Prop 23: Dialysis clinics

Rebecca Aguila

Prop 23: Dialysis clinics

Dialysis patients should be able to expect safe and effective treatment from government subsidized clinics performing care critical to their well-being.

As of now, clinics are not required to have physicians on site while people receive care. This not only creates a lack of accountability from the clinic, but also puts patients at risk in emergency situations, especially when chronic kidney disease is the 9th leading cause of death in the US.

Prop 23 will also require clinics to “report data on dialysis-related infections” and “obtain consent from the state health department before closing a clinic.” Additionally, the clinics cannot discriminate against patients based on the type of medical insurance they have.

You may have seen the ads on TV of scrub and stethoscope clad nurses and doctors telling viewers to vote NO on 23, or else clinics will close and patients will suffer.

You should also know that DaVita Dialysis and Fresenius have paid upwards of $75 million dollars campaigning against proposition 23, saying that if voters make them hire doctors to oversee patient care, the multi-billion dollar corporations will be forced to close clinics, which they won’t be able to do without approval from the state if 23 in passed.

We have seen time and time again what mega corporations and big pharma has been able to get away with without government oversight and strict regulation. The smallest request is asking a MEDICAL CLINIC to have a MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL present, if the thousands of ads airing everyday wasn’t a red flag, then the latter definitely should be.

Talon Marks • Copyright 2024 • FLEX WordPress Theme by SNOLog in

Comments (0)

All Talon Marks Picks TM Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *