Please read

Since most of the forum members have a chronic illness, I think you should be aware of something in the "stimulus" package that was just released by Fox News.  In the Senate version, there are measures for health care rationing for senior citizens (and possibly all those on Medicare),   AND FOR ALL AMERICANS, LIMITS ON MEDICAL RESEARCH, and LIMITS ON WHAT DECISIONS YOUR DOCTOR IS PERMITTED TO MAKE CONCERNING YOUR CARE.  

In the House version, there are millions of dollars set aside to "GUIDE THE PUBLIC TO UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE".

Just in case you didn't vote for this last November and would like an opportunity to call your Senator before the vote.  Pelosi and Reid are unavailable for comment.

Elaine

[sllowe]

Oh Elaine - thank you so much for bringing this to our attention.  This is VERY VERY IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!

I hope everyone reads this....

-Shell

[doni54]

Thanks Elaine!

I've been worried about some of the changes we might see in health care.  Most of my senatators here in AL are against the stimulous plan, but I'm sure it will eventually get passed.

doni

[sllowe]

      http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?     pid=20601039&refer=columnist_mccaughey&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs

Like Elaine says, it's important to know what this affects.

[monotreme]

Thanks for the link!!  By the way, the MS Society here in DE has been pushing for the passing of that exact segment of the bill which will hurt all people with a chronic illness.  I called their director today and she won't take my call.  Surprise, surprise, they are hiding under the desk!!

Our two DE sentator offices in D.C. said they haven't even read the bill....but they are voting for it!!!

Elaine

[BOK2Bjan]

ajskf[ab0yre]b9qhe]nb2 v24ih5guv029n4v]- m244u5poqw!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's what I have to say about that!  Oh my oh my oh my!!  And a few hand wrings thrown in. I'm in the mood to vent today!  Blessings to everyone anyway!  God loves us even if the government doesn't.  Jan

[opie74]

Communisism at its best!  Can't say more without loosing my temper.  The military has universal healthcare too.  When I was young, they almost killed me 3 times!  They let an inturn give my brother -in-law an antibiotic that killed his transplanted kidney AFTER he told the doc that he could not have it.  Dear God, please save us all form this.  I did not vote for it, and we don't deserve it!

[monotreme]

I finally got through to one of the DE senators and the staff did NOT deny that health care will be monitored by the federal government.  And treatments will be given according to cost.  The senator's staff was quite arrogant about it.  They said "too bad for you"  and remember...he said...they won power.

Socialism at its best.  But wait...where is Michelle Obama now??  Is this how she would have wanted her father treated with his MS??

Elaine

[ChunkyMonkeysMommy]

This makes me absolutely irate. I just can't even think about it anymore.

[PastorDan]

Opie74 was right about the temper; I should've taken my BP earlier, when my mind was on... well, almost anything.

[Fluffysmom]

I've been expecting something like this; with all the money being spent on wars and bailing out failing greedy-gut companies, tax cuts to stimulate the economy, where was the money going to come for Health and Human Services?

I've been planning ahead, knowing that whichever administration took charge, those of us on Medicare would pay first.  That's why I've been pushing for testing, trying to be as effectively gentle as possible while still getting things accomplished.

I also fill my Rxs at the earliest possible date, as I'm sure that Medicare Part D will also be found too expensive, and more meds will be excluded from formularies, and costs will go up.  I try to build up a little 'cushion' in case I have to start applying for Patient Assistance Programs from the Make Big Bucks drug companies.

Why didn't my MS Society Action group send out an alert on this?  Or did I just miss it?  I'll go check.

I did post one good thing that's coming up from the new administration...

Kathy

I have a MedAdvantage plan, and my premiums went down a little, but my co-pays went up.  When you go to the doctor a lot, that adds up quickly.

[jensequitur]

Here's an explanation of what exactly is in the stimulus package for healthcare.

Mainly, it provides $87 billion to the states to help fund medicaid.  It temporarily increases medicaid coverage for the unemployed.  For those people on COBRA, it allows the federal government to pay 65% of the costs for a year.

(From the Chicago Tribune) http://tinyurl.com/b2vo79

You'll note that Fox News (and all Republicans) are terrified of universal health care.  Why is this?  It wouldn't make the health care for uninsured Americans worse - in fact, it would get a lot better.  

Here is the full PDF of the amendment, for those who would like to search through it.

http://fee.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/senatestimamendment.pdf

Right now our insurance providers limit what kind of care everybody receives.  They decide whether somebody gets to have a kidney, or whether they get Tysabri over Copaxone.  

[biowham]

I *did* vote for "this" last November. Jen, thanks for posting those links. We have always had limits on medical research; in fact, a member of Congress recently called for a pause on a couple of billion to NSF because some staff at NSF were looking at porn on government computers. I couldn't put together why all research in the US had to be punished because of idiots at the NSF office...but...I digress. We've had limits now on stem cell research in this country for...oh...eight years?

And insurance? My insurance, for example, decides that I get generic levothyroxine, that I must pay full price for a BCP that contains iron unless I want the one on their list that I've never heard of and is made in China (talk about real communists), and that my family gets only one covered round of Tamiflu a season. Oh...and the state government that decided on my insurance coverage decided that our family would have an out-of-pocket total annually of $5000, not including co-pays, and a dental plan that barely covers checkups. There are "insurance coverages" we've had in the past that declined to pay for CHILDHOOD VACCINES. And, of course, I don't exist to specialists without a referral because we weren't offered a PPO option, just a godawful HMO.

It's a mess all around.

Biowaddle

[monotreme]

Thanks for your comments.  But I am referring to the Health Information Technology section of the stimulus.  It mandates an Electronic Health Card for each American and tracks lab tests etc, as well as government mandates for treatment for diseases.

I object to this being mandated for every American.  This is re-distribution of the wealth since my good insurance may be lost to government mandated restrictions on my health care.   Please read pages 442 to 449 concerning the government monitoring of health care for everyone, except civil and government employees.

I am sorry you have bad insurance and if you WANT to go under government care, you could do so if Obama allows it.  But it should not be forced on people.  That is my major complaint.    Why are our Congress representatives exemp from the mandate?

Elaine

[jensequitur]

I'm just looking through the PDF, with a simple search on the word 'health.'  Here's what I found:

Expanding Public Health Service facilities

• Money for research equipment for the National Institute of Health, and for additional scientific research, and for repair, improvement, and construction of facilities.

• Evaluating health care treatments and strategies - how effective are they?  

Health Information Technology

• Encourage the development and use of networks for electronic health data.
Assess health information technolgoy in communities with high health needs, underinsured, uninsured, and medically underserved individuals.  Especially including rural and urban areas.

• This should improve the quality of health care by reducing medical errors, improving population health, reducing chronic disease, and advancing research and education.  Pinpoints populations in need, including children and minorities.

• HIT committee will be created - representatives from everybody, including insurance agencies, labor unions, IT vendors, employers, etc.

• Quite a few provisions for patient privacy - no need to go into it here, but it's a LOT.

Aging Health Technology

• Studying scientific innovation and emerging, future, and current health technology for seniors and individuals with disabilities

Health Clinics for the military

Update Veterans Health Administration Medical Facilities - repairs, non-recurring maintenance, energy efficiency initiatives

Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control - making sure those homes that qualify for awards receive the funds.

I got to page 338... maybe I'll look at it again tomorrow!  But I think that just about covers the health section of this stimulus package.

[jensequitur]

Hi Elaine!  Sorry, didn't see your post before I put in this bit.

Just went and found the PDF again!  442 to 449 is about state and excise sales tax on vehicles.

I haven't found anything about an Electronic Health Card in this document.  That's not to say there isn't one - just isn't worded that way.  

However, this document does allow for a creation of a HIT committee - Health Information Technology committee - that will represent somebody from all concerned parties.  The main point of updating our electronic health data is to track individual's health histories throughout their lives.  Wouldn't it be nice if we could go to the ER and they knew immediately that we were allergic to penicillin?  Or that we had an adverse reaction to codeine?  Right now we have to rely on medicalert bracelets to tell the professionals what our medical histories are.

Personally, I don't mind mandates on treatment of certain diseases.  There's lots of people on this forum who should be receiving a DMD because of their MS, but don't because their doctor has decided their disease is 'mild' or 'benign.'  If we could make certain treatments the same in every hospital, then somebody in a rural region would receive the same quality of care as somebody in New York City, or Chicago.

[monotreme]

If mandates are good, then why are Canadians in many cases not given access to DMD's?  And wasn't there someone on the forum today from the uk who can't get Baclofen?  It will be a matter of money.  I will get those pages I mentioned.  Why is the originator of the socialized medicine system of Canada now saying he regrets his actions?  And he is now promoting privatization of medical care and a cash system?

My point is that I don't want it forced on me.

Elaine

[monotreme]

Hi Jen,
  If you look on www.congress.gov, you will see that there are four or  five versions of the senate bill to read.  I think that is our page disparity.

  I have a test on Thursday in my epidemiology course and will not go over all the versions now.  I had it today and had it in front of me when I called and spoke to my senator.  He denied none of what I said, which is also what I posted.

  The point is that there will always be people who like Big Brother government and those who don't.  I don't.  I should like this bill, since with my Masters in Public Health, I could bleed the government and get a big fat salary thanks to this bill.  But one trillion dollars more for the banks announced today and 800 billion in this bill makes me too sick to think about it.  There won't be any money for everything so it is all a moot point anyway.

  Good night.
  Elaine

[doublevision1]

I was wondering about your comment that many Canadians are not given access to DMD's.  What gives you this impression and what leads you to believe this is an issue of cost?

I don't know of any stats, so can only speak anecdotally from my own experience as well as some friends and acquaintances.  In all of our cases, those of us with clear confirmed diagnoses of RRMS were provided access to the DMD of our choice through our respective provincial programs.  In some cases, this is completely free of charge, in others (ie: as in Alberta) there are modest premiums to pay for non-group insurance in order to be eligible for the program.

For SPMS, I do not know whether DMD's are covered by such programs in Canada.  

Re: your comment about the originator of the socialized medicine system in Canada, I was wondering who you are referring to?  

Tommy Douglas, the "Canada's father of medicare" introduced Canada to the concept of universal public health care by introducing this program in Saskatchewan in the early '60's.  It was actually implemented in that province by his successor, Premier Woodrow Lloyd.  The federal government followed suit under P.M. Lester B. Pearson.  While any of these individuals could be considered the originators of universal health care in Canada (though the consensus tends to bestow this honour on T. Douglas) are long deceased.  Is someone else trying to take credit??  I bet Tommy Douglas is turning in his grave right now!  lol

Also, to sorry to be nitpicking on terminology, but health care in Canada is not 'socialized', although this is the term, intended as a pejorative, that is sometimes used in the media or by those in our own current Conservative-led federal govt.  It is considered a public system as it is publicly funded as mandated by the Canada Health Act, however most of the services are provided privately.  For example, GPs in the country are for the most part self-employed, and bill the govt for their services.  My understanding is that this differs from the UK in that all physicians work for the NHS, however I do not know this for sure.  Can someone from the UK please clarify?    

Decisions regarding diagnostic testing are made by physicians, not the government and not an insurance company.   I'm certain there must be guidelines they must consider in order to be cost effective; I can only say, again from my experience [which I realize is not necessarily indicative of the norm] that any test my physician or I felt I should have done was done, promptly and without question.  

I don't like Big Brother, but I love universal health care!  :)

This is a great thread, I like any dialogue that motivates patients/citizens to do their research, know the facts, and become activists for their cause --- regardless of left, right or centrist political preferences.

[monotreme]

My daughters did a paper on it for Civics.  The article was found on www.studentnewsdaily.com and it was published in December.  It is not in their archives and my daughters emailed the report, which I no longer have. My email has been broken for six months and I cannot archive my sent emails on the main server past 30 days.  So unfortunately I do not have the name of the person.    If one of my daughters happened to save it or I can talk to the teacher about it, I'll let you know.

I personally am tired of this thread and the forum in general.  I wish the best to all of you.  Thanks for everything.    I have too many personal responsibilities, and obviously I am not wrapped around what you all go through in your chronic illnesses.


Best Wishes ,
Elaine

[greenandchic]

Oh God - after reading this thread maybe this forum isnt for me.  

[jensequitur]

Surprisingly and sadly, health care has become a political issue.  I had no idea it had gotten to that point.  Greenandchic, we normally avoid political issues on this forum because this forum is about feeling better, not about convincing anybody to change their views.  I'm sorry Elaine has decided to leave!  But here we are.

[sllowe]

We talk openly here on our forum about how we want our health care providers to go the extra mile.  

Many of us are atypical or are still searching.  

Many of us have already experienced or are experiencing limitations of our health care or the burden of no healthcare.  For those of us with healthcare, myself included, I cherish it.  

I'll admit, it's difficult for me to imagine the day that my labs, tests, and health information will be at the tips of a HIT Tech's fingertips, and that there will be a possibility that a Drs hands may be strapped by the govt to not run a test he or she feels important.  It's scary, it's almost a fact, and it will affect me.

I'm not expressing my political views here, just acknowledging a little fear for our, all of our future in this regard.  

We are in this together - we bring information to each other out of compassion and empathy, and to bring about awareness.  This is not new. We do it with advances in technology, or studies, or with our own individual experiences no matter what the symptom posted.

Elaine brought this to our attention for awareness purposes where chronic illness is concerned, as she always has with Vitamins, or testing, thyroid, or Craig's struggles, or what has worked best for their family as a whole.

We should not stop learning or bringing important information to light, and I don't want to lose Elaine over this.
-Shelly

[doni54]

Elaine,

I always appreciate your posts, and as Shelly says, you always try to keep us informed.  I thought that's what this forum was about, knowledge.  With knowledge we all have the opportunity to make our own decisions, and do it knowing all we can.

Just because we have differing opinions, about politics or any other thing, this should not be an issue.  

Elaine, I for one, agree with many of your beliefs and truly appreciate you.  And with what you have been through with Craig, I don't know anyone who knows more about the experience of chronic illness.

Love & hugs,
doni

[doublevision1]

What I like most about this forum is that I get great information that helps me deal with so many aspects of having MS.  I agree with doni that knowledge is important in order to make informed decisions.  I have gained so much knowledge here.  Thus when misinformation is cited as fact, I believe it's important to provide correct information when possible, regardless of subject matter.  I have yet to see that done in an inappropriate or disrepectful way, which is another reason I appreciate this group.   My hope is that members don't shy away from providing factual information to correct misperceptions, out of fear of offending anyone.  And when it comes to voicing opinions, obviously we are all entitled to do so in the context of a healthy debate, and again, no one should feel a need to refrain out of fear of hurting someone's feelings.  Expressing conflicting opinions and being respectful aren't mutually exclusive.  Besides, if we all agreed with each other about everything, we wouldn't learn a thing.

[jensequitur]

And life would be so boring! ;-)  

[Quixotic1]

This is the first thread on this forum in its 20 month history to bring in politics and idealogy.  I personally am sad to see this.  I have tried to avoid it as there are innumerable places to go discuss the hot topics.  This forum has always been a safe place to discuss our lives and illness.  I find threads like this tiring and deflating.  

But, this discussions are likely to become more common as changes happen.  I would hope that people who are uncomfortable would just avoid them, and that people who enjoy the debate can join.   I would rather have people pointed to other places where the discussion is already raging.

I would ask, though, that, in general, political and religious views be left out of threads that don't bring them up directly.  I have been around many of the forums on the internet and seen what they can become.  We have had more deletions (by request of the posters themselves) once they have seen where the discussion is going in the last week, than we have in the whole prior history of the forum.

There are certain topics on which people will never agree and the debate is merely an exercise without teaching anyone anything.  I believe that those should be avoided.  I will avoid participating in them except to comment when they are pointless or becoming heated.  This thread has already upset a couple of members, yet I agree with Shelly that the discussion has remained relatively civil.  

However, I do not believe that this is a proper place for discussions about Socialism or Communism or Right Wing beliefs.  Let's do try to keep the discussions about MS and the impact of what is happening in our government to our own health care. And lets try to be factual, giving readers links to see for themselves.   Realize that the readers of your posts may well believe the opposite of what you are stating and be careful about judgmental statements.

I love you all, but I don't believe the same things all of you believe.  Let's not polarize.

Quix

[monotreme]

cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008/08/20/6515351-cp.html
www.nytimes.com/2006/02/26/international/americas/26canada.html health.dailynewscentral.com/content/view/0001031/39/ - 34k
krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/09/a-health-care-system-to-die-for/
www.chsrf.ca/mythbusters/pdf/myth28_e.pdf

These articles are samples of ones I found on the internet that talk about the privatization of Canada's health system since the public one is faltering and very costly.  This is what I was talking about....the original national public health care system is being  remade to include privatization.   There are plenty of other entries on the internet and I am sure people here are capable of finding them.  I am out of here...have a nice life everyone.

Elaine

[monotreme]

Sorry, we posted at the same time.
Elaine

[jensequitur]

Going through the links....

• The Krugman article seems to indicate that mortality rates are the highest in the US - 110 deaths per 100,000 people, compared to France at 65.

• The NY Times article mentions that Canada is looking at the European system, which is a mix of private and public - exactly what Obama proposes today.

• Same with the CNews article - most doctors support a move to a public/private mix.

• The Daily News Central article talks about heart transplants being successful, but not enough organ donations.  Not sure why this is on the list.

• the Mythbusters PDF is about how the current system in Canada will work, although adding private insurance to the choices would help.  From the PDF:  "In the end, the decision to maintain a comprehensive, taxpayer-funded insurance plan may grow the economy rather than hurt it."

So I've gone through the links and I still don't see how this supports the original premise that the ARRA will create a problem with Americans not receiving proper care.  Not trying to argue with anybody here!  Just trying to understand Elaine's original point.

What I do see is that many people aren't receiving proper care because their doctors don't have all the information about their patients - a problem that the HIT (Health Information Technology) part of the act is supposed to solve.  Opie's brother-in-law would have not received the antibiotic that destroyed the kidney, because his health records would have shown that he should not have received it.

[summer63]

I don't know what the right or wrong answer to the problems are, I have my opinions, but a couple of things to think about.

1.  This is a "stimulus bill".  How is this Health Information Technology going to stimulate the economy in the near future?  Why is this in this bill in the first place?

2.  As many of you have pointed out there is a lot of information out there that needs to be discussed, deciphered and debated.  This is such and important issue to everyone.  I find it awfully strange that this was kind of snuck in through the back door of this bill.  Is there something there that they don't want us to know about?  Something they don't want us to have the time to research and debate?  Something that if we did have to the time to debate, maybe the American people would not like but it would be too late to change?  

I work for the federal government and I know how they work.  It is very scary to me.

[fortywhat2]

bump