I don't see that happening, but it's something to think about.

Manufacturers definitely pick profitability over our needs when it suits them. Think about the appliances bought in the 60's, they ran for 30 or more years. My top of the line fridge lasted 8 before the compressor blew. When I fussed about replacing something so new, I was told that's about how long they last now. You can't tell me GE doesn't remember how to make a fridge that will last longer! They want to sell me a new one in 10 yrs, not 30. I'd like to think biotechnology is different, but I can't find my rose colored glasses this morning.

 

The Pacemaker Club is not a forum for political debate of any kind, certainly not about American health care reform, and when you post something that is sure to ignite debate, you can't then innocently say NO POLITICAL DISCUSSION. Ted is a well respected member of this club and has been for years. He is right to object to the "contamination" of PM club with political debate.

 

I don't believe what I'm seeing here. Personally I don't care what subject is discussed. If I'm not interested, I guess I'm one of the lucky ones that has a couple of arrow keys on my keyboard that lets me move on to something more interesting. I certainly don't feel obligated to try to comment. Then we have those that are saying don't do this or don't say that when actually they are doing exactly what they are telling others not to do. Anyway, the postings here now have such short life span that in less than 24 hours they will no longer be on the front page and you have to go digging through yesterdays mail to find those you don't like.

So I say post what ever subject you find interesting, but don't get offended when someone disagrees with you. Some of it I'll read and some of it I will pass on by, just like some of the pacemaker questions I see posted here.

It's the same old story, we would all be better off if we could try a little of live and let live. I know I can't make all of you as smart as I am, or some of you as dumb as I am, so unless call me out by name nothing you post is gonna bother me. If you make it personal I'll probably send you a private message explaining why I think what you said was in poor taste.

 

There were three guy's whose pacemakers all failed inexplicably at the same time and they died. As all three stood in judgement before St Peter, he asked each their political affiliation. As luck would have it, one was a Republican, one a Democrat, and the last was an Independent. So St Peter gazed at each in turn and said...


oops I almost forgot NO POLITICAL DISCUSSIONS.

So the three guys were attorneys, and St Peter said ...

 

Patch, I know the what you left out of that story and if I wasn't chicken I would tell it, but it would probably be considered political by some. Smitty

 

Tracy: My comments about right wing lackeys were not meant for you. They were intended for J.B., who escalated the thread into a politicized commentary. Everyone knows that the use of the term "Obamacare" is a code word for an accusation that the President is turning our country into a Socialist nation. As others in this group have observed, this stuff has no place here. I wouldn't waste my time feeling too sorry for the poor manufacturing companies stopping development or going out of business. I worry more about poor people doing their best to put food on the table and getting medical care when they are sick.

 

Hey Ted,

What did you do get your mouth to running before you got your brain in gear and felt like you needed to apologize to Tracey? Well how about apologizing to me and all the rest of us that happen to think differently from you so you call us a lackey? Just because I don't think much of your boy you feel as if have to single me out and call me names. I can't believe you are that dumb.

When I use the word Obamacare I talking about that monstrosity of a healthcare bill a bunch of Obama pimps are trying to push through congress. I'm not alone on that feeling either. I saw on MSNBC yesterday where 54% of the people in the U.S. do not like the Obamacare health program. But, I can see one thing very plainly. We are allowed to say anything we want to so long as it is not critical of your boy and his know nothing ideas.

As for your boy, to me he is nothing but a snake oil salesman. He will tell anybody anything to promote what he is selling. If what he says brushes by the truth, so be it, but if it doesn't that's all right too. If what I think of him and his know nothing policies, or what I have to say about him, steps on your toes, well all I can say is move your big feet.

J.B.

 

Ok, now its turning into personal insults. I think we should rephrase "no politics" to read "no personal insults". This is no place for mud slinging, it is however a very appropriate place to discuss healthcare since it is something very important to all of us.

J.B.: when you call the bill a monstrosity what about do you find so monstrous (apart from its size)? From what I understand the feared "public option" is just that: an option. How do you get from a public option for those with no other alternative to destroying America? I have heard it stated time and again that no one with a private insurance plan is being forced off of it. So what's the big deal?

From where I stand the bill seems rather tame. I come from a place where private insurance has essentially no place in medicine (well, they still rule dental) so from my perspective it really looks like nothing more than a baby step.

Jesse

 

J.B.: Why would I apologize to someone who refers to the President of the United States as "boy". We all know what you Confederate State denizens mean by the word "boy". Shame on you for such a racial slur.

 

Jessie, I think you told us all we need to know about your thoughts when you said "I come from a place where private insurance has essentially no place in medicine (well, they still rule dental) so from my perspective it really looks like nothing more than a baby step." Since you are in Canada I'm not sure why you feel obligated to comment on what is being proposed for U.S. citizens when more than half of them do not want that proposal. I think the U.S. is called a democracy which means, among other things, the majority rules.

As for name calling, I think if you will look back you will find that Ted established the ground rules for that a couple of weeks ago when someone expressed dissatisfaction with Obama care and he had a long list of names for us that disagree with him, none of which were very nice.

Now Ted, I don't care if you apologize or not, but I do think you have racism on the brain. My calling Obama a boy had nothing to do with the color of his skin. Hell, I would call him a boy if he was purple. What I was talking about is his immaturity, or to be more exact, he is a boy that has been put in a position to try to do a man's job and is a total failure.

I feel safe in saying that Obama is the perfect example of the Peter Principal.

 

Thanks for not talking politics in your latest fair and objective post. Did you also used to refer to President Bush as "boy". Let's end this nonsense of yours in the Pacemaker Club. The majority that you talk about has ruled and you are stuck with our president whether you like it or not. I hope you don't refer to Sarah Palin as "boy" if your wish comes true and she gets elected.

 

Well I hope you won't dismiss everything I say simply because I disagree with you. My take on this issue is radically different than yours because my very real experience with it is radically different than yours. The question of why I care is a good one. Maybe I shouldn't care, it doesn't affect me but nevertheless I do care. I care because I know from experience just how wrong some of the arguments that people are basing their opinions on really are.

Part of the reason I feel like commenting is that what we have here has been cited as some kind of nightmare scenario that must be avoided. There is a serious disparity between what I hear people talking about in the U.S. and what I KNOW to be REALITY. For example: you worry about government getting between you and your doctor right? But I'm glad that I DON'T have an insurance policy getting between me and my doctor.

Anyway our "nightmare" is basically irrelevant since what you're getting is nowhere close to it. If what we have is a nightmare don't worry...you're not getting it. But, if this is a nightmare then I want to dream nothing but nightmare's because its really pretty good.

To me it seems like you might be working very hard to throw away something you actually might want if the issue wasn't obscured by ideology. I find it very hard to just sit by and watch that happen. We heard all the same tired arguments 40 years ago in the fight to reform our healthcare system...Oh no..the Russians are coming! etc.. And that was at the height of the cold war when communists really were scary. Somehow common sense won the day, and I'm truly thankful for that. As I've said its been 40 years and the commie's still haven't shown up.

Now, I really want to know something. Please answer this because it is driving me nuts. I can understand calm rational disagreement with details of the bill. It is a huge document so there can't be many people who agree with everything in there. It's a compromise isn't it.?Isn't that the point of a democracy? Anyway I really really don't get how you can go from a disagreement with some detail in the bill to all this hand wringing about he end of democracy or a slide into communism or any of the other hyperbolic immensely frightening things that this bill is supposed to cause. Please I REALLY want to know. How do you get from a healthcare reform bill to the end of the world? I realize it may be hard for me to understand. After all, the reforms in the bill won't bring about anything close the system that I know, and nothing frightening or horrific has happened here, so you have understand that as far fetched as some of your fears are, they seem even more far fetched to me. Please I honestly do REALLY want to know because it all just seems so far from reality to me.

Jesse

 

No Ted, I have never called Bush "boy." I did call him "idiot" after he ordered the invasion of Iraq if that counts. No, I have not called Palin "boy" and if you think she qualifies to be called that I suggest you have your glasses checked and soon. If you are asking do I want her as a presidential candidate my answer is hell no. She is about as worldly-wise as the one we have now and one of those every hundred years, or so, is often enough.

Jesse, I do not like the health program under consideration simply because I think is a bad program. I've read about half of the 2,000+ pages and I see it as a disaster in the making.

I don't need it and while I may feel sorry for those that it may help, they are not my responsibility and I'm not interested in helping pay the cost of providing health care for others just because my government thinks it is the thing to do. Since the only money our government is that which it gets from its citizens, we are the ones that will foot that bill, like it or not.

I currently have two government mandated heath care programs, Medicare and Medicare Plan D. Given a choice I would have neither, but my government says I'll have them or pay serious penalties so I have both.

 

Okay...So there were two guy's whose pacemakers failed inexplicably at the same time and they died. We'll refer to them as Jed and T.B. to protect nothing in particular since both are clearly guilty. As both stood in judgement before St Peter, he asked each their story. As luck would have it, neither one was able to keep quiet while the other responded to Peter's question. So St Peter gazed at each in turn and said... Enough, take it elsewhere.

Jed and T.B. were immediately transported to that extremely hot spot below where they could bicker eternally without bothering others. And you guessed it, when they stood in judgement before the demon of all demons, a Politician, he said...

Ooops sorry forgot again, NO POLITICAL DISCUSSIONS.

 

Cabg Patch, is this the joke you keep been trying to tell?

John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama all die and go to heaven. God looks down from his throne and asks McCain, “Do you think you deserve to be in heaven?”

McCain takes a breath and then replies, “Well, I think so because I was a great leader and tried to follow the words in your great book.” God looks down and then says, “You can sit to my right side.”

So, McCain takes his seat and then God asks the same question to Hillary, “Do you think you deserve to be in heaven?” Hillary thinks for a second and then replies, “I think so because I have been fighting for the rights of so many people for so long.” God again looks down and this time says, “You can sit to my left side.”

Finally God turns to Barack Obama and asks, “Do you think you deserve to be in heaven?”
Obama smiles and replies, “I think you're in my seat.”

 

You're a funny guy Cabbage. I always enjoy your humor. As George Burns once said: "You are so funny you ought to be on the stage. There is one leaving in the morning."