Monday, March 22, 2010

Rep. John B. Larson: The Top Ten Immediate Benefits You'll Get When Health Care Reform Passes

Rep. John B. Larson: The Top Ten Immediate Benefits You'll Get When Health Care Reform Passes

As soon as health care passes, the American people will see immediate benefits. The legislation will:

  • Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans;

  • Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool;

  • Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans;

  • Lower seniors' prescription drug prices by beginning to close the donut hole;

  • Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage;

  • Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans;

  • Require plans to cover an enrollee's dependent children until age 26;

  • Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing;

  • Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions;

  • Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

OpEdNews - Article: The Specter of Bigotry in Health Care Debates

OpEdNews - Article: The Specter of Bigotry in Health Care Debates
or OpEdNews: Brasch - Writer
by Walter Brasch

The Republican leadership was quick to apologize, Saturday, for racist and anti-gay comments made by some citizens against Democrats who supported the health care bill.

Anti-reform demonstrators at the nation's capitol yelled racial slurs against three Black congressmen, including Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who had marched with the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. One demonstrator spit at Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.). Several protestors yelled anti-gay slurs at Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) "I heard people saying things today that I have not heard since March 15, 1960, when I was marching to try to get off the back of the bus," Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) told reporters at the Capitol.

Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) told CNN the attacks were "contemptible." Eric Cantor (R-Va.,) told ABC-TV that "nobody condones that at all." John Boehner (R-Ohio), the Republicans' House minority leader, called the incidents "reprehensible." But he then said that the incidents were isolated and that the real issue was that "millions of Americans want no part" of health insurance reform.

But the racism, bigotry, and homophobia although "contemptible" and "reprehensible" were not "isolated." They were heard from crowds who attended Sarah Palin rallies during the campaign of 2008, although John McCain specifically condemned them, and Palin only smiled. They were heard at most "tea party" rallies. They were heard at almost every anti-health care rally for more than a year.

It is true that most of those who opposed health care reform didn't resort to venomous hatred in public, but enough did to make it not isolated incidents of a political party that seems to have long since given up the notion of the "big tent" philosophy of inclusion, and to embarrass Republican leaders who had to issue apologies.

In contrast, voices of bigotry have not been heard at rallies of those who support health care reform. Perhaps, the health care bill needs one quick amendment--psychiatric care for all Americans, especially those who have sold out any principles they may have had by exposing their sputtering venomous hatred for anyone who doesn't look, act, or think like they do.

List of Countries with Universal Healthcare � True Cost – Analyzing our economy, government policy, and society through the lens of cost-benefit

List of Countries with Universal Healthcare � True Cost – Analyzing our economy, government policy, and society through the lens of cost-benefit

Thirty-two of the thirty-three developed nations have universal health care, with the United States being the lone exception [1]. The following list, compiled fromWHO sources where possible, shows the start date and type of system used to implement universal health care in each developed country [2]. Note that universal health care does not imply government-only health care, as many countries implementing a universal health care plan continue to have both public and private insurance and medical providers.

CountryStart Date of Universal Health CareSystem Type
Click links for more source material on each country’s health care system.
Norway1912Single Payer
New Zealand1938Two Tier
Japan1938Single Payer
Germany1941Insurance Mandate
Belgium1945Insurance Mandate
United Kingdom1948Single Payer
Kuwait1950Single Payer
Sweden1955Single Payer
Bahrain1957Single Payer
Brunei1958Single Payer
Canada1966Single Payer
Netherlands1966Two-Tier
Austria1967Insurance Mandate
United Arab Emirates1971Single Payer
Finland1972Single Payer
Slovenia1972Single Payer
Denmark1973Two-Tier
Luxembourg1973Insurance Mandate
France1974Two-Tier
Australia1975Two Tier
Ireland1977Two-Tier
Italy1978Single Payer
Portugal1979Single Payer
Cyprus1980Single Payer
Greece1983Insurance Mandate
Spain1986Single Payer
South Korea1988Insurance Mandate
Iceland1990Single Payer
Hong Kong1993Two-Tier
Singapore1993Two-Tier
Switzerland1994Insurance Mandate
Israel1995Two-Tier
United States2014Insurance Mandate

Will the United States join this list in 2009?

[1] Roughly 15% of Americans lack insurance coverage, so the US clearly has not yet achieved universal health care. There is no universal definition of developed or industrialized nations. For this list, those countries with UN Human Development Index scores above 0.9 on a 0 to 1 scale are considered developed.

[2] The dates given are estimates, since universal health care arrived gradually in many countries. In Germany for instance, government insurance programs began in 1883, but did not reach universality until 1941. Typically the date provided is the date of passage or enactment for a national health care Act mandating insurance or establishing universal health insurance.

System Types:

Single Payer: The government provides insurance for all residents (or citizens) and pays all health care expenses except for copays and coinsurance. Providers may be public, private, or a combination of both.

Two-Tier: The government provides or mandates catrastrophic or minimum insurance coverage for all residents (or citizens), while allowing the purchase of additional voluntary insurance or fee-for service care when desired. In Singapore all residents receive a catastrophic policy from the government coupled with a health savings account that they use to pay for routine care. In other countries like Ireland and Israel, the government provides a core policy which the majority of the population supplement with private insurance.

Insurance Mandate: The government mandates that all citizens purchase insurance, whether from private, public, or non-profit insurers. In some cases the insurer list is quite restrictive, while in others a healthy private market for insurance is simply regulated and standardized by the government. In this kind of system insurers are barred from rejecting sick individuals, and individuals are required to purchase insurance, in order to prevent typical health care market failures from arising.

Cigna Gives $110.9 Million Compensation Package To Ex-CEO

Cigna Gives $110.9 Million Compensation Package To Ex-CEO

The insurance giant Cigna last year gave compensation packages worth more than $120 million to two executives who left the company,according to a filing with the SEC on Friday.

The vast majority of that total went to former chairman and CEO H. Edward Hanway who left his post with a retirement package worth $110.9 million -- which included $18.8 million in executive compensation for 2009, as well as a healthy pension plan, deferred compensation and stock options.

With more than $19 billion in revenues reported in 2008, Cigna remains one of the most profitable insurers in the country. Though, unlike some of its competitors, it does not appear to have raised premiums on customers in an effort to improve somewhat sagging recent profits. ...

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Middle Class Losing Health Insurance Faster Than The Rich Or Poor

Middle Class Losing Health Insurance Faster Than The Rich Or Poor

It's the biggest "doughnut hole" of them all: Members of the middle class are losing their health insurance faster than any other income group, according to a new report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

The number of middle-income earners covered by employer health insurance fell by three million from 2000 to 2008, and government programs and the individual market aren't picking up the slack. The total number of uninsured middle-income earners rose from 10.5 million to 12.9 million, representing 16.2 percent of the income bracket -- a bigger increase than for any other income group.

"It really underscores how the problem of uninsurance is not something simply affecting lower-income Americans but is increasingly affecting the middle class," said Brian Quinn, the foundation's research and evaluation office. The most recent Census Bureau estimate puts the total uninsured population at 46.3 million.

Just 66 percent of people in families earning between $45,000 and $85,000 are insured through an employer plan -- 52.7 million people, down from 55.5 million eight years prior -- a drop of nearly seven percentage points.

...

According to the report, the cost for an employer to offer individual and family plans to workers increased 43 percent and 55.6 percent, respectively, during the eight-year period. The amount employees paid for the single and family programs increased 64.5 percent and 80.5 percent. Median household income has fallen 3.5 percent to $51,233.


Click HERE to download a PDF of the report, prepared for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation by researchers at the State Health Access Data Assistance Center, University of Minnesota--Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau (1999, 2000, 2007 and 2008) and the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, conducted by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (1999-2001 and 2008).

OpEdNews - Article: NY Times Reporter Confirms Obama Made Deal to Kill Public Option

OpEdNews - Article: NY Times Reporter Confirms Obama Made Deal to Kill Public Option

For months I've been reporting in The Huffington Post that President Obama made a backroom deal last summer with the for-profit hospital lobby that he would make sure there would be no national public option in the final health reform legislation. (See here,here and here). I've been increasingly frustrated that except for an initial story last August in the New York Times, no major media outlet has picked up this important story and investigated further.

Hopefully, that's changing. On Monday, Ed Shultz interviewed New York TimesWashington reporter David Kirkpatrick on his MSNBC TV show, and Kirkpatrick confirmed the existence of the deal. Shultz quoted Chip Kahn, chief lobbyist for the for-profit hospital industry on Kahn's confidence that the White House would honor the no public option deal, and Kirkpatrick responded:

"That's a lobbyist for the hospital industry and he's talking about the hospital industry's specific deal with the White House and the Senate Finance Committee and, yeah, I think the hospital industry's got a deal here. There really were only two deals, meaning quid pro quo handshake deals on both sides, one with the hospitals and the other with the drug industry. And I think what you're interested in is that in the background of these deals was the presumption, shared on behalf of the lobbyists on the one side and the White House on the other, that the public option was not going to be in the final product."

Kirkpatrick also acknowledged that White House Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina had confirmed the existence of the deal to him.

This should be big news. Even while President Obama was saying that he thought a public option was a good idea and encouraging supporters to believe his healthcare plan would include one, he had promised for-profit hospital lobbyists that there would be no public option in the final bill.

The media should be digging deeper into this story. Washington reporters should be asking Robert Gibbs if President Obama is still honoring this deal. They should be calling Jim Messina and hospital lobbyist Chip Kahn to confirm the specifics of the deal. They should be asking Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic leaders Dick Durbin and Harry Reid the extent of their knowledge of this deal. They should be asking Pelosi if the reason she's refusing to include a public option in the House reconciliation bill to be sent to the Senate is that there are at least 51 Senate Democrats who would vote for it and she needs to insure that a final bill with a public option does not end up on President Obama's desk where he would then have to break his deal with the hospital lobbyists and sign it, or veto it to honor his deal. ...

Thursday, March 18, 2010

State of the health care debate: Talk radio attacks an 11-year old | McClatchy

State of the health care debate: Talk radio attacks an 11-year old | McClatchy

WASHINGTON — Conservative talk show hosts and columnists have ridiculed an 11-year-old Washington state boy's account of his mother's death as a "sob story" exploited by the White House and congressional Democrats like a "kiddie shield" to defend their health care legislation.

Marcelas Owens, whose mother got sick, lost her job, lost her health insurance and died, said Thursday he's taking the attacks from Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin in stride.

"My mother always taught me they can have their own opinion but that doesn't mean they are right," Owens, who lives in Seattle, said in an interview.

Owens' grandmother, Gina, who watched her daughter die, isn't quite so generous.

"These are adults, and he is an 11-year-old boy who lost his mother," Gina Owens said. "They should be ashamed."

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., told Marcelas Owens' story to President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden at the White House health care summit last month. Murray also has spoken about it on the Senate floor. Last week, Owens was in the nation's capital to speak at a health care rally and to meet with Senate Democratic leadership.

Limbaugh, Beck and Malkin are skeptical about the story, saying there were other forms of medical help available after Owens' mother, Tifanny, lost her health insurance. They lambasted Democrats for using the story.

"Now this is unseemly, exploitative, an 11-year-old boy being forced to tell his story all over just to benefit the Democrat Party and Barack Obama," Limbaugh said on March 12, according to a transcript his show. "And, I would say this to Marcelas Owens: 'Well, your mom would still have died, because Obamacare doesn't kick in until 2014.'"

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

About 1 in 4 in California lack health insurance, a UCLA study finds - latimes.com

About 1 in 4 in California lack health insurance, a UCLA study finds - latimes.com

Nearly 1 in 4 Californians under age 65 had no health insurance last year, according to a new report, as soaring unemployment propelled vast numbers of once-covered workers into the ranks of the uninsured.

The state's uninsured population jumped to 8.2 million in 2009, up from 6.4 million in 2007, marking the highest number over the last decade, investigators from UCLA's Center for Health Policy Research said.

People who were uninsured for part or all of 2009 accounted for 24.3% of California's population under age 65 -- a dramatic increase from 2007 driven largely by Californians who lost employer-sponsored health insurance, particularly over the last year.

Among those over age 18, nearly 1 in 3 had no insurance for all or part of 2009, the UCLA researchers found. The ranks of uninsured children also grew. The study was based on phone interviews from 2007, updated with current insurance enrollment data. ...

Monday, March 15, 2010

Coronary Angiograms May Be Overused, Study Says - WSJ.com

Coronary Angiograms May Be Overused, Study Says - WSJ.com By RON WINSLOW

A widely used test to detect blockages in the heart's arteries often turns up little or no evidence of disease, a new study found, suggesting that patients are frequently exposed unnecessarily to the risks and costs of the invasive examination.

The test is a called a coronary angiogram, in which cardiologists thread a catheter into the heart to take an X-ray movie to look for obstructions that might cause chest pain or increase the risk of a heart attack. More than a million U.S. patients undergo the diagnostic test each year at a cost of about $10,000 each, according to government data. In cases where significant obstruction is found, the test helps doctors determine whether a patient should undergo coronary bypass surgery or have a stent implanted to alleviate the problem.

The new study, published in this week's New England Journal of Medicine, is based on data on nearly 400,000 angiograms performed between 2004 and 2008 that 633 hospitals in the U.S. submitted to a registry maintained by the American College of Cardiology. The patients weren't previously diagnosed with heart disease, but because of symptoms, family history or other reasons ended up getting the test. Such patients represent about 20% of all people who are referred for angiograms, researchers said.

The study found that 62% of the patients didn't have evidence of significant obstructions, while 38% had important blockages, researchers found. In all, 39% were determined not to have coronary-artery disease.

"The rate of obstructive disease isn't as high as we had hoped," said Manesh Patel, a cardiologist at Duke University's Duke Clinical Research Institute, who led the study. "Our process of diagnosing coronary artery disease needs improvement."

Dr. Patel and other cardiologists cautioned that the results don't apply to patients with established disease or, especially, with severe chest pain where there is concern for an imminent heart attack. For such patients, getting an urgent angiogram can be a crucial step in treatment.

...

The study also comes amid growing concern about the exploding use of radiation-based imaging in medicine, which has sparked worries that many patients are electing to get scans that provide little benefit while increasing their risk of cancer. ...

Sunday, March 14, 2010

AmnestyInternational: In the U.S., Too Many Women Dying While Having Babies - Yahoo! News

AmnestyInternational: In the U.S., Too Many Women Dying While Having Babies - Yahoo! News

Amnesty International may be best known to American audiences for bringing to light horror stories overseas such as the disappearance of political activists in Argentina or the abysmal conditions inside South African prisons under apartheid. But in a new report on pregnancy and childbirth care in the U.S., Amnesty details the maternal health carecrisis in this country as part of a systemic violation of women's rights.

The report, titled "Deadly Delivery," notes that the likelihood of a woman dying in childbirth in the U.S. is five times greater than in Greece, four times greater than in Germany, and three times greater than in Spain. Every day in the U.S., more than two women die ofpregnancy-related causes, with the maternal mortality ratio doubling from 6.6 deaths per 100,000 births in 1987 to 13.3 deaths per 100,000 births in 2006. (And as shocking as these figures are, Amnesty notes that the actual number of maternal deaths in the U.S. may be a lot higher since there are no federal requirements to report these outcomes and since data collection at the state and local levels needs to be improved.) "In the U.S., we spend more than any country on health care, yet American women are at greater risk of dying from pregnancy-related causes than in 40 other countries," says Nan Strauss, the report's co-author, who spent two years investigating the issue of maternal mortality worldwide. "We thought that was scandalous." (See the most common hospital mishaps.)

According to Amnesty, which gathered data from many sources including the CDC, approximately half of the pregnancy-related deaths in the U.S. are preventable, the result of systemic failures including barriers to accessing care; inadequate, neglectful, or discriminatory care; and overuse of risky interventions like inducing labor and delivering via cesarean section. "Women are not dying from complex, mysterious causes that we don't know how to treat," says Strauss. "Women are dying because it's a fragmented system, and they are not getting the comprehensive services that they need."

The report notes that black women in the U.S. are nearly four times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women, although they are no more likely to suffer certain complications like hemorrhage.(See the top 10 medical breakthroughs of 2009.)

The Amnesty report comes on the heels of an investigation in California that found maternal deaths have tripled there in recent years as well as a maternal-mortality alert issued in January by the Joint Commission, a group that accredits hospitals and other medical organizations, which noted that common preventable errors included failure to control blood pressure in hypertensive women and failure to pay attention to vital signsfollowing c-sections. And just this week, a panel of medical experts at a conference held by the National Institutes of Health recommended that physicians' organizations revisit policies that prevent women from having vaginal births after having had a cesarean. Such policies, designed in part to protect against litigation, have contributed to the U.S. cesarean rate rising to nearly 32% in 2007, the most recent year for which data is available.

The Amnesty report spotlights numerous barriers women face in accessing care, even among those who are insured or qualify for Medicaid. Poverty is a major factor, but all women are put at risk by overuse of obstetrical intervention and barriers in access to more woman-centered, physiologic care provided by family-practice physicians and midwives.

Walmart fires Michigan man for using medical marijuana | wzzm13.com | Grand Rapids, MI

Walmart fires Michigan man for using medical marijuana | wzzm13.com | Grand Rapids, MI

BATTLE CREEK, Mich. (WZZM) - Now that medical marijuana is legal in Michigan, can an employer fire a worker who tests positive for the drug?

WalMart says it can, so it did. "I was terminated because I failed a drug screening," says former WalMart employee Joseph Casias.

In 2008, Casias was the Associate Of The Year at the WalMart store in Battle Creek, despite suffering from sinus cancer and an inoperable brain tumor.

At his doctor's recommendation, Casias says he legally uses medical marijuana to ease his pain.

"It helps tremendously," he says. "I only use it to stop the pain. To make me feel more comfortable and active as a person."

During his five years at WalMart, Casias says he went to work every day, determined to be the best.

"I gave them everything," he says. "110 percent every day. Anything they asked me to do I did. More than they asked me to do. 12 to 14 hours a day."

But last November, Casias sprained his knee at work. Marijuana was detected in his system during the routine drug screening that follows all workplace injuries. Casias showed WalMart managers his state medical marijuana card, but he was fired anyway.

"I was told they do not accept or honor my medical marijuana card," says Casias. ,,,

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Employers plan to shift more health-care costs to workers, survey reports - washingtonpost.com

Employers plan to shift more health-care costs to workers, survey reports - washingtonpost.com

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 11, 2010; 6:00 AM

Most big employers plan to shift a larger share of health-care costs to their workers next year, according to a survey to be released Thursday.

Many say they may charge more to cover spouses, tighten eligibility standards for their health plans and dispense financial rewards or penalties based on the results of certain lab tests. At some companies, employees who are overweight could be excluded from the most desirable plans.

Meanwhile, employees at many companies can expect significantly higher premiums, deductibles and co-payments, according to the annual survey by the National Business Group on Health, a coalition of big employers, and Towers Watson, a consulting firm that advises companies on employee benefits.

"This shows that the constant, unrelenting increases in health-care costs are going to cost employees and their families more and more," said Helen Darling, president of the business group. Faced with rapidly rising medical expenses, "employers are going to have to do something," she said.

People who work for large corporations have some of the most stable and comprehensive medical coverage in the nation. They are insulated from insurance industry practices at the heart of the Washington health-care debate, such as having their policies rescinded after getting sick or being denied coverage based on preexisting conditions. However, the new survey is a reminder that even people who are satisfied with their insurance plans cannot count on a continuation of the status quo.

With or without reform, coverage at big corporations is likely to become less affordable, and it could become more restrictive. ...

Friday, March 5, 2010

Health Reform: Why Aren't We Talking About Prices? - US News and World Report

Health Reform: Why Aren't We Talking About Prices? - US News and World Report

America's sky-high healthcare spending must be brought down to earth, not soar further. I'm convinced that this can be done. How? If our opaque and often secretive health-payment system were made transparent, the ground would be laid for consumers to find better premiums and prices for their families.
...

But the real problem is that our prices are vastly inflated over what they can and should be. In a report comparing U.S. health spending with that in other developed countries, the Congressional Research Service showed that for virtually every medical service or product, Americans pay more. The same coronary bypass operation, abdominal aneurysm repair, or hip surgery will cost twice as much in the United States as in Canada. Americans pay the highest prices in the world for pharmaceuticals, averaging $878 per person per year versus $461 in Europe. That is a big reason that America spends more than 16 percent of its gross domestic product on healthcare, compared with Europe's average of 9 percent. There is a lot of room for lowering prices.

[One big problem: The true prices charged are often a secret.]

America's prosperity and rising GDP have enabled us to ignore the cost of health benefitsmostly obscured in pay stubs.

...

COMMENTS


Medical prices are vastly out of line
I can't believe anyone would suggest that our medical cost are "not out of line". What planet do you live on!? The charges for drugs and even many medical services are criminally high and excessive (far beyond the cost of production). The pharmaceutical industry has a strangle hold on the way medical professionals are schooled and trained and the whole system is geared, not for healing and health, but greed. Like the legal profession, the medical profession deserves the utter disdain of the American public. Sure, I have 'friends' in both professions whom I know to have integrity; but it is they who inform me of their shame. Wake up America. You have been duped and sold out. Wake up!

Warren Buffett On CNBC: Health Care Is Like An 'Economic Tape Worm' (WATCH)

Warren Buffett On CNBC: Health Care Is Like An 'Economic Tape Worm' (WATCH)

OMAHA, Neb. -- (BY JOSH FUNK, AP)Billionaire Warren Buffett says health care costs are a major drain on U.S. businesses and act like an "economic tape worm."

The head of the holding company Berkshire Hathaway Inc. said Monday on CNBC that America's health care system needs fundamental reform to attack costs because it's not practical to continue devoting roughly 17 percent of the nation's gross domestic product to health care.

Buffett says much of the rest of the world is paying about 9 percent of their GDP on health care and have more doctors and nurses per person.

He says he hopes Congress will develop a new health care reform proposal that will restrict costs more than any of the current plans would. ...

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

White House Health Proposal May Blow Up PhRMA Deal — Making Government Transparent and Accountable - Sunlight Foundation Blog

White House Health Proposal May Blow Up PhRMA Deal — Making Government Transparent and Accountable - Sunlight Foundation Blog
...
Throughout 2009, PhRMA and major pharmaceutical companies crafted a deal with the White House to limit cost cutting by the industry in exchange for the industry’s support, through over $100 million in television advertising, for health care reform. (The entire story behind the crafting of the deal can be read here.) The White House’s new proposal contains deeper cost cuts than previously agreed to and contains regulations on the relationship between brand-name and generic drug companies that the industry opposes.
The White House’s new proposal would eliminate the “donut hole” by 2020 by making participants pay only 25 percent coinsurance with Medicare covering the other 75 percent. The White House also takes a page from the House health reform bill by providing a $250 rebate to Part D participants who fall into the “donut hole.” (The House bill provides for a $500 reduction in costs for participants who fall into the “donut hole.”)

Another piece of the proposal would allow the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to regulate the interactions between brand-name and generic drug companies. At issue is the revelation that brand-name drug companies have been paying off generic drug companies for support on patent extensions for certain drugs. This means that consumers will see serious delays in the release of certain generic drugs and therefore still face the higher costs of brand-name drugs. The FTC is filing suit against the drug companies to end this practice and the White House proposal aims to give the FTC authority to regulate and end this practice. The summary of the proposal states that the White House would, “[make] anti-competitive and unlawful any agreement in which a generic drug manufacturer receives anything of value from a brand-name drug manufacturer that contains a provision in which the generic drug manufacturer agrees to limit or forego research, development, marketing, manufacturing or sales of the generic drug.” The White House claims that payouts to generic drug companies cost consumers up to $35 billion over the next ten years.

PhRMA and the brand-name drug companies backing it are adamantly opposed to FTC regulation of payouts to generic companies. A previous statement from PhRMA states:

Patent settlements between brand-name and generics companies can resolve expensive patent disputes to help foster innovation and improve access to medicines so that patients can live healthier, more productive lives. ...

Dr. Jon LaPook: Do Health Care Advances Make Us Healthier?

Dr. Jon LaPook: Do Health Care Advances Make Us Healthier?

Last week's CDC report, "Health, United States, 2009" confirms that Americans are increasingly turning to medications, scans, and procedures to improve their health. Exercising, eating right, and weight loss: not so much.
...
Here is the good news and bad news about three major findings of the CDC report:

1) The use of imaging studies like CT and MRI scans has tripled in the past ten years.

The good news
These tests can be truly lifesaving. They can diagnose conditions like appendicitis and cancer much earlier than in the past.

The bad news
They're expensive and carry risks. The annual price tag for all these scans is about 100 billion dollars and about 35 to 40 percent are estimated to be unnecessary. Experts are concerned that radiation exposure from tests like CT scans might increase the risk of cancer. And false positives often lead to further testing.

2) The percentage of Americans taking at least one prescription drug increased from 38 percent in 1988-1994 to 47 percent in 2003-2006. Those taking three or more drugs increased from 11 percent to 21 percent.

The good news
Medications clearly help control many medical problems -- for example, hypertension, high cholesterol, and diabetes.

The bad news
The more pills you take -- including vitamins, minerals, and herbs -- the greater the risk of an adverse interaction. Just three months ago, the FDA warned that commonly-used medications such as Prilosec and Nexium can make the anti-clotting drug Plavix less effective.

And medications can give patients a false sense of security. No matter how much Lipitor you take, you're not safe from heart disease if you eat a lousy diet, never exercise, and are obese.

3) Procedures such as angioplasty (opening up a blocked artery supplying the heart) and joint replacements are skyrocketing.

The good news
Used wisely, procedures are a tremendous boon. Emergency angioplasty performed during a heart attack saves lives. Knee and hip replacements can keep people active who otherwise would become immobile.

The bad news
About 30 percent of elective procedures are unnecessary according to experts like Dr. Elliott Fisher, director of population health and policy at the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice. Dr. Fisher advises, "If I were a patient, I'd ask two questions: help me understand the risks and benefits of these procedures, and by the way doctor, do you have a financial interest in ordering this test?"


To try to put the CDC report in perspective, I spoke to Dr. Linda Fried, Dean of the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University. She explained that despite advances in many areas over the past decade, we are falling way short in providing adequate health care to Americans. A big reason: we lack a public health system that emphasizes prevention.

She told me, "In our fast paced society, which goes for silver bullets, quick fixes, high return on investment on quarterly reports, prevention is not part of that scenario because prevention's for all of our lives, for our whole lives. And if we're successful in prevention, we don't see anything different and that is a mindset change which we need to learn to live with." She added, "Eighty percent of health is created through prevention and public health. Three percent of our (health care) dollars go into that. We need to find a better balance." ...

Bruco Strong Eagle Eastwood Could Not Afford Treatment For Mental Illness

Bruco Strong Eagle Eastwood Could Not Afford Treatment For Mental Illness

KDVR in Denver reports that Bruco Strong Eagle Eastwood, the suspect in Monday's shooting spree at Deer Creek elementary school in Littleton, had sought help for his mental problems, but was turned away because he couldn't pay for treatment. KDVR interviewed Eastwood's father, a Native American rancher with whom the 32-year-old suspect has lived for the last 5 years. "He tried to get help," Bruco's father told reporters. "He says 'I've been to places and asked if they could help me.' He says 'they won't help me... if I go there, they tell me I need money and I can't pay them.'"

According to reports, Eastwood, had been hearing voices, and was acting irritable in the weeks leading up to the shooting.

Stephen Kopranos of the Denver office of Mental Health America told KDVR that Denver ranks 50th in the number of in-patient beds per capita for the mentally ill.

Economic conditions have made the situation even worse for Coloradans with mental disorders. In September, Governor Bill Ritter announced that he would cut funding for mental health in order to close Colorado's significant budget gap. As a result, in-patient psychiatric facilities in Denver were forced to close their doors to patients. ...

Many who have mastectomies may not need them, docs say | Houston & Texas News | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Many who have mastectomies may not need them, docs say | Houston & Texas News | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Breast cancer patients are increasingly having preventive surgery to remove the unaffected breast, but a new study suggests it's not beneficial for the vast majority of women who undergo it.

University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center researchers today are reporting that the records of more than 100,000 patients revealed a survival benefit in 6 percent of those who opted to have a double mastectomy. Women who fell within that 6 percent fit a particular profile that doctors can easily identify before the patient decides on a treatment.

“It's important for women to understand that, except for one subset of breast cancer patients, they don't need to do this,” said Dr. Isabelle Bedrosian, a professor of surgical oncology and one of the study's two lead authors. “Hopefully, it'll reassure patients wondering if they should.”

The study, published online today in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, found that a double mastectomy offers a slight benefit only to breast cancer patients 50 and younger whose tumor is estrogen receptor negative and in the early stages. It found that five of 100 such patients having the preventive surgery lived longer.

The study found no benefit among other double mastectomy patients. ...

Waxman: Anthem Blue Cross Spent $27M On 103 Executive Retreats

Waxman: Anthem Blue Cross Spent $27M On 103 Executive Retreats

WASHINGTON — The House has voted to repeal the health insurance industry's exemption from federal antitrust laws, giving Democrats an easy win on health care a day ahead of President Barack Obama's bipartisan health summit.

The vote was 406-19, with most Republicans siding with majority Democrats against a widely unpopular industry which has been under attack by Democrats and consumer advocates for recent rate hikes.

Republican lawmakers complained, though, that the legislation passed Wednesday was largely symbolic and would have little real impact since states already regulate health insurers.

Independent experts largely share that view. Democrats, however, contended that the bill would help consumers by increasing competition.

Prospects are dim in the Senate. ...

GlaxoSmithKline deliberately hid evidence of Avandia harm, says Senate report – Mike Adams � Dprogram.net

GlaxoSmithKline deliberately hid evidence of Avandia harm, says Senate report – Mike Adams � Dprogram.net

Posted by sakerfa on February 23, 2010

(NaturalNews) – GlaxoSmithKline, maker of the diabetes drug Avandia, knew the drug was linked to tens of thousands of heart attacks but went out of its way to hide this information from the public, says a 334-page report just released by the Senate Finance Committee. (http://finance.senate.gov/press/Gpr…)

This report also accuses the FDA of betraying the public trust, explaining that FDA bureaucrats intentionally dismissed safety concerns found by the agency’s own scientists.

The report says that Big Pharma’s drugs “put public safety at risk because the FDA has been too cozy with drug makers and has been regularly outmaneuvered by companies that have a financial interest in downplaying or under-exploring potential safety risks.” Sales of Avandia were $3.2 billion (yes, billion) in 2006.

According to a statistical analysis in the report, if all the diabetics currently taking Avandia were put on a “safer” drug, it would avert 500 heart attacks and 300 cases of heart failure every month in the United States alone. Presently, hundreds of thousands of Americans are still taking this drug, and hundreds will continue to die each month as a result, according to the report estimates.

This report, championed by U.S. Senators Grassley and Baucus, is the result of investigators pouring through more than 250,000 pages of documentation gathered from GlaxoSmithKline and the FDA. The document reveals some rather startling facts about the dangers of Avandia, including evidence from the FDA’s own scientists who concluded that Avandia was associated with 83,000 heart attacks.

GlaxoSmithKline intimidates scientists

This investigative report also reveals that GSK engaged in the intimidation of physicians, saying: “GSK executives attempted to intimidate independent physicians, focused on strategies to minimize or misrepresent findings that Avandia may increase cardiovascular risk and sought ways to downplay findings that a competing drug might reduce cardiovascular risk.”

“Patients trust drug companies with their health and their lives, and GlaxoSmithKline abused that trust.” said Sen. Baucus. (Gee, really? Is anyone really surprised that GSK put its own financial interests ahead of a few thousand human lives?) ...

OpEdNews - Article: Medicare-for-all *IS* a jobs bill!

OpEdNews - Article: Medicare-for-all *IS* a jobs bill!

But it's for all employers, not just the bankers!

By Jack E. Lohman

Actually, we can get a "two-fer" by voting in a single-payer Medicare-for-all system. It is both the best health care proposal of them all, and a jobs bill wrapped into one.

So good, in fact, that the US Senate refused to even allow it on the table because the insurance industry objected to the tune of $46 million in campaign bribes. It would eliminate the cash they are now putting into the bank for profits and bonuses.

It's both funny and sad that you can tell how good a bill is by the amount of political cash needed to block it.

Medicare-for-all"

Bottom line: For the same amount of dollars we are spending today (17% of GDP) we could provide first-class Cheney-care to 100% of our population. Including those on Medicaid, SCHIP, worker's comp, and those who are unemployed, uninsured and under-insured.

We'd eliminate the 31% of insurance bureaucracy waste (reduce hospital and clinic billing clerks, eliminate exorbitant CEO salaries and bonuses, actuarial and denial costs, gatekeepers, broker commissions, rising shareholder profits, and even the political contributions that allow the politicians to share in the system).

We'd spend that money on healthcare instead.

Actually, we'd save $400 billion if we did nothing else, but that savings has already been earmarked for expanding the system to include limited vision and dental. Yet it still allows people to buy additional Gap coverage on the outside for things Medicare doesn't cover, like cosmetic surgery. And we'd retain the 20% co-pay, which Gap policies can also cover.

We'd pay for the system the same way other countries do, through our national infrastructure" about 2% on individual taxes and 8% on company wages (as opposed to the 15% they pay today). But other forms can be established, like a value added tax (VAT) on imported product. (How's that for returning American jobs?)

" it *IS* a jobs bill!

Employers now spend an average 15% of wages on health care benefits, which they pass on to the consumer at the cash register.

But this new Medicare-for-all system benefits only US manufacturers, and makes them more competitive with product from countries already with universal health care. The Big Three already make more cars in Ontario than the US because their health costs are $800 per employee there versus $6500 here. ...

After Years of Quiet, Expecting a Boom in U.S. Medical Schools - NYTimes.com

After Years of Quiet, Expecting a Boom in U.S. Medical Schools - NYTimes.com

Peter Allen applied to 30 medical schools after graduating from the University of Pittsburgh last year. Twenty-eight said no.

Of the two that said yes, one had something in common with Mr. Allen: It, too, was starting out in medicine. He enrolled in the inaugural class of The Commonwealth Medical College in Scranton, Pa.

“I was ecstatic that I had been accepted to a medical school,” Mr. Allen said, adding that he would have gone for a master’s in bioengineering if he had not been accepted. “It’s a giant sigh of relief; it secures your plans for the rest of your life really.”

The Commonwealth is one of nearly two dozen medical schools that have recently opened or might open across the country, the most at any time since the 1960s and ’70s.

These new schools are seeking to address an imbalance in American medicine that has been growing for a quarter century. Many bright students were fleeing to offshore medical schools, or giving up hope entirely, when they could not get into domestic schools. Meanwhile, American hospitals were using foreign-trained and foreign-born physicians to fill medical residencies. During the 1980s and ’90s only one new medical school was established.

“Huge numbers of qualified American kids were not getting into American medical schools or going abroad to study,” Dr. Lawrence G. Smith, dean of the proposed Hofstra University School of Medicine, in Hempstead, N.Y., which is not yet recruiting students, said last week. “I think it was a kind of wake-up call.”

The proliferation of new schools is also a market response to a rare convergence of forces: a growing population; the aging of the health-conscious baby-boom generation; the impending retirement of, by some counts, as many as a third of current doctors; and the expectation that, the present political climate notwithstanding, changes in health care policy will eventually bring a tide of newly insured patients into the American health care system.

If all the schools being proposed actually opened, they would amount to an 18 percent increase in the 131 medical schools across the country. (By comparison, there are 200 law schools approved by the American Bar Association.) ....
...

“I think we have to crank out different kinds of doctors,” said Dr. Olds, who started his new job Feb. 1.

Whether the demand for new medical schools exists among patients, it clearly exists among prospective doctors.

Dr. Olds said that at his former job as chairman of medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin, 25 percent of the students came from California. “So obviously there’s a ton of California kids trying to get into medical school traveling a long way.”

The Association of American Medical Colleges, a trade group, has called for a 30 percent increase in enrollment, or about 5,000 more doctors a year. The association’s Center for Workforce Studies estimates that 3,500 more M.D.s will enter graduate training over the next 10 years, roughly half of the 7,000 international medical school graduates now entering medical residencies in the United States every year, according to Edward Salsberg, director of the center.

At Quinnipiac, the trustees last month approved plans for a new medical school, to open in 2013 or 2014, if it passes accreditation. John L. Lahey, the university president, said that the proposed school would build on the university’s existing health sciences programs, and the hope was to recruit at least some students who had worked in health care and wanted to become doctors.

“We certainly think they will be what we tend to call nontraditional students, older, some minority,” Dr. Lahey said. ...

...

Given the pent-up demand, Dr. D’Alessandri said, he was not worried that he might produce too many doctors for the good of society. “We should worry about too many lawyers,” he said dryly.

Top five health insurers posted 56 percent profit gains in 2009 | Raw Story

Top five health insurers posted 56 percent profit gains in 2009 | Raw Story
...

According to a study by a pro-health reform group published Thursday, the nation's largest five health insurance companies posted a 56 percent gain in 2009 profits over 2008. The insurers including Wellpoint, UnitedHealth, Cigna, Aetna and Humana, which cover the majority of Americans with insurance.

The insurers' hefty profit gains came even as 2.7 million more Americans lost their insurance coverage due to the declining economy.

A lobbyist for American's Health Insurance Plans, the trade group that represents insurers in Washington, D.C., attributed the gain in 2009 profits to a poor performance in 2008. In 2008, insurers were forced to write down their stock holdings because of the US market's declines. Insurance companies keep a great deal of money in the markets, earning interest from the time between premiums are paid and the time when health providers are paid.

"It is disingenuous to look at the profits at one company today compared to where it was in the depth of a recession," Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, told the Cleveland Plain Dealer. ...

OpEdNews - Article: Single Payer Health Care (along the lines of the German and French System) is the way to go.

OpEdNews - Article: Single Payer Health Care (along the lines of the German and French System) is the way to go.
...
I have been a small business owner in the USA and in Germany for over 25 years.

I can not afford the same medical benefits to my USA employees that my employees get in Germany.


In the US as a small business owner I am always at a disadvantage when hiring employees vs a large company or hospital that can offer benefits. So I am forced to hire less qualified workers or pay more to get the same level of expertise.

Second, those opposed should be clearly identified as MURDERERS! Those opposed for the main part
are conservatives who support right to life and the unborn.
It should be made very clear that opposition to universal health care has killed more unborn babies than abortions.

Do they want to kill more unborn babies by not providing proper pre and post natal care for many of those babys?

Third is the reduction in cost. Single payer countries pay about half for health care and medicine than we do in the US.
This would be the best way to reducing the Budget Deficits that voters care about.

The Politicians and the Press need to use these words consistently when talking about Health Care.
from the President on down.
Now is the time for single payer health care for US citizens and voters. ...

Sebelius Attacks Wellpoint's 39% Rate Hike | Gooznews

Sebelius Attacks Wellpoint's 39% Rate Hike | Gooznews

Secretary of Health and Human Services Katherine Sebelius today sent a scathing letter to Anthem Blue Cross of California demanding to know why the Wellpoint Inc. subsidiary is raising that state's individual insurance premiums 39 percent.

"These extraordinary increases are up to 15 times faster than inflation and threaten to make health care unaffordable for hundreds of thousands of Californians, many of whom are already struggling to make ends meet in a difficult economy," she writes. "Your company's strong financial position makes these rate increases even more difficult to understand. As you know, your parent company, WellPoint Incorporated, has seen its profits soar, earning $2.7 billion in the last quarter of 2009 alone."

She could have also pointed out, as Matthew Holt did on the Health Care blog yesterday, that Wellpoint ceo Angela Braly earned nearly $10 million in salary, stock and stock options last year. That ought to get people fired up and ready to go. ...