Children can have health insurance if the parents can afford the price. Oh, I forgot, quality health insurance is for those who can afford the industry's price.

U.S. to Let Insurers Raise Fees for Sick Children
By ROBERT PEAR


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, aiming to encourage health insurance companies to offer child-only policies, said Wednesday that they could charge higher premiums for coverage of children with serious medical problems, if state law allowed it.


Jay Angoff, a health and human services official, said the new policy was aimed at making child-only policies more available.

Earlier this year, major insurers, faced with an unprofitable business, stopped issuing new child-only policies. They said that the Obama administration’s interpretation of the new health care law would allow families to buy such coverage at the last minute, when children became ill and were headed to the hospital.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/he...alth.html?_r=2

Originally Posted by Deb C

Children can have health insurance if the parents can afford the price. Oh, I forgot, quality health insurance is for those who can afford the industry's price.

U.S. to Let Insurers Raise Fees for Sick Children
By ROBERT PEAR


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, aiming to encourage health insurance companies to offer child-only policies, said Wednesday that they could charge higher premiums for coverage of children with serious medical problems, if state law allowed it.


Jay Angoff, a health and human services official, said the new policy was aimed at making child-only policies more available.

Earlier this year, major insurers, faced with an unprofitable business, stopped issuing new child-only policies. They said that the Obama administration’s interpretation of the new health care law would allow families to buy such coverage at the last minute, when children became ill and were headed to the hospital.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/he...alth.html?_r=2

Why am I not surprised?

Originally Posted by Deb C

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, aiming to encourage health insurance companies to offer child-only policies, said Wednesday that they could charge higher premiums for coverage of children with serious medical problems, if state law allowed it.

Yep, our government by the corporations, of the corporations and for the corporations shall not perish.

"Standard treatments" --- True, we are all human but on the inside and outside, there are many variances, which call for treatments that may work for some and not work on others. "Standardizing" cancer treatment is a way to further decrease the quality of care a patient receives for the quantity of dollars his or her insurance company is billed for the care. It's a cost-cutting measure that insurance companies are taking as they whine about the ways ObamaCare will cut into their ability to make profits. Don't be fooled---The reforms will bring increased profit to a for-profit healthcare system in America that will continue to bring hardship to society."

Obama gave the greedy ravenous fox watch over the vulnerable hen house in this sad definition of a reform. And too many progressives stood by and watched as he handed over our health care to this selfish giant, who has proven itself to be ruthless in its appetite for profits.

We as progressives best awaken to the fact that Obama is not on our side. We need to be his conscience, not apologists for his actions.

Health Insurers Test New Payment Incentives for Cancer Care
www.nytimes.com

Insurers are urging doctors to use standard treatments instead of individualized, unproven courses of therapy...57 minutes ago · Comment ·LikeUnlike · Share

So here is the latest on my families healthcare coverage "crisis". My husband has had health insurance through his employers. It's pretty standard coverage. $35 dollar co-pay for doctor's visits, $300 deductible and then 80/20 after that provided you stay within network. There is is also prescription drug benefits with a $10 for generic meds and $20 for non-generic. We paid a little more than $300 a month for our portion. It wasn't horrible coverage so I really couldn't complain.

Until today...My husband called me and told me they had changed his health care coverage at work. Since he travels outside of the country they are making him go on an international health care plan and the rest of his family has to too. So now we all have $2000 deductible per person then 80/20 after the deductible has been met. If any of you have children you know how often you have to visit the doctor. I've seen the claims paid statement as to what our doctor charges our insurance. He charges over $200 per doctor visit. Now some of that amount is adjusted off by the insurance company, they end up paying about $70 and we pay $35.

But now I suppose every time one of my kids gets an ear infection or strep throat it's going to cost me at least $200 for the doctor visit plus the prescription. We are totally screwed! Each kid would have to visit the doctor 10 times a year before we meet our deductibles. They probably go 6 or 7 times a year, per kid. And what happens if one of them falls down and needs stitches and has to go to the emergency room? (another not so uncommon occurrence with kids.)

At this point, I feel like we really don't even have any coverage. And I'm sitting here staring at the wall thinking what are going to do now???

So be prepared if you travel outside of the country with your job. This may the latest scheme employers have for getting out of providing decent health care insurance for their employees and their families.

Originally Posted by ASB65

At this point, I feel like we really don't even have any coverage. And I'm sitting here staring at the wall thinking what are going to do now???

So be prepared if you travel outside of the country with your job. This may the latest scheme employers have for getting out of providing decent health care insurance for their employees and their families.

I can understand how very disturbing this is for you and your family. Unfortunately, this is happening all over the country, and it's not just international insurance coverage. The greedy insurance industry is making sure that their profits increase, no matter the burden on the people. With higher deductables and co-pays, they know that you will be more likely to forgo a visit to the doctor. This is all very strategic on their part. Most employers are going to be looking for ways to cut teir portion of what they pay, and that sums up to the employee paying the price of junk policies.

This is what happens when presidents hand over our health to those who have proven in the past to be greedy and profit driven. Rack up one for the insurance corporation and zero for those depending on that corporation for decent and compassionate health care coverage.

Trust me, this is only the tip of the iceberg. It would be to our advantage to be working and voicing our demands for an honest to goodness health care system for all.

Please know that I care about your situation.

Obama Again Admits His Health Care Law Is Republican, Not Progressive | FDL Action
fdlaction.firedoglake.com

One of my strongest hopes is that everyone in the media, especially on the left, can simply stop pretending the new health reform law is some great progressive victory. It is not. It is a conservative victory.

Here's the site address to the above article.
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/201...t-progressive/

Originally Posted by Deb C

I can understand how very disturbing this is for you and your family. Unfortunately, this is happening all over the country, and it's not just international insurance coverage. The greedy insurance industry is making sure that their profits increase, no matter the burden on the people. With higher deductables and co-pays, they know that you will be more likely to forgo a visit to the doctor. This is all very strategic on their part. Most employers are going to be looking for ways to cut teir portion of what they pay, and that sums up to the employee paying the price of junk policies.

This is what happens when presidents hand over our health to those who have proven in the past to be greedy and profit driven. Rack up one for the insurance corporation and zero for those depending on that corporation for decent and compassionate health care coverage.

Trust me, this is only the tip of the iceberg. It would be to our advantage to be working and voicing our demands for an honest to goodness health care system for all.

Please know that I care about your situation.

Thanks Deb. I appreciate your concern. And yes, I'm feeling pretty upset at the moment. And it's not just about the health insurance issue. I feel like these companies have been jacking my husband and other employees around for the past 2 years because they can. They know there is no other jobs out there and we just have to put up with it. At this point, the best option I'm seeing is this...Well, we have international healthcare coverage. Maybe it's time we get the hell out... I've told my husband the same thing. I think it's time to seriously start considering some other job opportunities within the company outside of the US. I see the fuckery coming down the pike in this country. Maybe the best thing to do is save ourselves and our children and just leave.

But then, ask me again tomorrow when I'm more calm. Maybe it won't seem that dire then. But on the other hand....Maybe it still will.

On the subject of health care, I have not yet gotten around to blogging about the latest outrage, but I'm going to. It was in the Times over the weekend.

My grandfather (see A Century of family history on the Generations forum) was a doctor. As a kid I read a number of books about the conquest of infectious diseases, of which, of course, a lot of people used to die. The stories of sulfa drugs and penicillin were very inspiring, and I knew even then that my grandmother had died of something--postpartum strep--that would have easily been cured in the age of antibiotics. And indeed, I saw it cured in the age of antibiotics, when my own kids' mother got it after our second child was born.

Well, as you may have heard, drug-resistant bacteria are on the rise. In fact, according to the Times, they are killing 100,000 people a year at least in the US. Most of them are caught in hospitals. In short, we desperately need new antibiotics.

But guess what? The drug companies aren't in the least bit interested in spending the money to develop and produce them! The reason? Antibiotics work very quickly. You take them for 10 days and you are cured. That's not the kind of drug drug companies like. They like things like lipitor and anti inflammatories that they can hook people on for the rest of their lives. I am not making this up.

So people who are starting to be concerned about this are. . . trying to figure out ways to bribe drug companies to develop these drugs. So far they haven't found anything that looks like it would be a sufficient inducement.

Now strep has not yet mutated into a life-threatening organism as I understand it; but it could. So incredibly, it's quite possible that, if I ever had a grandddaughter, she, like my grandmother, but unlike my own ex-wife, could die of postpartum strep herself. And that is because we have for-profit medicine and we have, essentially, the only drug companies on the planet as far as I can see.

I'd be all in favor of forming a government corporation to hire idealistic young doctors and biologists, forgive their loans, and put them to work on problems like this.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Now strep has not yet mutated into a life-threatening organism as I understand it; but it could.

I guess you haven't heard:

Group A Streptococcal (GAS) Disease

"Severe, sometimes life-threatening, GAS disease may occur when bacteria get into parts of the body where bacteria usually are not found, such as the blood, muscle, or the lungs. These infections are termed "invasive GAS disease." Two of the most severe, but least common, forms of invasive GAS disease are necrotizing fasciitis and streptococcal toxic shock syndrome. Necrotizing fasciitis (occasionally described by the media as "the flesh-eating bacteria") is a rapidly progressive disease which destroys muscles, fat, and skin tissue. Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome (STSS) results in a rapid drop in blood pressure and organs (e.g., kidney, liver, lungs) to fail."

I'd be all in favor of forming a government corporation to hire idealistic young doctors and biologists, forgive their loans, and put them to work on problems like this.

Do what? How about working on this first:

http://www.jhu.edu/jhumag/0609web/farm.html
"Scientists estimate that 50 percent to 80 percent of all antimicrobials in the United States are not used by doctors to treat sick people or animals but are added to farm animal feed, mostly in such subtherapeutic dosages."

Originally Posted by ASB65

I see the fuckery coming down the pike in this country.

You are not alone. Too bad you can't opt out of your employers plan, and it will be even worse once we are all forced by law to buy crappy insurance.
A lot of doctors are going to leave the field also.
It will all have to fall apart before people figure it out, and in the meantime a lot of people are going to have no health care. Not just no health care insurance, I mean no health care.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Do what? How about working on this first:

http://www.jhu.edu/jhumag/0609web/farm.html
"Scientists estimate that 50 percent to 80 percent of all antimicrobials in the United States are not used by doctors to treat sick people or animals but are added to farm animal feed, mostly in such subtherapeutic dosages."

Indeed, much of the resistance to disease is because we ingest antibiotics on a daily basis through the meat we eat. And don't even get me started on the harmones.

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/...esistants.html

Originally Posted by The Rani

"Scientists estimate that 50 percent to 80 percent of all antimicrobials in the United States are not used by doctors to treat sick people or animals but are added to farm animal feed, mostly in such subtherapeutic dosages."

Not sure if this runs along the same lines, but I've read that the increased and widespread use of antibiotics among our livestock and poultry is suspected to be a not-so-insignificant cause of the rise in antibiotic-resistant drugs. Most of us are ingesting more antibiotics than we realize.

ETA: Already covered in the above post.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

I'd be all in favor of forming a government corporation to hire idealistic young doctors and biologists, forgive their loans, and put them to work on problems like this.

I agree.

And to ASB, I'm so sorry for the stress you're experiencing.

As we're walking through the cancer-treatment process for my father-in-law, who is suffering from glioblastoma, many of the flaws in our present system are highlighted. I'd want to make sure my husband is comfortable with my sharing before I offer too much. I hope it's sufficient to say that most of us are truly one catastrophic illness away from financial destitution.

And check this shit out:

Tainted meats point to superbug C. diff in food
Study finds gut germ in 40 percent of grocery meats; CDC says not to worry

Originally Posted by BookishXer

As we're walking through the cancer-treatment process for my father-in-law, who is suffering from glioblastoma, many of the flaws in our present system are highlighted.

Be careful. An old friend of the family just went through the "doctor-recommended" protocol for his colon cancer. It actually made him worse instead of better, and probably took weeks or even months OFF of his life.
Not that this happens with everyone. Just make sure you ask questions, and don't agree to anything til you've got the answers.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Be careful. An old friend of the family just went through the "doctor-recommended" protocol for his colon cancer. It actually made him worse instead of better, and probably took weeks or even months OFF of his life.
Not that this happens with everyone. Just make sure you ask questions, and don't agree to anything til you've got the answers.

Thank you.

Yes. We're trying to walk a discerning line between realistic and hopeful. We also want to be compassionate toward my father-in-law...who has lost the ability to advocate for himself. It's been emotional and complicated.

To add administrative duties to this trial as my mother-in-law processes medical billing...well. It's been complicated.

Originally Posted by The Rani

You are not alone. Too bad you can't opt out of your employers plan, and it will be even worse once we are all forced by law to buy crappy insurance.
A lot of doctors are going to leave the field also.
It will all have to fall apart before people figure it out, and in the meantime a lot of people are going to have no health care. Not just no health care insurance, I mean no health care.

Wouldn't be great if the federal government could simply enter the health-care insurance business as just another option for consumers? I mean, an employer could simply offer the Blue Cross et al "crappy" private plan or the federal government plan to their employees?

What could be so wrong with that?

Originally Posted by Deb C

Indeed, much of the resistance to disease is because we ingest antibiotics on a daily basis through the meat we eat. And don't even get me started on the harmones.

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/...esistants.html

This could open another can of worms. But our food industry has become as motivated by gigantic profits as most other industries, from antibiotics and hormones to genetically modified corn, soy and potato seeds.

We want large amounts of cheap food, and the food industry complies.

One sad outcome of this is that organic foods, such as milk, can be nearly $5 more per gallon than their non-organic counterparts. So, who is buying the organic products?

Originally Posted by Deb C

Obama Again Admits His Health Care Law Is Republican, Not Progressive | FDL Action
fdlaction.firedoglake.com

One of my strongest hopes is that everyone in the media, especially on the left, can simply stop pretending the new health reform law is some great progressive victory. It is not. It is a conservative victory.

As compared to what?

To what was before?

To what would be without it (I guess stuffing cattle with antibiotics is Obamacare's fault too; too bad its been going on before Obama graduated high school, but maybe Rev Wright started it and Barack is just following through? You know kinda like how they and Obamacare has been behind rising insurance premiums since, well, when George Washington got his wooden dentures).

Or, maybe you're comparing it to what is to come now that the evil health insurers have poured money into the 2010 election to get their t-baggers into the halls of Congress so they can now repeal the reform that they're suppose to be so giddy in love with?

Or maybe your comparing it to when the revolution comes, the heads will roll, and the public option will be crowned supreme. Hmm, you might not have notice that the tide is going the other way?

But that's what low tides are good for - shows how naked some swimmers' thinking might be.

Perfection is attained by slow degrees; it requires the hand of time - Voltaire

Hey ASB. I like your writing, and good luck with your health insurance.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Well, as you may have heard, drug-resistant bacteria are on the rise. In fact, according to the Times, they are killing 100,000 people a year at least in the US. Most of them are caught in hospitals. In short, we desperately need new antibiotics.

But guess what? The drug companies aren't in the least bit interested in spending the money to develop and produce them! The reason? Antibiotics work very quickly. You take them for 10 days and you are cured. That's not the kind of drug drug companies like. They like things like lipitor and anti inflammatories that they can hook people on for the rest of their lives. I am not making this up.

So people who are starting to be concerned about this are. . . trying to figure out ways to bribe drug companies to develop these drugs. So far they haven't found anything that looks like it would be a sufficient inducement.

Now strep has not yet mutated into a life-threatening organism as I understand it; but it could. So incredibly, it's quite possible that, if I ever had a grandddaughter, she, like my grandmother, but unlike my own ex-wife, could die of postpartum strep herself. And that is because we have for-profit medicine and we have, essentially, the only drug companies on the planet as far as I can see.

I'd be all in favor of forming a government corporation to hire idealistic young doctors and biologists, forgive their loans, and put them to work on problems like this.

It might be more prudent to educate the young doctors about 'not' giving patients antibiotics at the first sign of a sneeze. The over use of these drugs are partly responsible for the resistance to the superbugs. Doctors are pressured by patients to give them antibiotics and the pharmaceutical reps push the most powerful antibiotics, even though the less potent would work just as well. The more antibiotics are ingested, the faster these drug-resistant superbugs spread.

The pharmaceutical corporations continue to market/push, expecially to pediatricians, powerful antibiotics, that are not needed in most cases, for ear-infections, that usually go away on their own, and colds. They even created a fluffly stuffed zebra named Max as their mascot to sell their products. The use of Sesame Street characters are also used to vulnerable children and their parents.

So between the pharmaseutical corporations pushing these drugs, and the doctors caving into the pressure to use them, this has added to the terrible problem of drug resistance.

It is scary to think how much antibiotic people are ingesting at the hands of pharmaceutical reps, doctors and injected livestock.

Originally Posted by Publius

Wouldn't be great if the federal government could simply enter the health-care insurance business as just another option for consumers? I mean, an employer could simply offer the Blue Cross et al "crappy" private plan or the federal government plan to their employees?

What could be so wrong with that?

I think that the key is to put every US citizen in the same health care insurance pool( no exceptions). However, I would prefer that the Govt set rules/policy for companies and organizations( eg Unions) to then compete for the health care business. This is essentially how the federal govt administers the health care insurance for govt workers. Also want to minimize the control of health care insurance by employers.

Originally Posted by Deb C

It might be more prudent to educate the young doctors about 'not' giving patients antibiotics at the first sign of a sneeze. The over use of these drugs are partly responsible for the resistance to the superbugs. Doctors are pressured by patients to give them antibiotics and the pharmaceutical reps push the most powerful antibiotics, even though the less potent would work just as well. The more antibiotics are ingested, the faster these drug-resistant superbugs spread.

The pharmaceutical corporations continue to market/push, expecially to pediatricians, powerful antibiotics, that are not needed in most cases, for ear-infections, that usually go away on their own, and colds. They even created a fluffly stuffed zebra named Max as their mascot to sell their products. The use of Sesame Street characters are also used to vulnerable children and their parents.

So between the pharmaseutical corporations pushing these drugs, and the doctors caving into the pressure to use them, this has added to the terrible problem of drug resistance.

It is scary to think how much antibiotic people are ingesting at the hands of pharmaceutical reps, doctors and injected livestock.

Well, we do need new antibiotics in any case now. But you are right and others are right about antibiotics for animals. And did you know that the Europeans don't medicate common ear infections at all? They wait to see if the kids just get well, and usually, they do!

Luckily, there is a technology that already exists, that always works and can't be patented: microphages. The Russians are the experts on this, but the use of microphages is pre-antibiotic technology, so there is a lot known already.

The drawback is the specificity of each phage. Each strain is linked to a single strain of bacteria ... or so I'm told.

The upside, they self destruct after the bacteria are destroyed.