Promising Cancer Treatment Breakthrough

In a promising development, a new kind of weapon in the fight against cancer is about to be deployed:

"His oncologists delight in observing that if you saw Rulli on the street, you’d never guess he was sick. At 66, he still is 6-foot-1, still 215 pounds thanks partly to golf-course beer, still an easygoing husband and father of two children, now rejoicing in granddaughters"

In 2013, Bob Rulli was diagnosed with a glioblastoma, a rare but extremely nasty brain tumor. I know, because I lost my baby sister to one a few months ago. These are almost always a death sentence, and difficult to treat; the average life expectancy is about a year and a half.

Now, thanks to some true medical adventurers, there appears to be a real reason for hope, and so far it also appears to have few (if any) side effects):

"On that day in September 2016, for the first treatment, Rulli spent the day at UC with Wise-Draper and Morris keeping vigil for bad reactions. He had none. He felt fine."

Over the next year and a half, Mr Rulli continued to receive the medicine, called BXQ-350, in ever increasing dosages. Repeated MRI's showed that the tumor continued to shrink.

And then there was a glitch...

This is such a great story, I really recommend it. here's no rosy glasses here: there are definitely hurdles left. But so, so promising.

[Hat Tip: FoIB Holly R]

Original content copyright © InsureBlog

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2OyXYVo

Oh, SNAP! (vs Medicaid)

So, FoIB Michael Bertaut offer 1,000 words on how Medicaid really reimburses providers, and its implication viz both Medicare and commercial health insurance:

[click chart to embiggen]

Money quote:

"Every time she scans anything, the price drops dramatically. That $4 gallon of milk goes down to $2. That $10 worth of ground meat down to $5. That $2 loaf of bread to $.50!! ... The only other way out would be to raise your prices enough on everyone else to cover your SNAP shortfall."

Now apply this to health care.

And by the way, co-blogger Mike wrote something similar a dozen years ago - great minds do think alike!

Original content copyright © InsureBlog

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2KNx0XR

That was then, and this is now...

On the one hand (nine years ago):

"Medical Mutual of Ohio, recently completed a study with the University of Michigan's Health Management Research Center; the study concerned MMO's own employees' experience with company-sponsored wellness programs ... Medical costs increased less year-over-year for employees who participated in Wellness for Life activities compared to non-participants."

On the other (6 years ago):

"Workplace wellness programs sound like a win-win: Employees get discounted gym memberships or help quitting cigarettes, and their company gets a healthier staff and lower insurance rates ... Actuarial studies covering thousands of employees over the last 25 years or so don't bear that out.All these incentive programs really do is reward those with healthy lifestyles rather than forcing them to subsidize the additional cost of insuring obese tobacco users."

NTTAWWT.

On the Gripping Hand (a few days ago, as tipped to us by FoIB Holly R):

"Workplace Wellness Programs Don’t Work Well. Why Some Studies Show Otherwise ... These programs are usually offered by employers to make their employees healthier ... Many of the analyses of these programs have shown positive results." [emphasis added]

Okay, wait a minute, "analysis" is very different from "results." What gives?

Ah:

"Confounding is a classic problem of selection bias ... But that’s hard to do with a wellness program."

And thus, when accounting for the actual variables being  measured, there "seemed to be no causal effects."

Which is, of course, disappointing to those with an axe to grind, but I'd also point out that there didn't seem to be any evidence, or even any suggestion, that engaging in wellness activities was harmful.

So we've got that going for us, which is nice.

Original content copyright © InsureBlog

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2OXbymc

EBA whiffs it - Again

So the rocket surgeons at EBA (which, ironically, touts "benefits" in its very title) continue to double-down on the stupid:

"Here’s one option advisors can help them explore: health savings accounts. These accounts, which are offered in combination with high-deductible health insurance plans"

First of all, they keep conflating "High Deductible Health Plan" with "HSA-compliant" plan, thereby confusing laypeople (and irritating us pro's). As we pointed out on Monday:

"[U]ntil the age of ObamaCare, HDHP's meant HSA-compliant true Catastrophic coverage, no bells or whistles, just policies that paid for the truly disastrous claims (think cancer or brain surgery, for example)."

And second, they seem oblivious to the fact that HSA contributors are down for a very good reason: with premiums and out-of-pockets continuing to soar, who the heck has extra cash laying around to put in the account?

They even offer proof of this in their article:

[click chart to embiggen]

So, a 1,000 words in self-rebuttal.

Nice job, guys.

Original content copyright © InsureBlog

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2vVSHzg

CanuckCare© Takes a Shot

So it seems that Britain's Much Vaunted National Health Service© has some competition in the race to the bottom. From our friend The Political Hat:

"Canadian Hospital Pushes Euthanasia on Disabled Patient"

As we've oft-noted, killing off pesky, expensive patients is a sure-fire way to rein in out-of-control health care costs.

(And by the way: have we noticed yet that even nationalized schemes have been unable to keep health care costs in line? Just wondering)

And it seems to be becoming a pretty routine, if final, "solution:"

"Foley tells the man that he’s “always thinking I want to end my life” because of the way he’s being treated at the hospital and because his requests for self-directed care have been denied."

This is far form Dr K's assisted suicide apparatus: no mater what one thinks of that process, at least it was (ostensibly) voluntary. This is full-blown actively pushing for the patient to pull his own plug not for his own betterment, but for the savings to the health "care" system.

Which begs the question: what, they ran out of ice floes?

Original content copyright © InsureBlog

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2vTFh71

When health care is a "right"

We've long maintained that this notion of health care being a 'right' is fraught with peril:

"The noble-sounding idea that "health care is a right" doesn't even pass the smell test: health care must be delivered by a provider, so if it's a "right" then that person is being forced to provide that care whether or not he or she is remunerated for doing so."

But it goes even further: if health care is a 'right' then, by extension, then the government can force health care professionals to provide their service regardless.

Think that's far-fetched?

Well, our Neighbors to the North© are about to put that into practice in real-time:

"Vowing to maintain public dental services in the province, Quebec’s health minister said Thursday he would sign a ministerial decree to block dentists from withdrawing from the public health system amid a bitter standoff over contract negotiations."

Now, I have no idea how much force of law the gentleman can bring to bear on this, or whether he has the ability to actually force these dentists to provide care, but the fact that he believes that he does is chilling, no?

Next up: pediatricians.

Hat Tip to Physics Geek, who notes "Hey, so Canada is kind of cool with forced servitude. Kind of thought slavery was illegal, but whatever."

Yup.

Original content copyright © InsureBlog

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2OU9ifI

On BernieCare

Medicare For All (M4A) has been front and center in health care news this past couple of weeks.

Charles Blahous of Mercatus Center performed a study showing that the cost to move to this program would be $32 Trillion over 10 years. In his analysis he used some very favorable assumptions by assuming the law would hit all of its targets including dramatically reducing payments to health providers, reducing drug prices, and lowering administrative costs.

Senator Sanders countered with a Tweet claiming that the study shows that our country will save $2 Trillion dollars in moving to M4A. He thanks the Koch brothers and Mercatus for "proving" that his plan will work.

So where does the savings and funds to pay for the government program of Bernie's? If you read the media reports it will come from higher taxes, elimination of the insurance industry, and pay cuts to doctors who will accept 40% less at Medicare reimbursement.

On top of the likelihood that M4A will have to double tax rates what is most telling is the last point. For M4A to "show savings" the entire medical world will have to see their average reimbursement cut by 40%. Who all is in the medical world? Well, lets start with a few of those who would see their incomes whacked or in many cases see their jobs eliminated:

Nurses
Nurse Practitioners
Pediatricians
Hospitals
Billing Specialists
Insurance Agents
Speech Pathologists
Insurance Customer Service Representatives
Medical Device Manufacturers
Insurance Underwriters
Surgeons
Occupational Health and Safety Specialists
Therapists
Dental Hygentists
Physician's Assistants
Pharmacy Technicians
Lab Technicians
Home Health Aides
Certified Nursing Assistants
Medical Transcriptionists
Medical Records Technicians
Research Associates
Pharmaceutical Research Investigators
Optometrists

Maybe Senator Sanders should send out another tweet thanking all of these fine people who work hard to save lives and provide us with care needed to remain healthy. Because if his plan ever comes to fruition they will be the one's paying for it.

Original content copyright © InsureBlog

from InsureBlog https://ift.tt/2OTESu7