Rather than indulge in fantasies about the Obama administration using the swine flu national emergency to grab more power, it seems that our ongoing experience with the swine flu vaccine is a good example of where we are going to be if Obamacare gets enacted. Last weekend, my family and I stood in a long line, for a long time, in the rain and wind, to get the swine flu vaccine, something that is important to the two of us that have asthma and the one that is very young. The vaccine was “free”, and only the government could provide it as we could not get this vaccine from our pediatrician, adult doctor or asthma doctor even though we had contacted them about it a few months ago. It looks like there will be a significant shortage in the supplies of the vaccine, and it’s not even clear whether we can get the second dose that is recommended for children. The vaccine industry is heavily controlled, cannot make a real profit and therefore hasn’t really changed its method of growing flu vaccines in decades. This stands in stark contrast to the remarkable changes in knee surgery or cancer treatments, among many others, that have occurred during our lifetime.
When the Democrats get their way and the federal government ends up being primarily in charge of healthcare payment and access, we will have these exact same problems with getting treatment for all sorts of illnesses. Limited access and limited innovation mean that more people get sick and that fewer survive. But, at least it will be “free.” So “free” that we probably won’t be able to afford a military any more, but that is another issue.
18 responses so far
1 balconesfault // Oct 27, 2009 at 12:22 pm
The vaccine industry is heavily controlled, cannot make a real profit and therefore hasn’t really changed its method of growing flu vaccines in decades.
Seriously? The vaccine industry doesn’t make a real profit?
I read at the WSJ “GlaxoSmithKline has poured more than $3 billion into research, acquisitions and the like in an effort to build its pandemic business”. That seems like an odd business decision for a company when there’s no real profit to be made…
2 ottovbvs // Oct 27, 2009 at 1:49 pm
This joker seems to forget that in the last two years of Bush’s presidency there were next to no stocks of “ordinary” flu vaccine let alone for an entirely new type that has to be developed ……..the claim then was they couldn’t make enough money out of it…..so the provision of flu vaccine is entirely dependant on the profit motive……sounds like a great case for govt labs taking over the production of this essential medication……and I can see someone who would make the following comment being a bit of panicker…..but that’s another issue
” So “free” that we probably won’t be able to afford a military any more, but that is another issue.”
3 MI-GOPer // Oct 27, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Obama has dithered on addressing the Swine Flu problems. We knew last spring that the flu would be horrific and now over 1,200 people have died of H1N1 while Obama dithers. Obama should have pressed to have a Swine Flu Czar, should have pushed and incent companies to produce and distribute the vaccine effacious manner so that those deaths might have been avoided. He knew about the threat of this disease while it intensified in Mexico this spring and he did nothing –except dither– to address the issue.
Obama is quickly falling below the lowest of standards that his idol, JimmineyCricketCarter, set while he was a 1-term president. I hope his polling can keep up with his lackluster performance.
4 LFC // Oct 27, 2009 at 2:53 pm
The manufacturers aren’t getting the yield they expected, and it’s Obama’s fault? Are you freaking kidding me? This post is a partisan joke.
I remember years ago when a number of companies stopped making flu vaccines because they weren’t profitable. It’s a complex and intricate process, with a lot of safety precautions needed. It requires special facilities. You don’t just re-purpose the manufacturing line for aspirin to make a flu vaccine. There were more profitable product lines to pursue, so free market theory said most companies should get out of the flu vaccine business. And they did. So profit motive did what free market theory says it should. And that works fine for the country IF we can consistently predict need.
The flip side, though, is that we had zero capacity to ramp up if need changed. And this year, need suddenly changed. The government intervention that occurred years ago is the only reason we’ve been able to keep enough excess capacity online to even develop a swine flu vaccine.
Now you can’t get vaccine quick enough and your whining your head off. Looks like somebody can’t live by free market principals, in which case there would have been no excess capacity to even develop a swine flu vaccine until maybe some time next year.
5 sims // Oct 27, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Google “Hilary Clinton and free vaccines for children” and you will get links to many, many articles which can educate you as to why we have some of the problems we have.
6 ottovbvs // Oct 27, 2009 at 7:05 pm
mi-goper // Oct 27, 2009 at 2:21 pm
“Obama has dithered on addressing the Swine Flu problems. We knew last spring that the flu would be horrific and now over 1,200 people have died of H1N1 while Obama dithers. Obama should have pressed to have a Swine Flu Czar, should have pushed and incent companies to produce and distribute the vaccine effacious manner so that those deaths might have been avoided. He knew about the threat of this disease while it intensified in Mexico this spring and he did nothing –except dither– to address the issue.”
……….the vaccine is produced by private enterprise……..you’d like the govt to take over vaccine production…yes……you have a screw loose my friend but never mind
7 MI-GOPer // Oct 27, 2009 at 9:07 pm
ottoBS and his troll friends try to gain the Obama some distance and protection: “The manufacturers aren’t getting the yield they expected, and it’s Obama’s fault? Are you freaking kidding me? This post is a partisan joke”; and “you’d like the govt to take over vaccine production”.
Well, Barry the Magicman did take over GM. Barry the Magicman did take over Chrysler. Barry the Magicman did take over more banks than a Swiss bureaucrat. Barry the Magicman did take over the Cheney-Bush strategy on Afghanistan only to be now caught with his pants down around his ankles because it wasn’t his team’s plan… he just stole the work of Cheney. Barry the Magicman is trying to take over Medicine, health care insurance industry, the CBO, Fox News, the US Chamber… phew.
But, here comes the liberal, far Left defenders of all things Obama to distract us from the blood of over 1,200 people who needlessly died from H1N1 because Barry the Magicman was more interested in fighting a War on Medicine, War on FoxNews, War on the CBO, War on the GOP rather than attending to the business of governing. Thank you ottoBS and lfc.
That’s the cost of having a president who is a perennial campaigner and can’t stop the partisan power grabs. The business of governing suffers and Americans suffer.
Just like the brave soldiers in Afghanistan have to die because this president is dithering on his support of the mission. What a shameful lot the American voter got sold in the last election.
8 balconesfault // Oct 27, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Barry the Magicman did take over more banks than a Swiss bureaucrat.
Only by winning the Presidency, and inheriting them from the free market Republican administration that preceeded him.
Barry the Magicman did take over the Cheney-Bush strategy on Afghanistan only to be now caught with his pants down around his ankles because it wasn’t his team’s plan…
Whatever that means. He actually, true to his campaign pledges, more than doubled US troop deployments to Afghanistan. His generals are telling him that’s not enough. This makes it time to re-evaluate the entire strategy. I’m not sure about his “pants down around his ankles”, unless that’s some fantasy of yours.
he just stole the work of Cheney. Barry the Magicman is trying to take over Medicine, health care insurance industry, the CBO, Fox News, the US Chamber… phew.
That has to be the worlds worst analogy.
Obama to distract us from the blood of over 1,200 people who needlessly died from H1N1
Really? That’s where you’re going with this – that every person who dies from the swine flu would have been saved had John McCain been in the oval office?
This is going to be an entertaining few years … because it takes a phenomenal amount of wingnut to be willing to even say something like that out loud.
9 writtenwithoutwax // Oct 28, 2009 at 12:56 am
A great, detailed article from Right Wing Nuthouse may help this convo. http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/10/26/why-the-shortage-of-swine-flu-vaccine/
10 txanne // Oct 28, 2009 at 2:09 am
Meanwhile in the land of “NO”. The Republicans are holding up the vote for Surgeon General for no good reason.
11 BoolaBoola // Oct 28, 2009 at 3:49 am
“…how things will be when government is in charge of health care.”
Fortunately, no one has any intention of putting government in charge of health care. Where did you get such a silly idea?
12 sinz54 // Oct 28, 2009 at 10:04 am
ottovbs:
I used to work at a government lab.
The idea that these folks would know how to operate a mass production line is absurd. Their entire culture is geared toward the R & D leading toward the production of a few proof-of-concept prototypes. They wouldn’t know how to manage a mass production line.
13 sinz54 // Oct 28, 2009 at 10:12 am
When you have an unexpected major antigenic shift in the flu genome, it’s very difficult to do the necessary R & D, safety testing, and production in time to head off a pandemic.
In 1968, I caught the infamous Hong Kong H3N2 flu. HK H3N2 was an unexpected major antigenic shift, just like H1N1 is now. And that year, no vaccine arrived in time for that bug. 34,000 Americans died, including Allen Dulles. I was sick for weeks. But I don’t recall Republicans blaming LBJ for that. Nixon never made it a campaign issue. Back then, we had politicians in both parties who were actually reality-based.
14 sinz54 // Oct 28, 2009 at 10:18 am
BoolaBoola:
Well, from Barney Frank, Jan Schakowsky, Michael Moore, all your heroes–who in talking with their own fans and supporters TOLD THEM that a public option is a stealthy way to get to single-payer. They’re all on YouTube. Thanks to YouTube, you can’t keep secrets like that from the general public anymore.
The dirty little secret that even they aren’t telling their fans is that the economics of health care ensures that demand will always outrun supply by a wide margin. And hence health care MUST be rationed by any society. And that right now, we ration by ability to pay. And those who are affluent like it that way. Those who are disadvantaged do not. So as a society, we have to decide whether to choose a different means of rationing.
All politicians of both parties, including Obama, are telling the public that they can have all the health care they demand without it costing very much. That’s a lie. We’re not going to be able to give all Americans all the care they want. We may not be able to give every patient in a hospital his own private room, for example. It’s a hospital, not a motel.
15 sinz54 // Oct 28, 2009 at 10:23 am
Here’s how we’ve been doing rationing long before Obama was elected:
Back in 1990, I had a bleeding peptic ulcer. My physician prescribed Prilosec, which is generic and OTC now but in 1990 it was brand new–and very expensive.
I asked him why he prescribed this particular drug. He replied, “Prilosec is the newest and most potent anti-ulcer drug we have. It will stop your pain, and heal your ulcer in 4 to 6 weeks.”
I said, “That’s wonderful. But it’s so expensive. What about people who don’t have health insurance?”
He replied, “Oh, we don’t prescribe it for THEM.”
16 LFC // Oct 28, 2009 at 10:41 am
Barry the Magicman did take over the Cheney-Bush strategy on Afghanistan only to be now caught with his pants down around his ankles because it wasn’t his team’s plan…
The man has been President for only 9 months. How, exactly, did he ignore Afghanistan for 7 years while the Taliban regrouped and reorganized (a.k.a. the Cheney-Bush “strateegerry”) in just 9 months? Is time different in your world than mine?
17 balconesfault // Oct 28, 2009 at 10:50 am
sinz: Well, from Barney Frank, Jan Schakowsky, Michael Moore, all your heroes–who in talking with their own fans and supporters TOLD THEM that a public option is a stealthy way to get to single-payer.
And Republicans who believe that private insurers cannot manage overhead costs as well as the federal government all agree with them.
That said – single payer does not mean the same as government controlling health care. That would be more a NHS type model, where government does not provide money to privately owned firms and hospitals and practices to supply health care, but rather takes over ownership of everything having to do with healthcare.
18 sinz54 // Oct 28, 2009 at 8:03 pm
balconesfault:
The Federal Government would have legal monopsony power to set price and supply. If that’s not “control,” I don’t know what is.
You must log in to post a comment.