patrick.net

This post is one of those very common can't win situations that the bitchers and moaners love so much. If the guy gets denied surgery then it's heartless death panels. If he gets the surgery then it's wasting money on someone who is terminal anyway.

Homeboy says

Weird. Why would they consider removing tumors as "experimental surgery"?

Read the article more carefully. It doesn't say what the new surgery is going to be. It only says he had surgery in the past to remove tumors.

rdm says

Very poorly written article.

That's what I figured. It didn't add up the way it was written. I appreciate you actually explaining it rather than just going in circles and repeating what the article said.

bob2356 says

Read the article more carefully. It doesn't say what the new surgery is going to be. It only says he had surgery in the past to remove tumors.

Actually, I think I read it more carefully than YOU did. That's not what it says.

"Lewis' insurance carrier would not pay for the SURGERIES TO REMOVE HIS TUMORS, treatments that doctors told him would stretch his life expectancy from one to two years to at least seven.

Lewis and Blansit got that news just hours before Lewis' second surgery in October but decided to forge ahead with THAT PROCEDURE, as well as a third and final operation...

Lewis' insurance carrier declined to cover the operationS (PLURAL) because they were classified as "experimental" and "exploratory,"..."

Anyway, I think the problem is that it's just a poorly written article.