hmmmm.......

They will likely have to take this on a case by case basis,

For example...my breasts were not all that bad, I did have some real breast tissue left, not just empty, deflated flaps...but I had my breasts lifted and small implants. They would perhaps look at that and say TAX IT...because mine were not getting wound up in my shoelaces...but forget that they looked nothing like they did in years past..and my self esteem was in the toilet.

This could be the bite of the century. They always seem to see what it going on out there and find a way to tax it.

The *******s!

"Been there done that in New Jersey" in 2004.  Same lawmaker who rpoposed the tax asked that it be repealed  a few years later:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/37505.php

Shows how desperate they are to fund this monstrosity.

That was my argument with my appeal.  That the panni removal was a reconstructive procedure resulting from the disease of Morbid obesity which was diagnosed and treated.  They still denied me. :(  I agree...*******S!!

Beyond an obvious grab for cash of a growing and booming industry, this move makes absolutely no sense.  The PS being taxed in this article is being paid out of pocket.  It's no strain on the current health care system at all.

Is this simply a vanity tax?  What's next?  Extra makeup tax?  Hair styling tax? Will I need to pony up an extra couple bucks at my barber?

What are the long term effects of such a tax on PS?  Econ 101 says as prices rise demand falls. Less folks getting PS.  Less doctors going into the field.  Less advancements being made.  Those folks that really need PS are the ones really being hurt in the end.

Mark

Here goes the government taxing everything again. They all need to take a pay decrease and fire some of the stupid positions they have open in their offices. Like the Assistant's Assistant. That gets paid $55,000 to fetch coffee and bagels. This is a joke. All most all cosmetic surgery is out of pocket unless it is from an accident or breast cancer. Plus people that pay for cosmetic surgery does not get the write off breaks like Insurance companies do. They pay full price. Thanks Obmama. I am sure your mother could not afford this when she was going through her illness.

Uh, this has been knocked around since LONG before Obama...he has nothing to do with it.

This is interesting too...a "prestigious" panel now says mamograms are not necessary until age 50.  Are they serious???  This is counter to what we have been told for years....early detection saves lives. 

This has got to be a Government ploy to save $$...in the long run it will cost lives and more money if they actually treat the patients. 


http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/features_momsatwork/2009/11 /panel-mammograms-not-necessary-until-after-age-50.html?utm_ source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+orlan dosentinel%2Ffeatures%2Fmoms+(Moms+At+Work)

'ja happen to notice that this silliness is targeting the females more than anything.,...who gets the most mammo's? Women!   Who gets the most PS? Women!

You know what makes so much sense to me and duh, why havent the insurance companies figured this out????

If you make certain AGE APPROPRIATE  SCREENINGS such nas Mammos, pelvics, PSA's, colonoscopies etc MANDATORY or you get dropped....they could save a bundle with the theory of early detection.

My husband died nearly 2 years ago of rectal cancer, He was 67, He NEVER had a colonoscopy until he showed Sx of a problem. By then, he had an apple sized Stage IV tumor in his rectum and it cost lots and lots of insurance dollars to keep him alive for 20 mo. Hmm. When we started dating 14 years ago, I asked him to have a complete checkup so he wouldn't  die of something stupid and preventable. He said he was as healthy as a horse and hadnt seen a doctor in 30 years (except for a very perfunctory exam every few years for his pilots license) and didnt need to.

Oh, did I mention he was a pharmacist? A medical person *****ferred people to the dr. all the time when they asked him about things that were happening to them??  It seems to me, if he had gone way back then and got the usual scope which the MD surely would have recommended at his age, they prolly would have found a tiny little polyp and removed it and he would still be here today giving me grief about something or other,

THAT would be a cost saving measure.
Anyone agree/disagree?

Soapy
 

I agree!  This is just stupid!  Today I heard the new recommendations on Pap smears.  I can't understand the reasoning when they said, "well ovarian cancer can take 7 or 8 years to progress, so it's okay to not detect it for years!"  TH?  How stupid!  So I could have Ovarian Cancer for 3 years between my recommended Pap's and that's okay - they are saying it's okay to be three years into the cancer before it's ever detected.  Don't they think my odds of beating it are 100% better with early detection?

This is tremendous.  AND it's going to push many others to look outside this country for plastics.  Just think if you've scheduled your procedure already for after 1/2010 and now find out that you're going to have to pay the extra tax!  I'd have to cancel my surgery!