HEALTH
CARE DELIVERY
ECONOMICS KNOWS NO BOUNDARIES
BUT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER
EVERYTHING ANSWERS TO HEALTH
CARE DELIVERY
ECONOMICS KNOWS NO BOUNDARIES
BUT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER
EVERYTHING ANSWERS TO HEALTH
The Health Care Page
Menu Is Here
Good Entry
BUNDLE
(Poor Process With
Monopolistic Value Chain
"Box" That Is Statutorily
Defined But Comparable To
Boxes In Fructose GMO's, Etc.)
Processes Can Be Contracted
For And Integrated In, But It
Will Still Be Like Building A
Lexus On Top Of A Lada Chassis
(When He Says "Considering The
Price," Remember: We're Going
(Ostensibly) To 21% Of GNP (2019)
Despite Having Cost Shifted All
Along, With Fast Mounting Reasons
For Doubt As To The Estimate.
Methinks The Health
Cartel Loves ObamaCare.
They Did Indeed Receive
What The TBTF Banks Have.
I Make Use Of The Market,
But It's "Market Progressive"
That's Patient-Doctor Centric,
Process Informed, But Process
Informed In A Best- (At Leat
Better-(Of-Application) Manner.
VIDEO Added To Tools
"24 Ways To Lose Weight Without
Dieting," Med Site/Doc Reviewed,
Is Integrated In The Food
(I'll Be Adding A Couple Studies
Deflating Omega-3/Cold Water Fish
As To A Couple Med Indications,
Which May/May Not Be Owing To
Extraneous Specifics As To Those
Indications; Of Course, Many More
Studies Will Come As To Those.
There're Still Innumerable Studies
Showing Benefit In Most Systems,
Including Some Therapeutic.
I'm At Least Still Favoring It.)
The Okinawans Are Mostly
Veggie Eaters.
Lots Of Recipes For Getting Them
Tasting Interesting While Not
Adding Lots Of Fat/Sugar.
Nothing's Deflated The Med Diet
As Far As I've Seen.
One Supposedly Anti-High Carb
Study Was Taken Out Of Context
(Coming,) Actually Blaming Simple
Carbs, Though NoOne Advises
Eating Whole Pots Of Whole
Grains.
For Direct Advice You Wouldn't
Believe How Many Experts
Are Here.
California Health
Exchange Contractor
Secrecy Granted
I Don't Know If This Is Supposed
To Be A Believe It Or Not Moment.
Nader's At Different Times Used
The Words Scam/Convoluted,
And He's Progressive, Like Myself.
To Me, It's Somewhere Between
Possibly Highly Promising Both
Superficially And Maybe Even
In Substance Combined
With Deceptive/Not-Really-
Progressive/Close But Doesn't
Make It (I Had A Grandfather, One
Of Whose Businesses Was Making
Clothes--That's Probably From
Where That Last Expression
Originates.)
I'm About "Market-Progressive,"
Process Rationally Informing,
Patient/Doctor-Centric, No
Market Control, Using The Wealth
Of Rationalization Resources Available
From Within A Sector Extremely
Talent Rich.
Other Progressives, And Persons/
Organizations Not From The Right
(My Own Approach In Medical Care
Is "Market Progressive")
Dissatisfied With ObamaCare--
A Chorus Growing And Harmonizing
Better.
-1- -2- -3- -4-
-5-
The Latest
On "Medicare Advantage."
Here's The Administration's Yet
Newer Act As To Medicare.
This, From Banking, Now Applies
To Health Care. We've Gone
From The Inability To Move To
Vegas For Real Estate/Job
Opportunities And/Or An
Eventual Choice Of "Go Naked"
Or "Premium Death Spiral," Both
Or One Or The Other The Case
For Very Many Of Us, To That,
But In Health Care Too.
It Helps Immensely If One Is
Familiar With The Ability To
Charge Different Prices To
Based On People's Different
Abilities To Pay Being
Monopolistic.
The Advancing
Risks Presented By Prospective
Patients Helps Define
That Ability To Pay.
The Ability To Pay Is Fixed By
That "Ownership" Of Risk,
Or Of Chance.
This Is Chance Treated Fairly.
There Are Many Well Intended
Persons In Different Segments
Of The Sector Not Connecting
Sector Architecture With What
The Actuaries Themselves, And
Most In Academia, Understand.
Insurance Is Supposed To Insure
Against The Unexpected.
Where It Administers Coverage
For The Expected, It's A Sector
Administrator, Not An Insurer.
One Can Have A Sector Thus
Administered In A Carrier-Centric
Manner. If The Carriers Are
De Facto A Cartel, Then They're
Administering It In A Cartel-
Centric Manner.
Monopoly Is No Stranger In The
Sector. But Where It Was In
The Past Physician And Hospital
Centric, Though That's Not A
Laudable Goal, That Would Still
Be Preferable To A Cartel-Centric
Sector.
Which Is What We Have. Instead
Of This, Risk Defines Where Along
A Profit Schedule And Formula For
Subsidy One Resides.
Where TBTF Banking Is Monopoly
Of Monetary Policy And The Currency,
This Is Monopoly Of The Sector That's
More Appropriately The Home Of
Compassion And The Profiting
On People's Denial Of Chance Or
Simple Unawareness Of How It
Can Be Handled Unfairly, And,
Hence, My Expression
"Ownership Of Chance" And
This Accompaniment.
And Wow. This Now
Looks O.K. To Link.
I Wish I Had Been There.
-----
Just Go Away Deductibles Means
Collecting Money But Leaving You
On Your Own To Confront
Misfortune And Guage When To
Pay For Help.
Affordability Becomes What Are You
Worth, And Comprehensiveness Of
Coverage In Terms Of Population
Can Look Fantastically Impressive
While In Reality Effecting The
Blanketing Of Monopoly And The
Playing Of That Architecture For All
Its Worth, Mimicing A Formula From
The 19th Century.
Nader Has Called It Convoluted, And
The Last Time I Checked He Wasn't
A Reactionary.
To Me, The Hiring Of Thousands Of
Subsidy Eligibility Qualifiers Is The
(Expensive, Though I Ordinarily
Welcome Jobs For Folks In My
Sector) Is The Demand Side Of
Gatekeeping Mirroring The Supply
Side: Telling Doctors What They
Can/Can't Do. Though That's
Defined Medicine For A Long Time
Now, Coming From A Med Family
It Still Feels No Less Alien.
Things Can Be Symptomatic
In Economics Too.
This Is Non-Rationalization.
This Is How Clinically Planning
PER MED CATEGORY Can
Be Efficient In Terms Of Dollars,
But Also Inevitably In Terms Of
Patient And Physician Satisfaction.
Create The Right Structure, And
Turn The Doctors Loose. Only
They Know How To Apply The
Better Medical Process In The
Structure Rightly Provided.
This Approach Is Probably Best
Known As "Value Basing."
I Personally Would Want It
Integrated Into A Less
Monopolistic Architecture.
Most Readers In Fact Have
Just Go Away Deductibles.
Absent Monopolists Disinterested
In The Rational And Fair, We
Would Do The Very Best We
Could Knowledge-Wise For
People. That's "Epidemiology"
And Each And All Of A Virtual
Infinity Of Factors Impacting
Health Status.
We Would Take That And Apply
It To An Economic Arrangement
That's Fair, Efficient (In
Medical Care Patient Satisfaction.
Physician Satisfaction,
And Measures Of Success Of
Clinical Purpose Should Match Up
With The Money Efficiency,
Because The End Goal Is The
Most Bang For The Buck, And
The End Goal Is
Docs, And Patients Upset About
Their Unhappy, Inconvenient
Lapse In Health Status, Being
Made Happy Campers.
There's Much To That Process.
And To The Structural
Arrangements, Of Which I
Would Allow Very Many, That
Can By One Part Having A
Friendlier Competition In Terms
Of Establishing Their Revenue
Flow, Part Cooperating Cross-
Organizationally In Working Out
The "Last Mile" Of Cost
Control And Practice Efficiency
Rationalization That's Left
Over After Middlemen Serve
As A Quality And Efficiency
Aid, Not A Mechanism Of
Monopoly And Control.
One Can Try This, Or
One Can Simply
Co-Opt Chance Itself.
Pursuing The Latter Is
To Follow The Path Of
The Banking Ponzi Schemes,
Except: There's No Kiting Of
Securities; There's No
Derivatives Market. The Cost
Of Inefficiency Will Simply Be
Expressed 2 Ways:
--Control Of Physicians
--Patient Needs Unmet In
Many Ways At Many Levels
The Opportunities Missed Will
Be Tremendous. Clinical
Rationalization
Is The Medical Foundation
For Public Health Seamlessly.
Because The Uncovereds'
Cost Has Been Shifted All
Along, The Projection Of
21% Of GNP By 2019 Cannot
Stem Primarily From Increased
Coverage.
It's The Gatekeepers And The
Profit Layering. I'm Obviously
Happy To See Extended Coverage
But Think That Measure Of
INCREMENTAL Profit And
Gatekeeping Hires Moving The
Percentage Of GNP Can Be
Done Much More Smartly
And Fairly And Instead Of
Foreclosing On The Latter.
And I Don't Think New
Gatekeeping Hires Are Needed
In A Better Done Plan.
In So Many Ways Patients Are
Treated The Way Car Dealers
Treat Their Cars In Inventory--
As Platforms For Contracting.
They Should Be Platforms
For Our Service.
(But The Coverage Is Expanded?)
Yes, But Monopoly Plays A Hand
In Your Own Risk Advancing
You To: The Need; AND, Eligibility,
For Subsidy. Young Persons
With No History Can Still Cost
Millions. Chance Affects Them.
As To Your March Toward
Medically Legal Poverty And
Concomitant Eligibility For
Subsidy, That's Not
"Insurance." That's
Administration Of A Service Plan.
Israel Has A Service Plan
Operated Through A Handful
Of Purveyors, But It's Not
Architected For A Monopolistically
Defined Profit Scheme.
It's A Uniform Benefits Package
(Elective Service Available,)
Fully Centrally Funded.
My Own Recipe Arrives At A
Similar Place To That Or Of
California OneCare's Because
Of The Simple Fact Our
End Goals Are The Same; And,
It's The Nature Of
Epidemiology And Disease
Management That Any
Plan Honestly And Efficiently
Satisfying Patients And Physicians
Will Look The Same At Bedside.
Government Provided Coverage
Co-Pay Based On Prior Year
Tax Return--
No Gatekeeper
Hires Needed Whatsoever.
ObamaCare's Approach In This
Regard Is Really A Wild One
For Me. Eligibility Per Worker
With Family But Not Counting
The Needs Of The Family.
Eligibility Based On "Modified"
Adjusted Gross Income
Calculated Per PRESENT Year,
Obviously To Avoid
"Entitlement" Status.
Gatekeeper Hires (1,000's)
Will GUESSTIMATE Relying
Only Partly On Prior Year
Income (?? --As In That's
Correct; I Just Find It Strange.)
I Would Unitize And
Equalize This, Repeal Anti-Trust
Immunity, Encourage A Physician-
Carrier Market, And Mandate
An Accountable Care Percentage
Of Service ("Skin In The Game
Stucturally" (Capitation
Prepayment For A Perentage
Of Service) As In The Way
J-Burg Mandates A Percentage
Of Black Investment In Its
Miners.
As Fee For Service Would
Conform To The New
Environment, It's Then
Welcome To Join The
Capitation Element As An
Anti-Fragile Partner.
Back To Service Plans.
Mine's Not Cartel Centric.
It's Patient-Doctor-Centric,
Market-Progressive Based.
Add Physician And Patient
Committee Material Input,
Statutorily Requiring A
Public Benefit Annually,
And, This Being The Part
I Really Like:
Last Mile Cost Effectiveness
Cross-Organizational
Physician Planning Informing
Labs Precisely What Is
Needed At The Most Practical
Service Level.
To Unitize Risk Fairly, There's
A Long Known Concept, Risk
Equalization.
"Collaborative Care" Is
Changing Medicare Somewhat
In A Maverick Fashion That The
Carriers Themselves Are
Probably Not 100% Sure Is
Desirable For Them, When
Compared To What They've
Otherwise Generally Had,
But Medicare's Otherwise
Generally National Health
Insurance For Unwanted
Customers.
Rail Didn't Want Its Passenger
Side When Air Flourished.
That's How Amtrak Got Born.
This Is One Page In One Blog,
So I Won't Work Out The Details,
But Medicare Already Utilizes
A Process For Paying Insurers
Extra For Taking Back Some Risk
Presented By Medicare Patients
(Who're Not Part Of A Collaborative
Care Program.) So The Technology
Exists, Though A Publicly Created
Version Would Be Desirable,
To Apply A Simple Tricky--
Any Kind Of Risk Escrow Mechanism,
For The Unitizing Of Risk From
Which Players Can Be Paid For
Taking More On, Or To Which They
Would Pay For Carrying Less.
Fair Poker Was Created At The
Birth Of Western Understanding
Of Probabilities And Risk.
I Don't Know When That Process
First Got Corrupted, But One
Would Never Know It Existed
From Just Our Experience.
There's Nothing Wrong With
A Catastrophe Insurer Charging
Bad Drivers Higher Premiums.
But Drivers Are Not Synonymous
With Human Bodies, Germs,
Accidents Generally, And
Epidemiology, And If Chance
And Risk Have To Be Gamed
At All It Should Be Grounded On
A Patient/Physician Based
Structure.
I Don't Think It Needs To Be
Gamed At All, And I Would
Take That Patient/Physician
Focus And Apply The Market
Progressively. (Presently It
Is Gamed/Is Not Focused Right/
Is Not-Really-Progressive, To Me.)
-----------------
When It's Advancing Risk That
Advances Eligibility For Subsidy,
Then It's Also Monopoly That's
Advancing You Toward
Impoverishment.
It's Actually Then The Opposite
Of This, Which Really Is Flatly
"Progressive."
I, Though, Jazz That Up, With
Max'ing Out Choice And
"Anti-Fragility" In A "Market
Progressive" Manner, Full
Universal Coverage Simply,
No New Gatekeepers, Treating
Risk And Chance Fairly,
Requiring A Percentage Of
"Skin In The Game"/"Accountable
Care," Thus Compelling
Conformity With That, Plus
Essential Other Process Repairs.
-------------------
...Speaking About The Present
Then, "Affordability" Potentially
Becomes "What Are You Worth?"
That's Why, Always Looking For
The Lighter Side, I Like To Say
Confusing ObamaCare With An
Honestly-Progressive,
Democratic, Legitimate/Fair,
Still Market Oriented Plan,
Like Risk Equalization,
Is Like Comparing A Buick
Skylark With A Corvette.
(Don't Take It Seriously
Southerners! There May Well
Be More Monopolists In the
North.)
Because The Structure Of
ObamaCare Is Exquisitely
Monopolistic, It Doesn't Matter
If The Carriers Have To Pay A
Fee To The Government, For
Whatever Reason (Fee To The
King For Fiefdom?)
Their (Statutory) Profit Box Is Fixed.
That's Statutory--Yet Better Than
Market Controlled Seeds Such That
Regardless Of The State Of Economy
In The Ailes Of Ralph's, Acme,
Wegman's Or Trader Joes, The
Purveyor Of Insecticide-Related
Ubiquitously Fructose Sourcing GMO
Seeds, Because Farms Become
Dependent On Them, Will Always
Have Its Profit Box, But Just
Not As Fixed As In Health Care.
Health Care By ObamaCare's
Architects Themselves Is To
Go To 21% Of GNP By 2019.
BUT FOR THE MOST PART THAT
CAN'T BE FROM ADDING
COVERAGE, BECAUSE OF COST
SHIFTING--YOU'VE ALL HAD THE
COST OF UN-REIMBURSED CARE
SHIFTED INTO YOUR PREMIUMS
ALL ALONG.
But Now The Cost Will Have
15 to 40% Tacked On In
Profit Margins.
As Of 4/21/2013 All The
Major Carriers Are
(Stock Market) Trading
Near Their 52 Week Highs.
For The Price There Should Be
No Monopoly, No Control Of
Doctors, No Just Go Away
Deductibles, No Financial Fear
Of Entering The System, Far
Better Outcomes And
Comparisons (I Really See No
Reason To Expect That;) And,
We Shouldn't Be Looking At
A Situation Where The Larger
The Volume Of Work, The
Larger The Base On Which To
Calculate The Statutory Profit
Margins. Economics Was
Considered All Right. Just Not
On Behalf Of Patients, Doctors,
Or Any Legitimate National
Interest.
Why, Then, Would The Result
Be Different From Bodies Of
Government Insistent On
Monopoly And Gatekeepin In
Monetary/Banking Policy,
Agriculture, Etc.?
Cable Should Have Health Care's
Profit Edict, If They're A "Natural
Monopoly."
They're A Do-What-You-Can-
Get-Away-With Monopoly Instead.
TBTF's Monopoly Of Monetary
Policy And The Currency. And Its
Stunning Failures Are Subsidized And
Lavishly Rewarded.
Restoring Democracy Unites
Liberals And Conservatives.
In Health Care, After That,
I Offer Market Progressivism,
The Only Rational Means Of
Providing Patient And Doctor
(Also, Really, Nurse, PA, Etc.)
Satisfaction To As Close To 100%
As Is Possible, With Maximum
Efficiency, Maximum Assurance
And Comfort, And Seamless
Connection With The Very Many
Approaches Of Translating
Medical Knowledge To
Community Health Support That
We Already Know Are Possible.
Such Things As Epidemiology,
Disease Management, And The
Persistent Disinterest On The
Part Of Microbes And Accident-
Style Happenstance In Such
Things As Price Motivation
Mitigate Against Insistence On
Simple Absolutes, Though Those
Absolutes Do Provide Useful
Seasoning To The Recipe.
Cynical 1
Monopoly-Afforded Cynical 2
American στυλ
In Environmental Matters,
Bona Fide Reductions Of CO2
Production Along Existing
Manufacturing, And Increments In
CO2 Production, Could Actually
Similarly Be Escrowed, Though
This Page Is Only For Medical Care
And Public Health.
Just Go Away Deductibles And
Large Co-Pays Impact Far More
Than The Manner Of First
Addressing A Patient's Concern
(And Actually That Initiation Can
More Economically And Better
Clinically Be Approached
Pro-Actively.)
Imagine Your Doctor Just Completed
A Wide Area Excission For A Skin
Cancer. She Informs, The Science
Says There's A Particular Percentage
Likelihood Of The Start Of Spread
(Metastasis,) Though Of Course The
Particulars Of A Patient's Case Will
Shade Her Prognosis. She Then Informs
Of The Science Of Sentinel Node Biopsy
For The Purpose Of Finding And Eliminating
The Beginning Elements Of Spread,
Hopefully While They May Be Still
Contained In A Bodily Self-Defensive
System.
But The Initial Work Took A Couple
Thousand (+) And The Proposed
Procedure Will Run Into The
'Teen'000's. Your $10,000 Deductible
Will Obviously Be Maxed Out, You May
Or May Not Be Looking At Your Annual
Maximum Out-Of-Pocket, You Of Course
Have No Idea What Else May Crop Up,
And You've A Spouse Who Comes With
Another Out-Of-Pocket Schedule.
The Doctor Plainly Feels This Combined
Diagnostic/Potentially Therapeutic
Procedure Is A Worthwhile One, But
The Money Makes It Look Like A
Tough Call, Cause It Could Very Well
Mean The Difference Between Sending
A Kid To College Or Not.
Or Your Retirement Or Pre-Retirement
Income May Have Been Flattened By
Mr. Bernanke's Generosity To The Banks,
And You May Be Seriously Concerned
About What Kind Of Retirement Lies Ahead
For You And Your Spouse.
You Search The Procedure's Diagnostic
Negatives And Positives And Resulting
Outcomes Compared To What Happens
In The Absence Of The Test.
Even Were We To Assume
"Affordability's" Been Achieved
(Kinda' Dubious At Least For Me--
With Varying Degrees Of Deficiency
Here And There, Including Plainly
Failing Any Kind Of Martin Goldstein
Pressure Test, And Degrees Of
Deficiency In Many Instances That
Occur,) That Does Not Address The
Interaction Of Economics And
Clinical Reality Nearly Enough. Just
Doing The Right Thing Is Something
Doctors And Patients Can Create
On Their Own, With Policy Guidance
-----
Though The Sector's Elements Can't
All Live Alone As Separate Islands,
With A Legitimate Form Of Risk
Equalization Needed, And Absent
Not Simply Monopoly And Risk
Filtering But Gatekeeping As Well,
If The Market Is To Contribute To It.
Gatekeeping Can Come With
Brash Risk Filtering, Such As With
The Medicare Disability Patient Thriving
On Physical Therapy vs. Languishing
But Being Kept Alive On Med's, Though
They Erase Much Of Her Gains From
Physical Therapy, And Her Being Told
She Has To Go Back To Med's Until
Her Physical Therapy Allowance Resets.
The Sector Will Always Have A
Spending Limit. But Our Nation's
Priorities Are Not Health Based Or
Medical Care Based.
This Sector's Economics Lives With
Clinical Realities And Epidemiology,
With Accidents And Germs Rather
Disinterested In Prices.
Its Structure Should Reflect A
Measure Of Savvy As To That. But
A Dose Of Discipline And Efficiency
From One Or Other Measure Of The
Traditional Marketplace Could Be
Useful Indeed.
In Terms Of The Choices That
Should Legitimately Be Available
To Patients,
We Have Had Neither Before.
We Have Neither Now.
Besides Issues In Monopoly, Risk
Filtering And Gatekeeping, Is
Pay To Play. Though, Pay
To Play's Really The Layering
Of Gatekeepers.
I'm The Gatekeeper Here.
I Say Keep It As The Fourth
Element For Explanation's Sake,
Especially When Pay To Play
Can Afford Protection.
This Was Expressly Rejected
In Open Congress.
Also, Health Care Is Not About
Simply Getting People To Higher
Ages Any More Than Transport
Safety Should Be About Only
Seat Belts Controlling Traffic
Fatality Stats.
The Former Is About Health
Status Now, As The Latter
Should Be About Uneventful And
Injury Free Transport.
Ordinarily The Route To Privatization
Is The Slow March Of Monopoly,
Risk Filtering, Gatekeeping And
Pay To Play. Imagine The Post
Office Is Created As A
Public Agency For Public
Benefit But With The Intention
Of 10 Minutes Later Raising
Postage Rates To Lofty Levels
But Payable According To
Ability To Pay, And 5 Minutes
After That Privatizing It.
It's Shrouded, Actually,
By The Exchanges And
Air Of Competition.
You Know It's There
Essentially Cause Of
This And This And Then
Especially When You Look
At The Structure, Especially
The Profit Regime, Naturally,
In Combination With Those.
Similar Place To That Or Of
California OneCare's Because
Of The Simple Fact Our
End Goals Are The Same; And,
It's The Nature Of
Epidemiology And Disease
Management That Any
Plan Honestly And Efficiently
Satisfying Patients And Physicians
Will Look The Same At Bedside.
Government Provided Coverage
Co-Pay Based On Prior Year
Tax Return--
No Gatekeeper
Hires Needed Whatsoever.
ObamaCare's Approach In This
Regard Is Really A Wild One
For Me. Eligibility Per Worker
With Family But Not Counting
The Needs Of The Family.
Eligibility Based On "Modified"
Adjusted Gross Income
Calculated Per PRESENT Year,
Obviously To Avoid
"Entitlement" Status.
Gatekeeper Hires (1,000's)
Will GUESSTIMATE Relying
Only Partly On Prior Year
Income (?? --As In That's
Correct; I Just Find It Strange.)
I Would Unitize And
Equalize This, Repeal Anti-Trust
Immunity, Encourage A Physician-
Carrier Market, And Mandate
An Accountable Care Percentage
Of Service ("Skin In The Game
Stucturally" (Capitation
Prepayment For A Perentage
Of Service) As In The Way
J-Burg Mandates A Percentage
Of Black Investment In Its
Miners.
As Fee For Service Would
Conform To The New
Environment, It's Then
Welcome To Join The
Capitation Element As An
Anti-Fragile Partner.
Back To Service Plans.
Mine's Not Cartel Centric.
It's Patient-Doctor-Centric,
Market-Progressive Based.
Add Physician And Patient
Committee Material Input,
Statutorily Requiring A
Public Benefit Annually,
And, This Being The Part
I Really Like:
Last Mile Cost Effectiveness
Cross-Organizational
Physician Planning Informing
Labs Precisely What Is
Needed At The Most Practical
Service Level.
To Unitize Risk Fairly, There's
A Long Known Concept, Risk
Equalization.
"Collaborative Care" Is
Changing Medicare Somewhat
In A Maverick Fashion That The
Carriers Themselves Are
Probably Not 100% Sure Is
Desirable For Them, When
Compared To What They've
Otherwise Generally Had,
But Medicare's Otherwise
Generally National Health
Insurance For Unwanted
Customers.
Rail Didn't Want Its Passenger
Side When Air Flourished.
That's How Amtrak Got Born.
This Is One Page In One Blog,
So I Won't Work Out The Details,
But Medicare Already Utilizes
A Process For Paying Insurers
Extra For Taking Back Some Risk
Presented By Medicare Patients
(Who're Not Part Of A Collaborative
Care Program.) So The Technology
Exists, Though A Publicly Created
Version Would Be Desirable,
To Apply A Simple Tricky--
Any Kind Of Risk Escrow Mechanism,
For The Unitizing Of Risk From
Which Players Can Be Paid For
Taking More On, Or To Which They
Would Pay For Carrying Less.
Fair Poker Was Created At The
Birth Of Western Understanding
Of Probabilities And Risk.
I Don't Know When That Process
First Got Corrupted, But One
Would Never Know It Existed
From Just Our Experience.
There's Nothing Wrong With
A Catastrophe Insurer Charging
Bad Drivers Higher Premiums.
But Drivers Are Not Synonymous
With Human Bodies, Germs,
Accidents Generally, And
Epidemiology, And If Chance
And Risk Have To Be Gamed
At All It Should Be Grounded On
A Patient/Physician Based
Structure.
I Don't Think It Needs To Be
Gamed At All, And I Would
Take That Patient/Physician
Focus And Apply The Market
Progressively. (Presently It
Is Gamed/Is Not Focused Right/
Is Not-Really-Progressive, To Me.)
-----------------
When It's Advancing Risk That
Advances Eligibility For Subsidy,
Then It's Also Monopoly That's
Advancing You Toward
Impoverishment.
It's Actually Then The Opposite
Of This, Which Really Is Flatly
"Progressive."
I, Though, Jazz That Up, With
Max'ing Out Choice And
"Anti-Fragility" In A "Market
Progressive" Manner, Full
Universal Coverage Simply,
No New Gatekeepers, Treating
Risk And Chance Fairly,
Requiring A Percentage Of
"Skin In The Game"/"Accountable
Care," Thus Compelling
Conformity With That, Plus
Essential Other Process Repairs.
-------------------
...Speaking About The Present
Then, "Affordability" Potentially
Becomes "What Are You Worth?"
That's Why, Always Looking For
The Lighter Side, I Like To Say
Confusing ObamaCare With An
Honestly-Progressive,
Democratic, Legitimate/Fair,
Still Market Oriented Plan,
Like Risk Equalization,
Is Like Comparing A Buick
Skylark With A Corvette.
(Don't Take It Seriously
Southerners! There May Well
Be More Monopolists In the
North.)
Because The Structure Of
ObamaCare Is Exquisitely
Monopolistic, It Doesn't Matter
If The Carriers Have To Pay A
Fee To The Government, For
Whatever Reason (Fee To The
King For Fiefdom?)
Their (Statutory) Profit Box Is Fixed.
That's Statutory--Yet Better Than
Market Controlled Seeds Such That
Regardless Of The State Of Economy
In The Ailes Of Ralph's, Acme,
Wegman's Or Trader Joes, The
Purveyor Of Insecticide-Related
Ubiquitously Fructose Sourcing GMO
Seeds, Because Farms Become
Dependent On Them, Will Always
Have Its Profit Box, But Just
Not As Fixed As In Health Care.
Health Care By ObamaCare's
Architects Themselves Is To
Go To 21% Of GNP By 2019.
BUT FOR THE MOST PART THAT
CAN'T BE FROM ADDING
COVERAGE, BECAUSE OF COST
SHIFTING--YOU'VE ALL HAD THE
COST OF UN-REIMBURSED CARE
SHIFTED INTO YOUR PREMIUMS
ALL ALONG.
But Now The Cost Will Have
15 to 40% Tacked On In
Profit Margins.
As Of 4/21/2013 All The
Major Carriers Are
(Stock Market) Trading
Near Their 52 Week Highs.
For The Price There Should Be
No Monopoly, No Control Of
Doctors, No Just Go Away
Deductibles, No Financial Fear
Of Entering The System, Far
Better Outcomes And
Comparisons (I Really See No
Reason To Expect That;) And,
We Shouldn't Be Looking At
A Situation Where The Larger
The Volume Of Work, The
Larger The Base On Which To
Calculate The Statutory Profit
Margins. Economics Was
Considered All Right. Just Not
On Behalf Of Patients, Doctors,
Or Any Legitimate National
Interest.
Why, Then, Would The Result
Be Different From Bodies Of
Government Insistent On
Monopoly And Gatekeepin In
Monetary/Banking Policy,
Agriculture, Etc.?
Cable Should Have Health Care's
Profit Edict, If They're A "Natural
Monopoly."
They're A Do-What-You-Can-
Get-Away-With Monopoly Instead.
TBTF's Monopoly Of Monetary
Policy And The Currency. And Its
Stunning Failures Are Subsidized And
Lavishly Rewarded.
Restoring Democracy Unites
Liberals And Conservatives.
In Health Care, After That,
I Offer Market Progressivism,
The Only Rational Means Of
Providing Patient And Doctor
(Also, Really, Nurse, PA, Etc.)
Satisfaction To As Close To 100%
As Is Possible, With Maximum
Efficiency, Maximum Assurance
And Comfort, And Seamless
Connection With The Very Many
Approaches Of Translating
Medical Knowledge To
Community Health Support That
We Already Know Are Possible.
Such Things As Epidemiology,
Disease Management, And The
Persistent Disinterest On The
Part Of Microbes And Accident-
Style Happenstance In Such
Things As Price Motivation
Mitigate Against Insistence On
Simple Absolutes, Though Those
Absolutes Do Provide Useful
Seasoning To The Recipe.
Cynical 1
Monopoly-Afforded Cynical 2
American στυλ
In Environmental Matters,
Bona Fide Reductions Of CO2
Production Along Existing
Manufacturing, And Increments In
CO2 Production, Could Actually
Similarly Be Escrowed, Though
This Page Is Only For Medical Care
And Public Health.
Just Go Away Deductibles And
Large Co-Pays Impact Far More
Than The Manner Of First
Addressing A Patient's Concern
(And Actually That Initiation Can
More Economically And Better
Clinically Be Approached
Pro-Actively.)
Imagine Your Doctor Just Completed
A Wide Area Excission For A Skin
Cancer. She Informs, The Science
Says There's A Particular Percentage
Likelihood Of The Start Of Spread
(Metastasis,) Though Of Course The
Particulars Of A Patient's Case Will
Shade Her Prognosis. She Then Informs
Of The Science Of Sentinel Node Biopsy
For The Purpose Of Finding And Eliminating
The Beginning Elements Of Spread,
Hopefully While They May Be Still
Contained In A Bodily Self-Defensive
System.
But The Initial Work Took A Couple
Thousand (+) And The Proposed
Procedure Will Run Into The
'Teen'000's. Your $10,000 Deductible
Will Obviously Be Maxed Out, You May
Or May Not Be Looking At Your Annual
Maximum Out-Of-Pocket, You Of Course
Have No Idea What Else May Crop Up,
And You've A Spouse Who Comes With
Another Out-Of-Pocket Schedule.
The Doctor Plainly Feels This Combined
Diagnostic/Potentially Therapeutic
Procedure Is A Worthwhile One, But
The Money Makes It Look Like A
Tough Call, Cause It Could Very Well
Mean The Difference Between Sending
A Kid To College Or Not.
Or Your Retirement Or Pre-Retirement
Income May Have Been Flattened By
Mr. Bernanke's Generosity To The Banks,
And You May Be Seriously Concerned
About What Kind Of Retirement Lies Ahead
For You And Your Spouse.
You Search The Procedure's Diagnostic
Negatives And Positives And Resulting
Outcomes Compared To What Happens
In The Absence Of The Test.
Even Were We To Assume
"Affordability's" Been Achieved
(Kinda' Dubious At Least For Me--
With Varying Degrees Of Deficiency
Here And There, Including Plainly
Failing Any Kind Of Martin Goldstein
Pressure Test, And Degrees Of
Deficiency In Many Instances That
Occur,) That Does Not Address The
Interaction Of Economics And
Clinical Reality Nearly Enough. Just
Doing The Right Thing Is Something
Doctors And Patients Can Create
On Their Own, With Policy Guidance
-----
Though The Sector's Elements Can't
All Live Alone As Separate Islands,
With A Legitimate Form Of Risk
Equalization Needed, And Absent
Not Simply Monopoly And Risk
Filtering But Gatekeeping As Well,
If The Market Is To Contribute To It.
Gatekeeping Can Come With
Brash Risk Filtering, Such As With
The Medicare Disability Patient Thriving
On Physical Therapy vs. Languishing
But Being Kept Alive On Med's, Though
They Erase Much Of Her Gains From
Physical Therapy, And Her Being Told
She Has To Go Back To Med's Until
Her Physical Therapy Allowance Resets.
The Sector Will Always Have A
Spending Limit. But Our Nation's
Priorities Are Not Health Based Or
Medical Care Based.
This Sector's Economics Lives With
Clinical Realities And Epidemiology,
With Accidents And Germs Rather
Disinterested In Prices.
Its Structure Should Reflect A
Measure Of Savvy As To That. But
A Dose Of Discipline And Efficiency
From One Or Other Measure Of The
Traditional Marketplace Could Be
Useful Indeed.
In Terms Of The Choices That
Should Legitimately Be Available
To Patients,
We Have Had Neither Before.
We Have Neither Now.
Besides Issues In Monopoly, Risk
Filtering And Gatekeeping, Is
Pay To Play. Though, Pay
To Play's Really The Layering
Of Gatekeepers.
I'm The Gatekeeper Here.
I Say Keep It As The Fourth
Element For Explanation's Sake,
Especially When Pay To Play
Can Afford Protection.
This Was Expressly Rejected
In Open Congress.
Also, Health Care Is Not About
Simply Getting People To Higher
Ages Any More Than Transport
Safety Should Be About Only
Seat Belts Controlling Traffic
Fatality Stats.
The Former Is About Health
Status Now, As The Latter
Should Be About Uneventful And
Injury Free Transport.
Ordinarily The Route To Privatization
Is The Slow March Of Monopoly,
Risk Filtering, Gatekeeping And
Pay To Play. Imagine The Post
Office Is Created As A
Public Agency For Public
Benefit But With The Intention
Of 10 Minutes Later Raising
Postage Rates To Lofty Levels
But Payable According To
Ability To Pay, And 5 Minutes
After That Privatizing It.
It's Shrouded, Actually,
By The Exchanges And
Air Of Competition.
You Know It's There
Essentially Cause Of
This And This And Then
Especially When You Look
At The Structure, Especially
The Profit Regime, Naturally,
In Combination With Those.
Basically The Cartel’s Created A Profit
Scheme Supposedly Just Shy Of What
They Could Take Before People Realize
Their Increasing Risk Moves Them To
What Else They’re Monopolistically Good
For, Until, Eventually, With This Very
Process Helping Impoverish You, But
Not Quite Far Enough For You To Really
Know, You Qualify For Federal Subsidy,
Which Process Is Highly Expensive And
Problematic But That’s Because With
Medicaid And Medicare It’s Part Of The
Monopolistic Structure’s Pressure
Release Valve. It Will Come Down To
How Much More Can Taxes Help The
Carriers As Much Or More Than Will They
Then Help You. Even Fees Running From
The Carriers To The Government Work
As A Backdoor Tax.
That's This One.
I'm A Purist/Reformist Market
Progressive, And That Link Comes From
A Group Probably More Associated
With People With More Conservative
Leanings.
We're Both Naturally Opposed
To Monopoly.
But.., Yes...,
ObamaCare, Also Replaces Now
You See It Now You Don’t Health
Insurance, With Its Eventual
Commonplace Choice Of Go Naked
Or Premium Death Spiral, Or, You Can’t
Move To Vegas For A R.E./Job Op Lest
You Suffer An Exclusion.
Scheme Supposedly Just Shy Of What
They Could Take Before People Realize
Their Increasing Risk Moves Them To
What Else They’re Monopolistically Good
For, Until, Eventually, With This Very
Process Helping Impoverish You, But
Not Quite Far Enough For You To Really
Know, You Qualify For Federal Subsidy,
Which Process Is Highly Expensive And
Problematic But That’s Because With
Medicaid And Medicare It’s Part Of The
Monopolistic Structure’s Pressure
Release Valve. It Will Come Down To
How Much More Can Taxes Help The
Carriers As Much Or More Than Will They
Then Help You. Even Fees Running From
The Carriers To The Government Work
As A Backdoor Tax.
That's This One.
I'm A Purist/Reformist Market
Progressive, And That Link Comes From
A Group Probably More Associated
With People With More Conservative
Leanings.
We're Both Naturally Opposed
To Monopoly.
But.., Yes...,
ObamaCare, Also Replaces Now
You See It Now You Don’t Health
Insurance, With Its Eventual
Commonplace Choice Of Go Naked
Or Premium Death Spiral, Or, You Can’t
Move To Vegas For A R.E./Job Op Lest
You Suffer An Exclusion.
THIS IS A CONTEXTUAL MENU
IN MEDICAL CARE ORGANIZATION,
PUBLIC HEALTH ECONOMICS
AND PUBLIC HEALTH
Returns To The Top.
I Just Naturally Wanted
Those Starting There To Know
This Was Down Here.
But The Top Is The Most
Sensible Place To Start.
Newest Spaces
(Every Element Of This
Website's A Wavefront) Are:
Bio-Med Taken Out Of Context
ObamaCare Vs.
"Market Progressive"
Care That's Satisfying To
Patients And Doctors/Nurses
Selected BioMed Clusters
(Especially With Translational
Med/Translational Public Health
Value--Currently Mostly Fat)
This Space Is Similar And
Shows How The Science, Entering
From Many Directions, Needs
A Regulatory Structure Best
Able To Guide Developmental
Processes Rationally.
Uh Oh. Another Monopoly
Sold And Enforced
Trickle Down Health Care
Doesn't Cut It For Me
What You See Is
What You Get
There's Some Re-Arranging
And Consolidating I'm Doin'
On This Page (Including Ditching
Lots Of Data Slowing The
Page's Loading While Far
More Relevant Material Is
Now Available,) Though It's
Presently Fully Operative.
But Before This Goes To
An Appropriate Slot, What
It's Not Saying Is Providers
Go Out Of Their Way To Care
Less. It Is Suggesting There
Exist Economic Monkey
Wrenches Disinclining Some
From Going Out
Of Their Way To Care More.
From This Page, How
Accountability, Having Skin In
The Game, Is Particularly
Related To The Singular
Nature Of This Sector--It's
Proper Connection With
Epidemiology And Clinical
Reality--Should Become
Easily Undersood.
Hospitals Profit From Surgical
Errors, Study Finds
Denise Grady, nytimes, 4/16/2013
This Page Is Very Largely
About "Accountable Care,"
Basically Skin In The Game,
And Processes Best Married
With That, Such As "Value
Basing."
As To Application In
Ostensibly Competitive
Exchanges.
Whereas Social Security And
Medicare Are Called
Entitlements Because They're
Earned, Here Subsidy Is The
Financial Pressure Valve Along
With Medicaid And Medicare
(Wrongly, Unjustifiably;)
And, ObamaCare Subsidy
Is Structured So As To Not
Really Act As An "Entitlement,"
Because It's Calculated
Presently And Subject To
Funding.
It's What's Left Over After
Monopoly.
Our Nation's Business Is
Increasingly Characterized
By Monopoly, Risk Filtering,
Gatekeeping And Pay To Play
The Adversity From Which
Leads To Privatization, And
So When The Subsidy Is
Offered On An As-Is Available
Presently Basis, After
A Monopolistic Structure
Gets Its Statutory Profit,
To Me, At Least, It Looks Like
A Public Health Support Plan
Privatized In Advance.
Yes, It's About Affordability
Of Private Insurance, But It's
State Action Sold As Being
For Everyone's Better
Interest While Really
Being Cartel Centric.
Obviously So Long As
ObamaCare Is Law
Medicaid Should Be Expanded
For Those With Incomes Below
The Poverty Level.
Though I'm Not A Mind Reader,
Frankly, Knowing The Political
Climates Of The Balking
States, It Would Seem
Unlikely That The Reason Is
Often So As To Hold Out
For Better Reform. But
That Purpose Would Not Be
Fully Unreasonable To Me.
In The Balance, Those Not
Helped, The Funds Turned Away
So As Subsidize Those States
Expanding Medicaid, Are
Different Animals From The
Savers Being Held Hostage
By TBTF Banks.
SEE
To Repeat A Bottom Line
Ounce Of Common Sense,
Taking Us To 21% Of GNP
By 2019 Can't Be Mostly
From Extending Coverage
Because Most Unreimbursed
Care Has Already Been
Mostly Just Cost Shifted.
Full Expansion Of Medicaid
Matched By A Jiggering Of
The Law Could Solve Much
Without Much Difficulty.
However, A Cartel Would
Have To Give It Up, Just As
Is The Case In Banking.
And Corporate Charters And
Some Processes Would Have
To Change To Do It Really
Right.
Righted Structurally,
And Then Fitted With Processes
Rightly Suited, But Then Going
Beyond That In An Open-Ended
Fashion, Can Leave Not Only A
Role For Fee-For-Service, But
An Important One, Which,
Living Amongst The Alternatives,
And With A Righted Carrier-
Provider Market, Would Dispel
The Fears Of The Most
Distrusting Persons.
As Things Stand, Most Doctors
Seeking Or Seeking To Retain
Freedom Don't Actually Have
Freedom. What They Have Is
Monopolistic Structure
And Control.
What I Have In Mind Is
Patient And Doctor Centric.
Done Fairly And Efficiently Trust
And Patient And Doctor Satisfying
Care And Practice, And
Demonstrably Effective Process,
Should Happen Readily.
They Should Fulfill Each Other
By Their Own Natures.
Without Minimizing The Point
Of The Study, Someone Has
To Simply Say This:
Wherever You Find Humans
You'll Only Find Humans.
So Stuff Will Happen Despite
The Best Of Intentions, Though,
Of Course, Standards/Negligence
Are Not Concepts Rightly, Suddenly
Disappearing Anywhere.
In Any Med Setting I've Known
Docs Have Never Reflected
Any Disinterest In Watching Over
A Patient's Vulnerabilities.
That's The Essence Of What
They Learn In Med Sch In The
First Place, The Essence Of
What They're Doing, Already
Aware Of How Phenomenally
Intricate And Unpredictable The
Human Body Is.
Much Of What's On This Page
Bears On The Clinical Aspects
Of Helping Attain Good
Outcomes, Especially Where
The Processes In A Treatment
Setting Can Lend Themselves
To That.
I Happen To Enjoy The Science
Itself, And Much Will Relate
In Terms Of "Translational
Medicine" On Its Way To
"Translational Public Health"
(Pasteur/Koch On Steroids.)
Add: The Concept Of
"Batting Average" Is Ill-
Placed In Medicine.
Informational Comparisons
At A Market Level Have To
Be Challenge Level Adjusted.
Obviously, Cutting Edge
Medicine Is Also Cutting
Edge Medicine.
If I Treat My Own Boo Boo,
I'll Have A Batting Avg.
Of 1000.
This Page Features Some
Of That Cutting Edge
Medicine On My Own Best
Of The Best Basis,
Including For Doctors
Knowing It's Distilled For
Optimal Interest.
Pre-ObamaCare, Sliding
Right On Through To You
And Me Today
MAIN WEBSITE MENU
(GROWING/MULTIFORM)
There Are Updates (Here,)
Of A HealthAffairs Nature,
Including As To ObamaCare's
Monopolistic Nature,
(But Sourced Far More
Broadly (This Is A Blog.))
For Instance:
A Risk Adjustment System, Plus
A Lock-in System Removing
Disenrollment Of Enrollees
Experiencing Health Declines
Effected Reduced Risk Selection
In Medicare Advantage.
Key Issues In This Sector Are
Oligopoly Combined With Risk
Filtering By The Taxpayer.
Add A Static Statutory Profit
Scheme And One Actually
Revisits The Structure
Reminiscent Of The Baroque
Era.
This Column By Nomi Prins
Has Taken The
Blogosphere By Storm.
I Created This Bundle.
The GSE's Are Risk Filters For
The TBTF Banks.
ObamaCare Replaces The
Inability To Move Betw States
To Take Advantage Of Job/R.E.
Op's If You've A Risk Factor With
Monopoly And Risk Filtering
(The Latter Part Being Developed
Here.) Here's For Profit Prisons
Risk Filtering. Here's The
XL Pipeline And Risk Filtering
(@ 1:40.)
New From Commondreams:
(I'd Call 100 Million Americans
Drinking Toxic Trash Water
Risk Filtering.)
Here's A Risk Filter
For War, Soldier.
Congress Is Paid To Guard
Monopoly And Risk Filtering.
It's Really A Very Simple
Task Though Some Go
Really Overboard In The
Control Freak Department,
Perhaps, Because Certain
Of The Most Protective Of
Cartel Power Are Also Loose
With Censorship.
"Accountability" As A Goal,
Roughly Comparable To Asking
For Players To Have "Skin In The
Game" In Other Sectors, Gets
Intermixed In The Health Care
Sector With Matters Of "Clinical
Rationalization,"
Apart From Universality, Efficiency/
Effectiveness, Top Outcomes,
Full Tilt Science, Seamlessness
With Health Maintenance Overall,
And Financial Stressors Replaced
With Care And Assurance.
A Medical Care Sector Should
Be About 2 Things, Really:
1: Patient Dopamine Overflowing
(Care Enough To Provoke
The Placebo-Like Effect)
And
2: Bed-To-Lab, Lab-To-Bed.
But The Tools For Getting
The Sector Right Are Not
Far From Reach At All.
So This --
pdf --
("Will The Affordable Care Act
Make Health Insurance
Affordable,")
Looks Compelling Except The
Patient’s Medical History And Risk
Combined With The Carrier’s
Stiuplated (High) Profit, Are
Determinants In Whether Premiums
Are A Percentage Of Income
Qualifying For Subsidization.
That Defines Monopoly And
Risk Filter.
-1- -2-
It’s “Static” In Terms Of Economic
Dynamics.
So ObamaCare Lets Risk
Impoverish Sufficiently For
Subsidies To Apply.
Well, It's Borderline.
This (pdf) DOES Indicate
Affordability, And The Cartel
Gets Sliding Scale Profit
Margins (Converse Of
"Medical Loss Ratio") Based
On Risk Coverage, And
Subsidy DOES Help Where
This Particular Cartels-R-Us
System Renders People
Tapped Out, But Then,
This Still Applies Exquisitely.
-1- -2-
But Shafting Affordability
Is The Sector Pressure
Valve Too.
And Segments Are Also
Not Subject To
Affordability Subsidy.
So Mr. Goldstein Might've
Still Been Inclined To Pull
The Trigger.
(Nothing Independently Verified
--Paul Drake Was Busy.)
-----
The Rest Of Us Not Tempted
To Jump Off The Terrace To
Protect Our Families' Financial
Security Still Suffer From A New
System That's Highly Effective
In Creating A Maximal
Monopolistic Shakedown, But
Severely Ineffective In
Clinical Matters.
This History Channel Details How
John D. Rockefeller's (By Them
Purported--Jay Rockefeller Is
Good With It In The Documentary,
And Frankly People Simply Didn't
Understand The Implications Of
Monopoly The Way We Do Now,
Like So Many Doctors Who Wished
We Better Knew Earlier How
Devastating Tobacco Is) Strategy
Was To First Establish Monopoly,
Rigidly Protect That Advantage,
And Then Simply Expand Margins
To The Maximum Point Available/
Affordable By The Public.
Now Wendell Potter Has
Interestingly Said He Thinks
ObamaCare's Like The Old
Blue Cross. To Me It's Similar
Mainly As To The Monopoly.
Old Blue Cross / Blue Shield By
Way Of A Microsoft Powerpoint
Presentation. I Had No Issue
In Downloading Though I Can
Make No Assurances As To Anything
(Privacy/Security.)
From The American College Of
Radiology, (Should Be Reliable
For You Too,)An Excellent
Summary.
Blue Cross Was A Hospital
Insurance Pool Monopoly.
Blue Shield Was AMA
Sponsored, Physician Controlled.
Far From The Experience In The
Original Blue Cross, Now The
Doctors Are De Facto Independent
Contractors, Undergoing Serial
Reimbursement Cutbacks In
Medicare And Medicaid.
Look At It This Way Too.
Pretend Your Carrier Sends
You A Rebate Check, From Out
Of The Blue. Better Yet, You
Were Supposed To Get Them
Per A Class Action Settlement,
But Because Of That Action You
Could Change Plans Once, And
Once Only (From The Exlusions
Allowed Era, Which, Actually,
We're Currently Still In,) But
You'd Have To Forego Getting
Those Rebate Checks.
But One Comes In The Mail.
You're Rather Clueless, Wouldn't
You Say? It Looks To Me Like
You'll Be Clueless With ObamaCare
Too. To Me, It's A Menu Of Plans
On Offer From A Consolidating
Oligopoly. The More The System
Acts As Though It's Single Payer
By Way Of A Cartel, The More It
Simply Resembles One Large
Obfuscating Insurance Policy.
The Parallel In TBTF Banking
Is If One Were To Boil GS,
Bk of Am, Citi And JP Morgan
Down To One Bank, It And The
Fed Would Be One And The
Same, So Long As The Banks
Are Regarded As TBTF.
Cable Is The Most
Preposterously Obvious.
So, As I've Said Elsewhere,
They Should Have A Profit Scheme
Stipulated, As In ObamaCare.
And ObamaCare Shouldn't Be
Allowed To Entrench A Cartel
In The First Place.
In Other Words, Natural Monopoly,
OK, If Regulated, For The Former.
No Monopoly Desired For The
Latter, Thank You.
If I'm Wrong, They're Wrong.
At That Link, Schumer's The
Buy A Toxic Asset Get A VISA
Guy (While Setting Radically
Different Standards For
Undocumented Workers,) So
Congress Is An Assortment Of
Of People Serving Various Vassals,
With Few Serving All Of Them.
ObamaCare’s De Facto Single
Payer With A Cartel Middleman
Acting Like The Paid Software
That Took Over Open Source.
It Could Instead Be A
Physician-Run Insurance Pool,
Patient-Run, Or Both. It Can Be
“Accountable-” Structured. Such
Exists Today In Famous HMO”s.
(Issues As To All
Architectures Coming.)
An Architecture Based
On Legitimate Risk
Equalization, Combined With
A Process Consisting Of
Culture That Self-Reinforces
Everyone Doint The Right
Thing Would Be Best Of
All. Supply And Demand
Alone Is A Naive Match
Choice For Epidemiology And
The Realities Of Clinical Care;
But, Market Efficiency And
Discipline CAN Be A Useful
Ingredient.
It Can Be In Different Coverage
Modalities Including Fee For
Service, With High Appropriateness
Of Care Enhanced Where Immunity
From Anti-Trust Is Ended, The
Carriers By Charter Having To Show
Public Benefit, And Having Doctor
And Patient Committee Decision
Making Input; Add, A Vibrant
Doctor-Carrier Market; And Risk
Equalization Being Done In A
Fashion Not Simply Where The
Taxpayer Serves As Risk Filter.
Doctor Committees Acting
Cross-Organizationally Can
Arrive At Last-Mile Cost-
Conscious Practice Standards,
Informing Research Labs,
Whatever Their Discoveries
Always Being Welcome, Of
Precisely Where The Most
Efficiency Can Be Next
Gained In Terms Of Exacting
Health Improvement.
To Me This Legitimate Market-
Legitimate Risk Equalization-
Legitimate Clinical Rationalization-
And, The Part I Really Like,
As Francisco Scaramanga Liked
The Solex, Is This Cross-
Organizational Last Mile
Multi-Physician Committee/
Patient Committee Practice
Guidelines Refinement/Patient
Assurance-Satisfaction
Refinement Part.
Under The System Enacted, Despite
Some Innovative Potential In The
Subsidized Plans, For The Most
Part Patients Will Simply Know
Just Go Away Deductibles, A
"Rationalization" Disaster.
ObamaCare Ostensibly Makes
Health Care Universally
Affordable (It Doesn't Cause
Of The Understating Of The
Increases In CPI, And Because
Affordability Is Keyed To
Coverage To The Self-Only
Worker, Even If He/She Has
A Family.) Though Still Outside
The High Risk Exchanges Higher
Risk Is Typically Keyed To The
Likes Of 20% Statutory
Operational Profit, Vs. 40% For
Low Risk (Healthy, Young)
Customers, That Actually
Constitutes The Institutionalization
Of Monopoly, Which Is Also
Fully Blanket-Universal. Hence,
The Must-Pay Language Really
Does Work Like A Tax, But A
Tax Running From A Cartel.
But That's Familiar Territory.
Everyone's Savings/Investment
Are Benchmarked To Negative
Real Rates So TBTF Banks
Can Have Free Reserves.
The Amount Of Tax Credit Available
For The Subsidized Party Is Based
On A New Invention--
Modified Adjusted Gross Income,
Or MAGI, Which Adds Certain Income
Items Back Placing Some Would-Be
Qualifiers Out Of Range.
This Can Apply To Persons Who Are
Not Ones Typically Associated With
The Financially Disadvantaged
Because Coverage Pricing Will
Nonetheless Reflect Risk.
Again, Here's Why Your Uneasy
Feeling About It:
It Looks Like, On The Surface It's
A Help-People-Pay, No
Exclusions System.
But It Runs From A Cartel Enjoying
By Statute, With Legislation Seeking
Repeal Of Immunity From Anti-Trust
Patently Rejected, A Statutory Profit
Regimen.
(More Explanation Back In This One,
With More On Monopoly Below; But,
The Point Is, As I See It, The Industry
Used The Fact Of The Market-Sham
Pre-ObamaCare As A Basis For
Comparison With Obama Acting
Like ObamaCare Would Be A Dramatic
Progressive Overhaul When It's
Actually A Not-Really-Progressive
Taxpayer Based Financing Of Charging
Patients All They Are Worth Per Risk/
Ability To Pay As Directed By A Cartel,
With Treasury's Help. It's Really Not
Very Different From TBTF In Banking.)
Because Deductibles And Co-Pays
Are Not Included In The Premium
Cost Percentage Of Income, In
Determining Eligibility For Subsidy,
To call This A Cartel's Shakedown
Doesn't Fully Describe It.
Financial Death March Is Better.
THE SUM TOTAL OF POLICY
AND PROCESSES IN PHARMA
IS MONOPOLY, GATEKEEPING,
RISK FILTERING (CAUSE THE
COST OF FAILURES GET BUILT
INTO A PROFIT BOX) AND
PAY TO PLAY.
Medical Care
A La ENEN
(It's Been There One Day
And It's Updated Already)
I Start With Essentials,
Including Avoiding Tiering,
But Jazz It Up.
Are The "Navigators" Actually
Monopoly Conformer Aids,
Hired At Taxpayer Expense?
Why Not Simply Create A
Sector Devoid Of Obfuscation?
(In This Space)
How Big Agribusiness Is Heading
Off The Threat From Seed
Generics -- And Failing To Keep
The Patent Bargain
I Personally Consider The Public
Health Functions In The U.S. Being
Borderline Defunct, With That Even
Allowing For The Field Itself Still
Learning How To Do Things Better.
There're Isolated Strengths.
But This (At "U.S.' Grossly Corrupt
Health Protection System..." Is Not
A Nation Prioritizing Health And
Happiness.
Obviously Public Education's
Struggling To Avoide A
Similar Fate.
Public Health Is Less Desirable
Than A Simple Inconvenience
To Smug Extractive Billionaires.
Functions In "Health Education"
And "Health Information" Can
Very Easily Be Far More
Helpful While Not Being
Intrusive. At-The-Fingertips
Access To Information, Of A
Generalized Nature, As To Drugs
That Might Pertain To Persons'
Individual Health Concerns Should
Be More Centrally And Officially
Available.
I Personally Do Not Support
Pharma's Direct Advertising Of
Drugs To Consumers In
Lieu Of That.
--------
What We Have Vs.
My Wish List Are
Under Construction.
Meanwhile,
Use Your Browser Page Word Find
For " Modified Adjusted Gross Income. "
If You're Risk/Cartel Bumped Into
Quasi Subsidy Eligibility Range,
That's What Will Be Used By One Of
The Large Number Of Rookie Eligibility
Analysts Determining Your Eligibility,
Guesstimating Current Year Finances
From The Previous Year.
If, Say, You Had A Major One-Off Tax-
Affecting Event That Previous Year,
Then To Me, At Least, Though That
Analyst's Determination May One Day
Be A Matter Of Huge Importance To You,
His Determination Would Necessarily
Consist Partly Of Bullshxx and Guessing.
I Fully Admit What Preceded
ObamaCare Was Cruel.
------
4 Flavors Of "Community
As Patient--"
I Try Envisioning
Not Simply What Would Be Of
Optimal Interest To The Public
But A Useful Quick-Sample For
Professionals Interested In
Seeing Some Of The Very Most
Interesting Developments From
Out Of A Waterfall Of
New Knowledge.
Primary
(link repaired)
Winded Version
Less Winded
How To Best Help Each Other
(Nanny State Issue,
Reflecting Personal Flavor)
Fat And Other
Selected BioMed Clusters
Will Integrate -This-,
Though, -Here-.
It Really Comes Down
To Regulators And People
In The Community Caring
About What The Doctors
And Biomedical Scientists
Recommend.
However, Where It Comes
Down To What's Getting
Approved For Patient Care,
I Think It Makes Most Sense
To Most Value The
Recommendations Of The
Doctors Gaining The
Bed-To-Lab, Lab-To-Bed
Practice Experience
(I Think Regulators' Doubts
And Qualifiers Sometimes
Take Way Too Much Time.)
Really, Who Else Would
You Prefer Calling?
Essentially, That Connects
"Translational Medicine" With
"Translational Public Health"
(Koch/Syphillis--Pasteur/
Tuberculosis (Done Proverbially)
On Steroids.) Translational Social
Work Is Also In The House.
Community As Patient
Items Also Exist Under
Different Concentrations
Of Interest
(Will Be Apparent)
(But Essentially One Can
Say This Entire Website
Bears On That. One Can
Prioritize Such Things As
Birthright, Health, Happiness,
And Economic Freedom, Or,
One Can Choose Not
Doing So.)
CORE GMO LOCATIONS
-1- -2-
Obviously The Economics Of Health
Maintenance, With GMO's, Once
Again Redounds In Monopoly, Risk
Filtering (The Risks Are On Us,)
And Cost Not Borne By The Cost
Creator (And What's The Value
Lost From Reduced Choices
In Food?)
Macro And Food/
Economic Parallels,
Food--Macro
THE FOOD
(W/ TOOLS--GROWING)
From Someone Who Gravitates
To This / (Relates) But Is
Aware Of New Knowledge As To
How We Actually Shouldn't Depart
Too Far From What's Healthful.
It's All Pretty Trivial Absent
A Desirable Humanity-Suited
Habitat (Many Items Initially
On This Page, The Page
You're Reading.)
Some Will Feel I Softsell The
Environmental Concerns Too
Much. I'm Sorry But I Generally
Don't Imagine Public Health
People Doing Alarmism.
Part Of That Reflects
Familiarity With Patienthood.
Good Decision-Making, With
I-Made-A-Mistake Privileges,
Following Best Available
Knowledge Optimally, Is
Preferable To Stressing
Nervousness.
However, I Am Getting More
Blunt, You'll Notice.
I Emphasize Public Education,
Which I Consider Foundational
To Health.
-1- -2- -3-
Diane Ravitch, former Deputy
Secretary of Education.
The PBS Video Is Often Slow Loading,
so 5 Links Provided:
Video and Transcript
Audio Only (a Little More Reliable)
Transcript Highlighted-1
Transcript Highlighted-2
Transcript Highlighted-3
At The Operative Level In All
Walks Of Life, Including, For
Me, How Persons In Public Health
Should Approach Interventions,
Empowerment And Providing
The Means Of Self-Help
(Enablers) Are A Galaxy Better
Than Pot Shot Advice, Directives,
Taxpayer-Filtered Lending
Initiatives Living In Isolation Of
Empowering Strategies.
-1- -2- -3-
FROM GETTING EATEN
TO GETTING TAKEN
Choices, Chance, Sort Of Chance
(Some May Be Interested In
Economics Per Se, As It May
Apply In Health Care Delivery)
Actually, Treating Risk Efficiently
Can Have Multiple Shades Of Green.
New Wrinkle In Cost Shifting
Updated
Am I The Only One
Who Caught This?
Sector Architectural
Issues To Which
People Gravitate
Supply And Demand Can Never
Be The Full Story Here. We Have
Epidemiology, Efficiencies
Dependent On Patient
Interactions, And Even Really
Large Biologic Issues Down
On The Farm.
Unfolding Story,
ObamaCare And
Our Health Sector
Many Issues All At Once
There're Actually Many
Structural And Organizational
Cultural (Process) Problems, But
Simple And Rational Responses To
Each Generally Exist
This Is How We Get To
The Letting Off Steam Box
(Please See Disclaimers There.)
This Is How We Get To
The Out Of The Blue Space.
By The Way, I Think Everything's
A Double Edged Sword. The Bigger
The Mess, The More The Growth
And Renewal.
I Believe We'll Succeed In
Minimizing The Environmental
Damage, But Our Ecology Will
Be Altered At Least Somewhat.
But That's The Optimistic View.
O.K. What's Different Here, Is:
I'm 60 And Kinda' Open To
Ideas. It's Only Here.
This Blog. I Can Do That
Cause, This Is Just A Blog,
Not HealthAffairs, And I'm
60 (Though I Call Myself
A "Public Health 60" (My
Health Measures Place
Me With Many Much
Younger Though I Accept
Anything Can Go Wrong
At Any Time.)
I Take The Risk Adjustments
Already Commonplace In
Medical Care And Would
Make It 2-Way Via A Risk
Escrow Mechanism.
I See No Differences Between
Human Endeavors, Really,
And So I Would Try Doing
That With CO2 Production-
Removal/Increase.
This Beautiful Human
Killed Himself So As To
Not Inconvenience His
Family. How Can We Be So
Wrong? If He Continued
Undergoing Treatment,
His Cost Would Have Been
Shifted To Other Covered's,
So The System Would've
Paid For Him One Way Or
Another, But His Family
Would've Been Wiped Out,
Only The Intermediary's
Position Going Teflon.
ObamaCare Will Leave
500,000 Children (Plus
Their Parents) Uncovered,
And Their Costs Will Be
Shifted.
With ObamaCare The
Carriers
Capture The Cost As
Revenue The Cost That
Would Have Been Shifted,
Except It Occurs In A
Fashion Paying A Cartel
And Using Denial Of
Financial Access, And Control
Of Doctors' Practices,
As Its Cost Brakes.
Martin Goldstein Pressure Testing
The System Is Obviously Useful.
(It Fails Probably More
Significantly Than People Realize.)
But Cost Braking Should Be About
Everything-Patient,
Everything-Lab To Bed, Bed To Laab
Clinically And Technologically
Satisfying, Assuring, Responsive,
And Efficient In A Patient-Care Manner
So That It's Intrinsically Cost
Efficient.
PHARMA
(New Space Cause Stuff's
Because Stuff's Been Accumulating)
Market Control, Gatekeeping,
Risk Filtering, Pay To Play
Recommended Podcast
(Pharma/Patents)
"Indian Drug Ruling Strikes a
Blow for Free Enterprise"
Also:
(-1- -2-)
NEW NEW
Probably Not Quite What
People With John Corzine's
Mentality Are Still Making
Tainted Patent Process
Big Pharma Pockets $711
Billion in Profits by Robbing
Seniors, Taxpayers
Ethan Rome, By Way Of HuffPo,
4/8/2013
(No, That's Not Money Recycled
Into Research. It's Also After
All Salaries, Though Stock
Compensation Is Dependent
Earnings/Sh + On P/E Ratios.)
(New Space Cause Stuff's
Because Stuff's Been Accumulating)
Market Control, Gatekeeping,
Risk Filtering, Pay To Play
Recommended Podcast
(Pharma/Patents)
"Indian Drug Ruling Strikes a
Blow for Free Enterprise"
Also:
(-1- -2-)
NEW NEW
Probably Not Quite What
People With John Corzine's
Mentality Are Still Making
Tainted Patent Process
Big Pharma Pockets $711
Billion in Profits by Robbing
Seniors, Taxpayers
Ethan Rome, By Way Of HuffPo,
4/8/2013
(No, That's Not Money Recycled
Into Research. It's Also After
All Salaries, Though Stock
Compensation Is Dependent
Earnings/Sh + On P/E Ratios.)
Article With Highlight Of My
Choosing Clarifies Kaiser
Permanente Position On GMO's
Fact Bases After The
Economic View:
My View Is They Fail The
Guinea Pig Test (Inadequate
Testing.) They Also Reflect,
In My Opinion, A Market Controlled
Commandeering Of Processes On
The Interface Of Economics And
The Most Essential Biology.
(Market Progressives And Keynesians
Unlike Those Of Their Kind Who're
Content With Monopolistic
Banking And Health Care Can Like
"Anti-Fragility" As Much As Can
Non-Keynesians.)
-C-
Fact Bases:
Here Is An Example Of A Naturally
Occurring Pesticide And How It
Plays All Manner Of Neurologic
Havoc. Synapses Relate To:
Vision, Personality, Thinking,
Neuro-Musculature, Hearing,
Freedom From Parkinson's,
Freedom From Alzheimer's
And From Simple Physical Harm
To Memory, And, A Whole
Lot More.
The Only Real Difference
Between You And The Insect
Immediately Killed By These
Naturally Occurring Pesticides
Is Size.
I Don't Think It Should Exist
In Every Bite. The Evidence
From The Preceding Citation
Is As To Enabling Topical
Application, GMO's Have
Led To MORE Application.
The American Breadbasket
Is Immensely Important.
Don't Let It Get Destroyed.
If The U.S. Produced More
Non-GMO Grain Crops The
Rest Of The World Would
Accept It (It Just Wouldn't
Allow For Market Control.)
Americans Pay A Very Large
Price In Support Of Each
Monopoly. It's Truly A
Wonder The Middle Class
Has Held Up As Long As
It Has (It's Getting
Hammered Now.)
The Often Overlooked Threat
Is To The DONOR Crops From
Whence These Genes Are
Taken, Which In Turn Are
Threatened By The Same
Resistance Accelerated By
The GMO's And More
Immediately Cancelling Out
Whatever Commercial
Advantage The GMO's Are
Supposed To Bestow In The
First Place.
‘Mounting Evidence’ Of
Bug Resistance To GMO
Corn
GM Crop Resistance
Unexpectedly Includes
Resistance To “Refuges,”
“which are specially designed plants
that work to dilute the population
of susceptible insects (this process
makes it difficult for two resistant
insects to mate and produce
resistant offspring).”
A particularly
big surprise was that the real
world mutations will be more
challenging to deal with from a
genetic perspective.
They identified two unrelated,
dominant mutations in the
field populations –
and by dominant they mean
that one copy of the genetic
variant is enough to confer
resistance to Bt toxin.
This kind of dominant resistance
cannot be readily slowed with
refuges, which are specially
designed plants that work to
dilute the population of susceptible
insects (this process makes it
difficult for two resistant
insects to mate and produce
resistant offspring).
Also C
Importantly 2
"Contrary to often-repeated claims
that today’s genetically-engineered
crops have, and are reducing pesticide
use, the spread of glyphosate-resistant
weeds in herbicide-resistant weed
management systems has brought
about substantial increases in the
number and volume of herbicides
applied. If new genetically
engineered forms of corn and
soybeans tolerant of 2,4-D are
approved, the volume of 2,4-D
sprayed could drive herbicide usage
upward by another approximate 50%.
The magnitude of increases in
herbicide use on herbicide-resistant
hectares has dwarfed the reduction in
insecticide use on Bt crops over the
past 16 years, and will continue to do
so for the foreseeable future."
Charles M Benbrook, WSU, 9/28/2012
Env. Sci. Europe
Bt Crops Produce Toxins In Their Tissues
Nearly Half of All US Farms
Now Have Superweeds
Tom Philpott, MotherJones, 2/6/2013
And The Problem's Getting
More Complicated
Question Arises As To Potential
Enduring Activity Of Final
Third Component Of Viral Gene VI
Discovered In GMO Crops.
Protein Produced Is Toxic In
Multiple Manners To Plants,
Its Affect On Humans Unkown
Absent Testing.
Is It Denatured In Food
Preparation Or Digestion?
(Clueless.)
The Nutritionist At Kaiser Permanente
Who Issued The GMO Proviso On
A Personal Level Is
Definitely The Person You Want
To Have Dinner With.
Labeling And Proper Testing,
Commensurate With The
Properly Identified Issues,
Will Likely Be All That's
Needed To Make Scientists
And Economists Happy.
EXTENDED DISCUSSION
(Part Of What I've Been Doing On
This Page Is Building Off-Site
Substantiation That ObamaCare
Is Not-Really-Progressive Care
Even Though What It Replaces
Was Quite Cruel Medical Care.)
High Fructose Corn Syrup And
Diabetes Prevalence:
A Global Perspective
Michael I. Gorana, Emily E. Venturaa USCl
Stanley J. Ulijaszekb, U. of Oxford
The Reader Is Flatly Uninformed
As To Obesity Absent Seeing
The Likes Of This.
(Presently Linked In 7 Locations.)
Associated pdf
All That GMO Corn Syrup
(GMO Corn Ethanol Too)
Yet So Much Hunger In
America
The Person Who Would Treat
Martin Goldstein Like An Abused
Chicken In A Food Factory Today Is
Probably Likely To Be That Way
To The Next Vulnerable
Person Tomorrow.
Any Government Regime Designed
To Accomodate Oligopoly Will
Primarily Benefit The Oligopoly.
The Implications, Straight-Forward:
The Economics Of Health
Care Delivery's Very Many
Nuances Is Ever More
Joined By Its Overlap In
Science.
-1- -2-
Fructose Foundationally GMO's,
Which, By Virtue Of The Extent Of
That Control, Will Be First Eater
In The Value Chain For The
Product Category
Choosing Clarifies Kaiser
Permanente Position On GMO's
Fact Bases After The
Economic View:
My View Is They Fail The
Guinea Pig Test (Inadequate
Testing.) They Also Reflect,
In My Opinion, A Market Controlled
Commandeering Of Processes On
The Interface Of Economics And
The Most Essential Biology.
(Market Progressives And Keynesians
Unlike Those Of Their Kind Who're
Content With Monopolistic
Banking And Health Care Can Like
"Anti-Fragility" As Much As Can
Non-Keynesians.)
-C-
Fact Bases:
Here Is An Example Of A Naturally
Occurring Pesticide And How It
Plays All Manner Of Neurologic
Havoc. Synapses Relate To:
Vision, Personality, Thinking,
Neuro-Musculature, Hearing,
Freedom From Parkinson's,
Freedom From Alzheimer's
And From Simple Physical Harm
To Memory, And, A Whole
Lot More.
The Only Real Difference
Between You And The Insect
Immediately Killed By These
Naturally Occurring Pesticides
Is Size.
I Don't Think It Should Exist
In Every Bite. The Evidence
From The Preceding Citation
Is As To Enabling Topical
Application, GMO's Have
Led To MORE Application.
The American Breadbasket
Is Immensely Important.
Don't Let It Get Destroyed.
If The U.S. Produced More
Non-GMO Grain Crops The
Rest Of The World Would
Accept It (It Just Wouldn't
Allow For Market Control.)
Americans Pay A Very Large
Price In Support Of Each
Monopoly. It's Truly A
Wonder The Middle Class
Has Held Up As Long As
It Has (It's Getting
Hammered Now.)
The Often Overlooked Threat
Is To The DONOR Crops From
Whence These Genes Are
Taken, Which In Turn Are
Threatened By The Same
Resistance Accelerated By
The GMO's And More
Immediately Cancelling Out
Whatever Commercial
Advantage The GMO's Are
Supposed To Bestow In The
First Place.
‘Mounting Evidence’ Of
Bug Resistance To GMO
Corn
GM Crop Resistance
Unexpectedly Includes
Resistance To “Refuges,”
“which are specially designed plants
that work to dilute the population
of susceptible insects (this process
makes it difficult for two resistant
insects to mate and produce
resistant offspring).”
A particularly
big surprise was that the real
world mutations will be more
challenging to deal with from a
genetic perspective.
They identified two unrelated,
dominant mutations in the
field populations –
and by dominant they mean
that one copy of the genetic
variant is enough to confer
resistance to Bt toxin.
This kind of dominant resistance
cannot be readily slowed with
refuges, which are specially
designed plants that work to
dilute the population of susceptible
insects (this process makes it
difficult for two resistant
insects to mate and produce
resistant offspring).
Also C
Importantly 2
"Contrary to often-repeated claims
that today’s genetically-engineered
crops have, and are reducing pesticide
use, the spread of glyphosate-resistant
weeds in herbicide-resistant weed
management systems has brought
about substantial increases in the
number and volume of herbicides
applied. If new genetically
engineered forms of corn and
soybeans tolerant of 2,4-D are
approved, the volume of 2,4-D
sprayed could drive herbicide usage
upward by another approximate 50%.
The magnitude of increases in
herbicide use on herbicide-resistant
hectares has dwarfed the reduction in
insecticide use on Bt crops over the
past 16 years, and will continue to do
so for the foreseeable future."
Charles M Benbrook, WSU, 9/28/2012
Env. Sci. Europe
Bt Crops Produce Toxins In Their Tissues
Nearly Half of All US Farms
Now Have Superweeds
Tom Philpott, MotherJones, 2/6/2013
And The Problem's Getting
More Complicated
Question Arises As To Potential
Enduring Activity Of Final
Third Component Of Viral Gene VI
Discovered In GMO Crops.
Protein Produced Is Toxic In
Multiple Manners To Plants,
Its Affect On Humans Unkown
Absent Testing.
Is It Denatured In Food
Preparation Or Digestion?
(Clueless.)
The Nutritionist At Kaiser Permanente
Who Issued The GMO Proviso On
A Personal Level Is
Definitely The Person You Want
To Have Dinner With.
Labeling And Proper Testing,
Commensurate With The
Properly Identified Issues,
Will Likely Be All That's
Needed To Make Scientists
And Economists Happy.
EXTENDED DISCUSSION
(Part Of What I've Been Doing On
This Page Is Building Off-Site
Substantiation That ObamaCare
Is Not-Really-Progressive Care
Even Though What It Replaces
Was Quite Cruel Medical Care.)
High Fructose Corn Syrup And
Diabetes Prevalence:
A Global Perspective
Michael I. Gorana, Emily E. Venturaa USCl
Stanley J. Ulijaszekb, U. of Oxford
The Reader Is Flatly Uninformed
As To Obesity Absent Seeing
The Likes Of This.
(Presently Linked In 7 Locations.)
Associated pdf
All That GMO Corn Syrup
(GMO Corn Ethanol Too)
Yet So Much Hunger In
America
The Person Who Would Treat
Martin Goldstein Like An Abused
Chicken In A Food Factory Today Is
Probably Likely To Be That Way
To The Next Vulnerable
Person Tomorrow.
Any Government Regime Designed
To Accomodate Oligopoly Will
Primarily Benefit The Oligopoly.
The Implications, Straight-Forward:
The Economics Of Health
Care Delivery's Very Many
Nuances Is Ever More
Joined By Its Overlap In
Science.
-1- -2-
Fructose Foundationally GMO's,
Which, By Virtue Of The Extent Of
That Control, Will Be First Eater
In The Value Chain For The
Product Category
Major Bio-Active Content Differences
Between GMO/Non-GMO Food Have
Been Asserted. (Citations Coming)
Key, New Bio-Med Issues Coming
(This Is Fundamental, Known By Docs
For Generations, Pyrethrins Being
Naturally Occurring.)
...
PAYING MORE FOR LESS
VISIBLE AFTER PEELING
BACK A THIN VEIL
Non-Whole-Food Food In Your Gut
The Keck Foundation Adopts
The Center for Food Safety Imploring
For Stringent GMO Controls
L.A. schoolkids get shafted on food
preparation and the food industry uses
that as a pretense for shafting them
on nutrition
CU On GE Food
Center For Food Safety/Nanotechnology
Center For Food Safety/GE Salmon
Center For Food Safety/GE Alfalfa, Dairy
On Mr. Obama's Offer To
Allow The U.S. Government To
Accept Competitive Bids From
Pharma Cos. In Exchange For
Allowing Some Of The Huge Tax
Breaks Running To The Uber-
Wealthy, Borrowed From China,
And Financed By The Middle Class
And Its Children And Grandchildren
To Lapse. (Hint: It's Not A Real
Quid Pro Quo. Bad People Prefer
The Middle Class Bestowing
Advantages To The Wealthiest;
And, They Actually Do NOT Want
The U.S. Government To Be Able
To accept Competitive Bids From
Pharma. So, This Appears Having
Been A Public Display Of Pleasure
Taken From The Cynical Offer
Combined With An Admission Of
The Very Wealthy Holding Control
Over The Middle Class.
The Above Was Essentially A
Cynical Gag. Really, Rather Weird.
As To The Following Item, The Above
Transpired Prior To The Presentation.
As To This Defense ( Full Contra
Data Presented) Of Part D/Medicare
(Drug Benefits--Medicare AS A WHOLE
May Not Entertain Competitive Bids,)
Absence Of Proof Is Not Proof
Of Absence. The Federal
Government STILL COULD (To
Me Obviously, Particularly In
View Of Its Clout) Lower Drug
Prices, If I Chose Doing So. In
Fact, It Could Bid For Allowance
Onto A Panel Of Choices From
Which Coverage Providers Can
Receive Bids. That's Not Looking
At Those Lacking Coverage Beyond
Medicare Itself.
Medicare At Its Inception Is
National Health Insurance For
Unwanted Customers. It's
Comparable In That Respect To
The Railroads' Preference For
National Rail At The Time When
Commercial Air And The Rollout
Of The Interestate Highway
System Left Mainly Only Freight
Profitable. Though Collaborative
Care, A New Segment, Is
Accountable Care Based (Read:
Involves The Carriers Having
"Skin In The Game,") But Saving
Unbridled Cheers Until Anti-
Competitive Issues Are
Considered, Here's The Latest
On "Medicare Advantage."
Here's The Administration's Yet
Newer Act As To Medicare.
Pointless Largesse For A Cartel,
Where A Sector Shouldn't Be
Cartel-Centric In The First Place.
I Go With Patient-Doctor-Centric.
It's Our Sector.
Who Was That Masked Man?
THE NOT-REALLY PROGRESSIVE
OBAMACARE ACTUALLY AGGRAVATES,
OR ELSE COMES WITH UNEASY
WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT, THE
BEGINNING OF THE DISMANTLING
OF MEDICAID/MEDICARE, WHICH,
THOUGH MEDICARE WAS ORIGINALLY
NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE
FOR CUSTOMERS UNWANTED BY
THE CARRIERS, ARE STILL BETTER
THAN NOTHING.
Democrats Agreeing to Cut
Social Security and Medicare
Commondreams, 3/21/2013
Obviously Sincere And Committed
To Honest Reason, Each Point Valid,
Considering His Open Consideration
Of The Potential For Inappropriate
Rendering Of Service, This Doctor
Further Quotes Substantial Savings
Attained In A
Doctor-Patient Brokerage.
Of course, Care Can Be Inappropriate,
And, Actually, There Are Live Issues As
To Underutilization At Major HMO's,
Particularly Where Not Patient
Organization Owned, And The Health
Care System Is Far More Complicated
Than Simply The Doctor And Patient
Getting Together; And, Though
Technology Can Go Far To Counter
Concerns As To Whole Patient Coverage
(Not To Be Confused With Holistic,)
I Think A System Can Benefit From
Doing More Along That Line.
First, Generally, As To The Extremes,
Just Supply And Demand, Vs., Mostly
Cartel.
Supply And Demand Don't Supply 100%
Of What Constitutes Optimality In The
World Where Germs And Accidents And
Epidemiology Generally, And The
Realities Of The Specificities Of
Particular Technologies, Clinical
Realities And The Like Enter Your Life.
You Can Certainly Take Advantage Of
Market Impartiality, Discipline And
Efficiency To The Extent Still Possigle,
Which Our Current Leaders And Their
String Pullers Do Not, But The Market
Needs A Litte Help Here And There.
And Though "Externalities" Can Be
Innocently Happenstance In The Same
Way A Moment Of Insecurity Will Never
Be Cause For Concern For The Mental
Health Professional, Cost Shifting CAN
Be A Cause For Concern And
Overbearingly Inefficient As Here,
Or As Joked About By Me Here,
And Offered With The Understanding
These Considerations Apply To Boss
-Employee, Seller-Buyer, And Really
Any Market Involving The Ongoing
Provision Of Personal Services; And
It Works Hand-In-Hand, All
Negatively, With Market Control,
Risk Filtering And Gatekeeping, That
Last Item Actually Being Where The
Doctor And Patient Really Really
Know There's Something Not Right
In The World.
If The Libertarians Were To Have Their
Way And Alice In Wonderland-Like
Have A World With Perfectly Equal
Information, Equal Entry To Every Market
And Utterly Pure Supply And Demand, No
One Would Make Any Profit, As Supply
And Demand Would Always Cross At Zero.
The Opposite Is Not Far From What The
U.S. Has Unfortunately Achieved:
Monopoly (Ghandi's Victory Over
Colony Arose From Defeating The Salt
Monopoly) In Its Major Sectors, With
Our Having Entered That State From
Simple Category-Killers Maybe
Somewhere Between Gen's X/Y.
I Think A Useful Efficient Optimality
Valuing Human Capital (And Thus
High Wages) And A Society Reflecting
That (And Thus A Strong Currency) Is
Achievable Between The Extremes,
With The Mathematical Unattainability
Of Alice In Wonderland Ideals Not
Being Worth Jumping Off The Terrace
For.
I'm Presently Outlining A Risk
Equalization Framework That Is
"Market Progressive," Achieving
Universality, A Wealth Of Patient
Assurance And Comfort, Full Tilt
Bed-To-Lab/Lab-To-Bed, And That
Does Not Lend Itself To
"Tiering."
To Honest Reason, Each Point Valid,
Considering His Open Consideration
Of The Potential For Inappropriate
Rendering Of Service, This Doctor
Further Quotes Substantial Savings
Attained In A
Doctor-Patient Brokerage.
Of course, Care Can Be Inappropriate,
And, Actually, There Are Live Issues As
To Underutilization At Major HMO's,
Particularly Where Not Patient
Organization Owned, And The Health
Care System Is Far More Complicated
Than Simply The Doctor And Patient
Getting Together; And, Though
Technology Can Go Far To Counter
Concerns As To Whole Patient Coverage
(Not To Be Confused With Holistic,)
I Think A System Can Benefit From
Doing More Along That Line.
First, Generally, As To The Extremes,
Just Supply And Demand, Vs., Mostly
Cartel.
Supply And Demand Don't Supply 100%
Of What Constitutes Optimality In The
World Where Germs And Accidents And
Epidemiology Generally, And The
Realities Of The Specificities Of
Particular Technologies, Clinical
Realities And The Like Enter Your Life.
You Can Certainly Take Advantage Of
Market Impartiality, Discipline And
Efficiency To The Extent Still Possigle,
Which Our Current Leaders And Their
String Pullers Do Not, But The Market
Needs A Litte Help Here And There.
And Though "Externalities" Can Be
Innocently Happenstance In The Same
Way A Moment Of Insecurity Will Never
Be Cause For Concern For The Mental
Health Professional, Cost Shifting CAN
Be A Cause For Concern And
Overbearingly Inefficient As Here,
Or As Joked About By Me Here,
And Offered With The Understanding
These Considerations Apply To Boss
-Employee, Seller-Buyer, And Really
Any Market Involving The Ongoing
Provision Of Personal Services; And
It Works Hand-In-Hand, All
Negatively, With Market Control,
Risk Filtering And Gatekeeping, That
Last Item Actually Being Where The
Doctor And Patient Really Really
Know There's Something Not Right
In The World.
If The Libertarians Were To Have Their
Way And Alice In Wonderland-Like
Have A World With Perfectly Equal
Information, Equal Entry To Every Market
And Utterly Pure Supply And Demand, No
One Would Make Any Profit, As Supply
And Demand Would Always Cross At Zero.
The Opposite Is Not Far From What The
U.S. Has Unfortunately Achieved:
Monopoly (Ghandi's Victory Over
Colony Arose From Defeating The Salt
Monopoly) In Its Major Sectors, With
Our Having Entered That State From
Simple Category-Killers Maybe
Somewhere Between Gen's X/Y.
I Think A Useful Efficient Optimality
Valuing Human Capital (And Thus
High Wages) And A Society Reflecting
That (And Thus A Strong Currency) Is
Achievable Between The Extremes,
With The Mathematical Unattainability
Of Alice In Wonderland Ideals Not
Being Worth Jumping Off The Terrace
For.
I'm Presently Outlining A Risk
Equalization Framework That Is
"Market Progressive," Achieving
Universality, A Wealth Of Patient
Assurance And Comfort, Full Tilt
Bed-To-Lab/Lab-To-Bed, And That
Does Not Lend Itself To
"Tiering."
There Are Many Problem Areas In
Different Types Of Organizations
That Can Get Bulk-Resolved With
Modest Structural Reform Plus Some
Cultural (Process) Reform
(Virtually Every Part Of This Website
Is A "Wavefront." Links Coming Here,
But Judiciously For Reasons Stated.
Cartel Means Also That Where An
Organization, Even Despite Claims
Of Underutilization, Is Structured
In An Accountable Care Manner, It
Can Take Advantage Of The Pricing
Levels Of The Sector, With Outright
Profiteering Alleged. This Is In
Addition To Underutilization (Under-
Provision Of Service Where Such
Service Will Not Generate Additional
Revenue.) Even Within A Given
Structural Type, Predisposition Based
On Ownership Structure And
Organizational Process Culture
Can Matter Quite A Lot. There's A
Simple, Rational Response To Any
Wanton Process, Generally.
In The Presence Of System Hodgepodge
The Leadership Culture Itself Within
A Large Organization Can Be Wanton.
(Planning Some Links, Issues Of Hearsay
And Diplomacy In The Sense Of
Overgeneralizing Mattering--I'm Limited
As To What One Website Can Accomplish,
So I Lean On What Can Be
More Than What Is.)
Public Education, Even Where Valued,
Has Had Its Cultural Issues Exposed,
But The Bases For The Problems Appear
Being Substantially Different.
As It Is In Education Where
Administrative Culture And Process
Might Need Better Focus On The Pupils,
Even In A Better Structured Health
Sector There's Tremendous Room
For Focus On The Patient.
This Site Being Focused On Health,
I Care Mostly In Education About
The Bullying (Augmenting, Especially
As Educational Studies Are Adding
Meaningfully To Others From Psych,
Social Work, Etc.;) However,
Comparing How The Sectors Can Be
Differnetly Predisposed To Unwanted
Behavior Should Also Be Useful.
Earlier
Newer
Tennessee's Health Care
By Lottery System
(Presumably For Patients
And Doctors Who Love
Rigged Casinos And Are
Great Sports At Losing)
Medicare, Which Is National
Health Insurance For Unwanted
Customers, In Its Origins, And
Medicaid, And The Subsidy
Function Of ObamaCare Itself,
Are The Financial Pressure Cap
For Monopoly, Under ObamaCare.
Chained CPI Matters
Here Particularly.
-----
Increasing (Taxpayer Filtered)
Risk Feeds The Line Seeking
Subsidy.
Health Care's Carrier
Titans Are Generally
Near Their 52 Week Highs.
That's Probably Because
They're On Their Way To
Becoming The Health Care
Equivalent Of Banking's TBTF.
Consistent: The View That
The Mandate Might Have Been
Upheld On Tax Power Grounds,
Rather Than Cause Of Any
Argument In Interstate Commerce
Or Other Commercial Basis.
(It Was Often The Case One
Could Not Move Between States To
Take Advantage Of Job/Real Estate
Opportunities Lest He/She Suffered
An Exlusion. It Was Very Commonly
The Case, Running Into A Choice
Of "Go Naked" Or "Premium
Death Spiral"
Does ObamaCare Make Care
Affordable Or Play Patients And
Doctors (Yes, If You Have The
Keys To The Gate You Can Play
The Demand Side AND The Supply
Side) For All They Can Afford,
Including What They Kick In As
Taxpayers, Until Each Source Is
Tapped Out, Whereupon The
Coverage Lapses, Along With
Medicaid And Medicare?
If Health Reform Requires
Mandatory Participation But Is
Not-Really Market Progressive,
It Might As Well Come From The
Sheriff Of Nottingham.
It Might Take A Funny Sort Of
Whistleblower To Like It.
It's Certainly Understandable,
Though, That Some May Simply
Not Understand The Instrinsic
Monopolistic Design Even
When They're Staring At It.
I Call This
Just-Go-Away Deductibles.
How Could Mr. Potter Expect
Anything Else From A Cartel
Statutorily Receiving 15 to
40 Percent Operational
Profits Across The Population
Universally In Mandated
Fashion, In A Clinically Irrational,
Doctor-Inefficient/Unsatisfaying,
Patient-Inefficient/Unsatisfying
Manner?
FAQ:
Does The Annual Fee On Health
Insurance Providers Work As
Some Sort Of Broad Brush Risk
Equalization?
My View:
No. It Bears No Relation.
Does It Have Any Monopoly
Mitigative Effect?
My View:
Flat Out No.
Once You Know To Ask
That And Are Aware Of This
The Monopolistic Architecture
Is Bared.
What's More, What's Becoming
More Visible Is This.
The Carriers Essentially Wanted
What The TBTF Banks Wanted.
Unearned, Monopolistic,
Guaranteed, Very Large Profits.
So, The Expansion Of Coverage,
As Laudable As That Is, Stands
Vulnerable, Having Been Carefully
And Expensively Designed To Not
Be Entitlement-Based, And So It's
Theoretically Far More Vulnerable
Than Medicare/Medicaid/Social
Security, Though Our Recent And
Present Administrations Have Seen
No Barrier To Shafting Those. It
Also Has A Distinctive Now You See
It Now You Don't Aspect To It As
Soft Funding, Anti-Competitive
Reality, And Extremely High Degrees
Of Uncertainty In The Eligibility For
Subsidy Determination Process All
Combine To Leave The Persons
Getting Monopolistically Marched
Toward Increasing Need For
Eligibility Less Assuredly
Having Access To It.
The Carriers Keep Their
Statutory Profit Margins.
Therefore, This Will Be Passed
Along As A Backdoor Tax, Such
That The Provision For That
Might Just As Well Read "Patient
Pays More Into The System."
As The Cartel Makes Its Operational
Profit Based On A Percentage Of Cost
Ranging From 60% to 85 % Medical Loss
Ratio (MLR--Or 15% to 40%
Operational Profit,) That De Facto
Backdoor Tax ACTUALLY SERVES TO
INCREASE THE PROFIT BASIS.
The Program By Its Own Projection
Takes Health Care To 21% Of
GNP By 2019. No One Welcomes
Increased Coverage More Than
Me, But It Can Be Done More
Efficiently, Effectively, Economically,
Fairly And Compassionately In
More Ways Than I Can Count In
A Hurry.
------------------
ObamaCare's Determination
Of Eligibility Approach Is
Really A Wild One For Me.
Eligibility Per Worker With Family
But Not Counting
The Needs Of The Family.
Eligibility Based On "Modified"
Adjusted Gross Income
Calculated Per PRESENT Year,
Obviously To Avoid
"Entitlement" Status.
Gatekeeper Hires (1,000's)
Will GUESSTIMATE Relying
Only Partly On Prior Year
Income (?? --As In That's
Correct; I Just Find It Strange.)
One Can Get Moved By The
Exchange, Between Enrollment
Periods, Using Income Databases,
To Medicaid (Which Is Getting
Shafted) Or Required To
Increase Their Own Coverage.
As Subsidy Eligibility Is Based
On Present Year Income, It's
Required That The Prior Year
Income, For Determination
Purposes, Be The Subject Of
A FINAL Tax Return By April 15.
The Exclusions Pre-ObamaCare?
That's This. By Itself Wonderful
But It Happens By A Cartel's
Taking Advantage Of The
Change Process.
Frankly, I Think The Industry Saw
Those Headed For The Choice Of
"Go Naked" Or "Primium Death Spiral"
Being Unable To Keep Up With The
Desired Margins, Especially Once
It Became Clear The TBTF Banks
Blew Up The Mortgage Market.
So The Full Population's On Board.
Again, Taken Narrowly By Itself
A Good Thing.
And When Young Healthy Folks Say
They Shouldn't Have To Participate
That's Equivalent To Saying They
Want To Pay Only When Need
Arises, Which Is Essentially Stealing
From Those Getting Coverage In
Advance.
But. But. They'll Go For The Cheaper
Policies With Less Adequate Coverage
While Simultaneously Paying The
Carriers Their Widest Margins (It
Will There Generally Be Bronze Tier,
Or Operationally What's Left After
60% Medical Loss Ratio.)
The Patients' Denial And Less
Familiarity With What Happens
Is Taken Advantage Of.
In Medical Care The Difference
Between Doing It Better And
More Fairly Or Not Is The
Difference Between Patient
As Contracting Platform, As
Like The Car On A Car Dealer's
Lot, Vs. Patient As Service
Platform.
The Wanton Coverage Variation
Under ObamaCare Is The Opposite
Of This Genuinely Progressive
Program, Though I Would
Jazz That Up In Multiple Manners.
We Know The Carriers Aren't
Interested In ObamaCare
Being Some Sort Of Stepping
Stone Because Of The Rejection
In Open Congress Of Repeal
Of Their Immunity From
Anti-Trust.
Doctors Don't GetA Break From Control,
Also. Prices Are Profit-
Regimen Set Pro-Actively,
With Present Take
Dependent On Control.
Do You Really Think This Is
For Doctors And Patients?
As I've Said Elsewhere, I
Think Even Thinking The
Medical Collections
Business Will Go Away Is
Foolish.
------------------------
Insured but unable to
afford health care
Affordable Care Act will leave
tens of millions underinsured,
facing choice between
‘life or debt,’ say Journal of General
Internal Medicine editorialists"
Physicians For A National
Health Plan (PHNP)
"...paradoxically, the ACA may
actually increase the number of
underinsured. About 40 % of those
gaining coverage will get Medicaid.
As Magge shows, many current
Medicaid enrollees are woefully
underinsured. Disturbingly, CMS looks
set to allow state Medicaid programs to
demand copayments and deductibles,
even from the poorest of the poor. Several
states have already reduced benefits, cut
provider payments, and narrowed
provider networks. Hence, underinsurance
among Medicaid recipients will
probably increase. More ominously,
the White House is encouraging state
officials to use federal Medicaid
expan-sion funds to purchase private
insurance, a shift likely to raise both
taxpayers’ costs and poor patients’
copayments...."
"...The new private coverage offered to
near-poor andmiddle income individuals
through insurance exchanges
will also leave many underinsured.
Bronze plans—the minimum coverage
mandated by the ACA—will cover
only 60 % of average medical
expenses; silver plans will cover 70 %.
That’s far worse than the roughly
80 % coverage under today’s average
job-based policy—equivalent to the
ACA’s Gold plans. (A complex system
of sliding-scale discounts on copays
and deductibles available to some of
those with incomes 138 %–250 %
of poverty will offset some, but
not all, of the near-poor’s cost-sharing.)
In concrete terms, a 56-year-old
making $45,900 (399 % of poverty,
and hence eligible for premium
subsidies) will pay an estimated $4,361
in premiums for individual Bronze
coverage, and up to $4,167 in additional
deductibles and copayments for covered
services. At 401 % of poverty
($46,100) subsidies disappear; the
mandatory premium would be $10,585,
with out-of-pocket costs for covered
services capped at $6,250. In effect, the
federal government has lent its
imprimatur to skimpy plans (long-
promoted by private insurers) that
offer scant protection from pauperization.
Little wonder that expanded coverage
under the Massachusetts reform (where
Medicaid has remained comprehensive,
and the Bronze plans’ actuarial value is
70 % vs. the ACA’s 60 %) yielded
no reduction in medical bankruptcies...."
Steffie Woolhandler, David U. Himmelstein,
C.U.N.Y. School of Public Health
at Hunter College
(pdf)
Nader Uses The Words
"'Reform' Scam."
Remember, I Think PRE-
ObamaCare Was Nothing Short
Of Cruel. I Simply Don't Consider
ObamaCare Progressive, Market
Progressive, Or, For That Matter,
Even Market Based At All, Really,
Any More Than I Consider
TBTF Market Based.
Funds Run Low For Health
Insurance In State 'High
Risk Pools'
N.C. Aizenman, WashingtonPost,
2/15/2013, Updated 2/16/2013
Gee. It's Looking Like
ObamaCare Dovetails With
Simpson Bowles Very Nicely
If One Sees The Monopolistic
Structure, Then ObamaCare Becomes
A Giant Obfuscating Insurance Policy,
And, If One Sees This, One Readily
Sees Congress' Bill Designers And
Obfuscating Insurers Are One And
The Same.
For Me, Just Doing The Right Thing And
Understanding The Sector's Processes
Changes The Patient From Being A
Car-On-The-Lot Like Platform For
Contracting To A Platform For
Excitingly Informed Application Of
Brilliant Know-How And The Marriage
Of Efficiency And Compassion That
Would Brighten Every Patient's,
Nurse's And Doctor's Day.
Now Do You Understand Why I
Wish I Had Been There?
BUT NOW WHAT WAS
JEAN-DOMINIQUE BAUBY'S
VISION HERE? (BALZAC PASSAGE)
I Think Work With Control Freaks.
They Stifle Compassion.
Qu'en pensez-vous?
Balzac & Balzac's Wife; Composer
Turned Away By Her; His Music;
About The Patient; His Work;
The Hospital; It's Location
Like You, I've Seen My Income From
Savings Flattened In Favor Of Free
Reserves For TBTF, With The Same
Having Severely Detracted From My
Folks' Retirement, Which Is Thus A
Retirement Game Under The
Circumstances; And, Being 60, Seeing
Medicare Getting Shafted (Actually A
Complicated Segment,) And Recognizing
That My Present Choices Pretty Much
Might As Well Be Coming From Them,
I Think I Know A Few Reasons
Why I Started This Blog.
By Way Of Alexander Reed Kelly
TruthDig, 2/9/2013
Truthdigger of the Week:
Anonymous Obamacare
Explainer
It's Becoming Clearer To
More People That Though
ObamaCare Replaces Cherry-
Picking, The Inability Of ManyTo
Move Between States To Take
Advantage Of Opportunities
In Employment Or Real Estate,
And A Cost-Shifting Flim-Flam
That Destroys Families, Makes
You Pay For Their Care Anyway,
While The Carriers Live
Unbothered, It's Actually Another
"Not-Really" Progressive Plan.
The Carriers Get A Profit
Growth Point From What Had
Been Cost Shifted, But Also
Mainly From Subsidy. Their
Profit Levels Adjust With Patient
Risk Profiles, And There's
Highly Compelling Evidence That
The Plan Allows Affordability
Generally, But It's Mainly A
System Structured For
Monopolistic Control, The
Filtering Of Risk For Carriers'
Unexplained Special Advantage,
And A Dearth Of "Clinical
Rationalization" That Would Also
Make A World Of Difference, For
The Better, For Both Patients And
Doctors, And Both As To Patient
Care As Well As The Bed-To-Lab,
Lab-To-Bed Nature Of The Field
Going Back To Pasteur
(Tuberculosis) And Koch (Syphillis.)
The Affordability Structure
Seems To Be Springing Some
Leaks (Links Coming, With
Related Matter.)
Are The "Navigators" Actually
Monopoly Conformer Aids,
Hired At Taxpayer Expense?
Why Not Simply Create A
Sector Devoid Of Obfuscation?
Families Including A Half-
Million Kids Go Uncovered
Owing To A
Obvious Omission.
Gaming Obamacare to
Benefit the Few
Wendell Potter,
wendellpotter.com,
3/25/2013
ObamaCare Tax Increases
Are Double Original Estimate
Paul L. Caron, U. Of Cincinnati;
Visiting: Pepperdine U., U. of San Diego,
TaxProfBlog, 3/8/2013
With The Plan Prioritizing
Market Control, Actually Mated
With Statutory Profit Levels
In A Field Supposedly Almost
Too Costly To Manage,
This Sector Is Actually Simply
Experiencing The Same Fate
As The Others Living Under
Those Undemocratic, Economically
Inefficient, And Health-Disfavored
Priorities.
So In Addition To The Structural
Affordability Leaks, This Sector
Is Simply Getting Whacked By The
Austerity Compensating For The
Folly Of Monopolists Elsewhere.
And So, Whatever Poster Is
Placed Congress' Window As
To Sequestration, That Will Now
And/Or Forever Be A Hammer
Hitting Everyone On Their Head
Here. To Ask An Exec From An
Insurance Carrier How It Will
Affect His Company Misses The
Point. They've Blanketed The
Country With Their Plan.
Their Margins On Everyone Are
Already Set. His Firm, And The
TBTF Banks, Are The Cruise
Ships Passing Too Close To The
Beach And Swamping Us.
Now, Physicians For A
National Health Plan Has
Already Accumulated A
Wealth Of Arguments As To
What Remains Deficient.
(I'll Be Adding Item By
Item With Commentary.)
What I Personally May Wish
For In This Sector, Which I
Call "Market Progressive,"
And What They Advocate, In
The End, Would Have To
Resemble Each Other Muchly,
Simply Because The Endpoints
As To Universality, Efficiency/
Effectiveness Achieved
Rationally In Terms Of Patient
Care And Physician Input
Are The Same.
BUT I'M ALL OVER THE PLACE,
LINKING MED CARE WITH NON-
INTRUSIVE HEALTH SUPPORT
PUBLICLY (WHAT I DON'T DO
IS WORK WITH REAL BLOOD.)
SO BESIDES THIS LINKED LOOK
AT SIMPLY GETTING NEW TECH
FROM LAB TO BEDSIDE, THERE'S
THIS; THEN, CONSIDER HOW BOTH
INTERVENTION AND SOCIETY'S
VIEW AS TO ALCOHOLISM CHANGES
ONCE ONE SIMPLY REALIZES SOME
PEOPLE SIMPLY HAVE A
GENETIC VULNERABILITY.
TO THE PERSON FAMILIAR WITH THE
ISSUES BUT STILL DOUBTING THAT
ANALYSIS, CONSIDER AGAIN:
---The High Volume Of Excluded
Coverage That Produced
Cost-Shifting, And The Fact That
The Carriers Simply Now Capture
That As Not Simply Passed Cost
But Received Income.
---The Who's Who List In
Cartels-R-Us Who Voted 4 It--
Even Wrote It.
Obama's Shakedown
Of Medicare
Shamus Cooke
Institute Of Medicine Report:
Countries Enjoy Better Health
When Health Isn't Treated
In Isolation From Educational
Opportunity, Community Design
That's Not Car-Centric, And
Buffers From The Health
Effects Of Social
Disadvantage (Safety Nets.)
VIDEO
That's Separate From Medical
Care Issues Per Se.
Anti-Fragility In Health Care
Should Result In This....
Anti-Fragile Basis In Nature?
Basis Of Theory (Nothing As To
Taleb's Theory, Which I'm
Commandeering For "Market
Progressives:")
Mark Bertness, Brown U.
Latest, Analyzing Plant Community
Stress Responses, Visiting Graduate Student
Qiang He of Shanghai Jiao Tong U.
ENEN:
Monopoly Is Economically Fragile.
TBTF Is Monopoly Of The Currency.
Climate Change Denial As Default
Policy Is Monopoly By Default To
Oil Pipers, Storage Providers And
Refiners. It Can Work AGAINST
The Interest Of Small Resource
Fee-Holders. ObamaCare Is
Surprisingly Monopolistic.
...That's Difficult Imagining
Given Our Health Care System
Being A Product Of A
Corrupt Anti-Democratic,
Pro-Monopoly Government.
Monopoly Is Instead
Of It. The Monopoly
Actually Has Nothing To Say.
It's Just There.
One's Personal Ability To
Extend One's Family's Life,
Is Trashed By The Equivalent
Of Paid Software Taking Over
Open Software (Just Think
Anti-Trust) So As To Impose
Monopoly, Profit Scheme, And
Control Of Doctors And Patients.
As I Heartell / Also @:19,
Or, As I See Being The
Quickest Explanation That
Would Also Be Why I Like
The Concept, Is Fragile Is
Bad, And Nothing's More
Fragile Than Monopoly.
Americans Are Presently
Controlled By Monopolists.
TBTF Is Monopoly Of The
Currency. HealthCare Is
This. It's Slipping And
Sliding In The Snow And War
That's Profitable For Some
And For Oil, And Unsustainable
Deep Drilling, Instead Of An
Alternative To Climate
Change Denial As Default
Policy Which Would Actually
Give Better, Rightful
Valuations To Small Royalty
Holders While That
Simultaneously Incentivized
A Renewables Grid.
Patient Protection Act
Proposed For D.C.
Hospitals
Marcia Angell, Former Editor-In-Chief,
New England Journal Of Medicine,
On Big Pharma (Find Podcast,
Simply Click "Play")
Drug Resistance Biomarker
Could Improve Cancer
Treatment
Using Very Expensive, But No Longer
Effective, Drugs Can Be Very
Wasteful, N'est-Ce Pas?
Does Rick Berman, Lobbyist
For Food Processors, Want
To Make The Leadership
Of The Humane Society Of
The United States Targets
Of DHS?
--C--
(I'm Not Making This Up.)
To Me, Doctors And Patients
Are Treated Like Abused
Chickens.
The Day The Health Insurers
Enjoy The Full Weight Of Our
Security Forces Is The Day
I Close This Blog.
U.S. Health System And Public
Health Failings (Neglect, Disinterest,
Affect Of Control, The Revolving Door,)
Previously, Currently.
I Think Health Prioritization, Health
Maintenance Promotion, And Health
Impact In Civil Administrative Calculations
Can Work To Provide An Assuring, Casual,
Seamlessness With Medical Care.
Summary
So Most Americans Will Choose
Between One Take It Or Leave It
Policy Or Another With No Real
Orientation Toward Health
Maintenance Or Timely Rendering Of
Attention. Upon Making Their
Choices They'll Be Fulfilling Their
Roles In Being Played For All The
Risk-Taxpayer-Filtered Easy Profits
Defining A Monopoly-Descended
And Playing A Population For
What It's Worth. Americans
Will Not Feel Health Secure,
Though They'll Have A
Catastrophe Stopgap, In The
One Sector Where "Casino
Economy" Defines The Perfection
Of Naivete, They'll Remain
Financially Very Worried About
Their Health Costs, And Will
Often Suffer Before Seeking
Attention. The Formula Is
De Facto Single Payer--It's Just
Not Directed By Patients Or
Doctors.
New Law Firms Up
Monopoly Power In
Cellular Phone Use
(That Monopoly, At Least,
Should Have Profit Guidelines
A La The New Health Care
Regime's Stipulated Oligopolistic
Profit-Fest. The Latter Shouldn't
Exist At All, Including Because
It's Clinically Stupid.)
Before Continuing, Monopoly's
Elements (Below Also So It's
Not Missed) Are Very Simply
Properly Understood, Only
Reflecting Thoroughness Of Control
And Ability To Charge What
People Are Good For. It's
More Aggregious Where It's
Unavoidable, Which, In A Different
Plan, Would Be A Different Matter,
And Fine (To Only Get Coverage
When Needed Is To Rip Off
Everyone Else.)
What Do We Have Now?
Same Pricing/Statutory Profit/
Taxpayer Risk Filtering Scheme
For Each Of A Few Giant Players
Mainly? YES.
Monopoly Indicia (Temporariliy
Minus The Expired Links Of
Others, Now Here)
(includes how it's'
"static" and resembles
similar products)
And
A Program To Match.
But There's Inadequate
Provision For
The Common Man's Policing
It, Anyway.
In Reality, A De Facto
Monopoly Has Been More
Perfectly Created With
Government Assistance Than
Has Been Created Before.
-1- -2-
Pricing Categories Are
Stipulated But Set To All The
Market's Worth In Exquisite
Monopolistic Fashion,
Risk Structured Not In Terms
Of Traditional Insurance But
More In The Manner Of
Government-Filtered.
TBTF Is Definitionally An
Oligopoly. But There The
Profits Aren't Pre-Set. The
Folly Is Encouraged And
Rewarded, As If Steve
McGarrett Had Told A Blackmail
Victim Always Send A Thank You
Present To You Blackmailer
Instead Of If You Give In To A
Blackmailer They'll Never
Leave You Alone.
Health Care By
Way Of Oligopoly Is Essentially
Single Payer. That Being The
Case It Might As Well Be Doctor-
Patient Directed. Otherwise, A
Right, Rational System, Would
Seek The Same Ends (With Risk
Equalization And Immunity From
Anti-Trust Repealed.)
Is It Supposed To
Be More Benevolent
Than THIS?
Extractive Oligopolistic Practices
Mirror Those In Other Major Sectors
Profoundly Damaging The Health
Maintenance Process.
People Should Not Feel Inclined
To Wait Till January If In Late
November They've An Alarming
Red Splotch In An Eye But A Very
Large Deductible And Out Of
Pocket. Everything's Cost Shifted
Where Patients Seek Care Late.
They Should Not Be Financially
Afraid To See The Doctor If
An Ambiguous Thing On Their
Skin Or A Maybe Seriously Broken
Toe.
Despite Traditional Standards,
The Medically-Financially Distressed
Family Is Among The Least
Capable Of Challenging A Policy
Application Construction Issue.
Such Issues Should Never Know
The Light Of Day, And, Outside
The U.S., Generally Don't,
Though Europeans Are Beginning
To Feel The Sting Of Market
Controllers' Expensive Folly.
Coverage Pools In Prior
Generations Weren't The
Pot Of Gold They're Taken For
Granted As Today. The
Gatekeepers Just Took Control.
Pretend You've A Choice In
Anti-Virus Programs For Your
Computer. You Go With A
$49/Year Deal Instead Of A
Free Open Source Program.
You Continually Have To
Prove Access To The Former
When You Have A Problem,
Generally To Download A
Replacement Program
Without Duplicate Payment.
But Then You Learn The Open
Source Program Would Have
Served Just As Well And You
Could've Always Downloaded
Replacements Of That One
Whenever Your First Download
Faltered. The Gatekeeper For
The Former Is Just There,
In The Way.
Coverage Pools Are An
Acceptable Avenue Where
Rationalized To Medical
Efficiency And Patient Ease
Of Care, And To System
Effectiveness, But They
Shouldn't Be Mainly A
Monopolistic Profit Ballooner
Mostly Lacking Those
Advantages.
With No Economic Justification
Besides Their Own Purposes,
Insurers Have Forced Many
Physicians Into Alternate Practice
Forms In Recent Times, And
Though ObamaCare (Stupidly)
Has A Cost-Plus Margin Of Profit
Aspect, That Will Not Likely
Change The Doctor's Plight,
Simply Because The Premiums
Are Paid First, Then The Care's
Given, And It's Not Structured
For Health Maintenance.
This Bears No Relation Even To
The Coverage Pools Of The Past
That Lacked Hospitalization
Disincentivization. My Family In
Youth Was A Med One. This Is
Thoroughly Alien.
BUNDLE
pdf -C2-
Further Proof Of A Link
Between Pesticides And
Parkinson's (UCLA);
Very Well And Very Long
Sort-Of Already Known To
Physicians, And Placed On
This Page Long Ago:
Pyrethrins Are A
Naturally
Occurring Pesticide.
(Somewhere Here--)
Actually At:
It's One Thing Getting Your
House Tented Before Termites
Become An Excessive Emotional
Hurdle. It's Another Having Your
Kids And Grandkids Chowing Down
On Insecticide.
So Some Chemistry Is Sometimes
Sensible, But Expressing
It In A Food's Flesh Or Growing
Out A Crop Designed To Be
Rick Scott Subsidizes
Other States' Wider
Medicaid Coverage
(Preferring Cherry-Picking,
The Choice: "Go Naked" Or
"Premium Death Spiral" And
The Inability To Move Between
States To Take Advantage Of
Real Estate Or Employment
Opportunities Lest One Suffer
A Health Coverage Exclusion)
(Full Disclosure: I'm Not Much
More Impressed With The
Institutionalized Monopoly
Replacing That But It's At
Least Less Go To Hellish Than
The Prior Health Regime.)
Pediatricians Offer Safety
Advice Intervention As To
Gun Possession In A Family
Home, But Florida Passed
A Law Making That Illegal.
A Miami Court Permanently
Enjoined The Gag-The-Doctor
Law, But Rick Scott Is
Appealing The Ruling.
Doctors Shafted Again In Medicare.
(But I'm Not Sure All Of Them
Distinguish Between Programs
Conforming To Monopoly Vs.
Just Worthwhile Programs
(But Actually 100% Otherwise
Know Gatekeeping
Intimately/Too Well.))+++++
If The High Risk Exchanges Escape
That They'll Be The Singular
Exception To All Life On Earth
Today. Falsely (To Varying Degrees
On Up To Entirely) Blamed For The
Folly Of Monopoly Are:
Europe, China, Social Security,
Medicare, Teachers, Nurses,
Collective Bargaining As A
Means Toward Continued
Economic Freedom In The Face
Of Diminished Choices In
Employment, Social Work, Medical
Social Work, Libraries, Municipal
-----
Self-Determination, Laws
Preserving Human-Suitable
Habitat, Etc.
-----
+++++
But One Has To Have Some
Kind Of Cost Brake. Clinical
Rationalization Within A
Sector No Longer Immune
To Anti-Trust Would Take
Us Most The Way, I Think,
With The Balance Addressed
In This Site (Essentially Still
For-Profit Can Be Perfectly
O.K. But With Performance
Bonuses From An Escrow Pool
Plus Mandating Insurer Charters
To Include Material Physician
And Patient Representation,
With Regional Physician
Committees Deciding On
Cost-Minded Practice Standards.
What Is Just Going Bust From
Monopoly Mixed With Cost-
Plus Reimbursement
Incentives Supposed To
Accomplish?
(Reader: Except Where
Taxpayer Assisted Playing
High Risk People For
Profit Potential And
Medicare-With-Capitation
Create "Accountable Care,"
Which Is Essentially
Coverage Providers Having
Skin In The Game.)
Skin. In. The. Game. Kaplooy.
Insofar As An Essential
Monopoly Is In Substantial
Part (Not Where Carriers Are
Helped Out With High Risk
Patients) Paid A Large Stipulated
Profit Margin On An Essentially
Cost-Plus Basis, That's Not
So Great (Which Is How Jack
McKee Described His Throat
Cancer In "The Doctor.")
Insofar As Much Of The Health Sector's
Structure Settles On Monopoly Married To
Cost-Plus Measured Profitability, That
Becomes A Disaster In Terms Of:
Clinical Rationalization: Health
Maintenance Based On Clinical
Rationalization Is Very
Different From Structuring Entirely
Toward Weighting Risk To The
Taxpayer In Tandem With The
Combination Of Controlling The
Doctor's Practice And Incentivizing
Non-Optimal Reimbursement
Routines.
Trust: So Long As There Will Exist
Overbearing Oligopoly, And Cost-Plus
Profitability Basing In Substantial Part,
Simultaneously, That Has To Be Listed.
The System Inescapably Has To
Be More HMO-Like: Capitation (Head
Count Reimbursement) With Low
Deductibles And Co-Insurance,
And Anything Avoidable Including
Hospitalization Disincentivized,
Plus Cost-Free Targeted
Interventions (Pay A Little Now
To Pay Much Less Later.)
Though More Complicated Than
Simple Community Rating,
Risk Equalization Across The Entire
Population Means There's No Passing
Of Risk To A Patient's Next Carrier.
Insurance Pools Not Designed To
Bestow Huge Profits Don't
Concomitantly Require Huge
Premiums.
Insurers Can Be Scored On New
Measures: Health Status Relative To
Health Risk Over Time, A Measure
Of Health Maintenance, With Only
A Sample Across The Health Risk
Spectrum Needed;
Promptness Of Attention
To Need, A Measure Of Speed With
Which Patients' Needs Are Addressed,
A Force Against High Deductibles, But
Also A Point Of Comparison With
Single Payer Systems Where
Needs Are Purportedly Addressed
Slowly. The Existence Of A Risk
Equalization Mechanism Means
Performance Bonuses Can Be
Awarded Carriers.
A Lavish Physician-Insurer Market
With Physician Committee Review
Of Provider Practice Can Allow
The Co-Existence Of Fee-
For-Service With HMO-Like
Health Maintenance.
But Anti-Trust Has To Be Restored,
And The More Aligned A Plan Is
With Health Maintenance The
More Viable It Will Be.
Insurers Should Have In Their
Corporate Charters A Requirement Of
Showing Of Public Benefit, And Material
Decision Making Should By Law Include
Input From Physician And
Patient Committees.
This General Idea Of Risk Equalization
Across A Modified Insurance Market
Seeks The Same Ends As This, But
Only Attempts Additionally To
Preserve As Many System Advantages
As Possible, To Invent A Couple
New Ones, And To Find A Welcome
Among As Many Sector Players As
Possible.
Though More Complicated Than
Simple Community Rating,
Risk Equalization Across The Entire
Population Means There's No Passing
Of Risk To A Patient's Next Carrier.
Even Proponents Of The
Canadian And NHS Systems Seek
Improvements. The Goals Should
Be Essentially Everything Opposite
From The Prior And Present
(Including ObamaCare) Experience.
Efficiency, Appropriateness,
Effectiveness, Universality Of
Access, Clinically Efficient Care
Design, Patient Assurance And
Promptness Of Caring
Attention, But Also Maximizing
Bedside-To-Lab, Lab-To-
Bedside, And Doctor And
Patient Choices Without Carrier
Imposition.
Nassim Taleb Has Introduced
Fascinating Insights That
Would Be Of Immense Use
To Physicians In Approaching
The Conduct Of The Newly
Constituted Insurance
Framework Envisioned Above:
Things That Gain From Disorder
(Theory Of Antifragility)
And Detection Of Risk In Medicine,
Including The Expansion Of Disease
Categories To Expand Pharmaceutical
Markets.
(Wrong Link Was Placed
--This One Intended)
Though Impersonal Adaptations
To Chance Are Antithetical To
Patient Assessment, They CAN Be
A Useful Added Tool In Such
Area As Cross-Organization
Physician Committee Cooperation
In Establishing Patient Diagnostic
Or Even Treatment Standards On
The "Periphery" Of Consensus.
In The Process, Such Area Becomes
Not Less Significant In Medical
Care But The Focus Of New
Progress And Research. And So
Medical Care Readily Shows
This New View To Be Very
Exciting Indeed (And A "Market
Progressive," Unabashed
Keynesian Not Enjoying Getting
Blamed For The Failures Of
Monopoly, Can Claim Usefulness
As Much As Anyone Else.)
My Own Approach Is To Patch
Together The Best Of All Worlds
But Prioritizing With Rational Patient
Assurance And Attention The
Bedside-To-Lab, Lab-To-
Bedside Core Of Medicine.
The Opposite Of Intervention
Flexibilities Is The "Static"
System, And Medical Care,
As Opposed To Medicine,
Being An Economic System,
I've Already Compared That
With The Product Of Russia's
De Facto Authoritarian
Business Climate, Which I
Think Has Parallels With
American Oligarchic
Structures.
Health Maintenance: ObamaCare
Replaces Cherry-Picking And The Choice Of
Go Naked Or Premium Death Spiral And The
Inability To Move Between States So As To
Take Advantage Of Job/Real Estate
Opportunities Absent, In Many Cases,
Suffering Exclusions With A System Grounded
In Oligopoly From Which I See No Reason To
Expect Improvement In Outcomes Or
International Comparisons.
Cost Containment: 21% Of GNP, 2019,
Perhaps More Sustainable, Admittedly,
If We Trained Kids To Do More Things
Besides Make Bullets Or Process
Insecticide-Related Market Control-
Related Corn Syrup Food Chain Basing
GMO Seeds.
There Will Still Be A Legal
Collections Business As To
Unpaid Bills Though Would-Be
Margins Missed In Cost-Shifting
Will Instead Be Captured Much
More!
I Don't Think It's Remotely Sustainable,
Though That Applies To Other
Sectors Lately Too. Monetary Policy
Based On Buying Mortgage
Bubbles After The Fact Is The
Economics Of Fluff.
On Self-Treatment
It's A Few Steps Beyond
Video Poker.
Let's Say You've A New Red
Spot Or Blackish Spot On Your
Skin. You Decide To Guesstimate
A Diagnosis And Guesstimate
A Treatment Regimen. And You
Just Happen To Be On A Cruise
From Out Of San Pedro Or San
Diego, So You Head To The Back
Of The Puerto Vallarta Wal Mart
And Pick Up A Cream That Burns
Off The Spot.
Well, At That Point You Might As
Well Be A Bookmaker Taking Odds
On Yourself. Be Sure To Build In
A Large Spread For Yourself Should
You Live, Cause Your Risk Merits It.
You Might Have Removed A Pimple.
You Might Have Removed A Benign
Cancer. There're Thousands Of Skin
Conditions. (That's Why Pathology
Exists.) If You Could Magically Know
You Removed A Benign Cancer,
That's Not Too Shabby But
It's Reason Enough For Planning
Physicals With Emphasis On An
Active (Cancer Risky) Skin Anyway.
If You Burred It Back Topically I
Would Personally Bet So As To
Stay In The Game If I Happened
To Be Already Betting Against You.
(I'm Making Light Of This To
Make A Point Only, And The
Cost Incentives As To Interventions
Should Become Self-Evident.)
If One's Thinking Possible Active
Cancer, Time's Everything, So They
Could Sensibly Just Call A
Dermatologist (Don't Wait Around--
They Have Their Time Accounted
For In Advance. If You Seriously
Think Maybe Melanoma, You Might
Be Better Off Not Waiting At All.
A Dermatologist Might Have A
Physician's Assistant Who Can Get
A Biopsy Started (Including
Removal Of The Core Subject Area
Of Threat.)
Med. Sch. - Affiliated Hospital
Emergency Service Can Be A Good
Place To Start, But There're
Typically Multiple Venues Of
High Quality In An Area, And
Academic Affiliations Can Be
Spread Out Much Further Than
Most People Realize. If You Already
Belong To Some Group You Like,
They'll Likely Have Urgent
Care Covered, Though The
Dermatology You Might Envision
Getting Could Alternately Follow
From A Univ. Emergency Center.)
Obviously, In A Panic, If You're
A Returning Patient, A Group
Colleague Could Cover.
Let's Say You
Decide To Have The Area Checked....
(Done Right And With Simple
Precautions (In Strong Sun Wear
A Hat--Get Some Ear/Face
Coverage)There's No Reason
For Worry Or Fear.)
....After Burring Back The Skin Thing.
(That's Still A Sensible Thing To Do,
And Doctors Understand People
Don't Really Know Their Own Best
Course.)
The Doctor May Elect Not Biopsying
Inasmuch As She Now Can't See Any
Reason To. She Might Be Sending To
Pathology A Maybe-There-Was-
Just-A-Pimple Zone Of Skin.
Now, You'll Be Going Back.
So. That's 2 Appointments.
2X The Nervousness.
And One Very Late, Very
Skrewed Up Biopsy.
And, At That Point It
Could Be Goombay.
I Want You To Be Medically-
Financially Care Free, Get Optimal
Care, High Quality Care, Know That
Your Concern Will Be Taken Care
Of With A Minimum Of Inconvenience,
And Because You Entered That Caring
System So Early, And Are Only
Finding Relief From Stress And Are
Finding Reasons To Have A Positive
Outlook, You Actually Will Have A Leg
Up (Especially If The Cancer's On
Your Leg) And Will Be Consumed
With That Happier Support.
This Will Still Carry The
Occassional Patient Who
Needs More Care.
What Would I Do If The Thing
Were On My Skin But Didn't Look
Like Something Straight Out Of
Here? This Is The Obvious Next
Question, But Not Being A Doctor,
This Is Only What I Would Do Next.
I'd Give It Time, Like Up To 2
Weeks, To Tell Me More About
Itself While I Tried Gently Testing
Whether It Will Respond To
Anti-Infection Treatment (Like
Warm Salty Water,) But I'd
Otherwise Leave In Tact
Something Testable. The
More It Looks Like Melanoma,
Highly Readily Curable If Caught
"Thin," The Sooner I'd Get Active.
By Mapping Your Own Skin
While You're Healthy, Casually,
Not Making A Project Out Of It,
You Become More Conscious Of
Scabs Forming From Normal Wear
And Tear And Less Likely To
Find A Worrisome Ambiguity.
Health Maintenance Should Be
Simple. Medical Care Should Be
Worry-Free, Fear-Free, Just
A Routine. Health Behavior
Guidance Is Really Very Simple.
This Whole Field Should
Be A Piece Of Cake.
ABOUT THOSE TESTS.
PLUS A MULTI-PURPOSE (MANY
THINGS WILL LINK TO THIS)
BOATLOAD.
They're Simpler, Easier To Do,
And Cheaper Earlier In The Disease
Progression Process.
There're Also More Options
Earlier In The Disease Progression
Process, The Later Ones Getting
Yuckier.
I Find It Suitable Extrapolating From
The Fundamental Process By Which A
Doctor Examines A Patient And
Applies The Implications From
The Weighing Of Multiple Paths Of
Factual Inputs In Terms Of Making
Sense Of The Following Morass.
After All, What
Happens Bedside Is The Whole Point.
A Company Has A Cardio Product.
It's Etiological Approach Is Early
(Means The Process Of The Emergence
Of Disease Is Addressed At An Earlier
Point Than It Is By Others.)
So It May Involve More Natural
Bodily Responses, Address The
Tree Of Disease Process Closer To
The Roots, And By Virtue Of That
Even Be Likely To Offer Help In
Other Disease Processes Stemming
From Those Roots.
Back To Cardio. Let's Say The
Product's Hung Up Cause The FDA
Person Says Results Are Gender-
Differentiating (Men Responding
Better. Multiple Entries Will Reflect
Actual Biotech Prospects Multiple
Reasons For Which I Will Not
Identify.)
Well, That Could Be Placebo Effect
(With The Question Of Definition
Hanging.) Men Have Crummier Health
Behavior, Generally, But Perhaps When
They Get A Whiff Of Fear They Appreciate
Their Own Room For Improvement.
How Much Of That Is Greater
Hope/Expectation? (Use Your Browser's
Page Word Find For Placebo And/Or
Dopamine And Thank Some People
In Boston That We Actually Have Some
Insight Into This Now--From Just
Recently.) How Much Is Their Getting
Their Act Together?
Dogs Have Greater Natural Heart
Reparative Ability, Which Is Consistent
With Their Being Carnivores. That
Means Mr. Beef Eater Really Has A
Good Shot At Not-Too-Troublesome
Repair If Effective "Early-Level"
Intervention Can Get Cleared.
So At This Point If Unbiased Doctors
Say Image The Physiology And Track
The Chemistry, But The FDA Guy Says
Restructure Trials To Deal With The
Statistical Dichotomy, I Say Go With
The Doctors, Really Learn Something
Useful, Get A Great Product Out There.
Now, I'm All Over The Map
Economically In This Website Already,
Which Really Helps With This Now.
Because Without This Kind Of
Rationalization The Process Becomes A
Crap-Shoot Of Statistics And Wanton
Judgement Such That Ultimately
Executives In Many Locations Have
To Think Like Oil Executives.
In Oil Drilling, Firms Spread And
Share Risk. Doing That In Medicine Is
Intrinsically Not The Optimal General
Business Model We Should Want
If Informed Guidance Of Knowledge
Is The Economic Goal, Though
Joint Venturing Between Firms In
Related Concentrations Is Different.
This Is Actually At Least In Some Small
Part A Handy Dandy Simplification.
Oil Firms DO Adapt Strategies To
Accumulated Information. They DO
Mix Science With Economics Too.
Marcia Angell, Former Editor-In-Chief,
New England Journal Of Medicine,
On Big Pharma (Find Podcast,
(Simply Click "Play")
COMPARING REGULATORS WITH A SENSE
OF MISSION VS. THOSE WITH A SENSE
OF GATEKEEPING OR ANY OTHER SENSE
THAT ISN'T A SENSE OF MISSION
(A CASE STUDY (COMING))
This Will Be The Case Of Tagatose
Vs. Primarily The Choice Of
Aspartame And Sucralose
As To Contemplating Any Possible
Degree Of Gatekeeping--Protection,
For Such Things As Market Control
Over Insecticide-Related GMO-Based
Fructose, Or, For Say, Aspartame Or
Sucralose, Here's As To The Centrality
Of Insulin Resistance, Excess Energy,
And Related Impacting Health Status.
Health Care Is A Handy Dandy
Place From Which To Explain
Oligopoly's Telling Advantages
The Craziest Thing About Having
Insecticide/Herbicide-Related
Market Control-Related GMO Seeds
Underlying Much Or Most Of What We
Eat (And Our Ethanol,) Apart From
Its Having Been Rejected By Most Of
The Rest Of The Developed World,
Is The U.S., Food-Wise, Is Synonymous
With The Diversity Of Different
Homespun Cultural Cuisines.
THIS
Pablo Monsivais, Anju Aggarwal,
Adam Drewnowski,
U. Washington Sch. of Public Health
Can Be Approached Two Ways.
1: Facilitate Healthy Eating That’s
Less Expensive Eating.
2: Incentivize The Food Production
Market
In A Manner More Conducive To
Greater Health Maintenance For
The Full Population
THAT
Lora Iannotti,
Washington U., St. Louis
Addresses This Simultaneously,
Though Food Production Economics Is
Not So Large That We Can't Identify
Areas For Potential Improvement Rather
Quickly
It's Part Of The Hidden Loss Of
Buying Power Of Everyone When A
Few Banks Get Massive Free Reserves
For Their Alternate Asset Base Value
Ad Infinitum
It's Partly Food For Fuel When Fuel
Need Not Be Produced From Market
Control-Related Seeds, Which In Turn
Shouldn't Exist In A Market Controlled
Environment (In An Uncontrolled
Environment There's Nothing Wrong
With Them So Long As They're
Labeled As To What The Alteration
Is For. If Then No One Would Eat
Their Food Product, Then So Be It.)
THIS /THAT
J. Paul Leigh, DaeHwan Kim,
U. Calif., Davis
Finding The Middle Class, Not The Poor,
Eats More Fast Food, Implies A Wide
Panoply Of Issues.
Whereas The Frenchman Walking To
The Metro Can Pick Up Some Wholesome
Food On Her/His Way To A Parisian
Suburb, Americans Are Car Bound.
Some Americans Have Never Appreciated
How Poorly They Regard Themselves, Or
How Quickly They’re Digging Themselves
Into A Lifetime Of Impaired Health
Maintenance.
No Wonder They Haven’t Reached
The Point Of Realizing The Health
Delivery Choice They’ve Been Given
Is That Between Cherry-Picking/”Go
Naked”/”Premium Death Spiral”/
Inability To Move Between States
To Take Advantage Or R.E. Or
Employment Oppt'ies Where
Exclusions Would Be Unavoidable Vs.
A Handful Of Giants With Profit
Margins Monopolistically Matched
To Abilities To Pay And Risk
Treatment Matched Such That The
More Insurance Risk There Is The
More The Taxpayers Cover It, With
All The Foregoing Mostly Devoid Of
Clinical Rationalization Or Economic
Improvability Except In Those Modest
Corners Of The System Where The
State Will Help Those Antil-Trust
Immune Companies Milk
The Risky Ones.
HOW /WITH THIS
It Can Be Lots Of People
Presuming Themselves Well Situated
Can Be Mistaken As To Who Their
Real Friends Are.
The Rising Cost Of Food And Energy
Should Be Far More Publicized.
There Can Be A Formal Commodities
Exchange That Segregates Organic From
Not Organic, GMO From Non-GMO, Even
GMO For Insecticidal Value Vs. GMO For
Non-Insecticidal Value.
Most Broadly Speaking, Ponzi
Schemes Operate In Darkness.
But Denial Of Information Of
Course More Simply Denies
Not Just Choice But The Lack
Of Meaningful Choice, So It's
Like Trying To Hide Monopoly
In The Same Way A Puppy
Might Try Hiding By Sticking
Just Its Head Under A Rug.
We Basically Still Know It's There.
Government Incentives Can Be Aimed
At Healthful Food Production And End
Products Rather Than A Base Consisting
Mostly Of Sugar Or Fructose From Market
Part Controlled Insecticide-Related
GMO Seeds.
A Space Re-Written (1st Link)
-1- -2- -3-
Welcome To Oligopoly Forest.
Over Yonder, Though, Is
Rational Everything.
Position Statement/ Newer (Start
At Either Place If Interested:)
ObamaCare Replaces A Market
Controlled Shell Game With
The Institutionalization Of Oligopoly,
On A Largely Cost-Plus Basis, Except
For The Part That Constitutes What
I Call
"Outskirts Of Medicare"
Imagine Someone Is A Cancer
Survivor. They Somewhere Between
Often And Typically
Could Not Change Carriers Absent An
Exclusion. They Somewhere Between
Often And Typically Could Not Move
To Another State (Rather Soviet-Like,
Though Those Displeased With
Immunity From Anti-Trust Were Always
Called The Renegades.)
Now Comes ObamaCare. The High Risk
Exchanges, "Outskirts Of Medicare,"
That Being National Health Insurance
For Those The Carriers Don't Want
(Then Variously Receive Extra Pay
When Taking Back Them Back Or For
Care Management--That Stage Only
Arrived At By Virtue Of High Risk/State-
Low Risk/Carriers Immune From Anti-
Trust, Except Then When Taking On
Patients With That Price Cap One DOES
See Behavior A La An "Accountable Care
Organization,") Are Essentially For Those
Too Expensive (Pre-Medicare/Boomers/
Expensive) To Carry Very Profitably,
Though "Bronze Tier" Policies Go
To "60% Medical Loss Ratios"
(40% Operational Profit.)
The Cancer Survivor Can By 2014
Change Outfits. But She/He Does
Not Particularly Have Much Economic
Basis For Doing So.
Policy Coverages Will Vary, Deductible
Proscriptions Are (To Me)
Unsatisfactory, Out-Of-Pocket Will Be
High. But What's Most Telling Is The
Stipulated Profit Level In Any Event,
Except In The High Risk Exchanges
Themselves, To Which I Think One
Should Regard Patients To Have Been
Passed Up ("Outskirts Of Medicare,")
Means That Cancer Survivor Has No
Real Competitive Choice.
It Might As Well Be Something Like
California OneCare Stripped Of
Rationalization For Most Its Breadth
And Depth, And Totally Slanted
For Guaranteed Very High Profit
Margins Mainly For A Few
Dominant Players.
Add This, High Out-Of-Pocket,
And This Seen In Anticipation
From A Sector Enjoying
Immunity From Anti-Trust.
The High Risk Exchanges Will
Also Be A Sitting Duck Along
With Social Security And
Medicare, The Shafting Of
Which The Present
Administration Is Negotiating.
There's No Justification For
Any Group Being A
Sitting Duck In This Sector.
Beyond Knowing The Carriers
Get A Stipulated Operational
Percentage Over Cost, In Some
Cases 40% (60% "Medical Loss
Ratio" (Yes That's True--Bronze
Tier Plans)) Obviously Few People
Will Really Be Able To Judge
Comparative Coverage Values.
This Is The Opposite Of
Volatility But Without Skin
In The Game On The Part Of
Those Creating The Volatility,
Even If Only Because Of The
Carte Blanche Bail-Out Guarantee.
This Is The Complete Lack Of
Volatility And Rather The Settling
Down Into Stipulated-Profit Fixation.
It's Held Out As Capitalism, Its
Foes Are Held Out As Not-Capitalist,
But What It Is, Is Oligopoly.
It's In The End, Though, The Same
As This. By Structure At Its Core.
(Technically The New Law Hires
Some People To Research Delivery
Innovation, But There's No Basis
For Proposing Changes To The Utility-
Like-Oligopoly Established.)
Though Health Insurers Aren't
The "Natural Monopoly" Cable TV
"Pipes" Are, Their Oligopoly's
Control Is Enough To Do The Damage.
Why Else Is There A Purpose For
Immunity From Anti-Trust?
The Cable Companies Don't Generally
Have A "Medical Loss Ratio-" Plus
Percentage Formula, Which Is Dumb
Enough In Medical Care, The High
Risk Exchanges Being "Outskirts Of
Medicare," Customers They Don't Want
If The Customers Can't Afford The
Equity Returns The Insurers Have
Decided They Require, But The Local
Regulators, In Setting Rates, Implicitly
Supposedly Consider Cost And Return Rate.
The Result There, Just To My Own View,
Is My Own Paying A Lot And Getting Very
Little.
So Here (When It Loads--I'm Looking
For A Better Link) Is Nassim Taleb
Explaining Economics In Terms Of
Static Markets And Chaotic Markets,
The Latter Yielding A Sustainability
Quite Analogous To Ecologic Processes,
So Long As It's Conducted Fairly.
Otherwise, The Ecologic Process Will
Simply Mirror The Warped Economic
Process, At Least Now That Human
Economics Exists On A Globally
Impacting Scale.
Now Making The Point I Have In Mind
Is Really Simplified This Way:
Obviously Vladimir Putin Holds Power
By Way Of Russia's Vast Oil Reserves
And, Also Very Helpful To Him, Gazprom's
Monopoly Or Near Monopoly Of Energy
In Europe.
Huh?
You Only Need A Controlling Stake To
Have Control. Just Ask Any LBO-Familiar
Person. And Yes, There Are Parallels
To Mortgaging The Nation.
And The Parallel Thus Extends To
Ecology. Thus Spoke Extraction.
So In The U.S. The Power Plants, The
Highways, The TV/Internet Cables, And
Now, Ta-Da, A Handful Of Major Health
Insurance Companies, Become
Gatekeepers Entirely Analogous To The
Mini-Castles One Can Pass Along The
Rhine River.
I Don't Know How To Tell You This, But
Our World Is Led By People Not
Particularly Healthily Inclined In A Social
Sense, For What Their Policies Indicate
Is Simply The Aim Of Retention of Power
And Wealth By Way Of The Above.
The Main Difference From The Familiar
Plantation Is The Cotton.
It's My View That While It's One Thing
That We Allowed Our Democratic
Structure To Loosen Up And People
Took Advantage Of That, It's Another
Where People Act Within Their Own
Culture Of Deceit And Control.
That Implies Compulsion.
In Turn, That To Me Suggests A
Distinction Between Laissez Faire
Thinking, No Matter How Warped,
And Feeling That What's Good For
Them Is Good For Everyone.
The More Financially Impacted
Someone Is By Something Like A
Premium Death Spiral, The More
Easily Trampled On They Are.
And Trampled Many Have Been
Indeed, We Obviously Know
That's Then Control Freaks Acting
Like Abusers Of Chickens In
Food Factories.
This Is The ONLY Thing These
People Have In Common.
The Last Time I Checked
Mr. Putin Did Not Belong To
Any Famously Vulnerable Group
Du Jour. But They Do Prosper
By Encouraging People To Play
The Blame Game And Then You
See One Spouse Blaming Another
At The Grocery Store For A
Million Crazy-Wrong Sounding
Things.
The Opposite Is Democracy,
Education, And Saving Our Planet.
In Spite Of The Above, ObamaCare
Probably Is More Livable Than
This.
Pretty Much Everything's
A Double Edged Sword.
Adjusting Our Competitions
So That They're Not Controlling
And Abusive May Be Timely And
Better Informed Than Might
Otherwise Have Been The Case,
But For Those Lapses, And Today
We Need Better Cooperation In
Coping With New Challenges.
As The Community As Patient Space
Now Connects Biology And Economics
As To Part Market-Controlled
Insecticide-Categorizable High Fructose
Corn Syrup From GM Seeds, With That
Product Being Foundational To The
American Diet, Despite It's Having Been
Rejected By Most Of The World,
But That Space (Me) Not Rejecting
"Accelerated Evolution" Per Se, A
Fair Amount Of Money Matters
Is In That Space Too.
We Should Be Incentivizing
Wholesome Food
Production.
-Y- / Y2 I Only Buy Whole
Grains Too Small
Commercially To Be
Altered. But Oats Look O.K.
(Interesting As To Oats.)
It's One Thing Getting Your
House Tented Before Termites
Become An Excessive Emotional
Hurdle. It's Another Having Your
Kids And Grandkids Chowing Down
On Insecticide-Yielding Or
Insecticide-Loving Food All Day
Long When We've Known
For A Generation
This.
These Are Reactive
At Best, Apologetic,
Voluntary Regime Based.
-1- -2-
I've This Personal
Assessment, It Happens.
This Is A Re-Run Of
Earlier Fishermen In S.F.'s
Embarcadero Who Fished
Their Own Supply Out
Existence.
Science's Possibilities Are
Exciting.
Possibilities Rings A Bell
In Economics.
Food-wise We're Risking
Too Much Portfolio For
Too Far Out, And It's
Clear That Control And
Unappetizing Science Have
Already Infected The Process.
There's A Simple Cost Of
Information Function
That Helps With That
Ordinarily, But The People
Involved Need Having A Sense
Of Mission, And I For One Can
Already Say I Won't Eat
The First Batch Of GMO's
Being Served Up Before
These Guys Do Over The
Course Of Some Years.
Even If They Don't Croak,
Given The New Gene's
Function, Who Would
Want To Eat It
If They
Have A Choice?
When People Get
Choosy, This Happens.
I Actually Formally Propose
The Economics Above
Might Be One Basic
Way Of Framing The Issues.
By The Way, Here It
Is As To Humans.
So, Using That Economic
Paradigm, The Possibilities
As To Direct Alterations
To Our Genome, Not
Simply Shopping At A
Fertility Bank, Appear
Rather Fat-Tailed, Involving
Who/What We Are.
It Goes Without Saying,
This Goes Beyond Germs/
Accidents Having No
Connection To Demand
Elasticities (Means Little--
The Money's In The Supply
Incentives.)
I'd Put A Freeze On It,
And Then That Could Be
The Positive Side Of
Being Late Controlling
GMO's In Our Diet.
As To That I've Proposed,
Knowing How Slowly Progress
Is Made In Health Ethics, That
People's "Humanity" Be
Protected Better Than These Folks
Protected Their Tomatos' And
Apples' Flavors.
I Don't See That Being A
Fearsome Challenge. Psych
Has Healthful Behavior
Covered, Which, Uh, Er, I
Think Comes From The Brain,
Though Not In Everyone's
Case. Medical Care Is Already
Rendered Compassionately To
Everyone No Matter Their State
Of Mind. Except To Him.
ON ECONOMICS AND TECH
WHERE THE DYNAMICS
ARE NOT SIMPLY
SUPPLY AND DEMAND
Corporate Farms Won't Disappear,
But Their Scalar Advantages Often
Come At The Cost Of The Biologics
Of Natural Food Product Practices.
Besides Restoring Sustainability And
Diversity, The Family Farm's Scale
Disadvantage May Be Cost-Offset By
Its Very Lack Of Market Control.
(Sounds Wrong, But It's
Right Cause Of The Nature
Of The Technology.)
Fewer People Are At Risk Where A
Pathogen DOES Come From The
Farm, If It's From A Smaller Farm.
It's Almost Certainly The Case That
One Size Fits All Policies Cause
Unnecessary Harm From Overkill With
Prophylactic Measures (Agricultural,
Not Sexual, Reader.)
Rationalize All That, Make It
Price-Control-Free, Risk-Control
Free, Assure Universal Access To
Quality-Assured Care, Which
Goal Then Includes Comforting
Patients So Much Their Dopamine
Will Get Going And They'll Be
Experiencing The Placebo Effect
Right After They Enter The
System, And Incentivize Patient
Interaction With Economically
Consistent, Accomodative Insurance
Practice For Maximum Clinical
Efficiency, Economic Efficiency,
And Patient Health Maintenance
Satisfaction, With Stunning System
Outcomes And Full Tilt Science And
Welcome Aboard, That's
Medical Care.
Who Would Have Spoiled
The Family Farm's Food
In Earlier Times?
Why A Romney Presidency
Would Be A Grave Threat
To … Romneycare
(But The Following
Remains Post-Election
(Any Oligopoly Will Be
The Primary Beneficiary
Of Any Govt Program That
Is Structured To Support
Oligopoly))
-1- -2-
Insurers Nervous Over
Prospect Of Romney Victory
Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar,
AP, 10/28/2012
ENEN:
Of Course. Though Romney
Want To Return To This,
ObamaCare Delivers
On A Platter The Establishing
And Entrenching Of A Formalized
(Economically) Discriminatory Price
Regime Population-Wide, With Risk
Also Apportioned So That All Higher
Risk Is Taxpayer Subsidized,
Replacing Simply Medicare Being
National Health Insurance For
Customers The Oligopoly Doesn't
Want; Though, Romney/Ryan
Wants This As To That.
Newer Summary Encompassing
Many Basics But Reminding
Of The Broader Oligopoly.
ObamaCare Replaces A Shell-Game-
Monopoly Resembling The Soviet
Environment That Had Been Defended
By Rent-A-Party Types Campaigning
For Monopoly While Pretending
To Campaign For Free Enterprise.
See This , After All
(Facts Not Independently Verified,)
But Notice The Placard:
“Republic, Not Democracy--”
By Proof Of Deed A Self-Serving
View, One Might Think.)
Also. We’ve Been Down This Road
Before. It Defines American History.
Considering The Enactor's And
Emmanuel's Own Past And Present
Health Administrative Connections, It
Unsurprisingly Replaces It With A Few
Dominant Cos. Taking Us Up To Over
20% Of GNP Going To Health Care
With No Reason To Believe Arbitrary
Practice Controls Will Serve Anything
But The Financial Support
Of Monopoly.
The High Risk Exchange's Role In
This Sector Sits Thusly Then. Medicare
Has Been National Health Insurance
For Customers The Carriers Don't Want.
They're Older, So They're Costlier. That
Becomes The Case Sliding-Scale-Wise
As We All Get Older, And Boomers Are
Saliently At That Stage Simultaneously
In An Economic Climate, Created By A
Look-Alike Monopoly, TBTF Banks,
At Some Point People Get Too Risky,
Essentially By Virtually Of Simply
Having Lived A Few More Years, To
Then Afford The Offerings Of A
Richly Rewarded Utility-Monopoly.
The Deduction Proscriptions Are Not
Anything That Can Matter To Me,
ThoughThe Colonoscopy Specialists
Will Welcome The Favor Particularly
After This. But Don't Think More
From That Particularly. Many
Considerations Underlie Choice Of
Procedure, Including Things
Presenting Not Referenced.
That's What Med School's For,
Along W/ How To Monitor What
A Prescribed Drug's Doing.
What Matters More Is If You're
Worried About Just How Badly A
Toe Might Be Broken Or About An
Ambiguous Thing On Your Skin,
You Might Be Financially Afraid
To See The Doctor.
Very Worrisome Red Zone
In Your Eye But 3 Weeks
To Go Till Your Massive
Deductible Re-Sets?
Any Program Designed To Conform
To Monopoly Will Benefit Mainly
The Monopolists, And Thus That's The
Purpose Of The Program's
Excise Tax.
There's A Transfer Payment
Mechanism From The Carriers Into
The System. To Me It Thus Works As
An Admission Of The Above.
There's A Very High Out-Of-Pocket
Limit.
To My View Mr. Goldstein Would Still Be
Treated Like An Abused Animal In A
Corporate Food Production Plant.
The High Risk Exchanges Are, Like
Medicare, High-Patient-Need-R-Us, And
Martin Goldstein Would Go There
When He Couldn’t Keep Up.
Keep In Mind The Consistent
Behavior Of American Monopolies
And Their Past Lack Of Their
Regulation.
Expressed Differently:
That High Risk Is Definitionally
Expensive Is A Little Item Of
Common Sense Safety That's Like
Second Base To Maury Wills.
It's Like Electric Cars Requiring
Power From Something.
So If Martin Goldstein Lived To
Transfer To A High Risk Exchange,
I Could Simply Imagine Him
Thinking To Himself The
Affordability Act Is More
Properly: The Monopoly
Affordability Act.
And Though I Don't Consider
Myself A Worrywart, This
Did Occur To Me.
On Top Of That Is Funding
Doubt. So I Would Personally
Not Make That My First Choice
And That Leaves Me With
Expecting My Insurer To Do
Everything It Can To Take
As Much As It Can Get And
Give As Little As It Has To.
Other Businesses Try That
To Be Sure, But They Don't
Involve Literally Taking Me
For All I'm Worth.
So Remarkably, It Potentially Turns
More People Into Martin Goldstein,
Just As TBTF Banking Has Turned
America Into Iceland And Japan At
Each Of Those Nation's
Worst Moments (A Carry Trade
Vis-A-Vis The Yuan Against
Ourselves To Give TBTF Banks
Cheap Credit.)
Wendell Potter Laudably Decries
ObamaCare's Predecessor
Shell Game But Compares The
New Regime With The Original
Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
Those Associations, Including
Plan Requirements, Were
Not Corporate Monopolies.
I Can Remember When Obama
Campaigned To Reduce Tuition
Burdens. People And Democracy
Should Be Empowered By Higher
Education. That Should Not Be A
Basis Of Class Advantage.
Newer Summary Encompassing
Many Basics But Reminding
Of The Broader Oligopoly.
Lower Medical Loss Ratios Being
(Higher Profit Margin Predetermined)
Allowed In Lower Tier Policies Means
Doing Everything Possible To Get
People There. That Incentivizes
Making More Comprehensive Policies
Be Very Expensive, Incentivizing High
Cost. So This Is A Law Encouraging
High Cost, Under-Coverage--A Real
Break The Bank Law.
The High Excise Tax On “Cadillac”
Policies, And The Extreme Favor Of
60% Cost Cut-Off (MLR--Medical
Loss Ratio.) Above Which Is Not
What’s To Be Considered Allowed
But Rather What Will Perpetually Be
The Case: Sheer Profit But As That’s
A Cost Plus Formula, The Better
Policies Predictably Going To Be
Priced To Get As Many People As
Possible Into Lesser Coverage.
This Law More Than Anything Has
Its Sites Set On The Same People The
Rent-A-Party Financiers Have Aimed
Their Guns At. Pre-Medicare People
Will Be Priced To Death Until They’re
Either Forced Into A Low Degree Of
Coverage, Affording Higher Profit
Margins; Or, They Will See If They
Qualify For Federal Subsidy To Live
In The Sector Of The Market The
Cartel Simply Doesn’t Want.
As Medicare Is National Health
Insurance For Customers The Cartel
Doesn’t Want, The High Risk
Exchanges Are Thus Best Understood
As “Outskirts Of Medicare--”
Customers Pushed Off
And Really Supplied With Just
Enough Subsidy To Make Them
A Worthwhile Market.
If I Were To Take The Dim View,
The Positive One Being It Eliminates
Exclusions, I’d Say Something
Like This:
As This Law Is Projected To Take
Us To Just Below 21% Of GNP Going
To Health Care, It’s Clear There
Will Be 2 Things Most Responsible:
Profiteering On Low-Grade Policies;
Shafting Boomers Aged Just
Shy Of Medicare.
Considering The Lobbyists Have
Their Sites Set On Medicare,
You Can Understand My Being
Leery About Being Dependent
On The High Risk Exchanges--
"Outskirts Of Medicare."
Monopolies In The End
Leading To Similar Logical
Extremes, This Result Is
Parallel To Saying End Social
Security. That's Safe Money,
And We Can't Afford Having
That. That's Why People
Who Sold The Housing
Bubble, Along With You, Are
Seeing No Return On Their
Present Savings, And Why
People Who Bought The
Financial Cos.' Retirement
Securities Are Getting A
Pittance Of The Income
They Expected.
It’s Obvious The Democratic
Leadership Lacks Any Sense Of
Mission As To Medicare Too, So,
This Is A Law Shafting Anyone
The Cartel Can’t Make An Easy
High Profit Off Of.
Part Of What’s Supposed To Make
It Work, Even With The Near 21%
Of GNP Thing, Is Doctor Practice
Control (Monopoly Is Market Control,
And That’s Control Freak In The
Market, So That’s Doctors Controlled
By Control Freaks. I’m Sure
They Think Someone’s Nuts.)
Effectiveness Rules Is Not If-Then
PracticeEfficiency. It Also Reflects
A Naivete As To The Merging Of
Science And Monopoly Economics.
I Don’t Think That Path Just As
Intended Is Necessary. It ‘Aint
The Law Of The Land As Is The
Case Of ObamaCare, As Boehner
Adamantly Declared, But I’ve
Alternate Ideas In This Space.
It’s Obviously Worse For Me, Doc,
What With Myself And Better Half
Being Pre-Medicare. The Cartel
Wants Us Profit-Pushed-Off.
My Situation Is Possibly Less
Precarious Than Some
Others'. There Is A Large
HMO Also Wanting Patients,
But I'd Have To Change
Doctors, One Of Whom
Happened To Write 2
Textbooks In His Field.
More Of What You See
Is What You Get.
(Link Repaired)
I Think That Linked UCLA
Study Is Important As
The Program Is Essentially
Voluntarily (Self-)
Regulated.
More On Being Underwhelmed.
-----
-----
If Someone Told Me The Koch'es
Wrote This Law I'd Feel I Could
Believe It. It's Obvious The
Jawboning About Public Optioni
And Single Payer Was Some
Kind Of Charade.
I Like This, So I'm Letting
Myself Have It In Two Places:
I Created A Logical Extreme
In Banking: Imagine The
TBTF Banks Dwindled To
One TBTF Bank Until The
Fed Was Simply Giving That
Bank Vast Free Reserves
And Overpaying For Its Assets.
Imagine The Dominant Health
Insurers Dwindled To One
Player. Then, ObamaCare Is
Their Health Insurance Policy,
And, Of Course, It's Pretty
Obfuscating. The Reason Is
The Same As With Any Other
Health Insurance Policy.
It's Going To Be Whatever
They Construct, And In
A Competition Vacuum.
The Part About This
Monopoly With Its
Thoroughly Prescribed
Profit Margins And With
The Entire Nation Now
Structured To Enable That,
But With The Affordability
Pressure Cap On Medicare
Now Widened, That's Most
Striking, More So Than The
Lack Of Anything Keeping
The Program From Quickly
Taking Us To Just Under
21% Of GNP On Healthcare,
Which Fact Reflects Its
Lack Of Cost Containment,
With Substantial Numbers
Expected To Still Not Be
Covered, Is The Single
Exception To That.
It's Not A National HMO.
It's Not A Systems Of HMO's.
It's Not Fee For Service
With Meaningful
Rationalization. For Most
Cost Containment Is
Thumb On Doctor.
So, Let Me Think On This
Some More.
Effectiveness Rules On
The One Hand, But Cost
Plus Actually Encourages
Unnecessary Tests On
The Other?
Every Here And There Is
A Doctor Connecting A
Patient With New Science.
This Is Not Conducive To
That Except Insofar As
Someone Else One Way
Or Another Subsidizes That
Process With Insurers
Nowhere To Be Seen.
My Father Was An "AOA"
Physician Whose Years
Were Probably Shortened
A Little From Excessive
Personal Investment In
His Patients.
ObamaCare Retains The
Environment Of Hostility
Toward People Like That.
Ending Immunity From
Anti-Trust And Simply Slicing
The Major Insurers Into
Smaller Parts Would
Immediately Change That,
And Then The Patient
Protection Provisions Of
ObamaCare, Minus The
Monopoly Affordability
Ones, Which Really Set
Profit Levels, Would Actually
Be Very Useful.
But Medical Care Is Different.
You Can Do Much With
Supply Incentives, But In
The End Accidents And Germs
Could Care Less About
Demand Elasticities.
So Especially If One Regards
Health Maintenance Something
Affordable On A Universal
Basis Once One Ditches The
Inefficiency Of Monopoly, Just
As Is The Case With Wholesome
Food, Air And Water, Then The
Market Progressive Such As
Myself And The Proponent Of
Califiornia OneCare Are Really
Headed Toward A Very
Similar Place.
Something Like The "Public
Option," Of Course, Would
Have Been The Exact
Opposite Of Squeezing
Medicare, Even If It Is
National Health Insurance
For Customers The
Insurers Don't Want.
They Get Risk Adjustments
Back In Their Favor For
Taking Them Back.
They Get A Once-Favorably-
Separated Out Audience
To Then Bid On For
Patient Management.
And Then It's Actually
From Them, Doing That,
From Whom You Actually
Here Talk Of Pulling The
Plug.
And, I'm Beginning To
Be Of The View That The
High Risk Exchanges
Will Just Be Part Of
That Same Process.
The Events That
Run Parallel To NBC's
Merger With Comcast
And Your Typically
Having A Choice Of
ATT Or Time Warner
(Throw In Satellite And
I Happen To Have Another--
Cox.) And I Wouldn't Get
My Hopes Of Cord-Cutting
Too High Considering
Who Owns The Pipes.
Here's Jane Hamsher,
Firedoglake, As
To Google. Here's A
Partial Alternate, But It
Will Be Difficult Carving
Out An Un-Part-Controlled
Existence.
The Place For Monopoly And
Large Profit Margins And
Disregard For Informed
Clinical Efficiency That Also
Would Make Life Better For
Patients Is, Ummm, Let Me
Think: Gaming Software Is
One Such Place. There're
Many Like That.
Many Basics But Reminding
Of The Broader Oligopoly.
Lower Medical Loss Ratios Being
(Higher Profit Margin Predetermined)
Allowed In Lower Tier Policies Means
Doing Everything Possible To Get
People There. That Incentivizes
Making More Comprehensive Policies
Be Very Expensive, Incentivizing High
Cost. So This Is A Law Encouraging
High Cost, Under-Coverage--A Real
Break The Bank Law.
The High Excise Tax On “Cadillac”
Policies, And The Extreme Favor Of
60% Cost Cut-Off (MLR--Medical
Loss Ratio.) Above Which Is Not
What’s To Be Considered Allowed
But Rather What Will Perpetually Be
The Case: Sheer Profit But As That’s
A Cost Plus Formula, The Better
Policies Predictably Going To Be
Priced To Get As Many People As
Possible Into Lesser Coverage.
This Law More Than Anything Has
Its Sites Set On The Same People The
Rent-A-Party Financiers Have Aimed
Their Guns At. Pre-Medicare People
Will Be Priced To Death Until They’re
Either Forced Into A Low Degree Of
Coverage, Affording Higher Profit
Margins; Or, They Will See If They
Qualify For Federal Subsidy To Live
In The Sector Of The Market The
Cartel Simply Doesn’t Want.
As Medicare Is National Health
Insurance For Customers The Cartel
Doesn’t Want, The High Risk
Exchanges Are Thus Best Understood
As “Outskirts Of Medicare--”
Customers Pushed Off
And Really Supplied With Just
Enough Subsidy To Make Them
A Worthwhile Market.
If I Were To Take The Dim View,
The Positive One Being It Eliminates
Exclusions, I’d Say Something
Like This:
As This Law Is Projected To Take
Us To Just Below 21% Of GNP Going
To Health Care, It’s Clear There
Will Be 2 Things Most Responsible:
Profiteering On Low-Grade Policies;
Shafting Boomers Aged Just
Shy Of Medicare.
Considering The Lobbyists Have
Their Sites Set On Medicare,
You Can Understand My Being
Leery About Being Dependent
On The High Risk Exchanges--
"Outskirts Of Medicare."
Monopolies In The End
Leading To Similar Logical
Extremes, This Result Is
Parallel To Saying End Social
Security. That's Safe Money,
And We Can't Afford Having
That. That's Why People
Who Sold The Housing
Bubble, Along With You, Are
Seeing No Return On Their
Present Savings, And Why
People Who Bought The
Financial Cos.' Retirement
Securities Are Getting A
Pittance Of The Income
They Expected.
It’s Obvious The Democratic
Leadership Lacks Any Sense Of
Mission As To Medicare Too, So,
This Is A Law Shafting Anyone
The Cartel Can’t Make An Easy
High Profit Off Of.
Part Of What’s Supposed To Make
It Work, Even With The Near 21%
Of GNP Thing, Is Doctor Practice
Control (Monopoly Is Market Control,
And That’s Control Freak In The
Market, So That’s Doctors Controlled
By Control Freaks. I’m Sure
They Think Someone’s Nuts.)
Effectiveness Rules Is Not If-Then
PracticeEfficiency. It Also Reflects
A Naivete As To The Merging Of
Science And Monopoly Economics.
I Don’t Think That Path Just As
Intended Is Necessary. It ‘Aint
The Law Of The Land As Is The
Case Of ObamaCare, As Boehner
Adamantly Declared, But I’ve
Alternate Ideas In This Space.
It’s Obviously Worse For Me, Doc,
What With Myself And Better Half
Being Pre-Medicare. The Cartel
Wants Us Profit-Pushed-Off.
My Situation Is Possibly Less
Precarious Than Some
Others'. There Is A Large
HMO Also Wanting Patients,
But I'd Have To Change
Doctors, One Of Whom
Happened To Write 2
Textbooks In His Field.
More Of What You See
Is What You Get.
(Link Repaired)
I Think That Linked UCLA
Study Is Important As
The Program Is Essentially
Voluntarily (Self-)
Regulated.
More On Being Underwhelmed.
-----
-----
If Someone Told Me The Koch'es
Wrote This Law I'd Feel I Could
Believe It. It's Obvious The
Jawboning About Public Optioni
And Single Payer Was Some
Kind Of Charade.
I Like This, So I'm Letting
Myself Have It In Two Places:
I Created A Logical Extreme
In Banking: Imagine The
TBTF Banks Dwindled To
One TBTF Bank Until The
Fed Was Simply Giving That
Bank Vast Free Reserves
And Overpaying For Its Assets.
Imagine The Dominant Health
Insurers Dwindled To One
Player. Then, ObamaCare Is
Their Health Insurance Policy,
And, Of Course, It's Pretty
Obfuscating. The Reason Is
The Same As With Any Other
Health Insurance Policy.
It's Going To Be Whatever
They Construct, And In
A Competition Vacuum.
The Part About This
Monopoly With Its
Thoroughly Prescribed
Profit Margins And With
The Entire Nation Now
Structured To Enable That,
But With The Affordability
Pressure Cap On Medicare
Now Widened, That's Most
Striking, More So Than The
Lack Of Anything Keeping
The Program From Quickly
Taking Us To Just Under
21% Of GNP On Healthcare,
Which Fact Reflects Its
Lack Of Cost Containment,
With Substantial Numbers
Expected To Still Not Be
Covered, Is The Single
Exception To That.
It's Not A National HMO.
It's Not A Systems Of HMO's.
It's Not Fee For Service
With Meaningful
Rationalization. For Most
Cost Containment Is
Thumb On Doctor.
So, Let Me Think On This
Some More.
Effectiveness Rules On
The One Hand, But Cost
Plus Actually Encourages
Unnecessary Tests On
The Other?
Every Here And There Is
A Doctor Connecting A
Patient With New Science.
This Is Not Conducive To
That Except Insofar As
Someone Else One Way
Or Another Subsidizes That
Process With Insurers
Nowhere To Be Seen.
My Father Was An "AOA"
Physician Whose Years
Were Probably Shortened
A Little From Excessive
Personal Investment In
His Patients.
ObamaCare Retains The
Environment Of Hostility
Toward People Like That.
Ending Immunity From
Anti-Trust And Simply Slicing
The Major Insurers Into
Smaller Parts Would
Immediately Change That,
And Then The Patient
Protection Provisions Of
ObamaCare, Minus The
Monopoly Affordability
Ones, Which Really Set
Profit Levels, Would Actually
Be Very Useful.
But Medical Care Is Different.
You Can Do Much With
Supply Incentives, But In
The End Accidents And Germs
Could Care Less About
Demand Elasticities.
So Especially If One Regards
Health Maintenance Something
Affordable On A Universal
Basis Once One Ditches The
Inefficiency Of Monopoly, Just
As Is The Case With Wholesome
Food, Air And Water, Then The
Market Progressive Such As
Myself And The Proponent Of
Califiornia OneCare Are Really
Headed Toward A Very
Similar Place.
Something Like The "Public
Option," Of Course, Would
Have Been The Exact
Opposite Of Squeezing
Medicare, Even If It Is
National Health Insurance
For Customers The
Insurers Don't Want.
They Get Risk Adjustments
Back In Their Favor For
Taking Them Back.
They Get A Once-Favorably-
Separated Out Audience
To Then Bid On For
Patient Management.
And Then It's Actually
From Them, Doing That,
From Whom You Actually
Here Talk Of Pulling The
Plug.
And, I'm Beginning To
Be Of The View That The
High Risk Exchanges
Will Just Be Part Of
That Same Process.
The Events That
Run Parallel To NBC's
Merger With Comcast
And Your Typically
Having A Choice Of
ATT Or Time Warner
(Throw In Satellite And
I Happen To Have Another--
Cox.) And I Wouldn't Get
My Hopes Of Cord-Cutting
Too High Considering
Who Owns The Pipes.
Here's Jane Hamsher,
Firedoglake, As
To Google. Here's A
Partial Alternate, But It
Will Be Difficult Carving
Out An Un-Part-Controlled
Existence.
The Place For Monopoly And
Large Profit Margins And
Disregard For Informed
Clinical Efficiency That Also
Would Make Life Better For
Patients Is, Ummm, Let Me
Think: Gaming Software Is
One Such Place. There're
Many Like That.
More Comparisons
In Monopoly
Newest Substantiation
Build A Superstructure On Top
Of A Monopoly And It Really Does
Become A Monument To Monopoly
Forever.
Bonds Repaid By Tolls Perpetuating
Just-Roads Forecloses Mixing In
Mass Transit.
This Is Highways Self-Fulfilling Over
People’s Lives, Dictating Lives.
This Is Highway People As
Control Freaks.
-----
Because It Matters So
Essentially As To
Healthcare,
Some Current Consequences
(One Key Location As To
Consequences Per Se, Otherwise
All Over The Place In This
Website,) Of Extractive Monopoly,
Not Anti-Control And Pro-Human
Capital Policy
Any Government Program
Aimed At Improving Consumer
Access To The Services Of A
Given Sector, IF THAT SECTOR
IS OLIGOPOLISTIC OR THE
OBJECT OF MARKET CONTROLS
BY A FEW, Then The Prime
Beneficiaries Of That Program
Will Be The Oligopolists, And
The Government Program
Will Be Destined To Look
Inefficient, Though It Will
Have Been The Wrongful
State Of The Sector That
Would In Fact Be Responsible
For The Inefficiency.
Pre-Textual Program Failure,
Though, Is Where Program
Designers Lacking A Sense
Of Mission, Or Worse, Working
For Ulterior Aims, Slip In
Self-Destruct Mechanisms.
Not Long After the anti-trust laws
(Health Cartel Exempt)
Restored Fairness To
The Treatment Of Pricing And The
Treatment Of Risk The Development
Of An Architecture Of Living Based
On The Elimination Of Trolleys And
Busses Set A Pattern Of Over-Reliance
On Cars, Oil, And Even
Particularly Imported Oil.
Although The Concept Of Organizational
Behavior Is Generally Applied To
Organizational Settings,
I See Nothing Stopping It
From Being Applied To An
Economy As Organization.
Our Economic “Processes” Have
Ever Consistently, Likewise, Been
Structured On A Manner Of Market
Control.
In Some Sectors It’s Preposterously
Obvious. There Will Always Be
Counter Examples, And “Cord-Cutting”
Is A Common Term Today, But
The Choice Of One Cable Provider
Or Just Another May Be The Most
Obvious Example.
No One Really Calls Themselves
An Anarchist And Intensely Few
A Socialist, But Many Think A Lot
Of People Are Confusing Capitalist
With Monopoly, And Surely Some
Of Those Few Calling Themselves
Socialist Have Simply Failed To
Distinguish Monopoly From Free
Enterprise As Well.
Where This Has A
Controlling Influence,
Then, If Mr. Goldstein
Might Feel Compelled To
Commit Suicide Still, Then
It Would Still Be
Death By Control Freak.
The Salt Mines Defined
Colony For Ghandi Because
The Production Of Goods
And Services Was Controlled.
In Earlier South Africa, It
Was A Segregated Colony-
Like Relation. In The Early
American South, It Was
Sharecropping On Plantations.
Where Most Major Sectors
Are Monopolistic, And Where
Unions Are Toothless,
Control Reappears, Whether
Worker Or Consumer.
The Analogies Perceived By
Insurance Agents In The
Field May Be More Or Less
Sketchy Than This, But
Surely Many Sense This,
Much As Probably Most
Mortgage Brokers Must Have
Sensed They Were Being
Told, I'd Guess, To Sell To
Unqualified Borrowers As The
Paper Was Going To Be
Securitized And Sold.
The Point That Goes Missed
Too Often At This Stage Is:
Most People Don't Commit
Suicide To Avoid
Inconveniencing Their
Daughters. Whatever's
Not Collected By The
Executor On Default
Judgement, Even After A
Family's Medical
Bankruptcy, Is, And Always
Has Been, "Cost-Shifted"
To Everyone Else By Way
Of Their Premiums, But The
Carrier's Risk Was A Pre-
Defined Large Profit-Maker
Regardless.
Here's Plain 'Ole Taking
Advantage Of The
Vulnerable--Just Like
Any Control Freak
Might Do.
I Don’t Think “Just Go Away”
Deductibles, What Most Readers
Are Increasingly Experiencing,
Bear Any Relation To These Ends.
I Don’t Think This
Meets Those Objectives, And
If They Come Close, I Think
They Leave Much Rationalization
Fallen Off On the Dustry Trail.
However, I Agree They’re
An Improvement From This.
Persons When Marginalized, Then
Made Feed For Lawyers Collecting
From And Bankrupting Patients'
Families, As May Be The Case
With Rahm Emmanuel
Acquaintances,
What's Not Collected Is Built
Into Everyone Else's Premiums,
The Insurer Not Caring, Its
Own Risk Pre-Defined And Limited
And I'd Say Protected And Subsidized
By The High Risk Exchanges, And With
The Rea-ea-lly Unwanted Patients In
Medicare, Which Is National Health
Insurance For Unwanted Patients.
I'd Like Seeing Rectification Of
Double-Benefiting, Or What I'd Call
"Game Once, Game Twice."
Once: The Government Takes On
The Higher Risks. Twice, When The
Cartel Helps With That End, It
Gets A Risk Adjustment Payment
Running In ITS Favor.
Presumably The Mountains
Of Patchwork Layered On Top Of A
Foundation Of Monopoly Make
Systemic Reform Impossible,
Short Of Something Like California
OneCare. Whether Or Not That May
Be A Pipe Dream I Wouldn't
Want To Pour Cold
Water On The Idea.
Simply Instituting A Superstructure
Of Risk Fairness System-Wide
Seems, To Me At Least, Nonetheless
Being NOT A Difficult Thing To Appy.
Only The Will Might Be Lacking.
The Same Process Required
Worldwide As To Rectifying Control
Systems That Have Been In Place
As To Energy And Transportation--
Namely A CO2 Same Or
Higher Production
Debiting/Lower Production
Crediting Mechanism
(Spec. Drawing Rights--)
Can Easily Be Applied Across
The Patchwork.
Much Of What The Cartel Has
Accomplished For Its Own Purposes
Would Be Of Enduring
Value Even With Rationalization And
Fairness And True Capitalism In Place Of
Monopolistic Control.
“Longitudinal” Case Management
A Positive Role.
I'm Only Interested In Stopping
Insurance Agents From Outright
Interfering In The Doctor's
Patient Management.
Reminder:
Will The Real Adam Smith
Please Stand Up.
Those Propounding
Ideology Based On Ayn
Rand's Characterization
Of Adam Smith Are Basing
It On A Falsehood.
works with this,
this
TIER PALACE OR
PRACTITIONER'S
(AND PATIENT'S)
ULTIMATE MINEFIELD?
Expectations For Physicians To
Play The Financial Safety Valve
Combining With An Ostensibly
Rationalized Subsidized Segment,
But Which Segment I Think Will
Prove Operationally More
Monopolistic Than Is Expected By
Many, Combine To Distinctly
Raise The Spector Of "Tiering,"
(Service Classing.)
As The Exchanges Are Just Now
Forming The Nature Of Patient
Behavior In Terms Of Actually
Paying, In Comparison To The
Following, Is Yet Uncertain, With
Tiering Expected By Myself Seeming
Highly Prospective If History In
Medicaid And Medicare Are
Any Indication.
Note, Here, Full Payment, Centrally,
With Uniform Benefit Packages,
In This Model, With Choice Of
Provider Preserved. My Own
Ideas Go Far More Multi-Form,
Including Preserving A Sector-
Informed Market Role.
High Deductibles Implies,
Notwithstanding the "Affordability"
Rhetoric, Subtantial Defaulting Will
Continue. Whoever Thinks
The Medical Collection Business
Is About To Go Away Because Of
This Law Is Being Foolish.
An Ambulance Ride's In The High
$100's, With More For Resusitative
Efforts. A Helipcopter Ride's
Typically Near $15,000. Those
Prices, Combined With The Service
Coming To The Patient, Rather
Than The Patient Coming To The
Service, Has Meant There Being
A High No-Pay Rate, And In
Fairness, Contractors Have Had
Spates Of Poor Financial
Performance.
Just The Same, It's Common For
People To Insistently Decline
Service, Even In The Presence
Of Suspicion Of Pernicious Injury Or
Debility, And Hence The Fear Of
Claim For "Abandonment."
All That's Nuts, Of Course. The
Opposite Should Be The Case, With
Patients Welcoming Help, Not
Seeing $$$'s.
Even If/When A Policy Is
Accomodative, Most People Are
Pretty Near Clueless As To
Per Item Coverage.
We Know Cost Shifting In The
Traditional Sense, Not Something
Now Captured By The Carriers
With Subsidy, Will Still Exist.
This Will Actually Leave Plenty
Adara Scarlet Situations.
But What Of A "New Wrinkle"
In Cost Shifting IN High Risk
Exchanges?
I Think Yes It Exists For At
Least 2 Reasons:
So Long As The CPI's Not
Accurate, Neither Are
Affordability Assumptions;
Also, Financial Support For The
Exchanges Is Not Such So As
To Preclude It.
Subsidy Is Also Based On The
Employee Sans Family Cost Of
Coverage.
Also, The Tax Credit Mechanism
For Subsidy Amount Determination
Is Based On A New Invention:
Modified Adjusted Gross Income
(MAGI,) Which Will Matter To
Far More Persons Than Simply Those
Typically Seen As Financially
Disadvantaged, Because Pricing,
With A Cartel's Profit Regimen
Fixed By Statute, Will Reflect Rising
Risk, With Subsidy Thus Based On
The Patient's Family Thus Reduced
To Need. The Structure Of The
Brokerage Defines, Along With Pricing
Based On Ability To Pay, Defines The
Difference Between Not-Really-
Progressive Monopolistic Structure Vs.
A Progressive One, The Simple
Progressive Intentions Barely Cover All
That Can Be Done To Make Health Care
More Simultaneously Rational In A
Clinical Sense And Efficient (Done
Right, The Two Would Work
Hand In Hand.)
A New Data Services Hub Will Retain
Income Information And Proof Of
Citizenship For Eligibility.
To Me It's Not-Really Progressive
But Also A New Control Mechanism.
My Own Dual Minimum Wage Idea
As To Undocumented Workers
Proposes Issuing Public Health Cards
For Health Access But On A Basis
Of Information Privilege Per
Court Evidence Rule.
Number-Only Identifiers Could
Make That Unnecessary, But
Providers Would Need Privileged
Communication Protection. My
Dual Minimum Wage Plan Includes
Means For Defraying Care
Providers' Costs.
It's Protective Of U.S. Citizen
Workers, Likely Reinforces
Unions As Much As Doing
Otherwise, While Treating Those
Voluntarily Hired Reasonably,
Better Than They're Treated Now,
And, Compassionately.
I Nowhere Imply There's No Need
For Borders, But The Control
Mechanisms In ObamaCare Applying
To Them Take Oversized
Advantage Of Their Vulnerability,
Can Morph Into More Control
Of You Than Is Necessary, And Lives
Alongside Subsidy Eligibility Workers'
Poorly Defined Manner Of Study Of
Your Finances, Which Is Obviously
Intrusive Of A Vast Part Of The
Population, In View Of The
Inevitable Escalation Of Need By
Virtue Of The Cartel, And Where
An Eligibility Analyst's Rather
Chancy Collection Of Data And
Decision-Making Can Mean The
Difference Between Life Or Death
For A Loved One.
In Other Words, This Is An Area
Where What Goes Around Comes
Around. The Control Mechanisms
Serve Those Most Benefiting--
The Cartel.
I Don't Like The Health Sector Being
Used To As De Facto Border Patrol
Toward Persons Who Need Care.
SEE
This Is Related, Though The Realities
As To The UNdocumented Workers,
The Utility Of A Public Health Umbrella
Applied In A Non-Intrustive, Essentially
Don't Ask/Don't Tell (By Proposed
Court Process) Manner, Beg The
Need For A Better Approach, Which
Would Be Very Different From The
Current Combination Of The Present
Official Immigration Proposal And
The Very Assertive Approach Under
ObamaCare As To Presenting
One's Documentation. Much
Evidence Supports Undocumented
Workers' Essential Contribution To
Farm Production Particularly (Food
Shortages Are Specifically
Documented In Their Absence,)
But To Employers And Their Ability
To Pay Taxes, To Hire Citizens,
And To Enable Their Employees To
Accrue "Entitlement" Benefits
(They're "Entitlements" Cause
They're Earned.) It Makes No
Sense To Say We Need You But
We Like Treating You Like
Scapegoated Pooches
On Leashes. The Border Patrol
Can Do Its Own Job, But
Compassionately. Most These
People Are Just Tring To Feed
Their Families.
As No Special Pretense For Division
Exists Between What Should Be
Normal, And Thus Good Neighbors,
This Should Be An Area Of
Rationalization Undertaken Calmly
As A Matter Of Course.
Actually, I Oppose Militarization In
Our Schools (And Any Control Freak
Atmosphere) In Concert With That
Opposition To Turning The Health
Sector Into An Arm Of The
Border Patrol. (This Is Healthcare.)
More On Affordability:
Because Deductibles And Co-Pays
Are Not Included In The Premium
Cost Percentage Of Income, In
Determining Eligibility For Subsidy,
To call This A Cartel's Shakedown
Doesn't Fully Describe It.
Financial Death March Is Better.
I Consider Myself A Reformer.
A Purist For Universal Best
Simultaneous Universal Patient
Satisfaction-Comfort-Assurance/
Science And Actual Practice-
Based Efficiency That Is
Yes-Really-Progressive.
To Me ObamaCare Is
Not-Really-Progressive.
The Industry Used Its Own
Abuses As A Pretense For
Change, Combined With The
Story That Obama Wanted
To Institute A Progressive
Plan.
Whereas Cost Shifting Used To
Mean Unpaid Hospital Bills Were Built
Into Paying Customers' Premiums, The
Carriers Not Caring Cause Of Pre-
Determined Risk And Margins
Above And Beyond The Cost Shifting,
Its Logical Greater Likelihood In
The High Risk Exchanges Generally
Implies, Group Contracts Aside,
Lower Provider Cost--
And Less Hassle/Greater
Provider Margins Outside
The High Risk Exchange.
So I'm Yet More Concerned That
The Persons With The Just Go
Away Deductible Destined For
The High Risk Exchange
Are Also Destined To Be Less Well
Situated In A More Tiered System.
Eliminating The Immunity From The
Anti-Trust Laws And Treating The Risk
Fairly Population-Wide Should Minimize,
If Not Nearly Eliminate, Most Tiering.
The Only Sort Of Exception Then Would
Be The Ultra Wealthy Woman or Man
Hiring the Nobel Laureate Who Really
Does Not Belong To PPO's, If Only Cause
She's Really In The Research Lab Half
The Time.
Until 2014 One Has To Go Naked
For 6 Months Before Being
Eligible For A High Risk Exchange.
(A Would-Be Progressive
Program With A Life And
Death Gauntlet. What
Will They Think Of Next?)
So That Option's Potentially
Useless For Some. Typical Of
How Market Control Creates
Casino Economy Moments For
Others, One Has To Gamble:
Exclusion Till 2014?
Naked For 6 Months?
(They Keep Their Clothes On.)
The Industry Self-Regulates,
Except For State By State
"External" Review.
Partial Community Rating Is Not
Exciting To Me Cause Carriers Can
Vary What You Get Drastically.
Cost Control Based On Arbitrary
Effectiveness Standards Is
Uncompelling And Worse
Than Unconvincing When
In Fact Health Care Is
Projected To Cost Over 20%
Of GNP By 2019, That Being
20% Of The GNP Passing
Through One Oligopoly.
The Out-Of-Pocket Expense
Limit Remains High.
And I'm A "Market Progressive."
I'd Campaign For RFK If Here
Were Alive Today But I'm Happy
With Markets Functioning Without
The Control Of Monopoly,
Just As He Would Have Been,
Of Course.
Doctors Have Begun Devising
More Clinically Efficient
Patient Management Channels,
And Large HMO's Undoubtedly
Have A Leg Up On This,
But ObamaCare Only Mandates
A Research Function And Creates
No Such Rationalization Outside
The High Risk Exchanges,
Which Are Underfunded.
After All, This Is Everyone
Funneled Through A Few
Providers, Higher Risk And Thus
Needier People Handed Over,
But Really In The End Fending
For Themselves With Those
In Medicare And On Social
Security.
The Items Excluded From
Deductions Include Assorted
Tests But Count Little To Me
As They Fail With This:
If I Should Have An Ambiguous
Thing On My Skin, I'm Still
Disincentivized To Have It
Checked. If A Family Member
Has A Possible Broken Toe, Or,
What's Worse, The Family
Member Probably DOES Have
A Broken Toe But It's Only
Maybe Serious, Some Will
Still Be Financially Scared And
Shy Away From Fixing It.
Very Worrisome Red Zone
In Your Eye But 3 Weeks
To Go Till Your Massive
Deductible Re-Sets?
Case Managers Controlling
Physician Patient Management
Is By Common Sense
Preferably Avoided And
Conceptually Easily Avoidable.
Immunity From The Anti-Trust
Laws Is Preposterous.
I'd Rather See A Lavish Doctor-
Insurer Market With Patient Per
Challenge Level Outcomes And
Cost And Insurer Practices Visible To
All, But With Open-Source Coding.
But The Competition Between
Insurers And The Market
Between Doctors And Insurers
Requires A Unique Flavor.
All That Competition Can Still
Exist With Physician-Community
And Citizens' Representatives'
Participation. The Competition
Can Still Exist With A Clause In
The Carriers' Charters
Requiring Cooperation With
New Community Chief Medical
Officer-Recommended
Effectiveness Standards.
As I Suggested Earlier, Insurers
In Actual Competition And
Physicians Can Assess What
Practice Areas Can Take On
Special Reimbursement
Limitations Across The Board.
At That Point Some Test Or
Procedure Will Finally Have
To Prove Itself, But The
People In Practice Decide.
I Agree With Wendell Potter And
The Predominant View That
Obamacare Is An Improvement
Over What Was Essentially A Shell
Game, But It Essentially Anoints
A New Utility Sector, Comparable
To TBTF Banks In That Sense,
Whose Cost Brake Mechanism Is
Problematic And Compensates For
The Fact Of Monopolistic Structure
Absent Health Maintenance
Benefit.
As I Would Not Expect Anyone
To Gladly Go Naked So As To
Get Into A High Risk Exchange,
It's Worrisome Comtemplating The
Policy Choices The Carriers Will
Create Given That They Are An
Oligopoly, And Effectiveness Rules
Will Undoubtedly Not Eliminate
Much Of The Large Case Management
Cost On The Insurers' Part.
If I Were A Leader Of One
Of The Existing Dominant
Health Insurers, I Would've
All Along Welcomed ObamaCare
For The Universality Of Sustaining
A Struggling Clientele And
Picking Up After Those Who
Couldn't Afford To Keep Up.
Part Of What Would Have
Made/Does Make It Hard For
Them To Keep Up Is Their
Rating, Even If Per "Partial
Community" Rating. So
While It Looks At First Blush
Primarily Like Supporting
People In Need, Its'
Really Back To Risk Gamed.
As The Man Said, Pretty
Much Any Program Conforming
To Oligopoly Will Primarily
Benefit The Oligopolists.
I Created A Logical Extreme
In Banking: Imagine The
TBTF Banks Dwindled To
One TBTF Bank Until The
Fed Was Simply Giving That
Bank Vast Free Reserves
And Overpaying For Its Assets.
Imagine The Dominant Health
Insurers Dwindled To One
Player. Then, ObamaCare Is
Their Health Insurance Policy,
And, Of Course, It's Pretty
Obfuscating. The Reason Is
The Same As With Any Other
Health Insurance Policy.
It's Going To Be Whatever
They Construct, And In
A Competition Vacuum.
Opting For Cheaper Tier
Policies Gives The Carrier
A Higher Profit Margin.
Bronze Is A 60% Medical
Loss Ratio. That's 40%
Profit Over Medical Cost.
The Stipulated Profit Rates
Derive From Everyone In
The Nation Who's Good
For It.
Pricing Limitations In
The More Expensive
Though Partially
Community Rated Groups
Is Partly A Function Of
Pricing For Low Risk
People, And The Latter
Will Be The Group With
The 60% Medical Loss Ratio
(Very Large Profit Margin.)
I Wouldn't Know If The U.S.
Economy Is Viable In A
Competitive Sense With
Health Care At Over 20%
Of GNP Any More Than I
Can Know If / When Non-
Americans Start Pushing Up
Rates On U.S. Debt If The
Fed Will Keep Marking Up
Free Reserves At The TBTF
Banks, Or If It Will Be
Financially Sound In Its
Own Right Without Then
Printing Lots Of Money
For 6 Months Before Being
Eligible For A High Risk Exchange.
(A Would-Be Progressive
Program With A Life And
Death Gauntlet. What
Will They Think Of Next?)
So That Option's Potentially
Useless For Some. Typical Of
How Market Control Creates
Casino Economy Moments For
Others, One Has To Gamble:
Exclusion Till 2014?
Naked For 6 Months?
(They Keep Their Clothes On.)
The Industry Self-Regulates,
Except For State By State
"External" Review.
Partial Community Rating Is Not
Exciting To Me Cause Carriers Can
Vary What You Get Drastically.
Cost Control Based On Arbitrary
Effectiveness Standards Is
Uncompelling And Worse
Than Unconvincing When
In Fact Health Care Is
Projected To Cost Over 20%
Of GNP By 2019, That Being
20% Of The GNP Passing
Through One Oligopoly.
The Out-Of-Pocket Expense
Limit Remains High.
And I'm A "Market Progressive."
I'd Campaign For RFK If Here
Were Alive Today But I'm Happy
With Markets Functioning Without
The Control Of Monopoly,
Just As He Would Have Been,
Of Course.
Doctors Have Begun Devising
More Clinically Efficient
Patient Management Channels,
And Large HMO's Undoubtedly
Have A Leg Up On This,
But ObamaCare Only Mandates
A Research Function And Creates
No Such Rationalization Outside
The High Risk Exchanges,
Which Are Underfunded.
After All, This Is Everyone
Funneled Through A Few
Providers, Higher Risk And Thus
Needier People Handed Over,
But Really In The End Fending
For Themselves With Those
In Medicare And On Social
Security.
The Items Excluded From
Deductions Include Assorted
Tests But Count Little To Me
As They Fail With This:
If I Should Have An Ambiguous
Thing On My Skin, I'm Still
Disincentivized To Have It
Checked. If A Family Member
Has A Possible Broken Toe, Or,
What's Worse, The Family
Member Probably DOES Have
A Broken Toe But It's Only
Maybe Serious, Some Will
Still Be Financially Scared And
Shy Away From Fixing It.
Very Worrisome Red Zone
In Your Eye But 3 Weeks
To Go Till Your Massive
Deductible Re-Sets?
Case Managers Controlling
Physician Patient Management
Is By Common Sense
Preferably Avoided And
Conceptually Easily Avoidable.
Immunity From The Anti-Trust
Laws Is Preposterous.
I'd Rather See A Lavish Doctor-
Insurer Market With Patient Per
Challenge Level Outcomes And
Cost And Insurer Practices Visible To
All, But With Open-Source Coding.
But The Competition Between
Insurers And The Market
Between Doctors And Insurers
Requires A Unique Flavor.
All That Competition Can Still
Exist With Physician-Community
And Citizens' Representatives'
Participation. The Competition
Can Still Exist With A Clause In
The Carriers' Charters
Requiring Cooperation With
New Community Chief Medical
Officer-Recommended
Effectiveness Standards.
As I Suggested Earlier, Insurers
In Actual Competition And
Physicians Can Assess What
Practice Areas Can Take On
Special Reimbursement
Limitations Across The Board.
At That Point Some Test Or
Procedure Will Finally Have
To Prove Itself, But The
People In Practice Decide.
I Agree With Wendell Potter And
The Predominant View That
Obamacare Is An Improvement
Over What Was Essentially A Shell
Game, But It Essentially Anoints
A New Utility Sector, Comparable
To TBTF Banks In That Sense,
Whose Cost Brake Mechanism Is
Problematic And Compensates For
The Fact Of Monopolistic Structure
Absent Health Maintenance
Benefit.
As I Would Not Expect Anyone
To Gladly Go Naked So As To
Get Into A High Risk Exchange,
It's Worrisome Comtemplating The
Policy Choices The Carriers Will
Create Given That They Are An
Oligopoly, And Effectiveness Rules
Will Undoubtedly Not Eliminate
Much Of The Large Case Management
Cost On The Insurers' Part.
If I Were A Leader Of One
Of The Existing Dominant
Health Insurers, I Would've
All Along Welcomed ObamaCare
For The Universality Of Sustaining
A Struggling Clientele And
Picking Up After Those Who
Couldn't Afford To Keep Up.
Part Of What Would Have
Made/Does Make It Hard For
Them To Keep Up Is Their
Rating, Even If Per "Partial
Community" Rating. So
While It Looks At First Blush
Primarily Like Supporting
People In Need, Its'
Really Back To Risk Gamed.
As The Man Said, Pretty
Much Any Program Conforming
To Oligopoly Will Primarily
Benefit The Oligopolists.
I Created A Logical Extreme
In Banking: Imagine The
TBTF Banks Dwindled To
One TBTF Bank Until The
Fed Was Simply Giving That
Bank Vast Free Reserves
And Overpaying For Its Assets.
Imagine The Dominant Health
Insurers Dwindled To One
Player. Then, ObamaCare Is
Their Health Insurance Policy,
And, Of Course, It's Pretty
Obfuscating. The Reason Is
The Same As With Any Other
Health Insurance Policy.
It's Going To Be Whatever
They Construct, And In
A Competition Vacuum.
Opting For Cheaper Tier
Policies Gives The Carrier
A Higher Profit Margin.
Bronze Is A 60% Medical
Loss Ratio. That's 40%
Profit Over Medical Cost.
The Stipulated Profit Rates
Derive From Everyone In
The Nation Who's Good
For It.
Pricing Limitations In
The More Expensive
Though Partially
Community Rated Groups
Is Partly A Function Of
Pricing For Low Risk
People, And The Latter
Will Be The Group With
The 60% Medical Loss Ratio
(Very Large Profit Margin.)
I Wouldn't Know If The U.S.
Economy Is Viable In A
Competitive Sense With
Health Care At Over 20%
Of GNP Any More Than I
Can Know If / When Non-
Americans Start Pushing Up
Rates On U.S. Debt If The
Fed Will Keep Marking Up
Free Reserves At The TBTF
Banks, Or If It Will Be
Financially Sound In Its
Own Right Without Then
Printing Lots Of Money
Updating/In Process
Elimination Of Duplication
If Monopoly Part Endures,
Price/Risk Subsidized
Plus D'Où Ca Vient.
Of Course, Absent More
Rational Structure And A Non-
Monopolistic Environment,
Each Element Is Easily
Gamed And Subject To
"Regulatory Capture."
------
------
Because Of The Mandate Being
Upheld On Tax-Status Grounds
I See The Health Sector,
With The TBTF Banks, Beginning
To Resemble De Facto Utility
Sectors. Privileged.
Actually, In View Of Health
Care's Portion Of The GNP,
And The Fact Of Oligopoly,
And The Fact ObamaCare
Marshalls A Nation In
Support Of That Oligopoly,
Including Universality And
The Begrudging Financial
Support Of Those Who
Otherwise Couldn't Afford
To Participate And/Or
Would Be Discarded By
That Oligopoly, It's My
Perspective That The Court
Essentially Literally Did
Uphold A Monopoly's Tax.
When Monetary Policy
Serves TBTF Banks, That's
Rather Consistent, The
Currency Itself Being
Monopolized, And Where
Allowed To Persist, A
Nation's Diet Can Consist
In Large Part Of Monopolistic
GMO-Insecticide-
High-Fructose-Corn Syrup
Seeds And Cow Feed.
Add It All Up, And That's
A Rather Monopoly-
Dominated Looking
Economy.
Banking Parallel
The Give To Support The Cartel
Is On the Patient Side But Also The
Doctor Side. Yes The Carriers Are
Incentivized A La A Percentage
Above Volume, But There's
Just Enough Of Them, And The
Demand, Let Alone The Need,
Is Just So Able To Play Along,
That The Give Will Also Remain
On The Control Of Doctors
Side.
I Think What Doctors Will
Mainly Feel Is The Just Go
Away Deductibles.
A Comparison Of Effect Per
Different Architectures Is
Started Here.
A SPACE RECEIVING SOME
BASICS AS I SEE THEM
This Space Is Among Those
As To Services Delivery, But
There Are Consistent Themes
Running Across Economic
Relationships
The Bungee Jumping
Business Example Starts Here
But Makes More Sense With
The Following, Because I
Think Market Efficiency Can
Not Only Afford Progressive
Influence But Can Be Enhanced
By It.
PAYING MORE FOR LESS:
-----
-----
VISIBLE AFTER PEELING
BACK A THIN VEIL
With The Nature Of ObamaCare
Being Better Understood Over
Time, I'm Going To Re-Work This
Space In A Manner Starting With
History's Earliest, Fairest, Best
(Most Mathematically Exacting,
But The Also Most Efficient From
The Standpoint Of Economic
Feedback) Treatment Of Risk.
Such Things As Externalities
(Someone Gaining From Others,
Often By Happenstance, From
Policy) Will Generally Be Not Very
Offensive In Terms Of Fairness And
Efficiency, But Now We're Potentially
Seeing The Attempted Ownership
Of Chance Pretty Much As In
Parallel With The Attempted
Ownership Of Sustenance.
Basically, This Will Be Going Back
To The Poker Table, Though This
Game Will Have Slightly Different
Attributes From This One.
The Unraveling Of A Poker Game
(Working On Better Links)
By Famous Mathemeticians
Depicts Efficiency/Effectiveness
And Fairness Maximally.
To Compare That With The General
Economy, Even Absent The
Oligopolies, Monopolies, Control
Of Regulators, Risk Filtering, Etc.,
Would In Itself Be Of Limited
Meaning Because In The General
Economy One Can Still Compete
In Terms Of Being A Better
Guesser About The Future.
Perhaps Theoretically The Future
Can Be Calculated, As The
Casino Operator Calculates How
It Will Be He/She Must Come Out
The Winner In The Long Run.
EXCEPT IN MEDICAL CARE.
That's Because We Know We're
All Going To Have Health Issues
Ultimately. We Even Know, On
Average, What Types, And When.
So, The Question Is, No Longer
Worrying About The Famous
Mathematicians' Disinterest In
Guessing The Future Financially,
Is Health Care Just A Matter Of
Efficiency/Effectiveness/Fairness
Based On A Poker Game Comparison
Fully?
Actually, Even Then Medical Care
Is Less Chancy.
Accidents And Pathogens Do Not
Respond To Medical Care Pricing.
Medical Care Is Sought By Way
Of Demand And/Or Need, Its
Basis Bearing No Relation To
"Price Elasticity." Yes There's
Tinkering With Deductibles And
Co-Pays, And Some Publish
As To Patient Provider-Shopping
(Looks Dubious Currently, And,
It's Intrinsically Tier-Inclined,
Which I Feel Is Unnecessary
Even While Talent Is Rewarded,)
But Early Attention Is The
Greater Issue As To The Former,
And The Latter Can Not Be
Realistically Very Significant;
Though, I Think Provider-Carrier
Mutual Shopping IS Very
Important. A Society Has
To Decide Access Yes/No.
Cost Shifting Has Decided For Us:
Yes. Except Where Family
Leaders Decline The Financial Fall.
The Fun Is Capturing The Cash
Flows Helping The People Such
As In Adara's - Story
(Not Independently Verified)
In A System
That Is Efficient/Effective/Fair
Overall.
ObamaCare Finances It Subject
To Self-Diminishing Financial
Pressure Valves In A Manner
Wherein As People's Risk For
Health Attention Increases They
Will Pay Higher Premiums At
Very Enviable Profit Rates Until
Those Premiums Represent A
Percentage Of Income Qualifying
Them For Subsidy.
Healthy Young People Will Go For
Simpler, Cheaper Policies That
Pay As Much As 40% Operational
Profit. The Carriers Are
Statutorily Immune From Anti-Trust.
Everyone Has Imposed A Regime
With Those Margins,
Those Companies.
The Mathematicians' Zeal For
Fairness CAN Be Somewhat
Duplicated, With Far Greater
Efficiency And Effectivness, With
Effectiveness Including Outcomes,
Patient Satisfaction, Patient
Assurance-Comfort-Happiness,
System Seamlessness With
Public Health, Etc., By
Re-Working The Treatment Of
Risk On The SUPPLY Side And
Flavoring To Suit The Nature Of
Medical Care.
A Little Duplication Will Happen
As I Consolidate This.:
pdf -C2-
So Health's Just One
Of These Four Sectors.
Exquisitely Satisfied:
-1- -2-
Tracing Out Choices Based On
Measures Of Control Or Risk
Fairness Can Be Compared With
Such Things As Charts Of The
Measure Of Civic Burden So As
To Provide Pictures Of Human
Relations And Their Economic
Consequences At Any Level
Imaginable. The Latter Measure
Is Arrived At Most Simply, With
An Obvious Parallel In Health Care,
Which Actually States The Obvious:
Having To Pay More To Get Less.
The Parallels Go Beyond
Monopoly And Risk Filtering.
Think: Mortgage Mod's Ostensibly
For Mortgagors But Really
Taxpayers And Especially Those
Who Sold The Mortgage Bubble,
Or Who Dutifully Saved For
Retirement, Buying Back The
Bubble They Just Sold Of Else
Simply Footing The Cost Of
The Bubble For The Banks.
That's A Government Program
Ostensibly Serving One Purpose
But Really Serving Control.
The Patient Receiving Medicare
Disability Coverage Might Discover
They Thrive With Physical Therapy,
And Survive But Languish With
Drugs, But If They Exhaust Their
Physical Therapy Allowance
Several Months Before The End
Of The Calendar Year, That
Patient Will Not Be The Beneficiary
Of Medicare Disability Coverage.
The Drug Company Will Be.
This Is Paying More
To Get Less
Demand Side Monopoly Is
Consumers Spinning Their Wheels,
Handing Over To A Blanketing
Scheme What They're Food For.
That Sort Of Makes The Consumer
Something Like A Pet Puppy Dog, Or,
Should The Purveyors Not Be
Benevolent, A Slave.
Here're These One More Time,
Esp. As Readers Skip Links:
-1- -2-
Supply Side Monopoly, Or, Minimal
Choice, For The Employee, Including
An Inability To Move (Could Be For
Local Family Responsibilities) Or An
Ability To Move But With No Prospect
Elsewhere, Combined With An Absence
Of Collective Bargaining, Is, If The
Employee Has To Work For
Sustenance, Is Slavery.
Risk Can Be Filtered So As To Hit The
Employee In The Employer-Employee
Relationship; Or, It Can Be Better
Accounted For, Along With (Other)
Costs The Employer Might Otherwise
Escape Incurring. Or, The Employer
Can Voluntarily, Or By Way Of
Regulation, Be Required To Mitigate Or
Insure Against Risk To The Employee.
I Add The Employer-Employee
Market (Health Element) Last
Because I've A Joke As To How
Risk Can Be Better, More Honestly
Accounted For, Appreciated,
And Adjusted For.
A Well-Intentioned American Decides
To Imitate The Bunjee-Jumping
Business, Opening Where It Hasn't
Been Marketed. He Hires A Local To
Manage It, As This Will Be Non-Owner-
Operated. After Assuring The Hire As
To Its Safety, The Hire's Told He Has
To Try The Jump Once. Reluctantly,
For His Family's Income, He Jumps.
He Comes Back Up, But His Nose Is A
Little Bloody. The Owner Desparately
Reaches For Him, In Vein, And Yells
"Did You Hit Bottom!?" He Hears Back
"No." The Hire's Back Up A 2d Time,
A Little Bloodier. The Owner Only Gets
Closer To Pulling Him Back In. Finally,
On The Hire's 3rd Return To The Top,
The Owner Manages Pulling Him In,
And Asks "Did You Hit Bottom?!"
The Employee:
"No. But What Does It Mean.
Pinata?"
Now, I'm Going To Address
Efficiency With Another Joke.
The Military's Typically Held Up As
A Model Of Organizational Efficiency,
And, Of Course, The Marketplace
Provides Efficiency And Discipline
In It's Own Right; But, We're In
Health Care Now, And Clinical Realities
And Epidemiology Are In The House,
And Accidents And Germs Really Don't
Seem Interested In Price, And, Also,
Patients Deserve Universal Access,
Comfort, Assurance And A Seamless
Connecting Of Those Things With
Public Health.
So, Anyway, Reader, I Was Just
Promoted--To Private First Class.
So This Is Going To Be My First
Order.
You're Going To Stand Guard
Right Where You Are.
Until You're Picked Off.
Simple. Direct. Efficient.
So, This May Not Reflect My Idea.
Perhaps If They Deleted "Exclusive."
Someone Will Have To Explain
To Me, Otherwise, Why For
Some It's Supposed To Be, In
A Sector Supposedly Financially
Borderline Unmanageable Owing
To Some People Living Longer, Plus
There's The March Of Technological
Inputs, Not All Of Which In The End
Saves Cost, O.K. For Carriers To
Own The Sector Totally With
Operational Monopoly Margins
Of 15% To 40%.
"Pretextual" Time-Bombs Run
Parallel To Look-Alike General
Election Resolutions And Projects
Lacking Sense Of Mission (As
In Rapid Transit Minus The
Accessible Parking Or
Convenient Scheduling.)
Aspects Of Potential-To-
Inevitable
Inefficient Support Of An
Oligopoly, By Virtue Of The
Enshrining Of The Oligopoly,
Such As Government Subsidy
Substituting For More Obvious
Discriminatory Pricing And
Risk Shifting, Exist.
Market (Health Element) Last
Because I've A Joke As To How
Risk Can Be Better, More Honestly
Accounted For, Appreciated,
And Adjusted For.
A Well-Intentioned American Decides
To Imitate The Bunjee-Jumping
Business, Opening Where It Hasn't
Been Marketed. He Hires A Local To
Manage It, As This Will Be Non-Owner-
Operated. After Assuring The Hire As
To Its Safety, The Hire's Told He Has
To Try The Jump Once. Reluctantly,
For His Family's Income, He Jumps.
He Comes Back Up, But His Nose Is A
Little Bloody. The Owner Desparately
Reaches For Him, In Vein, And Yells
"Did You Hit Bottom!?" He Hears Back
"No." The Hire's Back Up A 2d Time,
A Little Bloodier. The Owner Only Gets
Closer To Pulling Him Back In. Finally,
On The Hire's 3rd Return To The Top,
The Owner Manages Pulling Him In,
And Asks "Did You Hit Bottom?!"
The Employee:
"No. But What Does It Mean.
Pinata?"
Now, I'm Going To Address
Efficiency With Another Joke.
The Military's Typically Held Up As
A Model Of Organizational Efficiency,
And, Of Course, The Marketplace
Provides Efficiency And Discipline
In It's Own Right; But, We're In
Health Care Now, And Clinical Realities
And Epidemiology Are In The House,
And Accidents And Germs Really Don't
Seem Interested In Price, And, Also,
Patients Deserve Universal Access,
Comfort, Assurance And A Seamless
Connecting Of Those Things With
Public Health.
So, Anyway, Reader, I Was Just
Promoted--To Private First Class.
So This Is Going To Be My First
Order.
You're Going To Stand Guard
Right Where You Are.
Until You're Picked Off.
Simple. Direct. Efficient.
So, This May Not Reflect My Idea.
Perhaps If They Deleted "Exclusive."
Someone Will Have To Explain
To Me, Otherwise, Why For
Some It's Supposed To Be, In
A Sector Supposedly Financially
Borderline Unmanageable Owing
To Some People Living Longer, Plus
There's The March Of Technological
Inputs, Not All Of Which In The End
Saves Cost, O.K. For Carriers To
Own The Sector Totally With
Operational Monopoly Margins
Of 15% To 40%.
"Pretextual" Time-Bombs Run
Parallel To Look-Alike General
Election Resolutions And Projects
Lacking Sense Of Mission (As
In Rapid Transit Minus The
Accessible Parking Or
Convenient Scheduling.)
Aspects Of Potential-To-
Inevitable
Inefficient Support Of An
Oligopoly, By Virtue Of The
Enshrining Of The Oligopoly,
Such As Government Subsidy
Substituting For More Obvious
Discriminatory Pricing And
Risk Shifting, Exist.
Current State Backdrop:
Earlier
Newer
Monopoly Plays A Hand
Got That. Got That.
pdf/(new here)
--SEE--
Not Happening But 4 Immunity
From The Anti-Trust Laws
Elements From Bundle
Linked At "Anti-Trust:"
-1- -2- -3-
-4- -5- -6- -7-
The Sum Total, Once
Combined With This,
Is Veiled Monopoly Or Worse.
Is It Fair Looking At This While
Thinking To Oneself How
Much Is Competition, And How
Much Is Charade?
I Consider It Dubious The
Young Healthy Types
Supposedly Benefiting Are
Much Past Clueless Comparing
Values Given Different
Coverages. The Likely Choice
Of Lease Expensive Bestows
The Widest Fixed Profit Margin
(De Facto; The "Bonze" Tier Is
60% Medical Loss Ratio ("MLR.")
That Plays On Denial Of Risk
On The Buyer's Part As Well As
Makes Her/Him Think She's/He's
Getting A Food Value, While
That's Not True. The New
Gatekeepers Come On Top To
Make It Work. But It Also
Owns Chance, Channeling
Risk In A Manner Working
People Along The Federal
Poverty Level (FPL) Guideline
Till They're Closer To Subsidy
Eligibility, Except That's
Easily An Aspect Lending Itself
To Now You See It Now You
Don't Value. (More Below
After "'Modified' Adjusted Gross
Income," Also Lined Off.)
--------------
This Space Is Primarily About
Better Approaches, So Note
The Related Links At The
Space's Bottom.
If You're Going To Have A
Statutory Profit Regimen
(That's The Case Presently,)
Then It At Least Should Be
Adjusted For Times Such As
The Present, When Interest
Rates, And Investing, Are
Benchmarked To 0%, Or
Actually Negative Real Rates.
Patients And Doctors Don't
Get To Take Leave Of
Financial Reality.
In Your Own Risk Advancing
You To: The Need; AND, Eligibility,
For Subsidy. Young Persons
With No History Can Still Cost
Millions. Chance Affects Them.
As To Your March Toward
Medically Legal Poverty And
Concomitant Eligibility For
Subsidy, That's Not
"Insurance." That's
Administration Of A Service Plan.
Israel Has A Service Plan
Operated Through A Handful
Of Purveyors, But It's Not
Architected For A Monopolistically
Defined Profit Scheme.
It's A Uniform Benefits Package
(Elective Service Available,)
Fully Centrally Funded.
One Can Have A Plan Centric
In That (Israeli) Fashion.
One Can Have It Cartel-Centric
(ObamaCare, Just Like TBTF
Is Cartel Centric Monetary
Policy.) It Can Be State Centric.
It Can Be Union Centric.
One Can Have It Monopolistically
Hospital Or Physician Centric
(Older Blue Cross/Blue Shield,
Which I Actually Consider To
Have Been Far Far Better Than
Cartel Centric,)
Or One Can
Have The Following.
Patient-Physician Centric.
Market Progressive
Process Rationally Informed
My Own Recipe Arrives At A
Similar Place To That Or Of
California OneCare's Because
Of The Simple Fact Our
End Goals Are The Same; And,
It's The Nature Of
Epidemiology And Disease
Management That Any
Plan Honestly And Efficiently
Satisfying Patients And Physicians
Will Look The Same At Bedside.
But, I Would Unitize And
Equalize This, Repeal Anti-Trust
Immunity, Encourage A Physician-
Carrier Market, And Mandate
An Accountable Care Percentage
Of Service ("Skin In The Game
Stucturally" (Capitation
Prepayment For A Perentage
Of Service) As In The Way
J-Burg Mandates A Percentage
Of Black Investment In Its
Miners. Not Only Would Fee
For Service Conform To That
Environment, It Would Then Be
Transformed Into My
"Anti-Fragile" Element.
As Fee For Service Would
Conform To The New
Environment, It's Then
Welcome To Join The
Capitation Element As An
Anti-Fragile Partner.
Re-Instate In Corporate
Charters The Requirement
For Annual Show Of Public
Benefit. Install Patient
And Physician Committee
Material Decision Making
Involvement.
I'm Sorry. Health Care's
The Home Of Infinite Discovery
And Application Of Means For
Maintaining Health.
The Patients And Health Care
Workers Should Come First.
Organizational Profits Are
Appropriately Welcome For A
Role, But This Is Not An
Appropriate Place For
Profiteering.
I Don't See In That Any Need
For Eligibility Qualifier Hires.
Back To Service Plans.
Mine's Not Cartel Centric.
It's Patient-Doctor-Centric,
Market-Progressive Based.
Add Physician And Patient
Committee Material Input,
Statutorily Requiring A
Public Benefit Annually,
And, This Being The Part
I Really Like:
Last Mile Cost Effectiveness
Cross-Organizational
Physician Planning Informing
Labs Precisely What Is
Needed At The Most Practical
Service Level.
Government Provided Coverage
Co-Pay Based On Prior Year
Tax Return--
No Gatekeeper
Hires Needed Whatsoever.
It's Estimated Single Payer Saves
$400 Billion Annually In Paper Work
(Citing Dr. Andrew Coates, Physicians
For A National Health Plan.)
I Save The Lion's Share Of That
Also. The Sum Total Of The Elements
Risk Equalization, Physician/Patient
Committee Carrier Input, Required
Showing Of Public Benefit,
And Mandatory Percentage Being
Based On "Accountable Care,"
(Skin In The Game,) Thus Leaving
Fee For Service Conforming To
That Environment, There's No
Longer A Natural Place For
Carrier Care Managers; And,
Administration Is Radically Simplified
By The Inevitability That
Coverages Will Tend To Get
More Uniform, And Certainly Far
Less Obfuscating. Having Spent
Most My Life Disdainful Of The
Very Concept Of For-Profit
Health Care (Corporate Sense,)
I Nonetheless Welcome Infusing
Some Market Discipline And
Efficiency, Particularly With Doctors
Cross-Organizationally Setting
Cost Effectiveness Standards And
Objectives Such That The Very
Machination Of The Market
Becomes A Sort Of New Animal:
It Will Work More Dynamically
For The People It's Purported
To Serve.
But, What I Propose Includes
Maximum Choice Of Provider And
Coverage Modality.
Carriers Are Reformed And
Patient/Doctor Managed, Partly,
But Can Include Investor Owned.
Even China Presently Has A U.S.
Sourced Investor Owned Provider.
------------------
ObamaCare's Approach In This
Regard Is Really A Wild One
For Me. Eligibility Per Worker
With Family But Not Counting
The Needs Of The Family.
Eligibility Based On "Modified"
Adjusted Gross Income
Calculated Per PRESENT Year,
Obviously To Avoid
"Entitlement" Status.
Gatekeeper Hires (1,000's)
Will GUESSTIMATE Relying
Only Partly On Prior Year
Income (?? --As In That's
Correct; I Just Find It Strange.)
One Can Get Moved By The
Exchange, Between Enrollment
Periods, Using Income Databases,
To Medicaid (Which Is Getting
Shafted) Or Required To
Increase Their Own Coverage.
As Subsidy Eligibility Is Based
On Present Year Income, It's
Required That The Prior Year
Income, For Determination
Purposes, Be The Subject Of
A FINAL Tax Return By April 15.
MORE HERE
------------------------
The Foci Of The Plan Become:
Patient Care
Every Greatest Fulfilment A
Physician, Nurse, PA, Or Other
Med Tech Could Dream Of
Lab To Bed, Bed To Lab
Cross-Organizational Physician
Committee Community
Practice Cost Effectiveness
Planning, Adjusting And
Message Sending To The Labs
It Begs For Public Health
Seamlessly The Partner.
My Own Ideas In Health
Info/Health Ed Run To The
Pie In The Sky. France Just
Ended Minitel. I'd Bring It
Back For The Purpose.
The Above Incorporates
Primary Universal Coverage,
Broad Essential Benefits,
And Avoids Tiering, As Here,
But Adds Layers Of
"Anti-Fragility."
Some Readers Probably Came
From The Space Immediately
Above (Maybe 20% Of You.)
Many Readers Probably
Came From Here
(More Like 40% Of You)
The Balance Would've
Come From Here
(100 Minus 40 and 20
Is Another 40% Of You)
(Space Updated As To
Elimination Of Exclusions,
Carrier Purposes, And
Shortcomings For
Patients. (Doctors Don't Get
A Break From Control,
Also. Prices Are Profit-
Regimen Set Pro-Actively,
With Present Take
Dependent On Control.))
Car Dealers See Cars As
Platforms For Contracting.
Patients Are The Exact
Opposite.
Platforms For Our Service.
-----
Otherwise We're All Alone.
I Welcome Increased Coverage
But I Think Much Of The Increase
In GNP/Health Going To 21%
By 2019, Being Mindful Of Cost
Shifting Having Occurred All
Along, Represents INCREMENTAL
Profit And Gatekeeping Expenses
Stemming More From The Car
Dealer Comparison.
I Don't Think The Problems I
Have With The Present Regime
Involve Incrementalism, Though.
So Much Better That Could Be
Done Is Getting Foreclosed.
I Don't Think The New
Gatekeeping Hires Are Needed
In A Better Done Plan.
More As To Just Go Away
Deductibles, Policies Being
Unintelligible, And Foolish
Expectations Of There No
Longer Existing A Medical
Collections Business Simply
Because Of "Affordable"
Care's Existence.
Earlier
Newer
Monopoly Plays A Hand
Got That. Got That.
pdf/(new here)
--SEE--
Not Happening But 4 Immunity
From The Anti-Trust Laws
Elements From Bundle
Linked At "Anti-Trust:"
-1- -2- -3-
-4- -5- -6- -7-
The Sum Total, Once
Combined With This,
Is Veiled Monopoly Or Worse.
Is It Fair Looking At This While
Thinking To Oneself How
Much Is Competition, And How
Much Is Charade?
I Consider It Dubious The
Young Healthy Types
Supposedly Benefiting Are
Much Past Clueless Comparing
Values Given Different
Coverages. The Likely Choice
Of Lease Expensive Bestows
The Widest Fixed Profit Margin
(De Facto; The "Bonze" Tier Is
60% Medical Loss Ratio ("MLR.")
That Plays On Denial Of Risk
On The Buyer's Part As Well As
Makes Her/Him Think She's/He's
Getting A Food Value, While
That's Not True. The New
Gatekeepers Come On Top To
Make It Work. But It Also
Owns Chance, Channeling
Risk In A Manner Working
People Along The Federal
Poverty Level (FPL) Guideline
Till They're Closer To Subsidy
Eligibility, Except That's
Easily An Aspect Lending Itself
To Now You See It Now You
Don't Value. (More Below
After "'Modified' Adjusted Gross
Income," Also Lined Off.)
--------------
This Space Is Primarily About
Better Approaches, So Note
The Related Links At The
Space's Bottom.
If You're Going To Have A
Statutory Profit Regimen
(That's The Case Presently,)
Then It At Least Should Be
Adjusted For Times Such As
The Present, When Interest
Rates, And Investing, Are
Benchmarked To 0%, Or
Actually Negative Real Rates.
Patients And Doctors Don't
Get To Take Leave Of
Financial Reality.
In Your Own Risk Advancing
You To: The Need; AND, Eligibility,
For Subsidy. Young Persons
With No History Can Still Cost
Millions. Chance Affects Them.
As To Your March Toward
Medically Legal Poverty And
Concomitant Eligibility For
Subsidy, That's Not
"Insurance." That's
Administration Of A Service Plan.
Israel Has A Service Plan
Operated Through A Handful
Of Purveyors, But It's Not
Architected For A Monopolistically
Defined Profit Scheme.
It's A Uniform Benefits Package
(Elective Service Available,)
Fully Centrally Funded.
One Can Have A Plan Centric
In That (Israeli) Fashion.
One Can Have It Cartel-Centric
(ObamaCare, Just Like TBTF
Is Cartel Centric Monetary
Policy.) It Can Be State Centric.
It Can Be Union Centric.
One Can Have It Monopolistically
Hospital Or Physician Centric
(Older Blue Cross/Blue Shield,
Which I Actually Consider To
Have Been Far Far Better Than
Cartel Centric,)
Or One Can
Have The Following.
Patient-Physician Centric.
Market Progressive
Process Rationally Informed
My Own Recipe Arrives At A
Similar Place To That Or Of
California OneCare's Because
Of The Simple Fact Our
End Goals Are The Same; And,
It's The Nature Of
Epidemiology And Disease
Management That Any
Plan Honestly And Efficiently
Satisfying Patients And Physicians
Will Look The Same At Bedside.
But, I Would Unitize And
Equalize This, Repeal Anti-Trust
Immunity, Encourage A Physician-
Carrier Market, And Mandate
An Accountable Care Percentage
Of Service ("Skin In The Game
Stucturally" (Capitation
Prepayment For A Perentage
Of Service) As In The Way
J-Burg Mandates A Percentage
Of Black Investment In Its
Miners. Not Only Would Fee
For Service Conform To That
Environment, It Would Then Be
Transformed Into My
"Anti-Fragile" Element.
As Fee For Service Would
Conform To The New
Environment, It's Then
Welcome To Join The
Capitation Element As An
Anti-Fragile Partner.
Re-Instate In Corporate
Charters The Requirement
For Annual Show Of Public
Benefit. Install Patient
And Physician Committee
Material Decision Making
Involvement.
I'm Sorry. Health Care's
The Home Of Infinite Discovery
And Application Of Means For
Maintaining Health.
The Patients And Health Care
Workers Should Come First.
Organizational Profits Are
Appropriately Welcome For A
Role, But This Is Not An
Appropriate Place For
Profiteering.
I Don't See In That Any Need
For Eligibility Qualifier Hires.
Back To Service Plans.
Mine's Not Cartel Centric.
It's Patient-Doctor-Centric,
Market-Progressive Based.
Add Physician And Patient
Committee Material Input,
Statutorily Requiring A
Public Benefit Annually,
And, This Being The Part
I Really Like:
Last Mile Cost Effectiveness
Cross-Organizational
Physician Planning Informing
Labs Precisely What Is
Needed At The Most Practical
Service Level.
Government Provided Coverage
Co-Pay Based On Prior Year
Tax Return--
No Gatekeeper
Hires Needed Whatsoever.
It's Estimated Single Payer Saves
$400 Billion Annually In Paper Work
(Citing Dr. Andrew Coates, Physicians
For A National Health Plan.)
I Save The Lion's Share Of That
Also. The Sum Total Of The Elements
Risk Equalization, Physician/Patient
Committee Carrier Input, Required
Showing Of Public Benefit,
And Mandatory Percentage Being
Based On "Accountable Care,"
(Skin In The Game,) Thus Leaving
Fee For Service Conforming To
That Environment, There's No
Longer A Natural Place For
Carrier Care Managers; And,
Administration Is Radically Simplified
By The Inevitability That
Coverages Will Tend To Get
More Uniform, And Certainly Far
Less Obfuscating. Having Spent
Most My Life Disdainful Of The
Very Concept Of For-Profit
Health Care (Corporate Sense,)
I Nonetheless Welcome Infusing
Some Market Discipline And
Efficiency, Particularly With Doctors
Cross-Organizationally Setting
Cost Effectiveness Standards And
Objectives Such That The Very
Machination Of The Market
Becomes A Sort Of New Animal:
It Will Work More Dynamically
For The People It's Purported
To Serve.
But, What I Propose Includes
Maximum Choice Of Provider And
Coverage Modality.
Carriers Are Reformed And
Patient/Doctor Managed, Partly,
But Can Include Investor Owned.
Even China Presently Has A U.S.
Sourced Investor Owned Provider.
------------------
ObamaCare's Approach In This
Regard Is Really A Wild One
For Me. Eligibility Per Worker
With Family But Not Counting
The Needs Of The Family.
Eligibility Based On "Modified"
Adjusted Gross Income
Calculated Per PRESENT Year,
Obviously To Avoid
"Entitlement" Status.
Gatekeeper Hires (1,000's)
Will GUESSTIMATE Relying
Only Partly On Prior Year
Income (?? --As In That's
Correct; I Just Find It Strange.)
One Can Get Moved By The
Exchange, Between Enrollment
Periods, Using Income Databases,
To Medicaid (Which Is Getting
Shafted) Or Required To
Increase Their Own Coverage.
As Subsidy Eligibility Is Based
On Present Year Income, It's
Required That The Prior Year
Income, For Determination
Purposes, Be The Subject Of
A FINAL Tax Return By April 15.
MORE HERE
------------------------
The Foci Of The Plan Become:
Patient Care
Every Greatest Fulfilment A
Physician, Nurse, PA, Or Other
Med Tech Could Dream Of
Lab To Bed, Bed To Lab
Cross-Organizational Physician
Committee Community
Practice Cost Effectiveness
Planning, Adjusting And
Message Sending To The Labs
It Begs For Public Health
Seamlessly The Partner.
My Own Ideas In Health
Info/Health Ed Run To The
Pie In The Sky. France Just
Ended Minitel. I'd Bring It
Back For The Purpose.
The Above Incorporates
Primary Universal Coverage,
Broad Essential Benefits,
And Avoids Tiering, As Here,
But Adds Layers Of
"Anti-Fragility."
Some Readers Probably Came
From The Space Immediately
Above (Maybe 20% Of You.)
Many Readers Probably
Came From Here
(More Like 40% Of You)
The Balance Would've
Come From Here
(100 Minus 40 and 20
Is Another 40% Of You)
(Space Updated As To
Elimination Of Exclusions,
Carrier Purposes, And
Shortcomings For
Patients. (Doctors Don't Get
A Break From Control,
Also. Prices Are Profit-
Regimen Set Pro-Actively,
With Present Take
Dependent On Control.))
Car Dealers See Cars As
Platforms For Contracting.
Patients Are The Exact
Opposite.
Platforms For Our Service.
-----
Otherwise We're All Alone.
I Welcome Increased Coverage
But I Think Much Of The Increase
In GNP/Health Going To 21%
By 2019, Being Mindful Of Cost
Shifting Having Occurred All
Along, Represents INCREMENTAL
Profit And Gatekeeping Expenses
Stemming More From The Car
Dealer Comparison.
I Don't Think The Problems I
Have With The Present Regime
Involve Incrementalism, Though.
So Much Better That Could Be
Done Is Getting Foreclosed.
I Don't Think The New
Gatekeeping Hires Are Needed
In A Better Done Plan.
More As To Just Go Away
Deductibles, Policies Being
Unintelligible, And Foolish
Expectations Of There No
Longer Existing A Medical
Collections Business Simply
Because Of "Affordable"
Care's Existence.
Health Care In America Prior
To ObamaCare Was Quite
A Cruel Affair
ObamaCare Increases Financial
Access But In A Manner That
Primarily Serves The Aims
Of Religiously Committed
Monopolists, Following A Formula
Of Expressly Rejecting, In Open
Congress, Repeal Of Immunity
From Anti-Trust, Creating A
Universal Monopolistic Blanket
And Then Literally Distributing
Risk Along A Concrete-Fixed
Formula For Charging Prices Based
On Abilities To Pay.
That's The Structure.
The Processes Are All On
The Carriers' Side Too, And
They're Extremely Expensive.
And To Make It Work, And Owing
To There Still Being Just Enough
Competitive Wiggle Room So
As To Lend Itself To It, The
Process Mainly Works By Way
Of The Heavy Hand On Patients'
And Doctors' Heads.
And Whoever Invited The Carriers'
To The Party In The First Place?
When I Was A Kid, Growing Up
In An Extensively Mostly Med
Family, For-Profit Med
Intermediaries Were The
Exception, Not The Rule.
Actually, Though, I Welcome
Having The Market's Better
Seasonings: Efficiency, Discipline,
To The Extent They Can Serve
Effectively In A "Market-Progressive"
Based Sector.
ObamaCare Elements 1
ObamaCare Elements 2
Common Sense Meets Economics
Demonstably, However, So I
Think Much Better Is Possible.
Instead Of The Above, A
Sector That's Satisfying To
Patients And Doctors Will
Intrinsically Be Economically
Efficient, Because Efficiency
Is Measured By Health Status
And Satisfaction Itself.
Processes Simply Need To Be
Tailored To Science And The
Lives Of The Patients And
Doctors.
The Economic Structures
Simply Need To Mix Market
Elements With Those
Realities.
This (Warning: They Chose
A Trademark Reflecting A
Laudable Sense Of Mission,
And Though I Welcome Their
Sentiment, A Few Will Not
Find Their Style Tasteful)
And All Such Initiatives Will
Always Be Helpful, But This
Exists Sadly In The Absence
Of A Better Public Health
Infrastructure That Could
Seamlessly Assist In That
Function With Relatively Close
Coordination With Distinct,
Including The Many Forms
Of Private, Health Providers.
That Initiative Also Exists
Simultaneously With Most
People Remaining Afraid To
Enter The System, Under
ObamaCare. ...
There is no credible evidence that
high-risk people gaining insurance
under health reform could justify the
59-percent increase in rates
proposed by Blue Shield, UCLA Health
Policy Research Center
Associate Director Gerald F. Kominski
said on the Today in LA program
(link lost and substituted.)
Shana Alex Lavarreda,
Center research scientist and director
of health insurance studies, also
discussed the proposed rate hikes in
an interview on KPCC-Southern
California Public Radio.
SEE Also
Plus You're Paying For The
Gatekeeping And The Insurer's
Interference With Your Doctor'
Job. Sounds So Obvious By
Now As To Be Trite But, Ah:
Consider: Paying For Anti-Virus
Computer Protection When An
Equally Effective Free Program
Is Available To Do The Job, And
Then, You Have Repeated Problems
Proving You Paid And Are Entitled
To The Coverage.
Now Imagine The Paid Service
Becomes An Entrenched Monopoly
And Demands Huge Profits And
Micromanaged Supply Side
Control And The Ability To
Offer Demand Policies They
Can't Refuse.
high-risk people gaining insurance
under health reform could justify the
59-percent increase in rates
proposed by Blue Shield, UCLA Health
Policy Research Center
Associate Director Gerald F. Kominski
said on the Today in LA program
(link lost and substituted.)
Shana Alex Lavarreda,
Center research scientist and director
of health insurance studies, also
discussed the proposed rate hikes in
an interview on KPCC-Southern
California Public Radio.
SEE Also
Plus You're Paying For The
Gatekeeping And The Insurer's
Interference With Your Doctor'
Job. Sounds So Obvious By
Now As To Be Trite But, Ah:
Consider: Paying For Anti-Virus
Computer Protection When An
Equally Effective Free Program
Is Available To Do The Job, And
Then, You Have Repeated Problems
Proving You Paid And Are Entitled
To The Coverage.
Now Imagine The Paid Service
Becomes An Entrenched Monopoly
And Demands Huge Profits And
Micromanaged Supply Side
Control And The Ability To
Offer Demand Policies They
Can't Refuse.
Familiar With This Space?
Data's Now Integrated
In The Contextual
Menu.
Many Progressives, Flat Out
Liberals, Are Dissatisfied
With ObamaCare.
Usually One Hears "Flawed
But Better Than What
Preceded."
The Criticisms Explained
Here Are Essentially
Correct, Though My Own
Cures Wouldn't
Necessarily Follow His,
Thought Their Effects
Would Be Similar; And,
I Don't Necessarily
Agree With Him On All
Issues He Addresses.
The Absence Of Funding
Joins A Medicaid Expansion
That Would Be Laudable
But For State Taxes Then
Aiding Firms Immune From
Anti-Trust.
It Looks All The World To Most
Like Going To 21% Of GNP Stems
From Increasing Coverage When
For The Most Part That Cannot
Be Right.
The Rationalizations Anticipated
Become Starved Owing To
This Being A Unique Instance Of
"Let's Be Populist But Let's
Privatize Simultaneously."
Anything Program Conforming
To Monopoly Will Primarily
Benefit The Monopolists.
Those Unmoved By This
Are Still Staring At A Profit
And Pricing Scheme That
Defines It, Though In A
Shrouded Manner.
These Flaws
POTENTIALLY FORECLOSE
Improved Efficiency And
Even Mr. Potter's Essentially
Admitted In His Blog
What People Are Already
Generally Experiencing,
Which Is Simply
Go Away Deductibles.
And Profits Are A Percentage
On Top Of Volume As Well.
I Would End The Control, Allow
Legitimate Competition,
Not Charge According To Ability
To Pay With Risk Handled
Entirely In A Manner Serving That,
And Unitize Risk So That It Could
Be Fairly Traded.
Fairness Has Been An Essential
Component Of Freedom For
A Long Time.
Post-Monopoly, The Carriers Would
ONLY Have Clinical Rationalization And
"Value-Basing," The Precise Opposite
Of Just-Go-Away Deductibles, To Work
With.
That. And A Lavish Market Between
Providers And Carriers.
Define Cost Containment In Risk
Equalization As I Envision It.
The Very Occassional Super-Clinic
Already Engages In Just-Do-The
Right-Thing Practice To The
Benefit Of The Patient And
Economic Efficiency.
Remember: Unreimbursed Costs
Are Already, And Always Have
Been, Passed Through
The System ("Cost Shifting.")
If The Above Structure
Provides Insufficienct
Efficiency (Bang For The
Buck Meaning Quality Of
Health Maintenance For
The Price) In Terms Of
Cost Containment, Then I
Think The Structure Itself
Creates A Community Of
Interest Among Carriers,
Providers And Patient
Organizations Such That They
Can Calmly Agree On
Incremental Guidelines.
The Idea Is If Everyone
Is In A System Structured
Such That Everyone Is
Being Fair With Everyone
Else (No One's Gaming
Risk,) Then These
Adjustments Can Be
Easily Reached.
I Happen To Think The High
Risk Exchanges, Substantially
Taxpayer Subsidized--
Remember, Medicare Is
National Health Insurance For
Patients The Carriers Don't
Want--Are Gamable Particularly
In Some States, Where There's
Less Sunshine.
-----
-----
-----
I Think One Of Risk
Equalization's Greatest
Strengths Is Minimizing
"Tiering" (Quality Classing.)
As Structured, And With
Information Made Widely
Available As To Carrier
Coverage Comparisons, And
With Physician and Carrier
Comparisons Richly
Available Between Each Other,
Any Clinical Efficiencies To
Be Had Should Be Had.
However, I'd Be Happy
Seeing California OneCare
Implemented Should That
Happen.
I Could Be Happy
With A French-Style
System.
1 2
All Systems Have To
Contend With The
Challenges Enumerated
Though.
But An Architecture Based
On Legitimate Risk
Equalization, Combined With
A Process Consisting Of
Culture That Self-Reinforces
Everyone Doint The Right
Thing Would Be Best Of
All. Supply And Demand
Alone Is A Naive Match
Choice For Epidemiology And
The Realities Of Clinical Care;
But, Market Efficiency And
Discipline CAN Be A Useful
Ingredient.
ONLY Have Clinical Rationalization And
"Value-Basing," The Precise Opposite
Of Just-Go-Away Deductibles, To Work
With.
That. And A Lavish Market Between
Providers And Carriers.
Define Cost Containment In Risk
Equalization As I Envision It.
The Very Occassional Super-Clinic
Already Engages In Just-Do-The
Right-Thing Practice To The
Benefit Of The Patient And
Economic Efficiency.
Remember: Unreimbursed Costs
Are Already, And Always Have
Been, Passed Through
The System ("Cost Shifting.")
If The Above Structure
Provides Insufficienct
Efficiency (Bang For The
Buck Meaning Quality Of
Health Maintenance For
The Price) In Terms Of
Cost Containment, Then I
Think The Structure Itself
Creates A Community Of
Interest Among Carriers,
Providers And Patient
Organizations Such That They
Can Calmly Agree On
Incremental Guidelines.
The Idea Is If Everyone
Is In A System Structured
Such That Everyone Is
Being Fair With Everyone
Else (No One's Gaming
Risk,) Then These
Adjustments Can Be
Easily Reached.
I Happen To Think The High
Risk Exchanges, Substantially
Taxpayer Subsidized--
Remember, Medicare Is
National Health Insurance For
Patients The Carriers Don't
Want--Are Gamable Particularly
In Some States, Where There's
Less Sunshine.
-----
-----
-----
I Think One Of Risk
Equalization's Greatest
Strengths Is Minimizing
"Tiering" (Quality Classing.)
As Structured, And With
Information Made Widely
Available As To Carrier
Coverage Comparisons, And
With Physician and Carrier
Comparisons Richly
Available Between Each Other,
Any Clinical Efficiencies To
Be Had Should Be Had.
However, I'd Be Happy
Seeing California OneCare
Implemented Should That
Happen.
I Could Be Happy
With A French-Style
System.
1 2
All Systems Have To
Contend With The
Challenges Enumerated
Though.
But An Architecture Based
On Legitimate Risk
Equalization, Combined With
A Process Consisting Of
Culture That Self-Reinforces
Everyone Doint The Right
Thing Would Be Best Of
All. Supply And Demand
Alone Is A Naive Match
Choice For Epidemiology And
The Realities Of Clinical Care;
But, Market Efficiency And
Discipline CAN Be A Useful
Ingredient.
Medicareadvocacy Chart
(Which Has Bearing
Beyond Medicare And
In Which The Ryan
Competition-Related
Assertions Bear No
Relation To A World
Post-Immunity From
The Anti-Trust Laws)
Risk Equalization Envisions
Eliminating Immunity From
The Anti-Trust Laws And
Replacing Just-Go-Away
Deductibles With
Value-Based Policies; And,
It Then Becomes Surprisingly
Similar To California OneCare
And The European Plans
RECALL
(Which Has Bearing
Beyond Medicare And
In Which The Ryan
Competition-Related
Assertions Bear No
Relation To A World
Post-Immunity From
The Anti-Trust Laws)
Risk Equalization Envisions
Eliminating Immunity From
The Anti-Trust Laws And
Replacing Just-Go-Away
Deductibles With
Value-Based Policies; And,
It Then Becomes Surprisingly
Similar To California OneCare
And The European Plans
RECALL
I’ve proposed a bi-directional
double-pyramided health education /
health information system
applying the record-keeping of
the likes of MSN Health Vault, the
architecture of Google Docs,
and 2 way filtering down from
providers and up from receivers,
applying to individuals, subsets,
and the general population, on the
one hand, and providers:
individual, subsets, and
generally on the other hand.
Possible Frameworks:
A National Health Minitel-Like
System Living Alongside Or
Within, Usenet-Like, The
Internet, Still Using The
Technology of Google Docs
And MSN Health Vault. The
Minitel Example, But That Can
Be Incorporated Within The
Internet As Well As Live As A
Stand-Alone Technology,
Can Serve As Information-Street
And Education-Street As To
Any Size Population, Any
Population Sub-Groups,
Sub-Sub-Groups, And Then
Individuals.
This Is Fed By All Commercial,
Academic And Government
Sources Of Interest, With
Accesses From HIPAA-
Protected, To Shared On A
Proprietary Basis, To Physician
Communicating With Patient.
Public Health Departments
Can Measure How Many
People In A Community
Traditionally Using Pots Made
Colorful With Lead-Based
Paint Know Not To Do That.
They Can Advise People Not
To Do That Through The
Same Conduit.
The Only Thing That Gets
People Upset With Things Like
This Is The Same
Corrupting Of Shared Ideals.
This Is An Tool For Making
Greater Use Of Private
Resources, Enabling Them
To Help Dramatically
Improve Health Status And
Cut Health Costs. The
Only Private Enterprise It
Interferes With Is The
One In The Monopolist's
Imagination.
Some Readers Came
From Here.
The Idea Is Not Creating The
Health Care Equivalent Of
Big Brother But Nonetheless Not
Leaving People Walking Around
With Unmet Physical And Emotional
Needs.
Even People With Coverage
Today Can Feel Lacking In
Direction As To Ill-Defined Need.
Though An Architecture Like
OneCare May Be The Ideal
Receptacle, The Existing
Patchwork Is Really No Problem
At All, Allowing For Purpose-Based
Google Docs-Like Permissioning,
Combined With A 007-Style
Need-To-Know Policy.
Data Bases Can Be Merged
For Consolidated Predictive
Modeling, Proximately Useful
Algorithms Can Be Outsourced
Through Permissioning.
Even Centralized
Organizational Assistance
And Outsourcing Can
Be Facilitated.
Independently
Permissioned Systems
Can Be Linked Vertically
And Horizontally. With
All Gateways Anticipated,
It Becomes 2 Clicks
For The User.
Most Of What This Is About Is
Addressing Group Education,
But Not Just As To Disease
Management On Up To Broader
Or Down To Personal Advice,
But Teaching When To Know
To Seek Help And How To
Obtain It.
It Becomes A Conduit For
Anything.
Ex. 1
Ex. 2
The aim is health maintenance with
education and information tailored
to the particular
population, group and individuals.
The system allows for an infinity
of “tributaries,” reflecting
policy aims, as also here suggested.
A state marijuana user
fee-funded usage monitoring
system is one logical starting
point. A central virtual
commons can include
commercial interaction and
ad-based funding. States can
electively outsource system
management.
All health providers
can make good use of
such a system. Personally mindful
of the common problem of people
simply not having loved ones
available to drive them home from
clinical visits rendering them groggy,
social workers and family therapists,
for instance, can, on a population-
staged basis, address such issues
as spouses caught up in the
blame game. On many levels,
the success of mate-hood is critical
to successful health maintenance.
This Is An Ever Present Concern.
------
------
------
------
------
Thus This Is An Incremental Concept
As Epidemiologics And Data Collection
Go, Though, Frankly, Existing Systems
May Well Need An Efficient Super-Structure
Even Absent Concern For Finding
The Unmet Need And Eliciting New
Patient Self-Awareness.
double-pyramided health education /
health information system
applying the record-keeping of
the likes of MSN Health Vault, the
architecture of Google Docs,
and 2 way filtering down from
providers and up from receivers,
applying to individuals, subsets,
and the general population, on the
one hand, and providers:
individual, subsets, and
generally on the other hand.
Possible Frameworks:
A National Health Minitel-Like
System Living Alongside Or
Within, Usenet-Like, The
Internet, Still Using The
Technology of Google Docs
And MSN Health Vault. The
Minitel Example, But That Can
Be Incorporated Within The
Internet As Well As Live As A
Stand-Alone Technology,
Can Serve As Information-Street
And Education-Street As To
Any Size Population, Any
Population Sub-Groups,
Sub-Sub-Groups, And Then
Individuals.
This Is Fed By All Commercial,
Academic And Government
Sources Of Interest, With
Accesses From HIPAA-
Protected, To Shared On A
Proprietary Basis, To Physician
Communicating With Patient.
Public Health Departments
Can Measure How Many
People In A Community
Traditionally Using Pots Made
Colorful With Lead-Based
Paint Know Not To Do That.
They Can Advise People Not
To Do That Through The
Same Conduit.
The Only Thing That Gets
People Upset With Things Like
This Is The Same
Corrupting Of Shared Ideals.
This Is An Tool For Making
Greater Use Of Private
Resources, Enabling Them
To Help Dramatically
Improve Health Status And
Cut Health Costs. The
Only Private Enterprise It
Interferes With Is The
One In The Monopolist's
Imagination.
Some Readers Came
From Here.
The Idea Is Not Creating The
Health Care Equivalent Of
Big Brother But Nonetheless Not
Leaving People Walking Around
With Unmet Physical And Emotional
Needs.
Even People With Coverage
Today Can Feel Lacking In
Direction As To Ill-Defined Need.
Though An Architecture Like
OneCare May Be The Ideal
Receptacle, The Existing
Patchwork Is Really No Problem
At All, Allowing For Purpose-Based
Google Docs-Like Permissioning,
Combined With A 007-Style
Need-To-Know Policy.
Data Bases Can Be Merged
For Consolidated Predictive
Modeling, Proximately Useful
Algorithms Can Be Outsourced
Through Permissioning.
Even Centralized
Organizational Assistance
And Outsourcing Can
Be Facilitated.
Independently
Permissioned Systems
Can Be Linked Vertically
And Horizontally. With
All Gateways Anticipated,
It Becomes 2 Clicks
For The User.
Most Of What This Is About Is
Addressing Group Education,
But Not Just As To Disease
Management On Up To Broader
Or Down To Personal Advice,
But Teaching When To Know
To Seek Help And How To
Obtain It.
It Becomes A Conduit For
Anything.
Ex. 1
Ex. 2
The aim is health maintenance with
education and information tailored
to the particular
population, group and individuals.
The system allows for an infinity
of “tributaries,” reflecting
policy aims, as also here suggested.
A state marijuana user
fee-funded usage monitoring
system is one logical starting
point. A central virtual
commons can include
commercial interaction and
ad-based funding. States can
electively outsource system
management.
All health providers
can make good use of
such a system. Personally mindful
of the common problem of people
simply not having loved ones
available to drive them home from
clinical visits rendering them groggy,
social workers and family therapists,
for instance, can, on a population-
staged basis, address such issues
as spouses caught up in the
blame game. On many levels,
the success of mate-hood is critical
to successful health maintenance.
This Is An Ever Present Concern.
------
------
------
------
------
Thus This Is An Incremental Concept
As Epidemiologics And Data Collection
Go, Though, Frankly, Existing Systems
May Well Need An Efficient Super-Structure
Even Absent Concern For Finding
The Unmet Need And Eliciting New
Patient Self-Awareness.
Health System Data Collection
And Analysis, Pertaining Anything,
From Quality Measures To Needs
Measures, Is A Massive Topic
Easily Searched. I Propose,
Additionally, An Interactive Double-
Pyramided, Base To Base Information
System, With Health Education,
Clinical Advice, And Physicians'
Patient-Tailored Guidelines Flowing
One Way, Community, Sub-Group,
Specially Targeted Group, And
Individual Patients' Data
Flowing Another.
This Can Serve Any Health Purpose,
Including Those Impacting On Regional
Administrative Policy, Such As
A Program Defusing Marijuana
Criminality, Collecting Public For Public
Rather Than Nefarious Purposes,
While Actually Keeping In Touch
With What People Are Wisely Or
Unwisely Doing With Their Stuff.
My Interest Is In Protecting Their
Families As Much As Themselves.
Their Health Status Is Intertwined.
"How a Squirt of Oxytocin Could
Ease Marital Spats and Boos
t Social Sensitivity Oxytocin focuses
our eyes—and our brains—on love.
It could help troubled couples
as well as autistic people"
The Effect, Though, Would I Think
Only Be To Send MORE People
Looking At Initiatives Like
(Website Will Never
Contain Infomercials)
This One.
And Analysis, Pertaining Anything,
From Quality Measures To Needs
Measures, Is A Massive Topic
Easily Searched. I Propose,
Additionally, An Interactive Double-
Pyramided, Base To Base Information
System, With Health Education,
Clinical Advice, And Physicians'
Patient-Tailored Guidelines Flowing
One Way, Community, Sub-Group,
Specially Targeted Group, And
Individual Patients' Data
Flowing Another.
This Can Serve Any Health Purpose,
Including Those Impacting On Regional
Administrative Policy, Such As
A Program Defusing Marijuana
Criminality, Collecting Public For Public
Rather Than Nefarious Purposes,
While Actually Keeping In Touch
With What People Are Wisely Or
Unwisely Doing With Their Stuff.
My Interest Is In Protecting Their
Families As Much As Themselves.
Their Health Status Is Intertwined.
"How a Squirt of Oxytocin Could
Ease Marital Spats and Boos
t Social Sensitivity Oxytocin focuses
our eyes—and our brains—on love.
It could help troubled couples
as well as autistic people"
The Effect, Though, Would I Think
Only Be To Send MORE People
Looking At Initiatives Like
(Website Will Never
Contain Infomercials)
This One.
The Person Who's Overweight
Or Smoking Or Both May Also
Already Need Angioplasty.
Educational / Behavioral Help Is
Part And Parcel To Patient Care
Because That Person Is Either
On His/Her Way To Requiring
Care In The Clinic, Or, More
Urgently, Needs It Presently But
Doesn't Even Know It. Or, As
Is Often The Case, They May
Suspect They Need Clinical
Intervention, But They're Afraid
Of The Expenses, And They
Have Difficulty Adjusting Their
Behavior On Their Own.
At Any Of These Stages, This
Is A Patient--An Angioplasty
Waiting To Happen.
Prevention Is The Most
Trouble-Free And
Infinitely Less Expensive.
We've Hardly Begun Even
Trying To Apply Prevention.
And Then, Just Placing
Transportation Under The
Rubric Of Health Administration
Would Inevitably Lead To
Less Pollution And Fewer
Accidents. Once Prioritized,
Cutting Health Costs On The
Community Level Can Work
Large And Fast.
The Way That Would Work
Scientifically And Routinely
Is By Adding The Health
Cost/Saving Into Every
Project.
SEE
Or Smoking Or Both May Also
Already Need Angioplasty.
Educational / Behavioral Help Is
Part And Parcel To Patient Care
Because That Person Is Either
On His/Her Way To Requiring
Care In The Clinic, Or, More
Urgently, Needs It Presently But
Doesn't Even Know It. Or, As
Is Often The Case, They May
Suspect They Need Clinical
Intervention, But They're Afraid
Of The Expenses, And They
Have Difficulty Adjusting Their
Behavior On Their Own.
At Any Of These Stages, This
Is A Patient--An Angioplasty
Waiting To Happen.
Prevention Is The Most
Trouble-Free And
Infinitely Less Expensive.
We've Hardly Begun Even
Trying To Apply Prevention.
And Then, Just Placing
Transportation Under The
Rubric Of Health Administration
Would Inevitably Lead To
Less Pollution And Fewer
Accidents. Once Prioritized,
Cutting Health Costs On The
Community Level Can Work
Large And Fast.
The Way That Would Work
Scientifically And Routinely
Is By Adding The Health
Cost/Saving Into Every
Project.
SEE
Mayor
Default
Judgement
A Parallel; Except:
Not "Cost-Shifted."
Students Chased Like
Patients, But Unlike The
Case With The Patients,
No Student Bad Debt Is
(Meaningfully) Passed
To Other Students.
You've Always Paid For
The Unpaid Hospital
Bills Of Others, But The
Carrier's Risk Is Pre-
Determined Limited.
Medicare Is National
Health Insurance For
Unwanted Patients.
The High Risk Exchanges
Are The Taxpayer Helping
A Market's Controllers
With Risk.
The Low Risk Patients
Previously Living With
This, Some Frankly Naively
Insisting On Its Retention,
Will Have Choices, Including
Just Go Away Deductibles
Particularly As They Get
A Bit Riskier To The Carrier,
Reflective Of This:
-C- -C2-
If The Carriers Could
"Short" The Risk
(Profit From Adversity
Itself,) That Would
Variously Resemble
This.
There Is Absolutely
Nothing Wrong With
Risk Management.
It Can Be A Very Useful,
Even A Constructive
Tool For Society.
It's Just That Risk Should
Be Playable Fairly.
And It Shouldn't Be
Simply A Case Of
Privatizing The Profits,
Socializing The Cost.
Where That IS The
Case, At Least The
System Should Have
SOME Economic
"Rationalization" So
That The Taxpayers
And The Sector's
Customers Don't
Simply Get Soaked.
And, Where In A Sector
One Can Play Both Sides
Of The Fence, And
Particularly Where
Customers Are Played
Against Each Other
(Such As How Spectre
Plays The Americans
And Russians Against
Each Other,) There Are
Legal Issues.
Has Arrested Nurses
Rendering Care
Where's Margaret Houlihan
When You Need Her?
It's Precisely The
People He Arrested
Who Belong In Office
Physicians For Human Rights
As To Mistreatment Of Health
Workers In Bahrain
-----
Now Mayor Emanuel Wants
To Privatize Chicago's Schools.
Forget Equal Opportunity, Guy.
He's Flushing Public Ed Altogether.
For Him Teachers And Less
Wealthy Kids Can Jump In A Lake.
Also, Trust Me.
THIS
Is An Oxymoron. It's Only
PROPERLY, DEFINITIONALLY, All
Things Economic And COMMONLY
AGREED TO Community-Wide
In Integral Fashion And Encompassing
Coordinating All Things Bearing
On Health Status, Including Cultural
Enrichment, Family Support, And That
Including Providing Universal Quality
Education. All That Is Place.
It's All Health Rolled Up In
One Integral Ball. Any Suggestion
Of Public Health Being A Piecemeal
Process Is Utterly Naive.
See
Also
Also
This Is Complicated.
People Are Complicated.
Community Is All For
One, One For All.
You Can't Simply Open
A Can And Pop Out
Another One Of These.
-----
The "Mayor's" Oblivious.
It's Not Even About
Just Contracts So Much As
It Appears Being About Friends.
Adam Smith, Despite What
Rich Demagogues Or Mayors From
The Chicago College Of Sell-Out
Would Have You Believe,
Advocated Guarding Against
Labor Abuse (And Sellout
By Implication) And (In favor
Of) Protecting The
Common Good.
To Me "Mayor (?)" Emanuel
Defines The Anti-Community.
But Arresting Nurses Rendering
Care Is Really Something From
Beyond The World Of Reason,
I'd Say.
This, Not BullshXX, Is America.
Of Course, Nothing's Stopping A
Mayor From Treating Public Health
As A Source Of Brand Extension
For Existing Clients. Sort Of
Like Snickers (R) Ice Cream.
There's Nothing Stopping A Mayor
From Having This, His Laissez
Faire Vision, Even If He's Not
Secretly From The John Birch
Society, And Even If He Doesn't
Misquote Adam Smith.
Of Course, Whatever's Involved
Here, Principle Doesn't Seem To
Be That, One Way Or The Other.
There's Nothing Stopping Him
From Asking Local Colleges To
Jackhammer Over The Inscriptions
Over The Main Entrances Of Their
Schools Of Public Administration,
As Courses In Prison Management
And Road Construction Might
Already Obviate Most The Need
For Those Schools, As He Sees Fit.
There's Nothing Stopping Him From
Seeing Community Services As
Commodities Or Even His Voters
And Their Children As Commodities.
However, I Don't Think Even
Biff Tannin Would Have Arrested
His Own Nurses.
And I Actually Would Recommend
That Mayors NOT Be Allowed
To Sell Out Their Cities'
Functions Absent Full Public
Referenda.
How Far Does This Go
With Rahm? Does He
Calculate: You're Up To
Your Neck In Student Loans
So You'll Quickly Sell Out?
That's How Despots
Filled The Military
The Man's A Cannibal.
------
The Lobbyists Expect
Public Health Academicians
To Remain Transfixed.
This Says Public Health Is
Late In Seeking Public
Support For Adjusting
Priorities At High Levels.
It Frankly Says Failure's
Slipped Ahead Of Us.
I Hope Y'all Manage Some
Fun Before Being Surprised
By Getting Older.
Simply Balancing Cars
With Mass Transit Cuts
Accidents And Pollution
Simultaneously. It
Engenders A
Positive Health Cascade.
It Facilitates Engagement
Along Other Possibilities.
Everything Being A Double-
Edged Sword, We Can
Rebuild Cities And Repair
Schools With The Latest Stuff
And Know-How.
Families, And Health
Concomitantly, Require
Stability. Not Only Does
Valuing Schools Help Kids
Succeed And In Turn
Strengthen Their Own
Families, Those Same Schools
Can Become Central To
Family Enrichment Programs,
Including Making Counseling
Available.
Interesting Oakland Initiative
Should Be Available As A
Standard, Schools Being
Among Logical Locations.
This Is What Makes A
Nation Strong.
But No People Anywhere
Should Ever See A
Reason For Warring
Or Spying.
A World With Only
Healthy Minds, Not Bugged
By Demagogues, Will
Never Need That.
Link Health Webs, Education,
And Cultural Support, And
Communities Will Insist On
This.
I Obviously Feel Public
Health People Need A
Greater Political Voice.
There's A Natural, Massive
Coalition With Teachers,
Environmentally Concerned
Persons, And All Persons
Valuing Healthful People,
A Healthful Planet, And
Democratic Pricing And
Treatment Of Risk And People-
Supporting, Youth-Nurturing,
Family Supportive Policy
Without The B.S.
Nations Should Be Helping
Each Other Be Stewards
Of The Environment, Not
Divided So Unscrupulous
Extractive Rich People Can
Be Invisible, Point False
Blame, And Profit From
Adversity.
Recognition Of That, And
With Help From Psychiatry
Going Public About The
General Sorts Of
Childish Disturbances
That Lead To Obnoxiousness
Escalated On National
Levels To Military Conflict,
The Massive Commitments
Of Funds To War And
Spying Should Be Relegated
To A Primitive, Barbaric Past.
For Me, If A Mandate Is Held
Valid By Reason Of Its Being A
Tax, Then The Oligopoly's
Statutory Immunity From The
Anti-Trust Laws And The Concomitant
Arrangement Whereby High
Risk Customers Reasonably Expected
To Be Priced Out And Thus Covered By
The Tax-Subsidized High Risk
Exchanges, Imply, Though
This Is NOT Legal Advice, That
There Exists A State Authorized,
State Protected, Oligopoly.
Though Obamacare Guarantees a
Large, Easily Gamed Cost-Plus-Based
Profit And Fosters A High-Volume-
Encouraged Gameplan, And May Well
Engender The Emergence Of A
Second Tier, At Least It's Better Than
What For Many Sooner Or Later
Amounted Hearing From Their Insurer,
Seeing A Known Risk Factor,
"I'm Going To Make You An
Offer You Can't Refuse."
A Plus, It Likely Will Accelerate
The Emergence Of "Value
Based Insurance Design," That
Is, Clinically More Rational
Cost Of Service Structure,
Particularly, I Would Say, vs.
"Just Go Away" Deductibles.
The Great Many Americans Who've
Been Traveling Outside The U.S.
For Medical Care And
Pharmaceuticals Have Surely
Known Something
Has Been Irrational And Unfair.
Valid By Reason Of Its Being A
Tax, Then The Oligopoly's
Statutory Immunity From The
Anti-Trust Laws And The Concomitant
Arrangement Whereby High
Risk Customers Reasonably Expected
To Be Priced Out And Thus Covered By
The Tax-Subsidized High Risk
Exchanges, Imply, Though
This Is NOT Legal Advice, That
There Exists A State Authorized,
State Protected, Oligopoly.
Though Obamacare Guarantees a
Large, Easily Gamed Cost-Plus-Based
Profit And Fosters A High-Volume-
Encouraged Gameplan, And May Well
Engender The Emergence Of A
Second Tier, At Least It's Better Than
What For Many Sooner Or Later
Amounted Hearing From Their Insurer,
Seeing A Known Risk Factor,
"I'm Going To Make You An
Offer You Can't Refuse."
A Plus, It Likely Will Accelerate
The Emergence Of "Value
Based Insurance Design," That
Is, Clinically More Rational
Cost Of Service Structure,
Particularly, I Would Say, vs.
"Just Go Away" Deductibles.
The Great Many Americans Who've
Been Traveling Outside The U.S.
For Medical Care And
Pharmaceuticals Have Surely
Known Something
Has Been Irrational And Unfair.
I very much welcome ideas for
breaking down the structures of
polarization, be they by way of
“The Righteous Mind” or other.
As to fairness, I believe known risk is
unfairly gamed. I believe that when
the cartel prefers attempting to shoot
down any program that supplants simple
cherry picking of risk-free or low-risk
customers, they then take advantage of
people’s not having considered simple
chance, or “fat tails” (taken to the
extreme) as economists would
call it, this even though the cartel know
better than anyone that in health
care there’s really no such thing
as “chance:”
you will all need major medical
intervention sooner or later.
breaking down the structures of
polarization, be they by way of
“The Righteous Mind” or other.
As to fairness, I believe known risk is
unfairly gamed. I believe that when
the cartel prefers attempting to shoot
down any program that supplants simple
cherry picking of risk-free or low-risk
customers, they then take advantage of
people’s not having considered simple
chance, or “fat tails” (taken to the
extreme) as economists would
call it, this even though the cartel know
better than anyone that in health
care there’s really no such thing
as “chance:”
you will all need major medical
intervention sooner or later.
Pertains Health Ed And Health
Info Beyond Measuring Outcomes
And Risk Valuations For Core
Business And Public Health Stat
Purposes, Or At Least As To Far
More Pro-Active And Innovative
Manners:
As To "Engagement"
And Actual, Innovative
Public Health Measures
And Health Education,
See:
Ostrich Index
Vulnerability Index
Health Engagement Management
The Buzz: Social Interactions
Healing Older Brains
(Me: And Then, Mind To Body,
Body To Mind, Would Imply
Physical Health--By The Way,
It's Anecdotally Well Known
Computer Usage Aids Older
Persons Tremendously--
A Sea Change)
Health Information And
Health Education Systems
Are Connected Respectively
With Separate Proposals But
Are Somewhat Clumped
Here
Formally Integrating Formal
Communications Skillsets Into
Health Information And Health
Education Systems May Have
Another Model
This Section Works
In Tandem With The
Ideas Offered Here
Info Beyond Measuring Outcomes
And Risk Valuations For Core
Business And Public Health Stat
Purposes, Or At Least As To Far
More Pro-Active And Innovative
Manners:
As To "Engagement"
And Actual, Innovative
Public Health Measures
And Health Education,
See:
Ostrich Index
Vulnerability Index
Health Engagement Management
The Buzz: Social Interactions
Healing Older Brains
(Me: And Then, Mind To Body,
Body To Mind, Would Imply
Physical Health--By The Way,
It's Anecdotally Well Known
Computer Usage Aids Older
Persons Tremendously--
A Sea Change)
Health Information And
Health Education Systems
Are Connected Respectively
With Separate Proposals But
Are Somewhat Clumped
Here
Formally Integrating Formal
Communications Skillsets Into
Health Information And Health
Education Systems May Have
Another Model
This Section Works
In Tandem With The
Ideas Offered Here
WHEN YOU SAY YOU DON'T
WANT TO HAVE TO BUY HEALTH
INSURANCE, YOU'RE BEING EXACTLY
LIKE ANY PONZI ARTIST -- SELF-
DECEPTIVELY MAKING A DUBIOUS
BET THAT OTHERS WILL PAY FOR.
YOUR COST WILL BE SHIFTED INTO
EVERYONE ELSE'S PREMIUMS, THE
CARRIERS NOT CARING, AS THEY
HAVE A PRE-DEFINED, SELF-
DETERMINED, PRIVILEGED CAN'T
LOSE LIMITED RISK.
TO SAY YOU'LL SIMPLY BUY
INTO A GUARANTEED AVAILABLE
POOL ONLY WHEN YOU NEED IT
URGENTLY IS TO BE A THIEF
(IT'S ALSO CLINICALLY FOOLISH.)
To Explain That "Talking
Point" Style:
A Cartel Taking Advantage Of Your
Own Ponzi-Like Instinct
And Effectively Shunning The Very
Business Of Insuring Against
The Unexpected While Gaming
Covering The Expected
I Just Lightened This Page's
Data Load A Bit. The Point
From Here Was Science And
Economics Rationalized Along
Being A Fair, Honest Market
Progressive Should Leave Us In
A Place Not Very Different From
The Ones Envisionised By The
Authors Of California OneCare
Of Single Payer Plans, Simply
By Virtue Of The Nature Of
The Health Care Sector.
Science And
Economics Rationalized Along
Being A Fair, Honest Market
Progressive Should Leave Us In
A Place Like This:
Everyone Gets Care.
Quality Matters, Cost Contained
Rationally, With It Not
At All Difficult For The Well
Intended Person To Get Those
Objectives In Accord With The
Patient Community Being
Yet Happier With, And Unafraid To
Enter And Less Afraid Of
Simultaneously Confident About
Its Quality. And High Outcomes.
What I Suggest Should Do That.
What The Others Listed Above Suggest
Have Those Same Objectives.
Those Are The ONLY Sensible
Objectives.
NHS Reforms Will Betray
Generations To Come
USDA Confirms
California Mad Cow Case
(Vectors Fanning Out, Magnitude of
Change Deepening, Those Two
Things Only Compounding, In Terms of
Opportunistic Range, and Issues of
Local Opportunity, Changes in
Virulence, Etc., Are All Potential
Influencers In Disease Incidence)
Self-Destruction For Profit Is
Economically and Clinically
Going The Wrong Way
Use that apparently isolated case as
a mind experiment--commonplace
disruption to our adaptability.
New Questions As To
Mad Cow Vectoring
Basis Related Pathogens
Changes in organisms'
ecological ranges, relative
virulence, and all manner of
environmentally induced /
accelerated genetic changes,
those all reverberating
back on all these factors, and
concomitant new organisms'
"opportunities,"
all relate to any given existing or
de novo infection.
With growing concern
(SEE)
about increased radiation detected,
U.S. West Coast:
Iodine loading of the thyroid for
preventing radiation absorption is
obviously somthing consumers
shouldn't do absent supervision.
WHY
The lower in the food chain your
food comes from, the less
concentrated will be the radiation.
In health care, insurance has been
sold for coverage against the unlikely,
and it's been sold as if it would
cover the likely.
It has in reality been aimed at not
covering the likely, and when the likely
has become apparent, its coverage has
been in a feudal-imitative manner
(men (and women) owning men
(and women.))
Understand simply, Medicare exists
because a health insurance cartel
didn't want to cover older persons.
It's national health insurance for
unwanted customers.
Rather than a "public option,"
ObamaCare replaces this with
the Government paying for most
others the cartel doesn't care to
cover, actually incentivizing having
MORE volume by way of the
guaranteed large profit margin
(particularly when placed on top
of an easily fudged, large
admin cost figure.)
Even after 2014 there arises
a strong incentive to continue
the choice of "premium death
spiral" or "go naked," especially
relying on devices like
"Just Go Away" deductibles,
but with the premium marching
upward quickly anyway, because,
though Obamacare guarantees
them cost-plus, the mix-bag
of coverages offered lower
risk patients is easily skewed
to gain a larger customer base,
offering premiums to low
risk customers subsidized by
high risk customers, the latter
ultimatedly, as explained,
ultimately going to the
high risk exchanges, taxpayer
subsidized, and very possibly
en route to 2d tier status,
even thought the government
will surely be more determined
to institute rationalization
devices, such as "value
based insurance design."
SEE MORE AS TO SUCH
THINGS AS VALUE BASED
INSURANCE DESIGN (A PLUS)
AND POTENTIAL TIERING OF
HEALTH CARE OVERALL
AS TO OBAMACARE, AS
WELL AS TO UNFAIR
TREATMENT OF RISK.
(MY IDEA)
The closest parallel to national
health insurance for only
customers the cartel doesn't
want is Amtrak--not at all
to say we shouldn't have
far more balanced transportation.
It's simply cars/oil get subsidized
on highways and railroads
keep only the profitable part
of their business.
(But car travel is costly too.)
Passenger car travel is far
more costly than is mass transit, in
many/most instances (the exceptions
are where mass transit programs are
"pre-textually" created for self-failure
or for purposes of "pork,") measured
in cost per passenger-mile, but it wasn't
profitable enough or profitable at all,
particularly, by historic chance, when
air travel became popular. So,
naturally, rail had the Government
take it. That's rather heads I win,
tails you lose, too, wouldn't you say?
This can be returned to a don't con
me state by indexing need of application
vs. volume disadvantage, followed by a
mechanism for compensating for the
private entity's involvement in a
less inviting market segment.
However, in the case of
mass transit, the roll
out of all the flex tech, combined
with IT, and the integration
of different systems may actually
be better done by government,
so long as government's goal is
serving communities,
not sellers of hardware.
Just removing the heads
I win, tails you lose
element isn't such a chore.
Some Basic Aims, Here With An
Application Modeled on a
Modified Carbon
Tax Scheme
in application, incremental
from this
(no connection to me)
COMMENT / HEALTH POLICY,
EMPLOYMENT, INTERSTATE COMMERCE
You've been in a health casino
all along. It's simply been
a game where the carrier can't
lose and you've been served
at sufference.
The only limitation to how
climate change can affect
human "epidemiologics" is
the infinity of space beyond
the ignorance contained in
our arrogance.
Just Being Happy Matters
(Body to Mind, Mind to Body,
The Chemistry Increasingly
Citable)
Please Ignore This Being
On-The-Move On-The-Fly
While I Eliminate A HTML
Break Slowing The Page
From Loading
IMPORTANT JOB, AND HOW
THAT RELATES TO TODAY'S
ISSUES
(find evernewecon)
part means, in essence, you are
To Pre-Defined Profit,
The Framers Mandated Health
Coverage for Employees AND
Employee Acquisition
of Hospital Coverage
(Federal Statutes. Why Special?
Some of the Authors
WROTE THE CONSTITUTION)
This (referral networks)
entails many issues.
At ProPublica--An Issue
Particularly With Obama's
Plan Encouraging High
Volume, Though I
Consider Provider Abuses
Being Very Rare.
Frankly, what I really care
about, is someone should be
policing whether people are
getting referrals suspiciously
often, though profitably, from
particular practitioners.
And, also frankly, I would
want to see this simply tested
in the area of general dentistry,
where (a tiny minority
of...) dentists may produce
an inordinate number of
patients needing getting rescued.
If I can think of a nicer way of
putting that, I'll use it.
Earliest Findings:
Broader Coverage
Yields Less Emergency
Room Use
Why Large Banks Love Your
Having a Choice of "Go Naked"
Or "Premium Death Spirals"
Coverage for Employees AND
Employee Acquisition
of Hospital Coverage
(Federal Statutes. Why Special?
Some of the Authors
WROTE THE CONSTITUTION)
This (referral networks)
entails many issues.
At ProPublica--An Issue
Particularly With Obama's
Plan Encouraging High
Volume, Though I
Consider Provider Abuses
Being Very Rare.
Frankly, what I really care
about, is someone should be
policing whether people are
getting referrals suspiciously
often, though profitably, from
particular practitioners.
And, also frankly, I would
want to see this simply tested
in the area of general dentistry,
where (a tiny minority
of...) dentists may produce
an inordinate number of
patients needing getting rescued.
If I can think of a nicer way of
putting that, I'll use it.
Earliest Findings:
Broader Coverage
Yields Less Emergency
Room Use
Why Large Banks Love Your
Having a Choice of "Go Naked"
Or "Premium Death Spirals"
As physicians are cited
responding to this, it must be true
the proposal was actually made.
Though personally familiar with
the American and Canadian tourist
occasionally buying some popular
prescription drugs for him / her self
at places such as this (Puerto
Vallarta, pharmacy in the back,) at least
for me I consider this proposal as
actually sending a dangerous message;
and if it were effectuated, likely
to add to cost.
Analogize: you test-apply carpet
cleaner before you actually use it.
Many / most drugs, even sporting
the most innocuous images, carry
the sorts of risks any poison carries,
each drug being a + vs. - decision.
Liver and psych alterations are 2
obvious first concerns, but should a
patient actually present an issue
during physical I don't think there's
such a thing as a LabCorp test-for-
what's-been-popped test, and so one
can imagine doctors asking themselves
if they need re-visits simply after saying
come back after discontinuing
whatever you've been taking.
Obviously pharma hasn't figured out
how to make O-T-C tiering work.
When A Drug Is Legally On
The Market, And Will Likely
Help You, But It's Not FDA
Approved For Your Application,
Should Your Carrier Help Out
If Your Doctor Wants To Use It?
Stanford Genome Technology Center:
Predictions Made As To An Individual's
Genetic Risk of Developing Specific
Diseases, Using Commercial SNP
(Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms,)
May Vary From Those From Next
Generation Sequencing
(That Means They
May Be Wrong)
Application For Labeling
OxyContin For Kids
(Not Independently Verified)
responding to this, it must be true
the proposal was actually made.
Though personally familiar with
the American and Canadian tourist
occasionally buying some popular
prescription drugs for him / her self
at places such as this (Puerto
Vallarta, pharmacy in the back,) at least
for me I consider this proposal as
actually sending a dangerous message;
and if it were effectuated, likely
to add to cost.
Analogize: you test-apply carpet
cleaner before you actually use it.
Many / most drugs, even sporting
the most innocuous images, carry
the sorts of risks any poison carries,
each drug being a + vs. - decision.
Liver and psych alterations are 2
obvious first concerns, but should a
patient actually present an issue
during physical I don't think there's
such a thing as a LabCorp test-for-
what's-been-popped test, and so one
can imagine doctors asking themselves
if they need re-visits simply after saying
come back after discontinuing
whatever you've been taking.
Obviously pharma hasn't figured out
how to make O-T-C tiering work.
When A Drug Is Legally On
The Market, And Will Likely
Help You, But It's Not FDA
Approved For Your Application,
Should Your Carrier Help Out
If Your Doctor Wants To Use It?
Stanford Genome Technology Center:
Predictions Made As To An Individual's
Genetic Risk of Developing Specific
Diseases, Using Commercial SNP
(Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms,)
May Vary From Those From Next
Generation Sequencing
(That Means They
May Be Wrong)
Application For Labeling
OxyContin For Kids
(Not Independently Verified)
But I Realize The Middle Class
Is Finding Dental Hygiene
Ever More Difficult To Pursue
(That's Obviously A Matter Of
Not Getting Shafted On Policy,)
APPROPOS
ALSO
But Y'all Come Back Here Now
But Carriers In A "Rationalized"
Health Coverage System Can Better
See Their Own Purpose In
Providing Realistic Dental
Coverage
Serves:
A) The Access, Of Course
B) Creates Health Consciousness
And A Cross-Vehicle For Other
Health Education Efforts
C) Inspires, Maybe Even Fear-
Motivates (With Gums, That
Works For Me) Better
Health Behavior
D) Motivates Democratic Self-
Help, Which Helps Everyone.
Virtually All Uncovered Cost,
You Should Know, Is
"Shifted," In Any Event,
The Carriers Simply Having
Carved Out A Profit Niche
Or Next Seeing Cost-Plus,
You Paying For Whatever
Volume Passed Through.
People Seeing A Positive
Future Are Better Custodians
Of Their Own Health.
Technology Re-purposed
For Removing Radiation
From Your Morning
Coffee
Radiation App
As Disdainful As
((Alleged) Leaked)
Administration Efforts
To Support Monopolistic
Pricing of Drugs Are,
THIS
Most Threatens Your
Future Ability To Recover
From Illness By Slowing
The Discovery Process.
You Can Lose A Loved
One Some Years From
Now Quite Easily
Entirely Because Of That.
Property Content In Process
Should Have Protected Value
Where Administrative
Authorities Deem It Suited.
(Not Legal Advice)
The Scientific Knowledge Gained,
Whatever the Source, Obviously
Has A Brainstorming Value.
Scientific Progress
Should Not Be Conducted
Absent Greater Visibility.
Certainly Where Any
Component Of Clinical
Studies Involves Public
Funds, The Public Should
Be Able To Require That.
That Has Been A Cornerstone
Of National Scientific Advance
Through The Ages And
The Opposite, To Me,
Represents A Fundamental,
Societal, Failure.
That Degree Of Structured
Anti-Social-Style Economic
Conduct In A Scientific
Sector Actually Strikes Me
As Raising Anthropologic
Questions, And I'm Carefully
Trying To Avoid Sounding
Melodramatic. It Runs
Counter To The Presumed
Natural Common Aim For
Common Community
Survival, N'Est-Ce Pas?
Are Drones
Transponder-Visible,
Or Visible At All,
To Air Traffic
Controllers?
Meta-Analysis Using Partly
Data Obtained By Legal
Process Indicates Kidneys
Particularly Affected In Men,
Livers In Women, By GMO
Corn, GMO Soy
The Revolving Door in Federal
Agencies and Corporate Control
of Congress Produce
This Item:
Public Health Programs, Even
Ones Supportive of Privatized
Profits and Socialized Cost,
Get the Heave-Ho
Is Finding Dental Hygiene
Ever More Difficult To Pursue
(That's Obviously A Matter Of
Not Getting Shafted On Policy,)
APPROPOS
ALSO
But Y'all Come Back Here Now
But Carriers In A "Rationalized"
Health Coverage System Can Better
See Their Own Purpose In
Providing Realistic Dental
Coverage
Serves:
A) The Access, Of Course
B) Creates Health Consciousness
And A Cross-Vehicle For Other
Health Education Efforts
C) Inspires, Maybe Even Fear-
Motivates (With Gums, That
Works For Me) Better
Health Behavior
D) Motivates Democratic Self-
Help, Which Helps Everyone.
Virtually All Uncovered Cost,
You Should Know, Is
"Shifted," In Any Event,
The Carriers Simply Having
Carved Out A Profit Niche
Or Next Seeing Cost-Plus,
You Paying For Whatever
Volume Passed Through.
People Seeing A Positive
Future Are Better Custodians
Of Their Own Health.
Technology Re-purposed
For Removing Radiation
From Your Morning
Coffee
Radiation App
As Disdainful As
((Alleged) Leaked)
Administration Efforts
To Support Monopolistic
Pricing of Drugs Are,
THIS
Most Threatens Your
Future Ability To Recover
From Illness By Slowing
The Discovery Process.
You Can Lose A Loved
One Some Years From
Now Quite Easily
Entirely Because Of That.
Property Content In Process
Should Have Protected Value
Where Administrative
Authorities Deem It Suited.
(Not Legal Advice)
The Scientific Knowledge Gained,
Whatever the Source, Obviously
Has A Brainstorming Value.
Scientific Progress
Should Not Be Conducted
Absent Greater Visibility.
Certainly Where Any
Component Of Clinical
Studies Involves Public
Funds, The Public Should
Be Able To Require That.
That Has Been A Cornerstone
Of National Scientific Advance
Through The Ages And
The Opposite, To Me,
Represents A Fundamental,
Societal, Failure.
That Degree Of Structured
Anti-Social-Style Economic
Conduct In A Scientific
Sector Actually Strikes Me
As Raising Anthropologic
Questions, And I'm Carefully
Trying To Avoid Sounding
Melodramatic. It Runs
Counter To The Presumed
Natural Common Aim For
Common Community
Survival, N'Est-Ce Pas?
Are Drones
Transponder-Visible,
Or Visible At All,
To Air Traffic
Controllers?
Meta-Analysis Using Partly
Data Obtained By Legal
Process Indicates Kidneys
Particularly Affected In Men,
Livers In Women, By GMO
Corn, GMO Soy
The Revolving Door in Federal
Agencies and Corporate Control
of Congress Produce
This Item:
Public Health Programs, Even
Ones Supportive of Privatized
Profits and Socialized Cost,
Get the Heave-Ho
For Each Special Tree That Grows
In A Poorly Governed Community
There Could Be A Thousand. While
Addressing Medical Care
Organization Specifically, This Page
Also Reflects That One Might Quickly
Realize Economics Interfaces Matters
Of Community And Personal Health
In Many Ways. No Wonder It Is
That “Place” Itself
I'm Really Glad A
Physician-Academician
Conducted The Prime
Study Linked Above.
Place Alone Bears On
All Health Status Issues,
Including The Cancer
And Heart Disease Treated
In The Clinic And Hospital--
And IT EVEN BEARS AT
THE GENETIC LEVEL.
-----
Is Today
Understood As Being A Common
Denominator.
(In Real Life)
A Place Can Be Wealthy But
Lacking In Priorities. Birds Can’t
Fly Unless Their Community
Is Healthy.
-----
In A Poorly Governed Community
There Could Be A Thousand. While
Addressing Medical Care
Organization Specifically, This Page
Also Reflects That One Might Quickly
Realize Economics Interfaces Matters
Of Community And Personal Health
In Many Ways. No Wonder It Is
That “Place” Itself
I'm Really Glad A
Physician-Academician
Conducted The Prime
Study Linked Above.
Place Alone Bears On
All Health Status Issues,
Including The Cancer
And Heart Disease Treated
In The Clinic And Hospital--
And IT EVEN BEARS AT
THE GENETIC LEVEL.
-----
Is Today
Understood As Being A Common
Denominator.
(In Real Life)
A Place Can Be Wealthy But
Lacking In Priorities. Birds Can’t
Fly Unless Their Community
Is Healthy.
-----
Democracy, Free Enterprise
Practiced Legitimately, And
Health And Happiness
Depend On A Strong Depth
And Breadth Of Education.
FROM THIS SEE
HOW EDUCATION
UNDERCUTS THE
DEMAGOGUE.
IT ENABLES SUCH
THINGS AS DISTINGUISHING
THIS FROM THE
ALTERED SELF-SERVING
VERSION, NO MATTER
HOW MUCH FINANCING
GOES INTO THE
ALTERATION AND
ITS ADHERENTS.
In The Land Created On The
Basis Of All Men And Women
Being Equal By
Birthright There Is No Semblance
Of Equal Opportunity.
The Sapping Of Public School
Resources Aggravates That.
"Bill Gates Admits He Was
Wrong (Bloomberg Doesn't)"
HuffPo
Unionized Schools Afford Superior
Performance Despite The Childish
Denial By Way Of Reliance On
Misinformation Of That By The
Mouthpieces Of Demagogues
Profiting At Everyone
Else's Expense.
If There Should Be Self-
Serving Demagogues Of
Dubious Feelings Toward Other
People With Billions Of Dollars,
Why Would They Want
People To Have Any Opportunity
But To Do Whatever Work
They Have For Them?
The Poorer You Are The
More Willing To Help
Perform An Extractive
Job? Apply Force For Pay?
When That Self-Centeredness
Crashes A System, Along
With Duplicitous Banking And
Monopolies, There's Always
Shafting The Vulnerable, Eh?
Why Would They Want Them
To Have Time For Writing Blogs
Like This One?
Implicit In This Is Students
Are Compelled To Sell Out.
Policy Not Designed To
Conform To Oligopolistic
Control Would Allow For
Much Lower Tuition.
This Being A Blog, Not A
Textbook, Some Free-Hand
Exists
-1- -2- (Re-Written)
But Place Matters In Many Ways,
Cause The Health And Economics
Of The Individual And The
Community Are Connected.
It’s In Everyone’s Interest. An
Engine Runs Better With All
Its Cylinders Working.
Ejection
Fraction
Cause The Health And Economics
Of The Individual And The
Community Are Connected.
It’s In Everyone’s Interest. An
Engine Runs Better With All
Its Cylinders Working.
Ejection
Fraction
Our Health Care System Is One
Basket Of Economic Issues.
Health Planning Is Another.
If Health Is The Priority,
All Planning Is Health Planning.
This
Or
This
Which Looks Better?
Barcelona's Rambla
Our Macro Existence Bears On
People's Health, And Its Affairs
Bear On Health Economics, Really
Quite Directly.
It Also Affords Insight Into The
Conduct Of The Health Sector.
Our Communities' Economic
States Weigh Heavily On People's
Health In A Multitude Of Ways.
Health Economics Bears On Large And
Small Components Of The System,
And On Local Realities.
Hence, Place Alone Is Defining.
Our Communities' Problems Are
Not Difficult To Address.
We Have People Who Need Jobs.
We Have Communities With Work
To Be Done.
We’re Missing Endless
Numbers Of Blooms
------
If A Kid Becomes An
Artist And Starts Painting
Like Van Gogh, Don't Worry,
We'll Keep Her/Him From
Cutting Off Her/His Ear.
But We Can't Do Any Of That
Without Supporting Our Schools
And Getting A Start On Supporting
Families And Their Health.
------
SEE
Basket Of Economic Issues.
Health Planning Is Another.
If Health Is The Priority,
All Planning Is Health Planning.
This
Or
This
Which Looks Better?
Barcelona's Rambla
Our Macro Existence Bears On
People's Health, And Its Affairs
Bear On Health Economics, Really
Quite Directly.
It Also Affords Insight Into The
Conduct Of The Health Sector.
Our Communities' Economic
States Weigh Heavily On People's
Health In A Multitude Of Ways.
Health Economics Bears On Large And
Small Components Of The System,
And On Local Realities.
Hence, Place Alone Is Defining.
Our Communities' Problems Are
Not Difficult To Address.
We Have People Who Need Jobs.
We Have Communities With Work
To Be Done.
We’re Missing Endless
Numbers Of Blooms
------
If A Kid Becomes An
Artist And Starts Painting
Like Van Gogh, Don't Worry,
We'll Keep Her/Him From
Cutting Off Her/His Ear.
But We Can't Do Any Of That
Without Supporting Our Schools
And Getting A Start On Supporting
Families And Their Health.
------
SEE
Economics Per Se Include,
(Among Other Locations:)
-1- -3-
-4- -5-
-7- -9-
Not Only Is The Above
List Missing A Couple
Numbers, But These
Links Suddenly Appeared!
(Taxpayers Helping
Out A Cartel / ALSO)
And This One:
Inducing Global Warming
And Profiting From It
Can Someone Please Explain
What's Happening Around
Here?
If You Have An Issue With
Trust, This Page Obviously
Bears On That. I Think
“Rationalization” Should
Reasonably Allay That Even
For The Skeptically Inclined,
Though I Don’t Resist Larger
Overhauls Than The “Risk
Equalization” I Advocate.
Though I Think ObamaCare
Improves Upon What Precedes
It, One Of Its Flaws Is The
Lack Of Structure, Particularly
Outside The High Risk
Exchanges (Taxpayers Helping
Out A Cartel / ALSO) In Terms Of
Greater Rationalization And
Thus The Absence Of Solidifying
Trust. I Wouldn’t Want Long
Waiting Times, But Other
Populations Probably DO Feel
More Secure And At Ease.
If You Don’t Have An Issue With
Trust, Then A U.S. Licensed
Doctor Who’s Acquainted With
Your History And Current
Physical Is The Woman Or Man
With The Best Current Judgement
For What You Should Do, If Not
The Only Person With Any Good
Judgement As To Your
Particular Case.
Trust, This Page Obviously
Bears On That. I Think
“Rationalization” Should
Reasonably Allay That Even
For The Skeptically Inclined,
Though I Don’t Resist Larger
Overhauls Than The “Risk
Equalization” I Advocate.
Though I Think ObamaCare
Improves Upon What Precedes
It, One Of Its Flaws Is The
Lack Of Structure, Particularly
Outside The High Risk
Exchanges (Taxpayers Helping
Out A Cartel / ALSO) In Terms Of
Greater Rationalization And
Thus The Absence Of Solidifying
Trust. I Wouldn’t Want Long
Waiting Times, But Other
Populations Probably DO Feel
More Secure And At Ease.
If You Don’t Have An Issue With
Trust, Then A U.S. Licensed
Doctor Who’s Acquainted With
Your History And Current
Physical Is The Woman Or Man
With The Best Current Judgement
For What You Should Do, If Not
The Only Person With Any Good
Judgement As To Your
Particular Case.
COMMUNITY AS PATIENT
REGION PREAMBLE
(Not Pre-Ramble)
I've Placed An Assessment
As To GMO Management
(They Can Be Great, But Doing
It For Insecticide Production
Or Durability Value, Including
Potentially For Some
Degree Of Market Control
Value, Could Be Not So Great)
Here.
Doctors, Aggies, Biologists
Have To Work Out Degrees
Of Impact And Natures Of
Application In A Management
Regime.
Currently The American Diet
Is Grounded In GMO's That
The Rest Of The World Has
Thoroughly Rejected. Rather
Than Market Controlled
Insecticide-Expressing/-Better
Enduring Production Of Corn
Sweetener The U.S. Should
Incentivize Cultivation Of Such
Things As Organic Blueberries So
Really Helpful Foods Won't Cost
$US 3.99/lb. And Rising Fast. I
Now Address PH-Applied Nutrition
Considerably Below. What's The
Point Absent A Less Controlled
And Extractive Food Production
Chain? Those Berries Should
Be Well Below $2/lb. Tops. It's
Access To Wholesome Food
As Birthright, It's Economically
Pay Now Or Pay Later, But
Planting The Land With Right
Foods Obviates Cash Transfers.
If Ag's To Get Subsidized, Then
Help Farmers Get Rich From
Doing The Right Things.
Union Of Concerned
Scientists On Making
The Right Foods
Cheaper And
More Abundant
Producing Wholesome
Food Is Better For
The Source-
Economies
Human Genetic Intervention
Is No Longer Necessarily
Remedial, And Even If Only
Epigenetically (Activator
Genes,) May Include Novel
Genetic Expression. Designer
Humans May Not Necessarily
Be Quite The Package Of
Balance And Possibilities Best
For The Community. Smart
People And Strong People Need
Judgement And "Humanity."
I Don't Think It's Too Early
For Ethics Centers To Start
Contemplating Guidelines.
Someone Has To See If
Someone's Behaving Like
Max Zorin, The World's Most
Famous Designer Human.
Also See
Back To Eating:
This Is From The Center
For Food Safety, But I
Simply Assume That A
Food Consists Of GMO's
Unless Otherwise Specified
"Non-GMO," And I've
Abandoned Some Old
Favorites.
A Large Part Of What's
Wrong Is The Slowness
With Which A Collaboration
Of Expert Groups Is
Triaging Along The Lines
Of Nature Of GMO
(Expressing Insecticide?
Blowing Away Synapses?
Bringing Forth Parkinson's?
--Triples The Risk/
Beate Ritz, UCLA Sch.
Of Public Health--This Doctor
Really Confirming What
Doctors Long Suspected-Knew)
And Then Amount Of Testing
Appropriate. In The
Meanwhile, I Also Assume
The Worst.
I Write This Website Making Light
Of The Issues W/O Making Light
Of The Issues.) But Underlying
It, The Center For Food Safety,
For Instance, Is Reflecting A Sense
Of Urgency. I Rarely To Never Link
Outside Something Like Them, But,
I Like This. Added, At Least Basis
The Guinea Pig Rule. There's Nothing
Wrong W/ GMO Per Se Except For
Going About It Wrongly And Going
About It A Step Behind People With
Market Control In Mind.
Homemade Take On It.
We've Revolving Doors In
Government. We've Genetics
Surprisingly Innovative, Though
Hit And Miss And Proprietary
Ownership Of Seeds Of GMO's
Yielding Insecticide Is One
Thing. Using That In A Market
Controlling Fashion Is Another.
As To The Science, It's Like
Roger Barnes Saying I'd Just
Like To Slow Things Down.
As To The Policy.
This Unites With Economics
Centrally, So W/O Trying To
Sound Melodramatic, There Is
In This A Combining Of The
Biology Of Humans And Habitat
With The Economics Of Humans
And Habitat.
The American Academy Of
Environmental Medicine on
AMA’s
(pdf / AAEM)
Policy on GMO Foods
I Think Some News Sources
Implied The AMA's Simply
Acquiescent About GMO's
('Aint So)
Apart From Pressure Gradients
And Other Energy Systems,
Weather Moves West To
East Generally.
As The U.S. West Coast Gets
More Precipitation Over The
Coming Months, People
Will Benefit From Best
Information Sources Not
Sitting Transfixed, Providing
These Types Of Re-Assurances
Combined With Provisos As
To Extreme Avoidable Exposure
Risk.
Articles On Radiation
Health Hazard From
Physicians For Social
Responsibility--Environmental
Health Institute
Is There A General
Insufficient Redundancy
Of Safeguards At
Nuclear Power Generators?
The Need For Better Citizen
Involvement In Securing
Them (Crowdsourcing
Government There Too)
And/Or Replacement Is
Only Rivaled By This
Need.
Many Readers At The
Preamble Come From Here.
REGION PREAMBLE
(Not Pre-Ramble)
I've Placed An Assessment
As To GMO Management
(They Can Be Great, But Doing
It For Insecticide Production
Or Durability Value, Including
Potentially For Some
Degree Of Market Control
Value, Could Be Not So Great)
Here.
Doctors, Aggies, Biologists
Have To Work Out Degrees
Of Impact And Natures Of
Application In A Management
Regime.
Currently The American Diet
Is Grounded In GMO's That
The Rest Of The World Has
Thoroughly Rejected. Rather
Than Market Controlled
Insecticide-Expressing/-Better
Enduring Production Of Corn
Sweetener The U.S. Should
Incentivize Cultivation Of Such
Things As Organic Blueberries So
Really Helpful Foods Won't Cost
$US 3.99/lb. And Rising Fast. I
Now Address PH-Applied Nutrition
Considerably Below. What's The
Point Absent A Less Controlled
And Extractive Food Production
Chain? Those Berries Should
Be Well Below $2/lb. Tops. It's
Access To Wholesome Food
As Birthright, It's Economically
Pay Now Or Pay Later, But
Planting The Land With Right
Foods Obviates Cash Transfers.
If Ag's To Get Subsidized, Then
Help Farmers Get Rich From
Doing The Right Things.
Union Of Concerned
Scientists On Making
The Right Foods
Cheaper And
More Abundant
Producing Wholesome
Food Is Better For
The Source-
Economies
Human Genetic Intervention
Is No Longer Necessarily
Remedial, And Even If Only
Epigenetically (Activator
Genes,) May Include Novel
Genetic Expression. Designer
Humans May Not Necessarily
Be Quite The Package Of
Balance And Possibilities Best
For The Community. Smart
People And Strong People Need
Judgement And "Humanity."
I Don't Think It's Too Early
For Ethics Centers To Start
Contemplating Guidelines.
Someone Has To See If
Someone's Behaving Like
Max Zorin, The World's Most
Famous Designer Human.
Also See
Back To Eating:
This Is From The Center
For Food Safety, But I
Simply Assume That A
Food Consists Of GMO's
Unless Otherwise Specified
"Non-GMO," And I've
Abandoned Some Old
Favorites.
A Large Part Of What's
Wrong Is The Slowness
With Which A Collaboration
Of Expert Groups Is
Triaging Along The Lines
Of Nature Of GMO
(Expressing Insecticide?
Blowing Away Synapses?
Bringing Forth Parkinson's?
--Triples The Risk/
Beate Ritz, UCLA Sch.
Of Public Health--This Doctor
Really Confirming What
Doctors Long Suspected-Knew)
And Then Amount Of Testing
Appropriate. In The
Meanwhile, I Also Assume
The Worst.
I Write This Website Making Light
Of The Issues W/O Making Light
Of The Issues.) But Underlying
It, The Center For Food Safety,
For Instance, Is Reflecting A Sense
Of Urgency. I Rarely To Never Link
Outside Something Like Them, But,
I Like This. Added, At Least Basis
The Guinea Pig Rule. There's Nothing
Wrong W/ GMO Per Se Except For
Going About It Wrongly And Going
About It A Step Behind People With
Market Control In Mind.
Homemade Take On It.
We've Revolving Doors In
Government. We've Genetics
Surprisingly Innovative, Though
Hit And Miss And Proprietary
Ownership Of Seeds Of GMO's
Yielding Insecticide Is One
Thing. Using That In A Market
Controlling Fashion Is Another.
As To The Science, It's Like
Roger Barnes Saying I'd Just
Like To Slow Things Down.
As To The Policy.
This Unites With Economics
Centrally, So W/O Trying To
Sound Melodramatic, There Is
In This A Combining Of The
Biology Of Humans And Habitat
With The Economics Of Humans
And Habitat.
The American Academy Of
Environmental Medicine on
AMA’s
(pdf / AAEM)
Policy on GMO Foods
I Think Some News Sources
Implied The AMA's Simply
Acquiescent About GMO's
('Aint So)
Apart From Pressure Gradients
And Other Energy Systems,
Weather Moves West To
East Generally.
As The U.S. West Coast Gets
More Precipitation Over The
Coming Months, People
Will Benefit From Best
Information Sources Not
Sitting Transfixed, Providing
These Types Of Re-Assurances
Combined With Provisos As
To Extreme Avoidable Exposure
Risk.
Articles On Radiation
Health Hazard From
Physicians For Social
Responsibility--Environmental
Health Institute
Is There A General
Insufficient Redundancy
Of Safeguards At
Nuclear Power Generators?
The Need For Better Citizen
Involvement In Securing
Them (Crowdsourcing
Government There Too)
And/Or Replacement Is
Only Rivaled By This
Need.
Many Readers At The
Preamble Come From Here.
Hands-On Community As Patient
With Extended Original Input.
(But Otherwise With Biology
And Economics Intermixed
From Page Top To Page Bottom)
Main Community As Patient Space
Homicide Spreads Like The Flu
SOURCE
April M. Zeoli, Jesenia M. Pizarro,
Christopher Melde: Michigan State U./Crim.Just.
(Zeoli With Formal Public Health Background;)
Sue C. Grady, Michigan State U. Epidemiology
To Me An Exciting Application
Of Epidemiology Based On The
Sorts Of Applications I Suggest,
The Questions And Opinions
Being Only Mine:
Is There A Psychological And/Or
Anthropologic Vector
Predisposing To Crime?
Is There Simply A Community
Pathology Vector?
Can Policing Be More
Effectively Integrated With
Some Public Health Efforts?
(As In Preventatively/Not Negatively
/Not Threatening/Softer)
Also, To Me, Most Topics Covered
At The Source Publication Are Obviated
By Better Public Education And
Inspirational Opportunities.
Communities Do Not Choose
Being Denied Equal Opportunity.
Successful Effort
Successful Effort
-----
Politics Aside, The Map Speaks For
Itself, A Stunning Extension Of
Epidemiology (Tracing Out What's
Wrong,) The Purpose And Places
Thus Identified, So The MSU Team
Identifies Regions In Subject Location
Newark, NJ That Were Resistant,
A Trait Worth Trading Off Of.
Is This Where They're Looking?
Teacher Associations Everywhere Are
Crying Out For Not Diverting Resources
From Public Education, Which Can Only
Weaken It, And Which Will Nonetheless
Remain The Bedrock Of Education's Future,
And Against The Denial Of Quality
Educational Opportunity. NEA CFT
But Teachers Don't Forget The Oligopoly
Masquerading As Government Programs
Not Mainly Helping Oligopoly. Oligopoly
Is The Salt Mine.
So, This Being Public Health Originally,
-C- Also, My Outreach.
DON'T DOUBT
A MINUTE THE INSURERS
DESPARATELY WANT
OBAMACARE. But It's Static.
Taleb Happened To Explain
That Publicly. It's Putin
Or Oligopoly That Deliver
That, Not Market
Progressives.
This NEJM Column Includes
Reservations Consistent
With Mine.
Obamacare Architect Leaves
White House for Pharmaceutical
Industry Job
"Few people embody the corporatist
revolving door greasing Washington
as purely as Elizabeth Fowler"
Glenn Greenwald,
The Guardian, 12/5/2012
(Picture Available
With Article)
(Incidentally, Union
Shattering Attempts Are
Happening Concurrently)
So, You See, Cost Shifting Meant
During The Exclusions And Cherry
Picking Game Unreimbursed Costs
Passed Through The System
Ultimately Bankrupting Some
Patients, Partly Ultimately Passed
Through To Everyone Else Who
Otherwise Presumed They Weren't
Paying For Someone Else, The
Carriers Unscathed--Their Cherry-
Picked Risk Pre-Defined.
Obamacare Supplies The Cash From
The Taxpayer For That Only Up
To A Degree Of Need So As To
Cement The Formation Of An
Oligopoly Institutionalized, Precisely
In The Fashion Of The Famous
Industry Trusts Of The Past.
Monopoly's Very Definition Is The
Ability To Charge Different Prices
Per Abilities To Pay. ObamaCare
Stipulates Profit Margins, Running
To As High As 40% Operationally
(60% "Medical Loss Ratio") In
Low Risk "Bronze Tier" Policies,
Where Healthy Youngsters Will
Find Seemingly More Affordable,
But Really Highly Profitable Products.
Medicare Is National Health Insurance
for Customers The Carriers Don't
Want But They Get Paid Extra To
Get Take Them Back.
They Also Get Patient Maintenance
(Medicare Contracts) Wherein They
Also Take Back Patients Who Should
Never Have Been Palmed Off To
The Taxpayers In Self-Privileged
Fashion; But, I'm Happy To Say That
At Least There They Actually Have
Contributed To Medical "Rationalization,"
Because Then, With A Fixed Head-Count
Payment, They Live Within An
"Accountable Care" Regime. Such
Regime, With "Value Basing" And
Other (Particularly Hospitalization-
Reducing) Maintenance Rationalization,
Famously Including The HMO's,
Should Live Within A Risk Equalized
Structure Wherein Simply Milking
The System And Passing Tapped
Out Risk To The Taxpayer By Way
Of The High Risk Exchanges,
What I Call "Outskirts Of Medicare,"
Is Replaced Also With Repeal Of
Immunity From Anti-Trust.
Then, Only Rationalization And
An Honest Level Of Efficiency,
Ongoing Reward, And A Non-
"Static" Environment Will Exist.
It's The Nature Of Medical Care
That The Result Would Likely
Resemble Single-Payer, But Of
Course My Own Suggestion's
Flavor Is Market Progressive.
Even The UK, Whose
Population Rightly Desparately
Doesn't Want The NHS Cut
Back, Rightly Benefits From What
It Learns From ALL Lessons
Learned From ALL Inputs
Right Here In The U.S. That
Involve Instances Of Accountable
Care. My Own Idea Includes
Modified Charters With Doctor
And Patient Representatives
Materially Influencing Still-Profit
Based Carriers.
Rich Demagogues Have No Fondness
Or Need For Public Health.
We're Not Atomaton For Extraction.
We're Not Los Scientificos Y
Los Hacendados
I've Explained How In Paying For
Our Own Control We Cause Our
Own Immediate Deprivations
(Paid For By Ourselves) While
Simultaneously Causing Loss To
Our Overall Economy And
Environment. Consequently
Community Health Suffers,
Just As Does Public Education, And
The Cohesiveness Of Health Economics
Efforts, Even Allowing For Differences
Of Opinion, Could Be Better,
But In The End With Any
Disagreements Being Over:
To What
Extent Do We Have To Get
Penalized By Oligopolistic Control.
Most Sensibly See The End Of
Exclusions And Cherry Picking.
I See A Monopoly Perfected And
A Population Exquisitely Calculated
For Being Played For Every Penny
In A Static System (Except For
A Lip Service Affordable Care Act
Function As To Efficiency Improvements
Promising To Likely Hire Some
Younger Folks In My Field, Which I
Probably Shouldn't Interfere With.)
I Can Pretty Much Guarantee
Nothing Will Happen To Interfere
With The Profit Percentages.
Absent Changes, Notwithstanding
A Modest List Of Items Not
Allowed Subject To Deductions,
Patients Will Be DIS-incentivized
To See The Doctor When They
Get An Ambiguous Thing On Their
Skin, Or Have A Maybe Seriously
Broken Toe, Or Even If They
Have An Alarming Red Splotch
In An Eye, If They've A Just Go
Away Deductible Cause It's Still
Then More Profitable Than
Being Palmed Off To The High
Risk Exchanges, And If It's Only
3 Weeks For The Deductible To
Reset.
The High Risk Exchanges Will
With Medicare Itself Help
Constitute A Pair Of Punching
Bags, Cause Once Palmed Off,
If There Are Oligopolistic Bank
Bubbles To Pay Off Ongoing Ad
Infinitum, Then The Oligopolists
Simply Can't Afford Them.
With This It Should Not Be
Obvious The Affordable Care
Act Is The Plan The Carriers
Themselves Do Not Wish To
Live Without. Probably, With
Bernanke Engaging In QE
Infinity For A Handful Of
Bubble Creating Banks, They
Really Are Afraid To Go Back
To The Cherry Picking When
Here The Whole Nation Is
Covered In Perfect Monopolistic
Fashion With The Government
Helping Only So Perfectly
Where It's Needed In Support
Of That.
So About That Academic
Cohesiveness. Some, Probably
Many, Undoubtedly Agree With
This. And Still Prefer It Over
The Cherry Picking And Exclusions.
The Plan Itself, However, Projects
Just Southward Of 21% Of GNP
By 2019, With All The Negatives
I Identify, Which Guarantee
Continued Poor Outcomes
Comparisons, At Least In My
Expectation. That, Again Is
Consistent With The Cost
Of Oligopoly (I Actually Coined:
"Measure Of Civic Burden.")
More.
So That Being The Case I Think
The Fears Of Lack Of Funding,
In This Structure, Of The High
Risk Exchanges Particularly, Will
Be Proved Justified.
And This Law Thus Fails The
Martin Goldstein Test.
@2.50
Add:
O/C Cost Brake: Deductibles/
Co-Insurance W/Minimal If Any
Clinical Rationalization Value
Yes It's Only You Have An
Oligopolisitc Cluster Of Offers That
Are Profit Margin Regulated, But That
Margin Represents A Monopolistic
Scheme Blanket-Universal-Static
That Effectively Is Structured To Milk
Everyone For What They're Worth.
Whether Or Not Single Provider
Is Desirable, Cartel Is Worse.
And -C-
With One More Cost Brake To
Add To The Non-Clinically
Rationalizing Deductibles/
Co-Insurance: Tell The Doctor
What She Can/Can't Do.
So It Certainly Is Twinkles In
The Sky Jackpot Great That
Exclusions And Cherry Picking
Are Gone (Actually There One Get
Start Getting Doubts Because
Policy Choices Will Not Be Easily
Compared Values And The
Program Is Essentially
Self-Policing.)
And So Beyond That The
Program's A Turkey.
“Smoke-Free” Laws Lead
to Fewer Hospitalizations
and Deaths
Crystal E. Tan, MS;
Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, UCSF
Health Professionals Wrong
To Minimize Significance
Of Loopholes In Anti-Smoking
Legislation
Reductions In Hospital
Admissions By Specified
Morbidities Are Stunning
(It Goes W/O Saying The
Reductions Linked Represent
A Huge System Windfall,
Oligopoly Or Not-Privilege-
Structured.) ------
------
Because I Think A Very Casual
Sense Of Observational Science
Was Utilized By Many Earlier
Peoples, I've Proposed The Early
Am. Indians From Whom Tobacco Was
First Obtained May Have, And Their
Ancestry May Still, Enjoyed/Enjoy
(A) Protective Factor(s,) Something
Very Easily Tested For In Stages.
ENEN:
And Noooo..., There's No Way
Avoiding These Specified
Morbidities Simply "Right-
Shifts" Cost. (As I Indicate
Elsewhere, A Highly Dubious
Recent Distraction From The
Only Real Task: Health
Maintenance. "Cheaper-
Death" Blurbs Exist In
Isolation From The Past,
Also Dubious, And Obviously
More Removed From The
Role Of Health Maintenance.)
"Tobacco's" Easily
Yahoo'd "Highly Addictive." I
Personally Don't See How It Can
Be Viewed As Anything But A Far
Riskier Product Than Marijuana.
The Clerk Working Odd Hours
At The Local Drugstore
Pretty Much Knows Most People
Straggling In Need Smokes, Booze
Or Otherewise Really Are
Contagious.
A Person Can Have Very Many
Years Of Ongoing Bypass Surgery
Because Of Cigarette Smoking.
And The Opportunity For
Heroics Keeps Growing.
Economics Is All About Thinking
Fourth Dimensionally, As Emmett
Brown Would Advise, But
Medical Care's Advances Add
A Wrinkle To That.
Essentially, The Young Person
Smoking Her/His Way Into
Trouble Early May Very Well
Experience Many Many Years
Of Financial And Emotional
Challenge.
This Smoking Result Is So
Fundamental, That Against The
Backdrop Of Thousands Of Years
Of Observational Self-Medication
With Natural Substances By Earlier
Civilizations, With Large Homeopathic
Evidence Of Cause And Effect,
Though W/ Stat Confirmations/Methods
Of Action Often Still Needed, That It
Seems Unlikely Native Americans, From
Whom Tobacco Was Discovered,
Would've Been Unaware Of Its Communal
Cost. Many Living In Pristine Environments
Easily Would Have Lived Long Enough
For This To Have Been Discernible.
Doctors Might Consider That Key Tribes
May Have Enjoyed A Special Apoptotic
Or Other Factor.
Public Health People: If Interested
This Implies: Though Smoking Affects
Essentially Everything (You Search
And You Will Find,) Maybe Tribal Smoker
Comparative Lung Cancer Meta Incidence
(Deceased Verifiable Smokers
Who Died From Lung Cancer.
If In Fact A Very Low Rate,
Then Those Families Can Be Secondarily
Surveyed As To Other Cancers.
Then, Microbiologists Can Test
For Commonalities.)
Considering Where
Sir Walter Raleigh Supposedly
Discovered The Stuff, I'd Frankly
Aim This At UNC / (Seriously.
Think About It.)
(Links, Reversed,
Are Righted)
Ancient Chinese Medicine Gives
It Up To Scripps Research
Huihao Zhou, Litao Sun, Xiang-Lei Yang
Paul Schimmel: (Scripps Res. Instit.)
Scripps Orig.
(So The Indians Who Introduced
Tobacco To The Colonists May
Have Enjoyed An Immune,
Apoptotic, Or Other Factor, Which
Their Progeny May Reflect From
Cross-Referencing Smokers With
Cancer Incidence.
I'd Look For Everything Reflecting
Tobacco's Total Spectrum Damage.
But Lung Cancer Would Be The
First Stat To Glance At.)
"Legal By Toll"
Public Health Based
Rationalization Of The Marijuana
Segment Of Commerce.
(State As Retail Partner
Associated With An Unobtrusive
High Volume/Time Oversight
Mechanism)
It's A Complete Public Health Based
Rationalization Of A Segment Of
Commerce That's A Little More
Complicated Than Most Imagine,
If We're Meaning To Be Exacting
In Our Aims.
More Specifics And Impacting
New Knowledge Is Here.
The Most Relevant Clinical Issue
Insofar As Regular, Not Heavy,
Usage Is Concerned, Is
Affect On Memory, With The
Investigation As To That Getting
Quite Intricate And With Useful
Spin-Off Work Likely To Arise.
That's Precisely Because
Marijuana's Active Ingredient Is
Functionally Almost Identical To
An Endorphin Naturally Produced
In Your Own Brains, Which Fact
Argues For The Product's
Naturalness And Benign Nature
As Much As Any Pernicious One.
Hence, An Unobtrusive Usage
By Volume/Time Oversight
Integrated Into A State As
Retail Partner Plan Is What
I Propose.
The Obsessive Resistance To
Reform May Be Naive In
The Face Of Alcohol's, Or Especially
Tobacco's, Or For That Matter
Inadequately Tested GMO's,
Blessing On The Part Of Government,
Not To Mention Lack Of Balance In
Transport, Avoidable Pollution, And
An Essentially Infinite Number Of
Ways Where As Seen In Public Health
The Government Would Do Better
Investing Itself Rather Than
Obsessing Over Marijuana.
This Is Really A Matter Of
"Translational Public Health" Following
On "Translational Medicine."
The Output Is A Positive Enabler
Done Right, Recognizing That The
Chemistry Involved Is Going To Be
Used By Millions Whether Or Not Any
Rationalization Occurs At All.
For Readers Unhappy With The Idea
Of State Interference In This, Firstly,
It Would Obviously Be In The State's
Financial Interest To Remain Highly
Permissive And Non-Obtrusive, And
Defusing The Criminal Channel Requires
That As Well, So On A Practical Level
That Unhappiness Is An Overreaction.
Secondly, I Know Doctors With
Reservations, And Obviously I
Ordinarily Leave The Clinical Judgements
Up To Them.
But Here In Fact See The California
Medical Association's Recommendation
That Marijuana Be Legalized And
Regulated In The Manner Of Alcohol.
This Is Here Because The Last Time
I Checked Effectively Realizing
Legalization Hasn't Happened, With
My Expectation People Will Look
For, Find And Recycle Every Little
Issue Clinically, Though One Will
Find Those In Most Places They
Look, And Because Of The
Following, Summing In Advance.
People Are Having GMO's Of Dubious
Wholesomeness Or Of Known (And
It Obviously Is Now Fact-Based
Known As To Some) Detriment To
Health Half Because Of/ Half Not
Because Of Their Own Choosing,
People Sometimes Don't Hold The
Rail Walking Downstairs, People Can
Eat Too Much Apple Pie And We Lack
Better Public Health Infrastructure,
People Crash Driving In Snow Owing To
Monopolistic Transport Modality,
The Anandamide Confluence, Including
(Still Investigative) Arguments As To
Marijuana's Innocuousness As To Potential
Equational Effect, Etc. Some People Are
Likely Psychologically Affected Faster
And Worse By Others' Unsettled Issues
Than Will Many Heavy Marijuana Users
Start To Show Signs Of Paranoia. Finally,
To Sum, It's Here From My Recognition
Of The Widespread Use In Of The
Underground Economy And My Own Belief
In Placing Something Protective Over
That While Simultaneously Capturing
The Cash Flow.
Of Course, There's Virtually Nothing As
To How We Conduct Ourselves That
Doesn't Impact Our Health.
Now That I've Addressed Those
Wanting 100% Unbridled Commerce,
Which Is Very Close To The Calif. Med.
Assn's View, Tobacco/Alcohol
Comparisons Are Offered For The 0%
Commerce Crowd.
Mental Illness Linked to
Heavy Cannabis Use
This Article Bears More On
People Presenting Illness Turning
To Cannabis To Self-Medicate
(The Illness Comes First, The
Marijuana Offering The Escape.)
Discussion Of Paranoia
(Pertinence More Established)
And Parkinson's Is Integrated
Below. I Deem The Overall Risk
Profile Far Less Concerning Than
For Tobacco, For Starters,
But Also For Very Many Other
External Influencers.
How Much Paranoia Associated
With Mind Altering Substances
(The Issue Arises With Alcohol)
Precedes Usage, Stems From
People's Reactions, And/Or
Results From Usage, Currently
Not An Issue, Or Certainly Not
A Salient Issue, As To Marijuana
Usage, Is Up To The Psychiatrists
To Yet Determine.
The Headline's Undoubtedly Been
Taken Out Of Context, And Thus
This Will Be A Third Item In The
BioMed Reports
Taken Out Of Context Section.
Parkinson's Is Associated Particularly
With Insecticides, Including Naturally
Occurring Ones.
It Really Should Come As No Surprise
That Nature's Insecticides Would Often
Act Similarly To Earlier Human-Made
Insecticides, Derivatives Of Nerve Gas
Used During The World Wars.
The Primary Psycho-Active Ingredient
In Marijuana, THC, Is Functionally
Nearly Identical To Anandamide,
Already Coursing Through The Arteries
Of The Would-Be Prosecutor Of The
Kid Found With A Joint And Thus
Destined By That Hypocritical-By-
Ignorance Prosecutor To A Path Of Being
At Risk Instead Of Being Allowed To Be
A Kid Just Like Kids Enjoyed At
Earlier Times. That View Includes Lots
Of Safety Oversight Where The Criminality
And Likelihood Of The Kid's Getting Into
Trouble From Having A Little Marijuana
Are Covered Non-Intrusively By A
Public Health Umbrella.
Though This Pertains Guns, Earlier
Covered Here By Myself, The Principles
Are The Same As To Marijuana.
There Are Many Anandamides,
Including Those Occurring In
Chocolate.
Now. Do You See Why If
Marijuana's To Be Controlled
It Should Be At Most On A
Volume/Time Basis, Not In A
Manner Arbitrarily 100% Depriving
An Entire Population And Then
Simply Creating A Huge
Monopoly For The Scofflaws?
Just As A Health Cartel Cares
To Capture Cost Shifting In
A Monopolistic Architecture,
Currently The Purveyors Capture
Marijuana Based Revenue In
A Manner Also Not Benefiting
Our Communities.
I Want The Money In Each
Case To Go Toward The
Communities.
Legal By Toll Replaces Monopoly
For Control Freaks With
Compassion.
Marijuana's Relation To Addiction
Is More Comparable To One's
Potential Addiction To Apple
Pie, Generally Speaking, When
Compared To Addiction To
Alcohol Or Tobacco,
The Former Potentially Quite
Addictive And Destructive, The
Latter Essentially Equivalent To
Suicide-By-The Dimness Of The
Product, Which Is To Say, That
Particular Market Is Like A Ponzi
Scheme, Except That, It Has Been
Able To Replenish Its Buyers.
For All We Know Some GMO's
Might Be Inducers Of Parkinson's.
But 4
This,
This,
And The Fact People Become
Addicted To Butter Pecan Ice
Cream And Blaming Other People
For Their Own Mistakes,
Which Is Understandable Since
Our Leaders' Benefactors Do
That, Combined With Recognition
Of Usage Being On Its Way
Anyway, And The Following
"Legal By Toll" Marijuana
Rationalization Plan (Mine) Itself
Involving A Means Of Catching
Excess, I Wouldn't Do
This.
Spin-Off From NASA?
My Own Marijuana Rationalization
Proposal ("Legal By Toll," As In
Toll Booth (You Don't See Them On
Freeways Here In California But
People In New York And New Jersey
Know What I'm Talking About) Applies
Proportion And Recognizes Millions
Of Users Exist And Will Always Exist;
The Dangers From Prolonged
Excessive Use Of Alcohol And
From Any Use Of Tobacco, Or From
Obsessively Eating Particular GMO's,
Or From Relying On A Dangerous
Freeway Interchange Owing To
Monopolized Transportation Modalities,
Can All Be Somewhere Between
Comparable To Much Greater.
The Plan Defuses Much Of
The Criminal Incentive.
It Recognizes That
Marijuana's Active Ingredient Is
Functionally Nearly Identical To One
Of The Endorphins That Would Naturally
Be Coursing Through The Arteries
Of The Prosecutor Who Would Imprison
A Kid For Possession Of A Joint, From
Which He May Well Receive THC
Amounting To Far Less Than The
Anandamide In The Prosecutor's Brain.
Really A More Core Issue Medically,
Anandamide Helps People Forget.
A Virtual Chemical Twin, That's What
THC May Most Directly Interact With.
I Really Think A Public Health Umbrella
Should Be Installed, Easily Self-
Financed (State As Retail Partner
Implies $Billions Annually For
Sacramento Alone, And Can Simply
Be Their As A Time-Volume
Trip-Wire, Which Can Be Age-
Adjusted, Including Disallowing
Purchase Below An Age, Or Which,
Between Certain Ages, Can Be
Administered In The Fashion Of
Family Planning, The Key Point
Being The Intention Of Displacing
Illicit Sales With Compassionate
Oversight.
Of Course, It Can Be A Seed For
Other New Pro-Active, Non-
Intrusive Public Health Initiatives,
Including But Going Beyond
Imitating The Netherlands'
Measured Methadone Alternative
Program, Addressing Issues With
Really Dangerous Drugs, Which
Issues Will Get Addressed One
Way Or Another, Generally Today
Unsatisfactorily By Default.
This Revenue Has Been Passing
Through TBTF Banks By Default,
When It's Not Stuffed In
Mattresses, And Will Continue
Doing So By De Facto Monopoly
Of The Channel, Unless
The Activity Is Rationalized.
Importantly, It Non-Intrusively Enables
Putting People Getting Themselves In
Trouble, Though Their Intentions Are
Benign, On The Public Health Radar
Screen--If And When They Click
A Threshold.
It Finances DUI Enforcement.
If Fills Coffers, Not Prisons.
It Finances Public Schools, Public
Libraries, Public Cultural And Other
Bootstrapping Initiatives.
Drunk Paranoids With
Uncontrollable Rage Can't
Shoot You With A
Marijuana Brownie.
Oral Cancers (Graphic) Are
Caused By Booze, Not
By Marijuana.
There Hardly Been A U.S.
President In Recent Memory
Who Hasn't Admitted Having
Used Marijuana.
From The Guardian:
Did Cocaine Use By Bankers Cause
The Global Financial Crisis?
The Cannabis Article At The Top
Of This Space Was Likely
Widely Taken Out Of Context.
(Will Be Linked With Fukushima-
Exaggerated Hyperthyroidism
Impact And Carbs/Alzheimer's.)
Where It Has Been It's A Little Like
Saying Wait: You're Putting The Onus
On The Sugar In Soda, But Obese
People Also Drink Diet Soda.
Actually, The Sugary Soda Surely IS
A Cultprit. And, In Fact, Doctors DO
Associate Marijuana Use With Paranoia
By Relation To (High) Degree Of Use.
Far Less Established, Doctors Have
Generally Deemed Mind Altering
Substances Hazardous To
Synapses (Potential Parkinson's Risk,
For Instance.) Where A Famous
Person Has Developed Parkinson's
The Thought Is Commonly That
Substance Abuse MAY Have
Contributed (Many Factors Are
Being Discovered Regularly.)
Early Insecticide/Nerve Gas Derived;
Natural Insecticides Do This;
GMO's Are Coding For Naturally
Occurring Insecticides; The
Resistance Is Occurring In Every
Manner That Supposedly Would
Not Occur; I Think The DONOR
Crops Will Ultimately Be At Risk.
(New Knowledge Of GMO
Health Consequences Are Here.)
If Your Staple Is Bad For You,
Marijuana Is Comparably Far
Less Pernicious, And, It's Only
Pernicious With Volume Or In
Association With Behavior That
Should In Any Case Be Found So
Public Health People Can Help.
That's The
Essence Of Legal By Toll, Which
Should Nonetheless Be Worth
$Billions Annually To
Sacramento Alone.)
Legal By Toll Is State As Retail
Partner, For Serious Income,
With A Serious Price, But Not
So High It Wouldn't Defuse
The Crime Incentive. It's The
Nature Of The Product
Customers' Behavior Has To
Be Followed (But Then That
Would Logically Apply More To
Tobacco And Alcohol.)
Nonetheless, The Risk Comparisons
I Offer Stand As To Myself, Including
As To Such Things As Persistently
Eating/Drinking Foods/Beverages
That Are Too Hot, Eating Inadequately
Tested GMO's, Etc.
Pollution Damages Our Neurology.
State As Retail Partner Is An
Opportunity To Place A Public Health
Umbrella Over The Entire Segment
Of Commerce. It Unobtrusively
Places The Individual Actually Getting
Him/Herself In Trouble On The Radar
(High Volume/Time Threshold.)
Otherwise, Anything
Needlessly Labeled Taboo Becomes
The Monopoly Of The Least Deserving.
Environmental Factors
(Including Personal Influencers)
Lending Themselves To Inducing
Persistent Accelerated Cellular
Reproduction (Tissue Repair)
Are Of Carcinogenic Interest.
Consumption Of Marijuana
Brownies And Use Of Marijuana
Joints Do Not Generally Fall Into
This Area Of Concern Presently.
However, Your Tea, Coffee, Soup
Or Dinner, If You Never Wait
For It To Cool Down, Do.
Though Items As To Alcohol/
Alcoholism Will Generally Belong
On This Page, I've A Discussion
As To How Issues Grounded In
Biology Should Be Approached In A
Space Just Beneath More As To
Legal By Toll.
There, Find
NEW NEW
If Alcoholism Partly Reflects
Escapism, Does Monopoly Favor
Its Genetics?
The Following In Relation
To Nutitional Issues, Transplanted
From The Home Page, Will
Proceed To The Food (Linked
From Here) Shortly:
(Nutrition's Theoretical Optimality
Itself Might Be Illusory As Our Own
Metabolisms Change. The
Person Running High Potassium
Is Better Off Without The Banana.
I Keep It Real: Happiness Is
Effective. I Personally Let Variety
And Moderation Happen To Me
Though I Do Lean On The Usuals:
Legumes, O-3, Veggies/
Whole Grain
(Unless Complex
Carbs Should Become Associated
With Evolutionarily Discordant
Insulin/IGF Signaling (Should Be
Protective Vs. Simple Sugars--))
Update: Key Relevant Study
Was Taken Out Of Context By
Many In Major Media.
Complex Carbs Were Still
Protective. Simple Ones
Were Harmful.
I Will Be Using This Very
Study As To Bio-Med Reports
Being Taken Out Of Context
Or Exaggerated As To
Relevant Import,
Probably Here.
But
Of Course The GMO's In This
Category Are Insecticide-Related
Market Controlled Things, With
The Fructose Particularly Derived
From That. 7th Time Linked.)
More Broadly: We Have Homeostatic
Systems Tuned To Natural
Occurrence Of Sustenance.
That Homeostasis Extends
Horizontally And Vertically,
As It Were, To Millions Of Layers
Deep.
Humans Got Into Trouble When
They Invented Separating Out
For Fun Components That Could
Be Concocted Specially.
It's Cake And Ice Cream But
Also This. (After Ad, Opens
Not At The Beginning.)
Hence, Though We Know The
Med Diet, Cold Water Fish,
Etc. Are Especially Healthful,
Variety And Moderation Is
An Acceptable Place To Land
Generally.
Is Someone Trying To Enable
Altering That Metabolism?
Yes.
Anything That Extends The Lifespan
Of The Wits Or Life Of Myself Or
My Loved Ones Will Work For Me.
It Was The American Nurses
Association In The Early 20th
Century That Originally Advised
Variety And Moderation.
There're Important Trace
Nutrients Throughout Nature,
Though Everyone Should Be
Getting Regular Physicals In
Case They Should Have
Particular Dietary Advice.
That's Me. That's This.
You Know What? Some Fast
Food's Undoubtedly Worse
Health-wise Than Having A Joint.
I Earlier Proposed
Epidemiologic Work Seek Potential
Protective Factors Among American
Indians From The Region From Which
Tobacco Was First Obtained By
America's European Settlers. Many
Cultures Possessed At Least
Rudimentary Observational Science,
Especially As To Their Sustenance.
Of Course, The Doctors Are
Making These Judgements
Non-Stop Between Gridlock-
To-Work And Gridlock-Back-
Home.
Whether It's Politicians Or
Actors And Actresses Loosening
Up, Or San Francisco Authors,
Let's Do The Sensible Thing
And Try Adapting To Reality.
If A Trip-Wire Might Catch
Someone Really In Trouble,
Then Let It Do So.
Money Spent On Prosecuting
A Kid Caught Possessing A Joint
Would Be Better Used More
Democratically And Effectively
Policing And Securing Nuclear
Power Plants.
(More As To Taking Bio-Med
Reports Out Of Context)
Hands-On Community As Patient
With Original Input That's
Less Winded
Biology And Economics Are Connected
From Page Top To Bottom.
This Site Is Weighted Toward
Public Health/Medical Care
Economics And Also Has
4 Flavors Of "Community
As Patient:"
Primary
Winded Version
Less Winded
(Present Location)
How To Best Help Each Other
(Nanny State Issue)
Other Similar Spaces Exist Which I'll
Be Linking Separately Mainly For
Additional Wavefront Value.
Part Of What Defines Hospital
Care Is Compassion Combined With
Knowing Insecurities Are Understandable
And Forgivable. But Paranoia,
Uncontained Need To Scapegoat, And
Condescension Can Be So Intensely
Insulting As To Be Threatening To Staff
Operations And Even Staff Health.
Hospitals Should Do More, In Cases
Like This,
Than Simply Say, Well, We Were
Afraid For The Staff’s Safety. Group
Reassurances As To It Being Obvious
The Obnoxious Patient Or Patient’s
Relative Is The Clown, The Staff
Member Should Understand Not To
Take It Personally, Etc., Would
Help, I Think.
I Would Have Shared Every Ounce
Of Tanya’s Sense Of Pain And Insult
And Recovered With Her.
Tanya: Should Anyone You Know
Find This
And Show It To You, I Share, My
Readers Share, Your Pain, Insult And
Outrage. I Am So So Sorry That
Happened To You.
(Not Condoning The Course Taken--I'm
Clueless As To The Claimed Fears, And
This Appears Involving More Than
The Nursing Admin. Line )
Now, Go To The Letting Off Steam Box
To Help Make It Better And Let The
Shrinks Handle The Disturbed People.
Should Someone Actually Have Shown
Her This, Thank You. Have A Nice Day.
Everyone In The Hospital Knows
Medication Can Alter Mood.
I Think The Public Should
Understand That.
Women Drive More Sensibly
And Safely
Michael Sivak, U. of Michigan
(In When Harry Met
Sally, Sally Plainly Says
Women Are Very Practical.)
Popular, With More Accessible
Orig.
But, Women Will Still Have To Pay
The Same Insurance Rates As Men
In Europe.
ENEN:
Noooo. Don't Go Confusing
Pricing Risk With Monopolizing
It's Distribution,
Even Though
The Above Is Wrongful And
Different Rates Would Be
Sensible.
One Can Offer
Risk Management Absent Market
Control. Or One Can Simply
Rake It In With Risk Cubbyholed
To Suit. This Issue As To
Probabilities And Fairness Goes
Back For Centuries. Science And
Economics Rationalized Along
Being A Fair, Honest Market
Progressive Should Leave Us In
A Place Like This: Everyone Gets Care.
Quality Matters, Cost Contained
Rationally, With It Not
At All Difficult For The Well
Intended Person To Get Those
Objectives In Accord With The
Patient Community Being
Yet Happier With, And Unafraid To
Enter And Less Afraid Of
Simultaneously Confident About
Its Quality. And High Outcomes
Level.
-----
Overlapping The Medical
Social Worker's Role Some, The
Nurse Advocate (Links Upstate)
Is More Clinically Connected,
Informed And Instructional
To The Patient, Which Is Far
Better Than Good Luck, Next
Patient Please. As I Often Say,
American Health Care Is Largely
Not Whole Care, Let Alone Holistic.
Nurses Filling Voids In Primary Care
(UCSF)
ENEN:
In A Rational System Medical-Financial
Concerns, Patient Lack Of Direction And
Health Education/Information/Behavior
Disconnect Would Not Exist. Some
Organizations Are Further Advanced
Independently. The Above Will In Any
Setting Play A Vital Role, With Medical
Social Workers Also Providing Patient
Support. A Rational System Would
Remove Some Of The Challenges
Of The Latter Group.
Only Choice Separates Patients
From Being Medical-Financially
Carefree, Trusting, And Aligned In
Terms Of Health
Education, Information And
Personally Matched
Behavior Support, Such That
Maintenance Becomes Routine,
With The Inconvenience And
Apprehension Vastly Reduced,
And The Illness-Causing And
Aggravating Stresses Of Simply
Being Ill, Obviously Currently
Aggravated By Financial Stress,
Removed And Replaced Only With
System As Companion That We
Actually Now Know Has A
Positive Affect.
The Opposite Is Cost Shifting,
Pay Now Or Pay Later, And/Or
Getting Soaked For Oligopoly
One Way Or Another.
In Other Words The System Should
Be Seamless And Assuring (And
Not Intrusive) And
With Original Input That's
Less Winded
Biology And Economics Are Connected
From Page Top To Bottom.
This Site Is Weighted Toward
Public Health/Medical Care
Economics And Also Has
4 Flavors Of "Community
As Patient:"
Primary
Winded Version
Less Winded
(Present Location)
How To Best Help Each Other
(Nanny State Issue)
Other Similar Spaces Exist Which I'll
Be Linking Separately Mainly For
Additional Wavefront Value.
Part Of What Defines Hospital
Care Is Compassion Combined With
Knowing Insecurities Are Understandable
And Forgivable. But Paranoia,
Uncontained Need To Scapegoat, And
Condescension Can Be So Intensely
Insulting As To Be Threatening To Staff
Operations And Even Staff Health.
Hospitals Should Do More, In Cases
Like This,
Than Simply Say, Well, We Were
Afraid For The Staff’s Safety. Group
Reassurances As To It Being Obvious
The Obnoxious Patient Or Patient’s
Relative Is The Clown, The Staff
Member Should Understand Not To
Take It Personally, Etc., Would
Help, I Think.
I Would Have Shared Every Ounce
Of Tanya’s Sense Of Pain And Insult
And Recovered With Her.
Tanya: Should Anyone You Know
Find This
And Show It To You, I Share, My
Readers Share, Your Pain, Insult And
Outrage. I Am So So Sorry That
Happened To You.
(Not Condoning The Course Taken--I'm
Clueless As To The Claimed Fears, And
This Appears Involving More Than
The Nursing Admin. Line )
Now, Go To The Letting Off Steam Box
To Help Make It Better And Let The
Shrinks Handle The Disturbed People.
Should Someone Actually Have Shown
Her This, Thank You. Have A Nice Day.
Everyone In The Hospital Knows
Medication Can Alter Mood.
I Think The Public Should
Understand That.
Women Drive More Sensibly
And Safely
Michael Sivak, U. of Michigan
(In When Harry Met
Sally, Sally Plainly Says
Women Are Very Practical.)
Popular, With More Accessible
Orig.
But, Women Will Still Have To Pay
The Same Insurance Rates As Men
In Europe.
ENEN:
Noooo. Don't Go Confusing
Pricing Risk With Monopolizing
It's Distribution,
Even Though
The Above Is Wrongful And
Different Rates Would Be
Sensible.
One Can Offer
Risk Management Absent Market
Control. Or One Can Simply
Rake It In With Risk Cubbyholed
To Suit. This Issue As To
Probabilities And Fairness Goes
Back For Centuries. Science And
Economics Rationalized Along
Being A Fair, Honest Market
Progressive Should Leave Us In
A Place Like This: Everyone Gets Care.
Quality Matters, Cost Contained
Rationally, With It Not
At All Difficult For The Well
Intended Person To Get Those
Objectives In Accord With The
Patient Community Being
Yet Happier With, And Unafraid To
Enter And Less Afraid Of
Simultaneously Confident About
Its Quality. And High Outcomes
Level.
-----
Overlapping The Medical
Social Worker's Role Some, The
Nurse Advocate (Links Upstate)
Is More Clinically Connected,
Informed And Instructional
To The Patient, Which Is Far
Better Than Good Luck, Next
Patient Please. As I Often Say,
American Health Care Is Largely
Not Whole Care, Let Alone Holistic.
Nurses Filling Voids In Primary Care
(UCSF)
ENEN:
In A Rational System Medical-Financial
Concerns, Patient Lack Of Direction And
Health Education/Information/Behavior
Disconnect Would Not Exist. Some
Organizations Are Further Advanced
Independently. The Above Will In Any
Setting Play A Vital Role, With Medical
Social Workers Also Providing Patient
Support. A Rational System Would
Remove Some Of The Challenges
Of The Latter Group.
Only Choice Separates Patients
From Being Medical-Financially
Carefree, Trusting, And Aligned In
Terms Of Health
Education, Information And
Personally Matched
Behavior Support, Such That
Maintenance Becomes Routine,
With The Inconvenience And
Apprehension Vastly Reduced,
And The Illness-Causing And
Aggravating Stresses Of Simply
Being Ill, Obviously Currently
Aggravated By Financial Stress,
Removed And Replaced Only With
System As Companion That We
Actually Now Know Has A
Positive Affect.
The Opposite Is Cost Shifting,
Pay Now Or Pay Later, And/Or
Getting Soaked For Oligopoly
One Way Or Another.
In Other Words The System Should
Be Seamless And Assuring (And
Not Intrusive) And