Reply #1: Not sure quite how I feel about Lindorff's article ...but it deserves a kick to be read

[KoKo]

as an interesting take.

So much of the "good parts" (supposedly) of The Health Care Act don't kick in until 2013 or 14 it's hard to know the success of it at this time even though our Dems are very good at spinning.

It hasn't changed our health care..and indeed has made it hard for one in this household to get a prescription med that works for them...because they were forced on to "generics" and the generics that is paid for by our Blue Cross doesn't have an applicator that works. It's an eye drop and the generic bottling doesn't have a dropper that dispenses the proper dose of meds because they changed the applicator from the original that Blue Cross said was too expensive. It's been a terrible hassle and they don't allow you to get this med except once a month. The new dropper drips too much med so it runs out and Blue Cross won't cover it. The real med is $80.00 a month. (which we would have to pay out of pocket) The generic is $7.00 for the crap applicator and bottle.

It seems they are forcing people off to Generic Manufacturers as fast as possible without regulation as to which Generic Manufacturer is closes to the Major Pharma's packaging and dispensing that made the drug worthwhile in the first place.

That's only my experience with it. That things are much more complicated and they are putting screws to patients forcing them on Generics which might save costs for THEM but cost the patient in other ways that don't contribute to their patient wellness or safety.

It's a "work in progress" and I don't think Supreme Court should have gotten involved with it.