I have to respond to the latest article written by the Freedom of Speech staff. The first two sentences make perfect sense, the rest of the column, not so much.
"It simply amazes us at the misconceptions people have about a government run plan"
I agree.
"By far, a single payer system would be the best for providing care and in lowering cost"
Right again.
They go on to say that insurance companies need to be bailed out. No, actually the insurance companies are doing just fine. They have record profits at the expense of the citizens of America.
"According to CMS...Medicare only covers 53% of an average persons yearly healthcare expenses..." Our office (cardiologists) receives CMS bulletins every month and I have never seen these figures, nor has my supervisor. Medicare pays 80% if the approved charges which means that we take a write-off right at the top before the payment. For instance, if a doctor charges $100.00 for a procedure Medicare would normally approve about $70.00 of which the doctor would receive 80% or $56.00. The other $30.00 would be above allowed, meaning a write off, and the patient or their supplementary insurance would be billed for $14.00.
As far as the Medicare premiums, people on Social Security have around $97.00 deducted from their checks each month for Medicare. I don't know how that translates to $400.00 per month per individual. And a family of 4 would not be covered by Medicare anyway.
As far as people from Canada and Britian coming to America for healthcare, why would they travel to a country ranked 37th in the world for healthcare? Canadians and Europeans have a longer life span and lower infant mortality rates.
Mr. Obama wants everyone to be able to have preventative care, not wait until stage 4 cancer before seeking treatment. That is what many Americans do now because they have no health insurance and put off seeing a doctor for as long as they can.
As far as government providing healthcare at a reasonable cost; Medicare's administrative costs are approx. 3% compared to 15% to 30% administrative costs for private insurance companies such as Anthem, Humana, United Health Care, Cigna, and others. A Cabinet Member is paid a little over $100,000 per year as opposed to $6 Million to $20 Million, which is what some of the insurance company CEO's earn.
That is why the insurance companies can pay $1.4 Million dollars A DAY to oppose single payer. They are spending OUR premiums to oppose the healthcare that we so desperately need.
Talk about liars. I talk to patients every day who were duped into buying Medicare replacement coverage only to discover they have higher premiums, and limited choice of hospitals and physicians.
Even physicians are banding together in Oregon to form the "Mad As Hell Doctors Road Tour".
See www.MadAsHellDoctors.com or call Dr. Paul Hochfeld (541) 740-4065.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
50 comments:
Thanks for a report and commentary from the "front lines", Shirley. I found this very informative.
Mark
Why I am against Obama's Healthcare Plan:
* Approximately 103 million proplr eould be covered under the new public plan and, as a consequence, about 83.4 million people would lose their private insurance. This would represent a 48.4 percent reduction in the number of people with private coverage.
* About 88.1 million workers would see their current private, employer-sponsored health plan go away and would be shifted to the public plan.
* Yearly premiums for the typical American with private coverage could go up as much as $460 per privately-insured person, as a result of increased cost-shifting stemming from a public plan modeled on Medicare.
It is truly frightening that the President of the United States is pressuring Congress in an all out media blitz to pass legislation that he flatly admits he has not read and is not familiar with.
Diane
I am absolutely amazed that Obama took more time in considering what breed of dog to get for a family pet than the time he is allowing Congress to consider this HUGE Healthcare bill.
Both blogs make great points.
Whatever happened to healthblogger, anyway?
The sham health care proposals Barack Obama and his congressional cronies are peddling will bamkrupt our nation, fotrcr you into an inferiot government-run health plan, and endanger your family's lives and health.
What on earth is Obama really thinking?
Is he merely trying to tear down our America...and build a new one more to the liking of the radical left?
Perhaps the key question is; Do they - Obama and his fellow Marxists - really want to destroy private imsuramce and private health care in America?
So, is this the HOPE and CHANGE you voted for?
"Perhaps the key question is; Do they - Obama and his fellow Marxists - really want to destroy private imsuramce and private health care in America?"
No.
Thank you Mark. This is such a serious issue. Approx. 18,000 people are dying every day because they keep putting off seeing a doctor because they can't afford it.
I just wish I could make everyone understand that single payer health care is a good thing. The only people who will be left without a job are the CEO's of the insurance companies.
Good job, Shirley.
As a family without health insurance and my inhaler costing $115.00, I like Obama's ideas.
Shirley:
Thanks for setting the record straight.
Nice, Shirley.
Why markets can’t cure healthcare from Paul Krugman's blog.
You might have to register with the NYT for the link to work.
Quote:
There are a number of successful health-care systems, at least as measured by pretty good care much cheaper than here, and they are quite different from each other. There are, however, no examples of successful health care based on the principles of the free market, for one simple reason: in health care, the free market just doesn’t work. And people who say that the market is the answer are flying in the face of both theory and overwhelming evidence.
12:43-
What makes you think your inhaler will not still cost $115 - seen a cost guarantee? Or under the Obama plan, you will be given a generic inhaler (gosh it is lots cheaper but if you think it does not work as well, that is all in your head) and it will probably come from outside the US. If you need to use an inhaler and also smoke, you will probably be made to stop smoking and watched - like it or not, before you are even given an inhaler. Same goes if you are overweight, which could be affecting your breathing - forced to loose x amount of weight before you are given an inhaler. Read between the lines.
If you need an inhaler and continue to smoke, no health care plan anywhere can help you.
So maybe the new Healthcare Plan will give NO coverage to those who smoke. Save the rest of us a lot of money.
Read between the lines.
OK. I read that CFA/FOS/"Eric" is full of crap. "Eric" sure knows it all. Has every answer!
Are you forgetting something, Eric? Obama hasn't actually introduced healthcare legislation yet. How about we wait and see what is proposed before screaming that care will be less or fees/taxes will be more.
FOS/CFA/Fake Professor is entitled to its own opinion, NOT its own facts.
especially read page 10:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/HealthPlanFull.pdf
Maybe this person doesn't smoke? Several of you all assume they do. I know people who don't smoke cigarettes but smoke dope, go figure. Obama's healthcare plan just makes us a more socialist country. I don't want bg government in my families life.
Is Medicare considered a single payer? Wonder how many people don't have a supplement to go along with Medicare.
If a Dr. bill is $100 and Medicare pays $53, what percent of the $100 Dr. bill is that $53? So how much money does that doctor have to write off? Medicare may call it "approved charges" but I think that is just a way of the government saying we aren't going to pay that much money. That is money that must be included in the coverage costs and not disregarded. Who really picks up that write off tab?
Simply put, the system we have now is broken, way broken.
It is profit driven by both the insurance companies and Hospitals.
(I know first hand how much basic meds cost per dose, that in-patients are charges in some cases up to a in some cases a 350% mark up.)
I would ove nothing more than to be told that I am out of a job because there is no one left with out access to affordable, comprehensive healthcare. But we are a long way away from that ever happening.
Too many people will rise up against universal coverage and scream that too much big government is trying to control their lives, sad part is government all ready does that. Speed limits, legal drinking ages, income taxes, drivers licenses, fishing licenses, hunting licenses, hiking permits, car registration, there is hardly a single aspect of our lives that is somehow NOT under government control or oversight in oneway or another.
In this case there is BIG money on the line, and that is in the form of loss of profits for very big, very powerful lobbyist groups.
So dont lose any sleep over this just yet. As long as Anthem, Humana, Pfizer, Bayer, ect. are continuing to line the political war chests of elected officials, now extreme healthcare reform will be made.
Ugly but true
The generics thing too, I don't like. I usually refuse generics unless the cost may be $215.00 for a tube of something to cure excema.
Of course generics aren't the same as the "real" medicine. How else could they be so cheap and not as strong (and that's fact).
I guess it would save the gov some money using generics, but that may be the only thing I have against this particular plan.
Thanks, Shirley.
We should ALL have the SAME coverage that our President and Congress members have NOW - nothing less!!! So how much will that plan cost taxpayers per year?
Anon 10:59 wrote:
"Of course generics aren't the same as the "real" medicine. How else could they be so cheap and not as strong (and that's fact)."
Facts require proof. Where is yours?
"Of course generics aren't the same as the "real" medicine. How else could they be so cheap and not as strong (and that's fact)."
Generic Medication is required to be as effective as "name brand", in many cases, the generic medication is manufactured by many of the "name brand" pharmacuetical companies.
Usually the only difference between generic and name brand medications is the coloring.
The dosage, delivery mechanism, as well as the inert materials are generally the same as name brand.
(often reactions to "generic" medications, when there is an actual "reaction" and not a side effect, is a reaction to the coloring dyes that differ from generic to name brand)
You will find that some Doctors refuse to write for generic medications and sign the prescriptions "do not substitute", look around his offcie and you will probably see a lot of "gifts" from the company that manufactures the name brand meds.
Re: generic medications
A Pharmacist told me years ago that the main ingredients in a brand name and generic are the same. All you have to do is read the labels.
After a drug has been on the market for 7 years is allowed to "go generic". My husband is patiently waiting for Lipitor to become a generic drug. In the meantime he depends on samples from his cardiologist and my employer to keep him supplied.
RE: Medicare approved charges. Physicians set their own fees but they negotiate with Medicare and other major carriers for an agreed payment. The physicians themselves absorb the "above allowed" amount, it is not passed on to the public.
Re: Socialized Medicine. Universal health care is NOT socialized medicine. "Under socialized medicine systems such as Great Britain, doctors are government employees and hospitals are owned by the government. With Improved Medicare For All, doctors remain independent and hospitals continue to be run by private non-profit charitable groups. Doctors in private practice will remain in private practice. You will choose your own doctors and competition among providers will be increased, as you, not an insurance company decide where to get care"*
I hope this helps explain some of yur questions.
Shirley
* Healthcare - NOW!
healthcarenow@prioritypressny.com
If I was close enough, right now, I would shake your hand, Shirley. Excellent.
"After a drug has been on the market for 7 years ..."
I think this is 20 years since first developed, not 7 years. I am not sure.
Its 7 years.
Most pharmaceutical companies will "tweek" the meds just a bit before the 7 years is up.
(change the coating, make it an extended release medication, or apply for new label usages to retain copyright and prevent generic equiv's)
I think if it's good enough for Congress, the Senate and Obama. We should have the same healthcare they do.
I am against the purposed healthcare.
Do you think Ted Kennedy would be alive today on Obama's,Pelosi and Reid's program? Not at all.
But then again, how much money does THE Kennedy's have?
"how much money does THE Kennedy's have?"
Such incandescent curiosity and a grasp of the language worthy of the Gods.
If the writing of Anon 6:45 PM wasn’t so obviously from an uneducated person who can neither spell nor write with correct grammar, I’d guess that Anon 6:45 PM was a Doctor, a Doctor concerned not with the health of his or her patients but with generating revenue through the current fee-for-service system.
It's official: HobKnobb Coffee will be landing downtown at the former Joy's Coffee Nook on State Street (near State and Spring). Owner Barb Fischer will offer basically what she has at her other location in Floyds Knobs, and I think it will be a welcomed establishment with a good product.
Also official: The vacant building at 501 Pearl Street (formerly the John Vernia & Son Monument Co at the corner of Pearl and Elm) has sold and chances are if you drove by today you will see improvements already being made. This space is being prepared for office occupancy and may be completed by the end of October with a new tenant.
Though we have not closed on the building, there is a new owner coming to spruce up the service station at the corner of Oak and State Streets (former known as EZ Auto). This will be a new look, and it is planned for an official NAPA Auto Center. They, too, will be a U-Haul center but the new owners plan to provide fresh landscaping, renovation and a new look for the entire building, including resurfacing the parking lot and all new lighting for property as well. This will be noticed by September 1st.
A major retailer has downtown New Albany in its sights, so we're still in the running. These folks are out of Chicago and will need 5-10k square feet. They are an “apparel and more” retailer. This will not happen until after the first of the year, should I be successful in convincing them this is where they belong.
Liquidz Bar and Grill will be opening soon at the former Russ's Tavern on E. Main Street (between Pearl and Bank), and 211 E. Main (formerly Ermin’s and B & B, next to Studio’s) is the new location for the Redmens Club as Steinert’s moves in to their new location at 401 E. Main, which had been constructed by the Redmen in 2005.
The Parthenon at 203 E. Main continues to get a facelift as the columns are being repaired, and is it being made ready for a new tenant to be announced. There are new tenants at the southeast corner of Pearl and E Main (Merchants National Bank building). It is a spa of some kind, and that’s all I know, as I did not do the deal. The people from Louisville’s Green Building hope to meet with the city this week, as we have requested an appointment. They have their eyes on the Baptist Tabernacle Church (318 E. 4th) and the Reisz Building on Main Street.
Be sure to participate in one or all of the happenings in downtown. Great things continue to be said about our Farmers Market and the new activity on Fridays at the Amphitheater. Help clear up a few things: Both Wick’s Pizza in the former Speakeasy building on State, and Toast on Market on E. Market will be open soon, and both will have liquor licenses.
IAMHOOSIER:
If you have a medical problem and were prescribed valiums, I guarantee you there is a difference
between a generic and a REAL valium. So, I guess that would mean my "facts" are from personal use. Thanks for the sarcasm.
Anon 1:23pm
I assure you, Diazepam and Valium ARE EXACTLY the same, it has been around since 1963 from Roche Pharmaceuticals.
All you are paying extra for (or your insurance company if your one of the many people who claim to be "allergic" to a generic, when there is no allergic reaction), I digress, all you are paying extra for is the cute little V cut in the middle of the pill.
Efficacy trials for this medication consistantly show similar results for interactions, reactions, duration, onset, etc as compared to both actual and placebo, An inactive substance or preparation used as a control in an experiment or test to determine the effectiveness of a medicinal drug.
dosages.
I am not saying that the "name brand" does not work "better" for you, I am suggesting that in your instance that the effectiveness of the generic medication is lessened due to your expectations that the generic is less "powerful" than the name brand, and that is not an insult to you, the mind is an extremely powerful player in the totality of a persons sense of well being and has the physical ability to make the body believe that something just isnt the way it is.
(BTW Efficacy trial results can be easily found online for your personal comparison)
(concerning the treatment of people with hypothyroidism (low thyroid)
http://drugs.about.com/od/faqslibra2/f/levoxyl_generic.htm
Question: Levothyroxine: Is there a difference between brand name and generic versions?
"... The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the use of generic levothyroxine made by a number of different pharmaceutical companies. The various brand name and generic tablets of levothyroxine may differ in how much levothyroxine they contain; how much of the levothyroxine is absorbed into your body; and, how much levothyroxine circulates in your body.
If your doctor has switched you from a brand name levothyroxine – such as Synthroid – to a generic version, you may experience symptoms of too much medication or not enough medication. ..."
I don't pretend to be a doctor or a pharmacist so I will not get into a discussion of name brand vs. generic meds.
The only suggestion I have is to ask the experts.
1:23,
Did you participate in a double blind study? Otherwise, your "facts" are still in question.
One person, one drug and you make a sweeping generalization of all generics and call it "fact".
I don't believe my request for "your facts" was sarcasm. It was just a request. I'm still waiting.(now, that might qualify)
The publicly funded National Institute of Health develops a new drug. A private pharmaceutical company then pays a cost much less than it took to actually develop the drug to license the formula and tweaks it slightly.
The tweak is then tested by researchers at a public university. The pharmaceutical company pays for the tests, but again not for the actual expense of building and maintaining the lab, staff development, etc., all of which are subsidized by the public.
Once approval has been granted for the drug based on all that publicly funded work, the pharmaceutical company then spends millions to market it as a name brand. That sort of product differentiation is necessary only because it's so similar to other "name" drugs that all came from the same source and funding mechanism.
If the marketing works, we all pay around twice as much for it as people in other countries who receive the same drug. When people question the pharmaceutical company as to why that is, they say it's to cover the cost of research and development, even though we've already paid for most of that and they spent most of their money on marketing.
When we try to purchase the same drug from another country at their lower price, the pharmaceutical company again spends millions - to lobby Congress to make that purchase illegal - and that cost is added to the price of their drugs in the U.S.
Good work if you can get it, I suppose.
From the experts:
http://drugs.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=drugs&cdn=health&tm=15&f=20&tt=12&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.aace.com/pub/pdf/guidelines/AACE-TES-ATA-ThyroxineProducts.pdf
"...2) The FDA has failed to satisfactorily address questions relating to the
bioequivalence of thyroxine preparations.
Despite a written commitment to address the concerns of AACE, TES, and ATA as organizations
that represent those most knowledgeable about caring for patients with thyroid disorders and
thyroid hormone metabolism, the FDA proceeded to grant generic status to additional
levothyroxine preparations."
(American Association of Clinical Endocrinolo gists (AACE), The
Endocrine Society (TES), and American Thyroid Association (ATA) Accessed July 09, 2008
With proper TSH testing and management the difference in levels can be easily controlled and done so in a matter of days.
if the political science professor won't debate, maybe the anonymous chemistry professor and roger can debate generic drugs.
From the experts:
http://drugs.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=drugs&cdn=health&tm=15&f=20&tt=12&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.aace.com/pub/pdf/guidelines/AACE-TES-ATA-ThyroxineProducts.pdf
And here I thought "the experts" was Wikipedia.
Not prove they are the same is proving nothing one way or the other. That is different from providing they are different. But why am I arguing logic with the nutty professor?
I never use generic drugs -- only beer from reputable craft brewers with the alcohol content clearly labeled on the outside of the package.
A brief note: The passage quoted by "downtown is dead" was written by Mike Kopp and was copied from the edited version that appeared at NAC.
I don't know who you are, but you need to properly attribute.
I am sure you have heard the ideas that if you're a senior you need to suck it up and give up the idea that you need any health care. A new hip? Unheard of. We simply can't afford to take care of you anymore. You don't need any medications for your high blood pressure, diabetes, heart problems, etc. Let’s take care of the young people. After all, they will be ruling the world very soon.
So here is the solution. When you turn 70, you get a gun and 4 bullets. You are allowed to shoot 2 senators and 2 representatives. Of course, you will be sent to prison where you will get 3 meals a day, a roof over your head and all the health care you need!!! New teeth, great!!! Need glasses, no problem. New hip, knee, kidney, lung, heart? Well bring it on. And who will be paying for all of this. The same government that just told you that you are too old for health care. And, since you are a prisoner, you don't have to pay any income tax.
I really think we have a Perfect Solution!!!
So here is the solution. When you turn 70, you get a gun and 4 bullets.
What are you trying to say? Are you trying to say that when we lock someone up, we should just not treat them for any medical condition?
Got the flu? no problem, without antibiotics, you'll just die in prison...nevermind that it was a six month sentence.
I mean really Anon, what are you advocating?
It sounds like you're saying everyone should have free healthcare, just like prisoners. I agree! Something tells me that you're really not for universal coverage. Explain yourself and try to make sense this time.
By the way, Anon 1:39 PM still needs to learn to cite its sources.
Google the bit about the gun and the four bullets. It's hardly original.
Just because you can cut and paste doesn't mean you have a clue.
The Constitutional protection of freedom of speech doesn't mean you should plagarize.
Anon 1:39 PM says - it's an email that is circulating amongst us "older, been there done that" kind of folks. It is the irony of it all. Guess you don't REALLY know many senior citizens these days - what we go through to try and make it day to day. It's getting harder and harder for us! We are looking for solutions. Presently, that looks like our perfect solution. SAD!!!
Post a Comment