Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: pharmamom
Treating 65-year-olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life years is not.

Yeah, we can have medicare only in reverse. Everyone has full coverage up to age 65, then nothing, can't even see a Doc because it would take up the time which could otherwise be devoted to a 25 or so year old. I'll bet this guy is great with kids having learning disabilities as well.

25 posted on 07/26/2009 6:04:22 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: JimSEA

I am sure that anyone who falls into the category of “chronic user” is in his gun sights. I haven’t read the paper in the Lancet—I assume he published it there (2nd tier journal) because it got a cold reception with journals here in the States. Of course it would go over well in Britain—they already deny their seniors care based on their analysis of Quality-Life-Years or whatever they call them.


28 posted on 07/26/2009 6:07:06 PM PDT by pharmamom (Queen. Visit the Queendom: www.whenwearequeen.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson