I'm not a democrat and didn't vote for Obama you guys. I'm just looking at this information objectively. (You may want to look that word, objectively' up in the dictionary)
I am a cancer patient and I know that the San Diego area has excellent care and access to care for cancer treatments.
Like I said before, maybe the article is leaving out some critical information that would make it clear why he travels so far for ongoing treatment.
But, the average cancer patient simply doesn't travel that far for ongoing treatment. The cost alone would be a real burden for someone chronically ill.
The author also states that she went to Houston for treatment. Stanford and Houston, with UCSD for the emergency needs.
Some people, not all but some, will travel and seek out the best possible care and the best possible doctors. I imagine that, during some consulltation or another, she was directed to the doctors at Stanford and Houston and chose to avail herself of their talents. A person with a strong desire to live and the ability will seek out the best care possible. Perhaps the doctors she saw at Stanford and in Houston specialized in gallbladder cancer. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston is an exceptional facility.
So why the skepticism?
(You may want to loook that word up in the dictionary...)