Ccommentary on AND THE BYPASS, SOLD! TO A CHILD

A man hating woman buying a male cancer exam, men with no female connection buying a female cancer exam, people with healthy legs buying a leg transplant, and a boy who obviously has decades before he will need a heart bypass buying one and refusing to share it with a man who actually needs it. This may seem harsh, and it is. But that's how a system that puts profits before people opporates, and that's how the old system, thesystem that somesaid needed no reform, opporated. Denying coverage to someone for an alement that they need to be treated for in order to cut medical costs and increase profits by an insurance business is no different than selling amale cancer exam to a man hating woman because she put in the highest bid, selling afemale canccer exam to males with no female connection because they put in the highest bid, selling aleg transplant to someone with two perfectly intact and healthy legs because they put in thehighest bid, or selling atriple bypass surgery to a perfectly healthy boy because he put in the highest bid, even when there is a man present who actually has a heart condition. This story exposes the old system for the profits ovcer people thing that it was, and puts in stark relief howcorrupt such a system is, but that isthesystem that some said did not need to bereformed. This story, more than any previous one, clearly exposes the old system for what it was and clearly exposes anyone who sayshealth care reform was not needed to either have no heart or have not been paying attention, for those who have been paying attention, especially those who know someone who has partially or entirely been denied coverage, will recognize this story as the way the old system in fact did work, and will recognize it as not the way we ought to treat one another. Therefore, anyone who thinks the old system was fine and did not needto be reformed, should read 'AND THE BYPASS SOLD! TO A CHILD' again and very carefully and know that someone they know has been on the losing end of thismetaphoric auction and in some way been denied necessary medical care for monitary reasons, perhaps not resultiing in adeath, but resulting in some manner of injury or disability that could have been avoided if human life and well being had counted for more than money, asshould be the case. So health cae needs soldat an auction to the highest biddder isa harsh indigtment of the oldsystem, but an accurate one. And some say no changes were needed to that? How Can they? How can anyone say that a system that would let cancer screenings only be done for the highest bidder, especially since early detection generatesthe best survival rates, that would let transplants only be given to the highrst bidder and that would let life-saving heart bypass surgery only be given to the highest bidder was fine as it was and did not need to bereformed?