According to the Associated Press as cited in the Post article, "Cuba has made recent advancements in biotechnology and exports its treatments to 40 countries around the world, raking in an estimated $100 million a year. ... In 2004, the U.S. government granted an exception to its economic embargo against Cuba and allowed a California drug company to test three cancer vaccines developed in Havana."
I don't see why health care has to be a privilege. As human beings, we should all be entitled to health care, education, and housing. Those are basic needs for survival. If you are sick and therefore cannot work and therefore have no access to health care, why should you suffer? It is very frustrating. Health care is &*#@ expensive, especially when you have a chronic illness.
Personally I loved Michael Moore's movie. It was not a waste of my time, nor do I deserve disrespect for choosing to have the opinions I have and spend my time the way I spend it. We all deserve respect for our inherent brother/sisterhood and connection as citizens of Planet Earth (so long as we are not hurting others).
I thought nurses were full of compassion? Why throw such stones as "fat @ss". Do you think those thoughts when an obese patient walks into your clinic?
i think you may have opened a real sore over here in the us.
most of the responses i read that are opposed to michael moore's movie rely far more on emotion and anecdote than the movie is accused of. rather than approaching the issue scientifically and looking at the pros and cons, michael moore's movie gathers comments about his waist size. i just hope the people responding in this way dont practice nursing with the same disregard for evidence and such emphasis on emotion.
it is true that we are ranked 37th in overall health care by the world health organization. it is also true that nearly 50 million americans have no health insurance. technically we are supposed to be able to be treated at any facility despite this fact. the result is the greatest number of personal bankruptcies in the history of the u.s., half of which are directly related to health care bills.
at the same time the u.s. has cutting edge procedures and, if one can afford them, i am sure they are among the best in the world.
the bottom line of this debate is ultimately about the source of funding for health care. because the rulers here are making record profits, the market system is defended for every possible social relationship. the result is that we have to fund profit for our health care costs where if health care was publicly owned we would not have this unneeded cost. this is why americans pay the most for the least.
it is also a statement about how americans feel about government in general. we have such a corrupt one that the idea of letting washington fund our health care is met with great reservation.
i would do some research online into the whole system. the studies speak for themselves. (it should also be added that 98% of canadians would not give up their health care for the american system.)
stay sharp and get the studies from all over about the effectiveness of market-driven health care.
i saw the movie and some of it was definitely true. You basically have to find a job and never quit it to have health insurance. My husband and I moved to another state and there was a 7 day period between him quitting his job and starting the new one. He had blue cross with the federal govt and at his new job he signed up for blue cross immediately. Even though we are respectable people with normal jobs (nurse and engineer) we have a period of 1 year in which blue cross will not cover anything we were seen by a doctor for in the past 6 months just simply due to the fact that we "changed" insurance providers (even though they are both blue cross, but since they are through diff employers) We have always had private health insurance since the day we were born either through our parents when we were students and through our jobs. The whole insurance business is crooked as hell! they have it set up so they basically will get out of paying for anything.
How does the insurance work anyway. If you're a patient in hospital, and the doctor orders and X-ray say, do you just get taken off to X-ray, or does the insurance company have to be called first and approve it?
Or for example, I recently had a cyst on my liver and had to have a bunch of tests before anyone knew what it was I had an ultrasound, 2 CT scans, and an X-ray. In America would all that have to be approved by insurance first, or do you just go ahead and have the tests?
Specializes in home health, peds, case management.
i saw the movie and some of it was definitely true. you basically have to find a job and never quit it to have health insurance. my husband and i moved to another state and there was a 7 day period between him quitting his job and starting the new one. he had blue cross with the federal govt and at his new job he signed up for blue cross immediately. even though we are respectable people with normal jobs (nurse and engineer) we have a period of 1 year in which blue cross will not cover anything we were seen by a doctor for in the past 6 months just simply due to the fact that we "changed" insurance providers (even though they are both blue cross, but since they are through diff employers) we have always had private health insurance since the day we were born either through our parents when we were students and through our jobs. the whole insurance business is crooked as hell! they have it set up so they basically will get out of paying for anything.
your experience has less to do with corruption on the part of the insurer than a misunderstanding of the exact issu, and a failure to understand the terms of your health coverage. most health plans require "continuous credible coverage" in order to provide coverage for pre-existing conditions, defined in your case as any condition treated within the prior 6 month period. by having a 7 day lapse in coverage, you failed to meet this requirement.
this is a good example of why it is so import to request and read through your specific plan description before you agree to those terms of coverage. it amazes me to this day that americans will spend hours upon hours researching the new car that they are going to buy, yet when it comes to something as important as health insurance, there is neither adequate thought nor effort put into it.
additionally, you may want to consider the funding of the health plan before attacking the insurance company. a majority of health plans in the us are self funded, which means the company writes the policy and contracts with the insurance company for the network and claims processing services.
i'm not saying that private health insurance is perfect, but i think it's important to know what you're talking about before making accusations of corruption.
additionally....are we naieve enough to believe that universal health coverage equals coverage without restriction or limit? take a look at medicare, you will soon see that that is not the case.
i encourage everyone to form their own opinion...all that i ask is that the proper research is conducted.
Specializes in home health, peds, case management.
how does the insurance work anyway. if you're a patient in hospital, and the doctor orders and x-ray say, do you just get taken off to x-ray, or does the insurance company have to be called first and approve it?
or for example, i recently had a cyst on my liver and had to have a bunch of tests before anyone knew what it was i had an ultrasound, 2 ct scans, and an x-ray. in america would all that have to be approved by insurance first, or do you just go ahead and have the tests?
i am not aware of any health plans in the us that require prior authorization for services provided during an inpatient stay.
outpatient based services are a different ballgame; it is impossible to make a blanket yes or no statement. it depends entirely upon the specific rules of a specific health plan.
i am also not aware of any health plans that require preauth for xrays and ultrasound, since they are usually low cost procedures. it is the high dollar tests (ct, mri, pet) that are subject to prior authorization.
Maybe 'universal care' isn't the answer, but we here in America definately need to come up with a better system.
I agree that one big problem with the private insurance, as brought up in a couple pp's, is that it is far to difficult for people to understand. i can't understand all the regulations, exclusions under certain circumstances, ect, let alone the billing statements. But I have known other educated, upstanding american citizens (who have private insurance) who didn't know about the 'preexisting condition' clause, ect.
You know it 's bad when you call up the insurance company to ask if 'this or that' is covered, and the person on the other side doesn't know, and tells you so.....such as what happened to me a couple months ago. I have been given misinformation several times by my health insurance company. And there really isn't much you can do about it......you are governed by which insurance company your employer chooses.
And for those of you who don't want the gov't involved in healthcare, how do you explain Medicare, medicaid, CHP+, indigent care programs, public health depts, and the list goes on.....the govt already is involved in health care.
Personally, in my nsg experience, I don't see how a medicaid pt. gets much different treatment than a pt. with private ins - at least in the acute care setting. I do understand that they are more limited in getting preventive care. Maybe this is not always the case....just from what I've seen.
Specializes in home health, peds, case management.
maybe 'universal care' isn't the answer, but we here in america definately need to come up with a better system.
i agree that one big problem with the private insurance, as brought up in a couple pp's, is that it is far to difficult for people to understand. i can't understand all the regulations, exclusions under certain circumstances, ect, let alone the billing statements. but i have known other educated, upstanding american citizens (who have private insurance) who didn't know about the 'preexisting condition' clause, ect.
you know it 's bad when you call up the insurance company to ask if 'this or that' is covered, and the person on the other side doesn't know, and tells you so.....such as what happened to me a couple months ago. i have been given misinformation several times by my health insurance company. and there really isn't much you can do about it......you are governed by which insurance company your employer chooses.
and for those of you who don't want the gov't involved in healthcare, how do you explain medicare, medicaid, chp+, indigent care programs, public health depts, and the list goes on.....the govt already is involved in health care.
personally, in my nsg experience, i don't see how a medicaid pt. gets much different treatment than a pt. with private ins - at least in the acute care setting. i do understand that they are more limited in getting preventive care. maybe this is not always the case....just from what i've seen.
well said!! i agree that the current system isn't working...and i've left it up to far greater minds than my own to figure it out.
your ancetdote serves well to support my position that insured americans do a pitifully poor job of understanding their health plan. i again say that it is one's own responsibility to use the available resources to learn the finer points of one's own health plan.
i agree that customer service can be woefully inadequate at time. this is not unqiue to health care, but instead seems to be the norm in most industries (but that's a brand new thread)
the problem that i have is that most who support universal coverage think that it is going to be the be all end all perfect solution. again, i invite you to take a close look at medicare. like private health insurance, it has restrictions and limitations. the governement has already proven its inablity to provide adequate coverage for our senior citizens....how else to explain the use of medicare supplement plans?
i thank you for the engaging discussion free of the personal attacks that are so often launched!
employer-sponsored health plan premiums increase 6.1 percent
the cost of employer-sponsored health insurance in the united states increased 6.1 percent this year and continues to outpace increases in inflation and wages.
that's the finding of an annual report released tuesday by the kaiser family foundation and the health research and educational trust.
average annual premiums this year were $12,106 for family coverage and $4,479 for single coverage. of those totals, workers paid $3,281 and $694, respectively, the los angeles times reported. the amount paid by workers increased 10 percent for family coverage and 11 percent for single coverage from last year.
family coverage premiums have increased 78 percent since 2001, while wages have increased 19 percent and the cost of inflation has increased by 17 percent. the report said the average total cost of health-care premiums for a family of four now exceeds the yearly income of a minimum wage worker.
The figure below, from a recently published study by the Urban Institute (UI), shows that this is not the case. Most SCHIP enrollees (72%) were not covered by private coverage six months before enrollment in the public program. Another 14% lost coverage within a six month period prior to SCHIP enrollment, due to a lost job, an employer dropping coverage, or change in family structure that led to the child's coverage being dropped (as in a divorce, separation, or death of covered spouse).
This leaves only 14% of SCHIP cases that substituted the public program for private coverage. But the Urban Institute's study points out that more than half of these cases (8%) cited an inability to afford private coverage as the reason for shifting over to SCHIP. That is, the cost of the family premium through their job was prohibitively high.
But I have known other educated, upstanding american citizens (who have private insurance) who didn't know about the 'preexisting condition' clause, ect.
BBQvegan
180 Posts
I don't see why health care has to be a privilege. As human beings, we should all be entitled to health care, education, and housing. Those are basic needs for survival. If you are sick and therefore cannot work and therefore have no access to health care, why should you suffer? It is very frustrating. Health care is &*#@ expensive, especially when you have a chronic illness.
Personally I loved Michael Moore's movie. It was not a waste of my time, nor do I deserve disrespect for choosing to have the opinions I have and spend my time the way I spend it. We all deserve respect for our inherent brother/sisterhood and connection as citizens of Planet Earth (so long as we are not hurting others).
I thought nurses were full of compassion? Why throw such stones as "fat @ss". Do you think those thoughts when an obese patient walks into your clinic?