YW Urges You to Vote NO on Prop 54 - California

[annaplurabelle]

Originally Posted by Chasiubao_Boy

nope, in my opinion it wouldn't affect it.

they're blowing it way out of proportion, almost bordering on shock tactics. i wouldn't be surprised if they're all MPH's or hold a MPH degree along with their MD, Ph.D, RN or any combination.

Well, if you're right about that, then I would support it too. That is my major concern.

[sandra]

Originally Posted by Chasiubao_Boy

in the proposition

section F

it's vague. the courts will be left to interpret this. and how will they interpret it? nobody knows.

what if, say, they decide that only medical doctors can ask for this information? what would happen to other individuals in the field who would want to conduct similar helpful studies?

[annaplurabelle]

QUOTE (originally posted by professor frink):
anyhow, the exemptions prop 54 would allow are quite arduous and agrievous - the medical community would have to go through a long process of forms and papers just to obtain some data and information on race/ethnicity for their research.

Okay, then scratch my (hypothetical) vote. I'm against it again (I sometimes fail to follow my libertarian instincts).

QUOTE (originally posted by professor frink):
could i just add, and i know and i know - doesn't it tell the public something when the only most obvious and loud supporters of prop 54 are the cal republicans club?
(im at berkeley)

I know what you mean. But it's like pulling teeth to try and get realistic info on the repercussions of this legislation. In medicine, race matters (what race is, is another story). But being against something, as a knee jerk reaction against republican support, is (IMO) a stupid position. JUST GIVE ME THE FACTS, DAMMITT!!!

[sandra]

Originally Posted by annaplurabelle

Well, if you're right about that, then I would support it too. That is my major concern.

what about the fact that it would be difficult for us to track down police departments that engage in racial profiling?

or whether students of certain ethnicities do better or worse or specific sections of standardized tests?

[sandra]

Originally Posted by annaplurabelle

But being against something, as a knee jerk reaction against republican support, is (IMO) a stupid position. JUST GIVE ME THE FACTS, DAMMITT!!!

of course. but whatever gave you the idea that it was a knee jerk reaction against republican support?


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 03, 2003

Doctors, Nurses, Medical Researchers, Hospitals, Community Clinics, County Health Officers, American Cancer Society, Public Health Experts Blast Prop. 54
ELENA STERN
work (310) 226-3098
Cell (310) 738-1376

Pledging to do whatever it takes so they can continue to save lives and protect the public health of California, medical and healthcare professionals from across California today vowed to launch a full frontal assault against Proposition 54.

The initiative, sponsored by Ward Connerly, would bar public agencies from compiling or using information about race or ethnicity. The dramatic impact would eliminate statistical information that health care providers need to ensure quality care to all Californians, prevent disease and save lives.

Experts from such groups as the California Medical Association, California Nurses Association, California Primary Care Association, American Cancer Society, California Association of Health Plans, Kaiser Permanente and the UCLA School of Public Health stood outside the UCLA Emergency Center today to denounce the initiative’s so-called medical exemption, which they called dangerously misleading.

"The Connerly exemption is so narrow as to render it meaningless to the protection of public health and the greater good of California," said Dr. Jack Lewin, Executive Vice President of the California Medical Association. "What he calls ‘medical research subjects and patients’ is in reality a miniscule number of people participating in a small number of studies and surveys. The vast majority of vital health information will still be kept out of the hands of the medical professionals who use it to save lives. Voters beware – this measure is bad for your health and this exemption offers you nothing but empty promises."

Virtually every group concerned with the provision of medical and healthcare services has come out in opposition to the measure, including hundreds of doctors, nurses and medical researchers who have never been politically active in the past. Many of them are on the front lines of addressing and treating diseases and illnesses that impact the general public.

"Clinics like the Venice Family Clinic serve a very diverse population," said Susan Fleischman, Medical Director of the Venice Family Clinic and president-elect of the California Primary Care Association. "Statewide, almost 70% of our patients are from communities of color. The one-size-fits-all model has not worked for these communities. While we should all receive care with equal dignity and quality, our needs are not all the same. Our clinics are successful because we utilize data by race and ethnicity to develop specific programs to meet the varying needs of each community no matter the race or ethnicity."

Dr. Rick Brown, a professor at the UCLA School of Public Health and the Director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research spoke about the importance of continued public health data. "Information enables public health professionals to target life-saving programs to those who have the greatest risks, those who can benefit the most. We use statistical analyses of such information to track health problems, identify who is most affected by them, and to develop strategies and programs to stop the spread of disease, reduce death rates and improve the health of all communities."

Also attending the press conference today were Dr. Jonathon Fielding, Director of Public Health, County of Los Angeles, Howard Kahn, CEO, LA Care Health Plan and a board member of the California Association of Health Plans, Dr. Daniel Higgins of the Los Angeles County Medical Association, Martha Swiller, acting director of Planned Parenthood, Dr. Michael Rodriguez of the California Academy of Family Physicians and the Latino Coalition for a Healthy California, representatives from Health Access of California, the National Health Law Program, the California Physicians Alliance, California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, Asian Pacific American Legal Center, California Public Health Association North, doctors and nurses from the SEIU Local 660, which represents staff at the UCLA Medical Center, and the California Nurses Association.

While the medical and healthcare professionals were gathering at UCLA, Bay Area Public Health Departments also warned of health threats that would be caused by Prop. 54. The warning was issued in a joint statement released today by health officials from Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara Counties, and the City of Berkeley. The statement emphasized the "disastrous" impact on health research and treatment.

[deez nuts]

Originally Posted by kasia

it's vague. the courts will be left to interpret this. and how will they interpret it? nobody knows.

what if, say, they decide that only medical doctors can ask for this information? what would happen to other individuals in the field who would want to conduct similar helpful studies?

is the potential medical ramifications of this proposition the reason or a big part of why you're apprehensive and skeptical of this bill?

there is no way MD's will be the only ones privy to this information.

in nyc hospitals (not sure about other hospitals nationwide) we're already subjected to a privacy act it's called Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. when it was first implemented less than a year ago at my hospital, everybody was screaming bloody death, how it'll affect patient care, how it'll stymie research progress and it'll be the end of the world.

[deez nuts]

Originally Posted by kasia

of course. but whatever gave you the idea that it was a knee jerk reaction against republican support?


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 03, 2003

Doctors, Nurses, Medical Researchers, Hospitals, Community Clinics, County Health Officers, American Cancer Society, Public Health Experts Blast Prop. 54
ELENA STERN
work (310) 226-3098
Cell (310) 738-1376

Pledging to do whatever it takes so they can continue to save lives and protect the public health of California, medical and healthcare professionals from across California today vowed to launch a full frontal assault against Proposition 54.

The initiative, sponsored by Ward Connerly, would bar public agencies from compiling or using information about race or ethnicity. The dramatic impact would eliminate statistical information that health care providers need to ensure quality care to all Californians, prevent disease and save lives.

Experts from such groups as the California Medical Association, California Nurses Association, California Primary Care Association, American Cancer Society, California Association of Health Plans, Kaiser Permanente and the UCLA School of Public Health stood outside the UCLA Emergency Center today to denounce the initiative’s so-called medical exemption, which they called dangerously misleading.

"The Connerly exemption is so narrow as to render it meaningless to the protection of public health and the greater good of California," said Dr. Jack Lewin, Executive Vice President of the California Medical Association. "What he calls ‘medical research subjects and patients’ is in reality a miniscule number of people participating in a small number of studies and surveys. The vast majority of vital health information will still be kept out of the hands of the medical professionals who use it to save lives. Voters beware – this measure is bad for your health and this exemption offers you nothing but empty promises."

Virtually every group concerned with the provision of medical and healthcare services has come out in opposition to the measure, including hundreds of doctors, nurses and medical researchers who have never been politically active in the past. Many of them are on the front lines of addressing and treating diseases and illnesses that impact the general public.

"Clinics like the Venice Family Clinic serve a very diverse population," said Susan Fleischman, Medical Director of the Venice Family Clinic and president-elect of the California Primary Care Association. "Statewide, almost 70% of our patients are from communities of color. The one-size-fits-all model has not worked for these communities. While we should all receive care with equal dignity and quality, our needs are not all the same. Our clinics are successful because we utilize data by race and ethnicity to develop specific programs to meet the varying needs of each community no matter the race or ethnicity."

Dr. Rick Brown, a professor at the UCLA School of Public Health and the Director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research spoke about the importance of continued public health data. "Information enables public health professionals to target life-saving programs to those who have the greatest risks, those who can benefit the most. We use statistical analyses of such information to track health problems, identify who is most affected by them, and to develop strategies and programs to stop the spread of disease, reduce death rates and improve the health of all communities."

Also attending the press conference today were Dr. Jonathon Fielding, Director of Public Health, County of Los Angeles, Howard Kahn, CEO, LA Care Health Plan and a board member of the California Association of Health Plans, Dr. Daniel Higgins of the Los Angeles County Medical Association, Martha Swiller, acting director of Planned Parenthood, Dr. Michael Rodriguez of the California Academy of Family Physicians and the Latino Coalition for a Healthy California, representatives from Health Access of California, the National Health Law Program, the California Physicians Alliance, California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, Asian Pacific American Legal Center, California Public Health Association North, doctors and nurses from the SEIU Local 660, which represents staff at the UCLA Medical Center, and the California Nurses Association.

While the medical and healthcare professionals were gathering at UCLA, Bay Area Public Health Departments also warned of health threats that would be caused by Prop. 54. The warning was issued in a joint statement released today by health officials from Alameda, San Francisco and Santa Clara Counties, and the City of Berkeley. The statement emphasized the "disastrous" impact on health research and treatment.

and again MPH's spearheading this whole thing.

[annaplurabelle]

Originally Posted by kasia

of course. but whatever gave you the idea that it was a knee jerk reaction against republican support?

Just a general comment, inspired by this comment:

QUOTE (originally posted by professor frink):
could i just add, and i know and i know - doesn't it tell the public something when the only most obvious and loud supporters of prop 54 are the cal republicans club?
(im at berkeley)

Is that enough info to make an informed decision?

I'm a (currently non-practicing) RN. I still have no idea how this legislation would affect patient care, or research. And I'm making an effort to find out. So, just a commentary on how difficult it is to form a knowledgable opinion.

[annaplurabelle]

Originally Posted by The MaguS

But the logic is there. If republicans support it, it's obviously quite a bad idea, and probably evil.


PS: I can't tell if I'm serious or not.

I'm gonna go with: you're not serious. FTR: I'm "white". I don't trust republicans, I don't trust democrats, I don't trust opinion polls.

It's not that simple. If you want to debate this on the basis of fact, you have to do the grunt work (and I certainly sympathise with the idea that fact is difficult to come by).

[deez nuts]

Originally Posted by annaplurabelle

I'm a (currently non-practicing) RN. I still have no idea how this legislation would affect patient care, or research. And I'm making an effort to find out. So, just a commentary on how difficult it is to form a knowledgable opinion.

off topic:

i assume you're in cali

you should consider coming to NY to work

1)there's a huge shortage of nurses here. the hospitals offer huge incentives like signing bonus, tuition reimbursement for grad school if you choose to specialize, 4-5 weeks paid vacation etc etc.

2)no pesky propositions to worry your head off.

[annaplurabelle]

Originally Posted by Chasiubao_Boy

off topic:

i assume you're in cali

you should consider coming to NY to work

1)there's a huge shortage of nurses here. the hospitals offer huge incentives like signing bonus, tuition reimbursement for grad school if you choose to specialize, 4-5 weeks paid vacation etc etc.

2)no pesky propositions to worry your head off.

Hey, thanks for the advice, but I'm a New Yawker! Right now, I'm considering the grad school options, but leaning towards a total career change, since I don't plan on staying in the US (and I'm so tired, doctor).

(I'm married to an MD, so I'm living off my former good karma of supporting him through med school :p)

[deez nuts]

Originally Posted by kasia

it's vague. the courts will be left to interpret this. and how will they interpret it? nobody knows.

what if, say, they decide that only medical doctors can ask for this information? what would happen to other individuals in the field who would want to conduct similar helpful studies?

i'll throw another variable into the mix. since yw has the occasional conspiracy theories that pop up every now and then on how "the man" and republicans keep us minority down; i'll throw in my first conspiracy theory like idea on yw.

say hypothetically that prop 54 is passed.

as you know most hospitals have one main hospital and several subsidary hospitals affiliated with that main hospital. if prop 54 was passed, hospitals wouldn't know the ethnic demographics in the surrounding areas of each of their hospitals.

follow me on this:

for example: my mom's radical hysterectomy with overlapping bilateral lymph node biopsy recently. her ob/gyn oncologist that did the procedure is affiliated with NYU hospital. he has priviledges at NYU hospitals. the main NYU hospital located on 32nd and 2nd ave is pretty afluent area with mostly upper class white people. after going through her medicaid paperwork and pre-cert to get approval for the procedure, they told her NYU hospital center doesn't take medicaid which is state health insurance for retired people without private health insurance. however, NYU downtown hospital in chinatown takes medicaid. NYU downtown is on the outskirts of chinatown inhabited mostly by recently immigrated chinese people. same hospital medical center affiliation. different insurance polices. coincidence?

it's the same at my old hospital: ny presbyterian-cornell on 68th and york ave. it's in the upper east side of manhattan. a really rich and affluent area mostly populated by rich white people. they don't take the state funded medicaid. one of it's subsidary, NY Hospital in Flushing Queens, populated by working class minorities takes medicaid. same hospital medical center affiliation. different insurance policies. coincidence?

so if prop 54 gets passed, the hospital administration won't be up to date on the possible changing ethnic demograhics around the hospital and therefore will not be able to determine the most efficient way to generate income for each hospital. the hospital isn't an altruistic place you may believe it to be. it is a corperation that needs to make money to keep it running.

[SunWuKong]

take your personal disagreements over on PM. any new irrelevant posts will be promptly deleted, just like the two posts i deleted.

[sandra]

Originally Posted by Chasiubao_Boy

is the potential medical ramifications of this proposition the reason or a big part of why you're apprehensive and skeptical of this bill?.

of course. that and the fact that i think that racial statistics are necessary for sociological and criminological studies as well.

there is no way MD's will be the only ones privy to this information.

but that's not what the medical exemption makes clear; it's only what you claim. why isn't it fair to say we will not pass the initiative unless we are clear that the exemption is broad enough to cover all necessary studies? again, i add that there is no rush. this initiative has been around since at least 2000, and it wasn't passed before.

in nyc hospitals (not sure about other hospitals nationwide) we're already subjected to a privacy act it's called Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. when it was first implemented less than a year ago at my hospital, everybody was screaming bloody death, how it'll affect patient care, how it'll stymie research progress and it'll be the end of the world.

i think you may describe this act in your post below, but let me ask, does it affect medical studies? what is the wording of the act?

[sandra]

Originally Posted by Chasiubao_Boy

i'll throw another variable into the mix. since yw has the occasional conspiracy theories that pop up every now and then on how "the man" and republicans keep us minority down; i'll throw in my first conspiracy theory like idea on yw.

say hypothetically that prop 54 is passed.

as you know most hospitals have one main hospital and several subsidary hospitals affiliated with that main hospital. if prop 54 was passed, hospitals wouldn't know the ethnic demographics in the surrounding areas of each of their hospitals.

follow me on this:

for example: my mom's radical hysterectomy with overlapping bilateral lymph node biopsy recently. her ob/gyn oncologist that did the procedure is affiliated with NYU hospital. he has priviledges at NYU hospitals. the main NYU hospital located on 32nd and 2nd ave is pretty afluent area with mostly upper class white people. after going through her medicaid paperwork and pre-cert to get approval for the procedure, they told her NYU hospital center doesn't take medicaid which is state health insurance for retired people without private health insurance. however, NYU downtown hospital in chinatown takes medicaid. NYU downtown is on the outskirts of chinatown inhabited mostly by recently immigrated chinese people. same hospital medical center affiliation. different insurance polices. coincidence?

it's the same at my old hospital: ny presbyterian-cornell on 68th and york ave. it's in the upper east side of manhattan. a really rich and affluent area mostly populated by rich white people. they don't take the state funded medicaid. one of it's subsidary, NY Hospital in Flushing Queens, populated by working class minorities takes medicaid. same hospital medical center affiliation. different insurance policies. coincidence?

so if prop 54 gets passed, the hospital administration won't be up to date on the possible changing ethnic demograhics around the hospital and therefore will not be able to determine the most efficient way to generate income for each hospital. the hospital isn't an altruistic place you may believe it to be. it is a corperation that needs to make money to keep it running.

i'm not quite following the point. i understand that race/ethnicity is tied to income - and that hospitals accept different insurance policies based on the income of the neighborhood. am i following? i'm not sure how this applies to our discussion.

aren't there other areas of medical studies that apply to purely race/ethnicity and have nothing to do with income level? for example, aren't certain races/ethnicities of people more prone to certain diseases?