One mans attempt - a healthcare post to end all healthcare posts

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

TL;DR basic introductory stuff that will probably make people want to lynch me as usual. :x

.......

One fundamental flaw within the current era healthcare reform legislation process is the over emphasis upon reactionary measures as opposed to preventive ones. As with cancer, high blood pressure, diabetes & other ailments; early detection & treatment can mean the difference between life and death.

Obamacare and all proposed forms of healthcare legislation completely ignore this precedent. They focus entirely upon healthcare treatment methods which take effect only after a person has contracted a disease, health condition or illness. What may be lacking is an emphasis upon proper nutrition, maintenance of healthy food standards, developing good lifestyle habits in terms of diet and exercise and proper education & awareness relating to health.

In an ideal world the ultimate method of providing healthcare is preventing diseases before they occur. Any scenario involving treatment of a disease or illness may be considered a systemic methodology failure. In an ideal world the goal is to prevent disease and illness, not react to instances of them.

In this, our current era reactionary approach to healthcare reform and Obamacare is like waging a campaign against AIDs and STDs without including condoms or contraceptives. The question may be asked: why focus upon measures that wait until a person is infected or ill as opposed to measure which prevent such from occurring?

Confirmation bias aside, one might wonder how serious politicians are about fixing healthcare & what their motivation is for ignoring what may be the most important aspects. Is Obamacare & ACA like SOPA where politicians claim a bill will "fix the 1nt3rn37z" with perhaps ulterior motives in mind?

The lack of emphasis upon preventionism in healthcare reform may be considered a form of bias and misinformation via omission. In a world where politicians care about the health and wellbeing of citizens, prevention is perhaps the first word which should pass from their lips.

Just as a responsible and caring parent might involve their kids in sports or athletic activities in an effort to encourage them to be healthy and refrain from becoming obese, so may a politician who cares about the health of citizens focus upon preventionary measures.

Unfortunately, there may be a conflict of interest present which sabotages any chance of having affordable healthcare. There are some in the world who, like vultures, benefit and thrive off the misfortune and misery of others. These are those we refer to as health insurers doctors and healthcare providers.

Generally speaking, the more americans who contract illnesses and disease, the more money doctors and healthcare providers can make treating them. In a sense, a person with an illness or disease is like a consumer or customer. And, perhaps, healthcare providers expand their consumer base with each person that is unhealthy.

If prevention were a major aspect of healthcare reform, undeniably the profits of doctors and healthcare providers would decline. In this, perhaps we see a connection between the lack of preventive measures in Obamacare being aligned with the monetary interests of doctors & healthcare providers. We may also see how the monetary self interests of doctors and healthcare providers are diametrically opposed to american citizens having affordable healthcare.

Healthcare costs, after all, do not disappear into a random, extra-dimensional, black hole never to be seen. The exorbitant costs associated with healthcare are funneled into the pockets and bank accounts of those who own healthcare establishments. It naturally follows that the more unhealthy and diseased american citizens are, the richer healthcare establishments and those who own them become.

In this world we can either have healthy citizens and extremely low healthcare profits. Or, unhealthy citizens and extremely high healthcare profits. Considering the degree to which some say the american dream has devolved into an unrealistic expectation all of us can be rich and beautiful, perhaps it suffices to say materialism wins over ethics or morality?

In a sense, the business of healthcare may be profiting from the pain, blood and misery of humanity. It may be similar to war profiteering. The profits and revenues it generates akin to blood money.

I could easily see this post being 4x to 5x times longer than it is, but I'll stop here to give the naysayers an opportunity to disagree.

And also to give mods a chance to delete this if it looks like it may spark too much controversy. :x

Comments

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

a healthcare post to end all healthcare posts

Bleah! You wish.

Hey, if it didn't cause enough controversy we'd have probably issued an application at the Hague tribunal on charges of... um, uncontroversialness!

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

I'm just bracing for the sounds adam sandler made whilst bum rushing people in: the waterboy, followed by a mad rush of community goers denouncing me for being terrible and wanting to deprive americans of the universal healthcare system our foreign friends enjoyed for so long.

Bad me. Bad me. Bad, bad. D:

Uncontroversialness indeed!

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

I'm sure the international crime tribunal would be able to come up with some suitable punishment for ya!

[peamasii.livejournal.com]

Basically I agree, but I think it's in the nature of democratic capitalism to let the individual have enough rope to hang themselves if they want to. Unless you prefer some statist society where the nanny state tells you what not to eat, drink or smoke? Legislation and 'healthcare' cannot replace personal health responsibilities so it's never going to provide total coverage at efficient prices. As for profits being made from people's weaknesses, that's the business incentive for healthcare providers to exist. If there were no profits to be made, the state might as well be the basic provider, run it at a loss and set a level of minimal health services for everyone who is a legal resident.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

I suspect the state may have crossed that line when they took over the educational system. Education may imply areas other than academic knowledge and basic skills aptitude. Good life habits, nutrition, diet and health may also apply. Likewise, government regulation may be self-defeating without the necessity of acting within public self interest.

I'm not certain where the fine line exists between smoking being a choice and regulatory measures forbidding cigarette producers from scientifically engineering their product to be as addictive as possible... You bring up some excellent points.

The analogy of giving people rope is spot on.

[bikinisquad3000.livejournal.com]

Obamacare and all proposed forms of healthcare legislation completely ignore this precedent. They focus entirely upon healthcare treatment methods which take effect only after a person has contracted a disease, health condition or illness.

I don't know about controversial, but none of this (http://www.healthreform.gov/newsroom/acaprevention.html) is true (http://www.healthcare.gov/law/features/rights/preventive-care/index.html). How much attention have you been paying to what the ACA actually entails?

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

None of those items appear preventive to me, not in a legitimate sense.

I'll give you an example:

Tobacco Cessation ($16 million). Implement anti-tobacco media campaigns showing the negative health consequences of tobacco use, telephone-based tobacco cessation services, and outreach programs targeting vulnerable populations.

...

Cigarettes today could well be scientifically engineered to be as addictive as possible (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/393075.stm). The public already knows cigarettes are harmful to your health. And, so-called education and awareness programs typically do not even cite cigarette smoking as the main cause of male impotence. Right away, we can see that most peoples main reason to stop smoking is something that so-called awareness and education programs likely won't bother informing them on.

The best method to help people encourage smoking would be to regulate the levels of nicotine and potentially addictive substances cigarettes contain.

Perhaps, already we see the government isn't interested in helping smokers so much as it is interested in gaining a foothold into introducing its own expensive and worthless rehabilitation programs which give people a false sense of security and a false notion that the government cares about them and their well being.

We can see this occurring in great britain with their sin bin programs. The government places CCTV cameras in peoples homes and tries to pretend this represents a monitoring & rehabilitation program for troubled families.

Its all smoke and mirrors, deception and ulterior motives, I would say.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

^ That should say: best method to help encourage people to quit smoking** btw.

[myste-uk.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure I buy into your premise that Obamacare emphasises reactionary measures over preventative ones. An important part of preventative healthcare is going to the doctor early if something is wrong, and getting it dealt with before it becomes a bigger issue. If someone can't afford to go to the doctor to see about that back pain they keep getting or whatever, and they just try to muddle on without getting any medical advice, they can end up making the problem much much worse, until in the end they need to have much more expensive and prolonged medical treatment, than if they had just been able to get medical advice and the problem solved early. Doesn't Obamacare aid with that kind of preventive measure, by allowing people who otherwise couldn't afford it to get early medical intervention? (in fact, I've seen the fact that more people will be able to access preventative care used as an argument against obamacare, claiming it will mean increased healthcare costs)

(Caveat: I'm speaking as an outsider looking in, I don't fully understand the American health care system, and know only what I've been able to learn from online sources discussing the issue).

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

Well, I s'pose I could try to sway you with evidence. ( - :

Here are changes made to american healthcare under Obama's administration:

-A federal panel recommended reducing mammograms from yearly to every other year (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/16/AR2009111602822.html)

-The same federal panel recommends against routine prostate exams (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/oct2011/pros-o25.shtml)

-Doctor Panels Identify 45 Unnecessary Medical Tests and Procedures to Cut Costs (http://www.medicaldaily.com/news/20120404/9433/medical-test-health-care-spending-screening.htm) (They claim the tests are unnecessary, but considering they think yearly mammograms are unnecessary I question their motives)

There are other healthcare items that were cut or denied state funding like abortions.

I think a lot of people have been saved by yearly mammograms and would be outraged if they were aware of the federal panels recommendation. Its possible such is indicative of monetary concerns being a higher priority than healthcare or preventive measures. But, honestly, that's for you to decide. :T

[madjacktech.livejournal.com]

Hello, all;
long time no post.

Basics: How right you are; Big Medicine/Insurance/Pharma will certainly not allow Congress to pass anything resembling
a fair & equitable health care plan; b/c no matter which side of the coin you look at it from (From the left, a good example
of the whole preventive measures thing is far more than a 'Don't Smoke, Bro' campaign. One need only look at how
Big Insurers give breaks to corporations that incorporate healthy-living programs/policies for their employees.
And, look at Mrs. Obama's health campaign for children (well-meaning, but still tends to be minding someone else's business).
But, it all comes down to Big M/I/P profits, for which they've got more than enough lobbyists to inundate every elected one on the HIll.
Which is why the congresscritters will never do the right thing by us.

Especially when they ('they' being Big M/I/P) can overprice everything extravagantly & charge more for something through insurance co-pays & bills than
they can over the counter.
As an example: here in San Diego we've got an investigative/consumer reporter at KUSI tv by the name of Michael Turko.
(Sorry, this story just aired on Thursday night's 10:00 news, and there's no link (YET);
if you wish, check here later today: http://www.kusi.com/category/195821/turko-files & it should be there.
But, the story being: last night Turko ran a story about a man who was WAY overbilled by insurance (& a medical device retailer)
for an inexpensive traction device you can hang on your door & use a few minutes at a time at home to help w/ back problems.
This retailer offers this device for under $30 off the shelf, & the retailer bills the insurance company for 20x that much (yes, over $500
for a $30 device), and insurance billed the individual almost $70, twice the retail price.
The f***ers are gouging each other, and we're ALL paying the price.
Tell me, is there anything RIGHT with this picture?

And, lest we forget, how conveniently costs for emergency care were jacked up in the 90's, as a preventive measure, to try & keep people from going to the ER unless it was absolutely vital; which, while it could be construed as well-intended (in some circles), that it overlooks the fact that people need care that can be considered non-life threatening at any time of the day or night, not just 9-5 Mondays to Fridays. For which, insured or not, we ALL pay for (and, through the nose, since there AIN'T nothing else outside of bankers hours).
Gee, how's that working for ya now?
Tell the truth, Big Insurance, you just set us up to pay real money for another one of your fantastic cash cows.

Now: just how the f do we get these f***ers to stop using us for extravagant perennial profits?

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

I agree completely. Thanks for the link!

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

Well, that's no different then any other service provider in any other industry.
Say you call a plumber to fix running toilet....
New ballcock wholesales for $15
New ballcock retails for $30 at hardware store
Plumber will sell new ballcock for $45 plus labour of installing it (service call minimum 1.5hrs at $85/hr) $127.50= $172.50
Now you want this to be covered by home owners insurance?
You pay $50 deductable, and your premiums rise, Plumber charges same $45 for material plus volume discounted service call minimum of 1.5hrs at only $60/hr ($90)

Same goes for any service provider in any industry. Computer tech comes to your home/business there is a premium paid for convenience and expertise of their education, for a product you could have got at Office Depot.

Yeah, the off the shelf price is a lot less, as it always is. The mark-up you pay might be incredible but it's entirely appropriate. You're not just paying for product, you're paying for expertise choosing the right product for you, explaining how it works, it's limitations, how you should use it, what results you should expect, and when, etc. This service isn't free, and neither is the experts education.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

In an ideal world the goal is to prevent disease and illness, not react to instances of them.

Flawed premise. This is impossible to achieve, even in an ideal world. Disease and illness can not be prevented and you will always have to have some amount of reactionary medicine. And you ignore trauma events, which are a significant part of healthcare.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

I said... "in an ideal world".

I never claimed the world we live in is ideal?

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

So the major failing of the healthcare bill is it doesn't change what people do inside their own homes? It's a healthcare bill man, not a Big Brother bill.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

One major failing of the healthcare bill is it does nothing to raise health standards of food, beverages, tobacco or drugs.

McDonalds sells food that is harmful enough to your health that obese people can sue it successfully for "making them fat". The occasaional lawsuit aside, there is zero impetus or awareness on the lack of FDA standards as being a major culprit in making healthcare expensive and unaffordable and a major cause of poor health in americans.

Orwellian police states aren't necessary for these things, thankfully.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

I suppose Americans are too stupid to do what the rest of the civilized, wealthy states in the world have already done.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

FREEEWHARGARBLEDOM!

Sure, you guys have freedom of speech, but I'm free to not die of an easily detectable and preventable disease. Jealous?

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

But don't tell that to Doc_Neuro, OMG!

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

America is the greatest country™ on earth.

Foreign countries should emulate our healthcare system, not the other way around.

Why would any proud american want to emulate !@#%'in european and canadian healthcare?

Madness!

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

I only read the first bit about preventative vs. treatment. And you're right, the simplest way to make healthcare more affordable for all is universal coverage combined with education about the benefits of seeing your doctor about things you're not sure about. You're only a hypochondriac if you refuse to believe the doctor when he says it's just gas.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

AFAIK, education doesn't teach students things that are important. Such as:

-Smoking is the leading cause of male impotence.
-Drinking soda on an empty stomach raises its acidity which can result in health complications.
-HFCS and high salt diets cause high blood pressure, which can result in kidney failure and other illnesses later in life.

Etc, etc. The most important aspects of health & nutrition may be completely ignored.

Maybe, maybe, maybe.

Thanks for commenting, btw.

[squidb0i.livejournal.com]

So because a single action isn't a panacea, that makes it worthless.
Got it.

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

Uh, no I think you don't get it. : D