Saturday, October 3, 2009

A Doctor Distorts Facts for the Public Option Cause

Be careful of data coming out of Doctors for America. It appears to be the reincarnated George Soros front group Doctors for Obama.

This supposed grassroots (according to their web site) organization is headed by Dr. Vivek H. Murthy a Soros Fellow, 1998-2001, of The Paul & Daisy Soros Fellowships For New Americans (Paul Soros is the brother of George).

Doctors for America member Dr. Katalin Roth was invited to introduce Vice President Biden at an event in Silver Spring, Maryland.

And the Executive Director of DFA, Dr. Mandy Krauthamer, doesn't mind a little distortion of facts to promote the agenda. But she is honest about her dishonesty among fellow travelers at the DFA blog. She writes:
In response the new NEJM article about physician support for a public plan….I landed myself a spot on MSNBC... the segment was tee’d up with the “data” that 61% of of physicians support a public option.

First, a few words about the NEJM study….I don’t see anywhere in the study that 60+% of physicians support a public option. I see 60% support a mix of public and private (but the public option that they are referring to could mean medicare and medicaid or even VA care…and not necessarily a NEW public option.) So, while I quote the study for our advantage….it doesn’t give me clear guidance about what physicians really support.

Do physicians support a public option? The truth is I don’t know.
Watch the MSNBC clip, given what she writes here, she just outright lied at the end of her MSNBC appearance.


  1. While you are correct about my initial misgivings about the NEJM study, my statement on MSNBC was accurate. My updated blog post shows that my initial interpretation of the study was incorrect.

    I am happy that Dr. Wagle wrote in and further explained the survey choices that were given to respondents and thus alleviating my initial concern about the study.

    The choices given to the respondents were, which of the following three option would you most strongly support to expand health insurance coverage in the US:
    1) providing people younger than 65 years of age the choice of enrolling in a new public health insurance plan (like Medicare) or in private plans [called "Public and Private Options"] --61%
    2) providing people with tax credits or subsidies, if they have low income, to buy private insurance coverage,without creating a new public plan [called "Private options only"]--29%
    3) eliminating private insurance and covering everyone through a single public plan like Medicare [ called "public option only"] --10%

    So, it is very fair to say 61% support a public option as was stated on MSNBC.

  2. Uh Mandy

    Robert has you nailed...the number (1) in the survey offers the doctors a "public health insurance plan (like Medicare} or in private plans..." So which is this choice, public or private?

    The way this question has been worded the responses are meaningless. Although since "private plans" was the last idea in #1 it could be argued that the doctors chose private plans NOT A PUBLIC CHOICE.

    It appears your dishonesty knows no bounds.

  3. Mrs. Krauthamer,

    The wording of choice #1 is indicative to me of how unattached from reality you folks are that latch onto the highest government teats.

    "providing people younger than 65 years of age the choice of enrolling..."

    The Federal Government will "provide" me with a "choice"?

    What Benefactors you serve!