<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: coverage,</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'coverage,'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22coverage%2C%22&t=%22coverage%2C%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 10:53:54 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Implementing Health Reform: Preventive Services</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3757828&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F07%2F15%2Fimplementing-health-reform-preventive-services%2F</link>
            <description>Editor’s Note: Earlier posts by Timothy Jost provide analyses of regulations implementing provisions of the new health reform legislation governing a patient bill of rights, grandfathered plans, tax exempt hospitals, the small employer tax credit, the Web portal, reinsurance for early retirees, and young adult coverage.  On July 14, 2010, the Departments of Treasury, Labor, and Health and [...] (Source: Health Affairs Blog)</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3757828</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:48:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3757828</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Your Health Insurance, Designed by Lobbyists</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3757852&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FsaYXyH9Fags%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonChristopher Weaver of Kaiser Health News has an excellent article in today&amp;#8217;s Washington Post on the various government agencies that will now be deciding what health insurance coverage you must purchase, and how many of those decisions will ultimately fall to lobbyists and politicians:
For years, an obscure federal task force sifted through medical literature on colonoscopies, prostate-cancer screening and fluoride treatments, ferreting out the best evidence for doctors to use in caring for their patients. But now its recommendations have financial implications, raising the stakes for patients, doctors and others in the health-care industry.
Under the new health-care overhaul law, health insurers will be required to pay fully for services that get an A or B recomm...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3757852</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:32:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3757852</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Too Much Journalistic Enthusiasm Again For The Artificial Heart</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3753823&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Ftoo-much-journalistic-enthusiasm-again-for-the-artificial-heart%2F2010.07.14</link>
            <description>Here we go again. And believe me, as one who&amp;#8217;s covered the artificial heart experiments of the 1980s, I feel like I&amp;#8217;ve been through this countless times before &amp;#8212; but so have health news readers.
Another entrepeneurial team announces hopes for its artificial heart device and some news coverage trumpets the company&amp;#8217;s announcement:


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
But this was in The New York Times! Now, granted &amp;#8212; it&amp;#8217;s in a &amp;#8220;Global Business&amp;#8221; section. But we don&amp;#8217;t see why that removes the need for more scrutiny, for independent perspective, and for a better discussion of evidence. (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at Gary Schwitzer's HealthNewsReview Blog* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3753823</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 20:00:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3753823</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senators (Finally) Press Kagan about ObamaCare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3753804&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FZthdcmVWQls%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonBack in May, I suggested:
Senate Judiciary Committee members should be sure to ask Solicitor General and Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, during her upcoming confirmation hearings, whether she or her office played any part in crafting ObamaCare or the administration’s defense to the lawsuits challenging that law. If Kagan helped to craft either, that would present a conflict of interest: when those lawsuits reach the Supreme Court, she would be sitting in judgment over a case in which she had already taken sides&amp;#8230;
If Kagan played a role in drafting ObamaCare or formulating the administration’s legal defense, and is confirmed by the Senate, propriety would dictate that she recuse herself from any challenges to that law that reach the high court.
Committee memb...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3753804</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:10:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3753804</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>July Health Affairs: The Impact Of Health Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3737017&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F07%2F08%2Fjuly-health-affairs-the-impact-of-health-reform%2F</link>
            <description>The new health reform law charges the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) with testing new payment and delivery models intended to improve health outcomes and restrain costs. But as the July issue of Health Affairs, published yesterday, points out, implementing all of these activities will require a combination of flexibility, leadership, coordination, [...] (Source: Health Affairs Blog)</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3737017</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:54:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3737017</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Dendreon Stock Plunges On Medicare Review</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3714442&amp;cid=t_374886_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FkbaEvFLNUu4%2F</link>
            <description>Nothing like an after-hours plunge in a stock. Dendreon shares fell as much as 23 percent this evening after the Centers for Medicare &amp;#038; Medicaid Services announced it is reviewing the prostate cancer vaccine to determine whether national coverage is &amp;#8220;reasonable and necessary,&amp;#8221; but a final decision won&amp;#8217;t be made for an entire year. The stock later regained some of its losses to close at $26.69, but remains well below its 52-week high of $57.67 on May 3.
The agency will take public comments through July 30 &amp;#8220;on the evidence regarding the effects of this treatment on health outcomes in patients with prostate cancer,&amp;#8221; according to a statement, adding that it is &amp;#8220;particularly interested in clinical studies and other scientific information relevant to the ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3714442</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 00:24:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3714442</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Male Menopause Story: Journalists All Over The Map</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3710558&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fthe-male-menopause-story-journalists-all-over-the-map%2F2010.06.29</link>
            <description>An article on the Knight Science Journalism Tracker comments on German media coverage of the &amp;#8220;Is there male menopause?&amp;#8221; question. An excerpt:
One study, but very different types of headlines: &amp;#8220;&amp;#8216;Male Menopause&amp;#8217; discovered&amp;#8221; and &amp;#8220;Men have no Menopause.&amp;#8221; Both types of headlines are based on one study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which analyzed 3219 European males between 40 and 79. Blood samples provided testosterone levels and questionnaires (!) asked about the &amp;#8220;general, sexual, physical, and psychological health.&amp;#8221;
What the scientists found was nothing more and nothing less than a correlation between a low testosterone level and three clinical symptoms (&amp;#8221;decreased frequency of morning erection, decreased fr...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3710558</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 21:01:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3710558</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Insurance coverage during Pregnancy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3699486&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36941&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mazecordblood.com%2Fblog%2F%3Fp%3D525</link>
            <description>Chances are most of us have sorted this out; but there are always potholes that pop up (down?) and throw us off, particularly in this economic environment.  So, here&amp;#8217;s a brief write up on health insurance companies and what they can and cannot do regarding the expected &amp;#8211; or unexpected &amp;#8211; pregnancy. (Source: Cord Blood News)</description>
            <author>Cord Blood News</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3699486</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:08:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3699486</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Solutions To Scale: Proven Health Care Models for Primetime</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3695561&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FYNl6kCYgWcM%2F</link>
            <description>By Joy Burwell

You’re Invited to
“Solutions To Scale: Proven Health Care Models for Primetime”
 Wednesday, June 30, 2010
 9:00 – 11:30 am
Breakfast will be served at 8:30 am
 
Kaiser Family Foundation
Barbara Jordan Conference Center
1330 G Street, NW
Washington, DC 20004
 Raise the Voice, a program of the American Academy of Nursing supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, showcases the work of “Edge Runners” – nurse researchers and experts who have developed proven care models and interventions that demonstrate significantly improved clinical outcomes and cost savings.  The Edge Runners will share their experiences to highlight what does and does not work for consideration by federal and state agencies during health care implementation.
Welcome:

...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3695561</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 14:04:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3695561</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Same-Sex Couples Face Inequities In Access To Health Coverage</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3695527&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F06%2F24%2Fsame-sex-couples-face-inequities-in-access-to-health-coverage%2F</link>
            <description>Partnered gay men in California are only 42 percent as likely as married heterosexual men to get employer-sponsored dependent health insurance. Partnered lesbians in the state have an even smaller chance (28 percent) of getting that same coverage, compared to married heterosexual women.
Those findings are contained in a Web First article released online today by Health Affairs; the study will also appear in the journal’s August issue.
The work by researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund in Los Angeles is the first to quantify 1) the gap between dependent coverage received by heterosexual employees and coverage received by lesbian and gay employees, and 2) the greater extent to which the dependent partners of l...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3695527</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 11:39:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3695527</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama to Health Insurers: Stop Revealing How Expensive Our “Protections” Are</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3687083&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F4bBx9_gb1Ug%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonIn the upside-down world of ObamaCare, politicians can force health-insurance companies to spend more yet blame them when premiums increase.
Today, President Obama extolled new &amp;#8220;protections&amp;#8221; included in the sweeping legislation he signed into law on March 23.
One category of &amp;#8220;protections&amp;#8221; requires consumers to purchase coverage for more and more expensive medical services (e.g., limitless coverage, requiring insurers to recognize ob-gyns as primary care physicians, coverage for &amp;#8220;children&amp;#8221; up to age 26).  If consumers valued such &amp;#8220;protections,&amp;#8221; they would have already bought them &amp;#8212; and if they&amp;#8217;re not in a position to select their own coverage, Congress should have fixed that problem.  Instead, Congress and Pre...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3687083</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:07:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3687083</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rwanda and the Psychic Benefits of Universal Coverage</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3683605&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FvkmITx0TgXo%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonLast week, The New York Times published an article subtitled, &amp;#8220;In Desperately Poor Rwanda, Most Have Health Insurance.&amp;#8221;  The main theme was the contrast between Rwanda&amp;#8217;s compulsory health insurance system and the as-yet-non-compulsory U.S. health insurance market:
Rwanda has had national health insurance for 11 years now; 92 percent of the nation is covered, and the premiums are $2 a year.
Sunny Ntayomba, an editorial writer for The New Times, a newspaper based in the capital, Kigali, is aware of the paradox: his nation, one of the world’s poorest, insures more of its citizens than the world’s richest does.
He met an American college student passing through last year, and found it “absurd, ridiculous, that I have health insurance and she didn’...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3683605</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:44:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3683605</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medical Bills Mean Bittersweet Victory Over Breast Cancer</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3655758&amp;cid=t_374886_136_f&amp;fid=36032&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydayhealth.com%2Fblog%2Flife-with-breast-cancer%2Fmedical-bills-mean-bittersweet-victory-over-breast-cancer%2F</link>
            <description>The most heartbreaking stories I hear are from those who found a lump or have been diagnosed with breast cancer and don’t have insurance. Fear grips us the moment we notice a lump in our breasts; fear can overwhelm us when we are told it is breast cancer. There are no words, however, to describe the horror of realizing that you can’t afford treatment.
I had good insurance when I was diagnosed with breast cancer, but I shared in previous entries the horror of finding we were without health insurance when my husband&amp;#8217;s employment changed and his company didn’t offer us COBRA right away. The battle with breast cancer was bad enough, but knowing we had to pay over 1,100 dollars a month to continue coverage once we were given COBRA was like fighting the enemy on two fronts. Add in th...</description>
            <author>Life with Breast Cancer</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3655758</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 16:17:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3655758</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Guns Save Lives, Part XXXIVXX</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3648481&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F4ZCAYfHGVlc%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchJohn Lee still has his life and four children still have a father because Mr. Lee  had a handgun when three criminals tried to kill him and take his money.

When John Q. Citizen takes out a gun and the criminals flee, reporters don&amp;#8217;t consider the incident &amp;#8220;news&amp;#8221; (at least when there are no injuries)&amp;#8211;so guns are typically on the evening news when they are used by criminals.  As a result of that skewed coverage, it is no wonder that many people have a negative view about firearms.
On June 17, Cato will be hosting a forum about guns, crime, and self-defense.  Speakers include John Lott, Jeff Snyder, and Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign.
For related Cato scholarship, go here. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3648481</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 18:37:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3648481</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Anyone from GSK Interested?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3641307&amp;cid=t_374886_149_f&amp;fid=35776&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpipeline.corante.com%2Farchives%2F2010%2F06%2F08%2Fanyone_from_gsk_interested.php</link>
            <description>A reporter from a major newspaper has contacted me while working on a story about GlaxoSmithKline's new R&amp;D structure. They've noticed a lot of comments to posts here, and wonder if anyone would like to provide their opinions as to how things are going. If anyone's interested, drop me an e-mail, and I'll provide contact information. At that point, I'll drop out of the process entirely. (Source: In the Pipeline)</description>
            <author>In the Pipeline</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3641307</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:56:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3641307</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>John Brennan on Countering Terrorism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3603574&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FfDM9_O3USl4%2F</link>
            <description>By Christopher PrebleEarlier today, I attended a lecture at CSIS by John Brennan, a leading counterterrorism and homeland security adviser to President Obama. His speech highlighted some of the key elements of the administration&amp;#8217;s counterterrorism strategy, in advance of tomorrow&amp;#8217;s release of the National Security Strategy (NSS).
I hope that many people will take the opportunity to read (.pdf) or listen to/watch Brennan&amp;#8217;s speech, as opposed to merely reading what other people said that he said. Echoing key themes that Brennan put forward last year, also at CSIS, today&amp;#8217;s talk reflected a level of sophistication that is required when addressing the difficult but eminently manageable problem of terrorism.
Brennan was most eloquent in talking about the nature of t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3603574</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 20:52:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3603574</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Emergency Care’s Ambiguity In The Affordable Care Act</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3595588&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Femergency-cares-ambiguity-in-the-affordable-care-act%2F2010.05.24</link>
            <description>There&amp;#8217;s just so much hidden and buried in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that it&amp;#8217;s like trying the find all the goodies in an Easter egg hunt. ACEP News pointed out one hidden goodie, nicely illustrated in this article from Kaiser Health News:
Under the new health law, insurance companies must extend several new protections to patients who receive emergency care. One of the biggest guarantees: Patients who need emergency treatment will have their costs covered at the same rate, regardless of whether they are treated at &amp;#8220;in-network&amp;#8221; or &amp;#8220;out-of-network&amp;#8221; hospitals.
The law also bars health plans from requiring prior authorization for emergency services. And it mandates that plans follow the &amp;#8220;prudent layperson&amp;#8221; rule. For example, if a person goes ...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3595588</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 18:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3595588</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Will Large Employers Dump Healthcare Coverage?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3592210&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fwill-large-employers-dump-healthcare-coverage%2F2010.05.24</link>
            <description>Fortune magazine has made some news recently about the impact of healthcare reform on large employers:
Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill’s critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the healthcare coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.
The only trouble? There’s no way these employers are seriously thinking about doing this.
I can understand why the employers would do the math. According to healthcare reform law, penalties for failing to provide health coverage are a small fraction of the cost of that coverage. But as with most everything else in healthcare, there’s muc...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3592210</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 12:00:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3592210</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Faith In Healthcare Is Falling</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3552246&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Ffaith-in-healthcare-is-falling%2F2010.05.10</link>
            <description>A newly-created index of consumer healthcare confidence has fallen steadily this year, reports The Thomson Reuters Consumer Healthcare Sentiment Index. Consumers report declining confidence in their ability to access, use, and pay for healthcare. The index, set at a baseline of 100 in December 2009, is now at 97.
More consumers reported difficulty paying for services and insurance, or reported a reduction or cancellation of their insurance. More delayed or failed to fill a prescription in the past three months or canceled a diagnostic test (such as blood work, X-ray or mammogram). Further, consumers expect the situation to worsen in the next three months, including putting off elective surgery.
Thomson will report figures monthly and has published their methodology online.

			
			*This bl...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3552246</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 10 May 2010 20:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3552246</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Malcolm Gladwell on Synta and Oncology</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3549552&amp;cid=t_374886_149_f&amp;fid=35776&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpipeline.corante.com%2Farchives%2F2010%2F05%2F10%2Fmalcolm_gladwell_on_synta_and_oncology.php</link>
            <description>The folks at the New Yorker sent along this link to a new article by Malcolm Gladwell about Synta and their attempts to get elesclomol (STA-4783) to work as a melanoma therapy. (If you don't know how this one turns out, you might want to read the article before clicking on that second link).

Update: didn't realize that the full article was subscriber-only at the New Yorker site. Not sure if there's anything to be done about that, but I've dropped them a line. . .

Gladwell (an occasional reader of this blog) often takes some hits from experts in the fields he writes about, but after reading the article this morning, I think he's done a fine job of showing what drug discovery is like. His division between screening and rational drug design is a bit too sharply defined, to my eyes, but he g...</description>
            <author>In the Pipeline</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3549552</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 10 May 2010 12:22:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3549552</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Yoga and Health Reform: A Mat(ch) Made in Heaven?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3529781&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2F-E9F5R-sVuw%2F</link>
            <description>By Glenna Crooks. Full disclosure – I’ve practiced yoga fairly consistently for decades. It’s been good for me.
In grad school it helped me stay focused – and calmer – through killer statistics classes. Later, it was a way to unwind at the end of a workday. Still later, it saved me from surgery to correct fairly severe scoliosis. It’s not cured the deformity but I’m virtually pain free most of the time – no small feat for one who spends 18-24 hours on flights and 8 hours standing to facilitate meetings.
More disclosure – I am certified to teach, though I don’t. The same erratic travel schedule that prevents attending classes on a regular basis precludes committing to teaching them. I trained to be able to practice on the road. It was a good investment of my time and fun...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3529781</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 04 May 2010 13:45:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3529781</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How Employers Can Manage Healthcare Services And Expenses</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3529789&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthblawg.typepad.com%2Ffiles%2Fgeorge-pantos-hpm-institute-healthblawg-interview-with-david-harlow-042110.mp3</link>
            <description>Healthcare costs are a perennial issue for employers and employees. There are a variety of approaches out there designed to improve health status and health outcomes and reduce costs at the same time. Proponents of a variety of approaches have been featured here on HealthBlawg in the past. 
I recently had the opportunity to speak with George Pantos, of the Healthcare Performance Management Institute, a brand-new organization on the scene, founded by a group of folks who have developed tools for managing these costs. (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at HealthBlawg :: David Harlow's Health Care Law Blog* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3529789</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 17:00:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3529789</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Virus-laden DNA of Aborted Babies</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3499267&amp;cid=t_374886_133_f&amp;fid=35128&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fthiswayoflife.org%2Fblog%2F%3Fp%3D457</link>
            <description>Well, that&amp;#8217;s one of the current quack theories about vaccines and autism. While it is clear that vaccines have absolutely nothing to do with autism (other than the known causation through the Rubella virus in, obviously, people who were un-vaccinated), that doesn&amp;#8217;t stop people from believing in vaccine causation.
Well, a new group of people has joined this fight. Rather than being autistic-adults, parents of autistics, or researchers, this group has little personal contact with actual autistic people. Instead, it is one group of pro-life people wanting to use autism as proof of why abortion should be outlawed &amp;#8211; never mind that it has no basis in fact!
Don&amp;#8217;t believe me? See this article, Study Confirms Link Between Autism and Use of Cells From Abortions in Vaccines. ...</description>
            <author>NTs Are Weird</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3499267</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 23 Apr 2010 00:06:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3499267</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>C&amp;E News - A Few Questions</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3483102&amp;cid=t_374886_149_f&amp;fid=35776&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpipeline.corante.com%2Farchives%2F2010%2F04%2F18%2Fce_news_a_few_questions.php</link>
            <description>I'll be traveling Monday, so no new posts during the day. But I'm traveling to something that's of interest to many of the readers here, so I wanted to throw the floor open to questions. I've been invited to be on the editorial advisory board of Chemical and Engineering News, and I'll be meeting with the staff there later this week.

So I wanted to ask the chemists in the crowd: what do you think that C&amp;E News does well, and what do you think it does poorly? Are there topics that you think are covered too much, or some that you think aren't being addressed? Please feel free to add comments - I'll collate them and pass them on to the staff there. (Source: In the Pipeline)</description>
            <author>In the Pipeline</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3483102</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 03:15:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3483102</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who else wants a massage covered by insurance?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3467839&amp;cid=t_374886_111_f&amp;fid=39123&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fnursingcomments%2Ftdtc%2F%7E3%2FcvHo0cow9go%2F</link>
            <description>GUEST POST BY ANDREW WOLFE, LMP, MMs
&amp;#8220;Medical Massage Therapy and Insurance Coverage.&amp;#8221;  By Andrew Wolfe, LMP, MMs.
Medical massage therapy is recognized as a health care provision under rehabilitation outpatient coverage under most major medical plans.  Specific plan coverage’s vary according to the benefit package your plan and/or employer offer.  Medical massage therapy definition is the ability to heal, restore and improve function which was otherwise compromised due to illness, injury, disease or surgery.  It must be a part of a treatment plan your primary care provider recommends as medically necessary to restore lost function.
Provisions are also given towards motor vehicle accident (PIP) and worker&amp;#8217;s compensation-labor and industry (L&amp;I), job injury reco...</description>
            <author>Nursing Comments</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3467839</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 2010 13:28:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3467839</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Media Coverage of the Health Care Overhaul</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3467738&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fw1mT8tFucSU%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael D. TannerOver the course of the health care debate, the media often reported and editorialized &amp;#8212; and sometimes it was impossible to tell the difference &amp;#8212; quite favorably on the Democratic proposals running through Congress. While some upheld their journalistic responsibility to scrutinize and offer objective analysis of the legislation, many did not.
It was not surprising to read stories almost daily about how Obamacare would lift millions of poor, elderly, sick, and generally down-trodden Americans out of financial and medical crisis, and even go so far as to singlehandedly save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans over the course of the next decade. (It would even provide one free turkey for Thanksgiving to every family living 400 percent below the pover...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3467738</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 21:06:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3467738</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Round Two in the Fight to Cover Children with Pre-Existing Conditions: Cost.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3432875&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2Ft8RF0ckq3_A%2F</link>
            <description>By Santi Bhagat, MD, MPH. Health Care Reform is off to a good start.  A couple of days ago, I blogged on the debate between the insurance industry and the administration about the interpretation of this new law.  Hats off to insurers for making the right choice, right away, to heed regulations that are forthcoming from Health and Human Services.   I first heard this through the grapevine at the Disruptive Women Breakfast Series this week from Stephanie Cohen, the expert panelist representing the insurance industry.
The law is intended to require insurers to issue policies that provide a full range of benefits for all children with pre-existing conditions starting in September 2010.  That means insurers can no longer refuse to cover children with pre-existing conditions under their par...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3432875</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2010 12:07:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3432875</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Life in the Trenches of the Health Insurance Business:  Calculating Coverage for Adult Children</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3420451&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FsWwQK21VocY%2F</link>
            <description>Hygeia Note:  On March 30th, Disruptive Women in Health Care launches the first of its monthly in-person breakfasts.  Among our speakers will be Stephanie Cohen.  Her post appears below.
By Stephanie Cohen.  This month&amp;#8217;s health insurance nightmare: Dad is still paying for his daughter&amp;#8217;s insurance — and no one is happy.
The situation: I received a call last week from a client whose daughter recently told him she hates her insurance &amp;#8220;because it does not cover anything.” He phoned me to see if she had a real gripe, and if I could help him find another policy with better coverage for her.
The problem: It turned out that her policy had a $5000 deductible, which did not include coverage for dental or vision doctor visits. Since she has an entry-level position and not a ...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3420451</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 04:21:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3420451</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Reform Implementation Timeline Prepared by Kaiser Family Foundation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3408373&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.kff.org%2Fhealthreform%2Fupload%2F8060.pdf</link>
            <description>With the enactment of comprehensive health reform, the Kaiser Family Foundation has prepared a timeline detailing when specific provisions of the legislation are scheduled to take effect. 
The implementation timeline reflects the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which President Obama signed on March 23, 2010, as well as provisions in the Health Care &amp; Education Reconciliation Act passed by the House and Senate. 
It includes more than a dozen key provisions scheduled to take effect in 2010, including the creation of a national high-risk pool for people with pre-existing conditions that can’t buy insurance on their own, tax credits for small businesses that obtain health coverage for their workers and assistance for Medicare beneficiaries with high drug c...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3408373</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:37:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3408373</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bioethicists Weigh In On the Healthcare Reform Vote (updated)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3403844&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35052&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FWomensBioethicsBlog%2F%7E3%2FZCDfBbsuRbw%2Fbioethicists-weigh-in-on-healthcare_22.html</link>
            <description>As the readers of this blog know, both myself and several of our bloggers have posted about universal health care coverage many, many times as an ethical and moral imperative. In the last year, my hopes (along with many other bioethicists, I'm sure ) of attaining universal coverage have gone up, down and sideways, like a roller-coaster ride, exhilarating and frightening, with emotions ranging from inspiration to resignation.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Now that the US House of Representative has finally passed a health reform bill, I've requested several bioethicists (and friends of the WBP) to share their thoughts on the ethical implications of the passage of this bill:
Art Caplan of UPenn:&amp;nbsp; &quot;The passage of this bill, flaws and all, represents the elimination of the single greatest failure in Americ...</description>
            <author>Women's Bioethics Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3403844</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 22:13:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3403844</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How Would Health Reform Affect The Uninsured?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3403846&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F03%2F24%2Fhow-would-health-reform-affect-the-uninsured%2F</link>
            <description>In an appearance on the PBS NewsHour last night, Health Affairs Editor in Chief Susan Dentzer broke down the composition of America&amp;#8217;s uninsured population and discussed how health reform is expected to extend coverage to 32 million uninsured people. Dentzer described the planned expansion of Medicaid and the creation of state-based exchanges for individuals and small businesses that would feature income-based subsidies.
Note: Yesterday&amp;#8217;s post about Dentzer&amp;#8217;s earlier appearance on the NewsHour misstated her remarks concerning the timeline for implementing bans on coverage restrictions for preexisting conditions. The current corrected version of the post contains the correct timeline.
Copyright &amp;copy; 2010 Health Affairs Blog. This Feed is for personal non-commercial ...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3403846</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 19:06:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3403846</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bioethicists Weigh In On the Healthcare Reform Vote</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3395086&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35052&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FWomensBioethicsBlog%2F%7E3%2FZCDfBbsuRbw%2Fbioethicists-weigh-in-on-healthcare_22.html</link>
            <description>As the readers of this blog know, both myself and several of our bloggers have posted about universal health care coverage many, many times as an ethical and moral imperative. In the last year, my hopes (along with many other bioethicists, I'm sure ) of attaining universal coverage have gone up, down and sideways, like a roller-coaster ride, exhilarating and frightening, with emotions ranging from inspiration to resignation.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Now that the US House of Representative has finally passed a health reform bill, I've requested several bioethicists (and friends of the WBP) to share their thoughts on the ethical implications of the passage of this bill:
Art Caplan of UPenn:&amp;nbsp; &quot;The passage of this bill, flaws and all, represents the elimination of the single greatest failure in Americ...</description>
            <author>Women's Bioethics Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3395086</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 01:50:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3395086</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Health Care Reform Reconciliation Bill (Updated)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3386875&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F03%2F19%2Fthe-health-care-reform-reconciliation-bill%2F</link>
            <description>**An update added the afternoon of March 20 at the end of this post provides a brief summation of the manager&amp;#8217;s amendment to the health reform reconciliation bill being considered by the House.**
The House began its last step in the health reform legislative process early in the afternoon of Thursday, March 18, when it released HR 4872, the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010. As this year’s health reform legislation has gone, this is a slender bill, weighing in at 153 pages, of which 35 are dedicated to student loans and 32 to revenue enhancements. Nonetheless, the reconciliation bill makes significant changes in the Senate bill, moving it closer to the House’s earlier legislation.
First, a quick recap for anyone who happens to have slept through t...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3386875</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:11:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3386875</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Health Care Reform Reconciliation Bill</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3385328&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F03%2F19%2Fthe-health-care-reform-reconciliation-bill%2F</link>
            <description>The House began its last step in the health reform legislative process early in the afternoon of Thursday, March 18, when it released HR 4872, the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010. As this year’s health reform legislation has gone, this is a slender bill, weighing in at 153 pages, of which 35 are dedicated to student loans and 32 to revenue enhancements. Nonetheless, the reconciliation bill makes significant changes in the Senate bill, moving it closer to the House’s earlier legislation.
First, a quick recap for anyone who happens to have slept through the past few months. On November 7, the House passed its health reform bill, HR 3962, by a vote of 220 to 215. After more than a month of deliberation, the Senate finally cut off a filibuster and passed ...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3385328</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:11:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3385328</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Yet. Another. Fraudulent. Cost Estimate.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3378449&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FD8FXSTYtAVk%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonHouse Democrats claim that a not-yet-released Congressional Budget Office report puts the cost of their revised health care overhaul at $940 billion over the next 10 years.
Though I have yet to see the CBO score, I&amp;#8217;ll bet anyone a fancy lunch that it does not claim the legislation would cost the federal government just $940 billion from 2010 through 2019.
As former Congressional Budget Office director Donald Marron has explained over and over, the figure that Democrats consistently cite for the cost of their bills is only the CBO&amp;#8217;s estimate of the cost of federal spending related to the expansion of health insurance coverage.  It is not the full cost to the federal government, because each bill also spends taxpayer dollars on other items.
Marron examined th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3378449</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:26:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3378449</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>AP: Obama Misleads Voters about ObamaCare’s Effects on Premiums</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3374106&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUA3h7xM7mE4%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonThe Associated Press reports:
Buyers, beware: President Barack Obama says his health care overhaul will lower premiums by double digits, but check the fine print&amp;#8230;
The [Congressional Budget Office] concluded that premiums for people buying their own coverage would go up by an average of 10 percent to 13 percent, compared with the levels they&amp;#8217;d reach without the legislation&amp;#8230;
&amp;#8220;People are likely to not buy the same low-value policies they are buying now,&amp;#8221; said health economist Len Nichols of George Mason University. &amp;#8220;If they did buy the same value plans &amp;#8230; the premium would be lower than it is now. This makes the White House statement true. But is it possibly misleading for some people? Sure.&amp;#8221;
Nichols&amp;#8217; comments are also m...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3374106</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:51:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3374106</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Is ‘Meaningful’ Health Insurance? Who Decides?’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3354301&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FNhKpCeZLjag%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonNoting that premium increases, such as Anthem&amp;#8217;s proposed 39-percent hike in California, have caused individuals and employers to purchase less coverage, Kaiser Family Foundation president Drew Altman writes:
Rising health care costs and insurance company practices are leading not just to more expensive premiums, but to skimpier, less comprehensive coverage as well; slowly redefining what we have known as health insurance. To be sure, some economists argue that this is precisely what should happen&amp;#8230;But this is not likely how regular people see it. Appropriate cost sharing is one thing, but we may be reaching the point in the individual market where the policies many people have simply cannot be considered meaningful coverage.
Of course, this is the whole idea ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3354301</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:57:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3354301</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Death Of A Sales Job (A Three Act Ploy)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3338202&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F03%2F05%2Fdeath-of-a-sales-job-a-three-act-ploy%2F</link>
            <description>With apologies to Arthur Miller &amp;#8230;
President Obama went back before the cameras again Wednesday, providing yet another recycling of fading rationales for his health reform product that more voters would rather leave on the Capitol Hill store shelves than purchase.  
But “attention must be paid” whenever the president speaks. 
He tried to claim that “we have now incorporated most of the ‘serious’ ideas from across the spectrum about how to contain the rising cost of health care.”  Perhaps that includes compromising on the implementation date for taxing the extra amount of premiums in the most expensive and comprehensive private insurance plans (just short of waiting either “in perpetuity” or “forever;” whichever comes sooner and still meets the approval of org...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3338202</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 17:15:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3338202</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Care Summit: The Conclusion</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3311640&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F02%2F25%2Fhealth-care-summit-the-conclusion%2F</link>
            <description>Editor&amp;#8217;s Note: This is the second of 2 posts on the health care summit from Tim Jost. Part 1 looks at insurance reforms, premium rates and more.
Most of the last three hours of the summit was devoted to the effects of proposed legislation on the federal budget deficit (primarily on Medicare and Medicaid) and on expanding coverage.  It seemed to me that the Democrats were stronger in the second half than in the first, less focused on telling stories (although there were still a lot of them) and more on substance.  The Republicans kept to their talking points, but were at a disadvantage because their bills do not really address Medicare or coverage expansions.
Insurance Reform: Risk Pools and Mandates

Before turning to the deficit issue, several Congressmen who were not able to tal...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3311640</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 04:06:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3311640</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>If you read only one article on health care reform...</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3287760&amp;cid=t_374886_99_f&amp;fid=35344&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fzackarysholemberger.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F02%2Fif-you-read-only-one-article-on-health.html</link>
            <description>...then you've probably read it already, or you're never going to at all. But in case you haven't found that one article, hie yourself to The New Republic. There Harold Pollack has some clarity on the relationship between universal coverage and improved mortalitywould universal coverage make people tangibly healthier? You betcha. but says something else even more important:there are other ways to save thousands of lives that are much more cost-effective than expanding health insurance coverage. We systematically neglect these other opportunities. (Source: Zackary Sholem Berger)</description>
            <author>Zackary Sholem Berger</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3287760</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 03:52:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3287760</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Summit: A Public Co-Option?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3283521&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqQZ4Mo5s4Ow%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonStill doubt that the Church of Universal Coverage is a bona fide religion?  Consider:

The American people have been solidly against the Democrats&amp;#8217; universal-coverage plan since July 2009.
Roughly 60 percent of the public wants Congress to scrap that legislation and start over.
President Obama will nevertheless use that legislation as the starting point for negotiations with Republicans at next week&amp;#8217;s health care summit.

Mmmm, that&amp;#8217;s good fervor.
Republican summiteers shouldn&amp;#8217;t spend too much time discussing their own ideas &amp;#8212; which aren&amp;#8217;t going anywhere, and really aren&amp;#8217;t that great anyway &amp;#8212; lest they unwittingly aid Democrats in changing the below-illustrated narrative.  They should instead focus like a laser beam on t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3283521</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:43:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3283521</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>An Alternative Path On Health Reform: A Reply To Tim Jost</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3269675&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F02%2F12%2Fan-alternative-path-on-health-reform-a-reply-to-tim-jost%2F</link>
            <description>Tim Jost’s thoughtful analysis of the state of health reform concluded that the only practical means of accomplishing health reform is to find a short parliamentary path to some melded version of the two bills that passed the respective Houses. In a comment in response to Jost&amp;#8217;s Post, I argued that even if the bills were reconcilable politically, they are structurally flawed, fiscally reckless and have irrevocably lost public support.   So Jost rightly asks: What is the alternative?
The options are constrained not only by political circumstances, but fiscal circumstances as well. The recession has seriously diminished the fiscal capacity of the federal government and has damaged the corporate cash flow on which an employer mandate depends.   The true cost of universal coverage...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3269675</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:42:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3269675</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Getting Health Reform Done</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3235809&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F02%2F02%2Fgetting-health-reform-done%2F</link>
            <description>Although President Obama’s State of the Union address made it clear that he has a long list of  urgent priorities for the coming year, the President certainly did not signal retreat on the signature initiative of his first year—health care reform.  His words were “do not walk away from reform, not now, not when we are so close,” “finish the job” and “let’s get it done.”  Indeed, he repeated “let’s get it done” twice.
So how do we “get it done?”
The smartest approach procedurally would be for the House and Senate to pass a reconciliation bill—a budget bill that requires only a simple majority to pass—that makes the requisite fixes to the Senate bill agreed upon by House and Senate leaders in their informal conference last month.  With this, the House shou...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3235809</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 18:48:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3235809</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How to Reform Health Care? ‘Let Them Have Choice’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3231461&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FN3IPr6YMUV0%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonThis is big.
The federal tax code creates a large tax preference for employer-sponsored health insurance.  As a result, 61 percent of non-elderly Americans obtain health insurance through an employer.  That tax preference creates all sorts of problems.  It encourages more comprehensive health insurance and wasteful health care spending.  It deprives many workers of their health coverage at the moment they need it most: when they get sick and can no longer work.  And it denies workers the benefits of being able to choose their health plan.  Eighty percent of those who work for an employer that offers health benefits have at most two health-plan choices, which are typically both run by the same insurer.
To date, no one had really quantified the damage done by denyin...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3231461</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 20:14:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3231461</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Balancing Access to Experts and Better Pay for Primary Care</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3208364&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fedocket.access.gpo.gov%2F2009%2Fpdf%2FE9-26502.pdf</link>
            <description>Every January, new billing rules and rates go into place for physicians’ services as part of the annual update to Medicare’s Physician Fee Schedule. Dominating DC health policy concerns in this arena are the medical community’s efforts with Congress to address Medicare’s cost-of-living adjuster, known as the “sustainable growth rate” (SGR), which would have lowered 2010 fees across-the-board by 21 percent, if not for a last-minute temporary stay through the end of February. Negotiations with Congress are on-going to provide a long term or multi-year solution—a costly “fix” that I believe is well worth the price to keep physicians in the Medicare program, and seems to have widespread support.
Getting much less attention is a unilateral policy pronouncement made by the Cent...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3208364</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:00:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3208364</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Representative Camp: Where Does Health Reform Stand Now?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3197594&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F01%2F21%2Frepresentative-camp-where-does-health-reform-stand-now%2F</link>
            <description>Speaking at a Health Affairs media breakfast this morning, Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) did not offer much hope for the prospect of moving toward universal coverage, either now or in the foreseeable future. Camp, the senior Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, offered a little heartburn for the insurance industry as well: He endorsed requiring insurers to cover Americans with pre-existing conditions but opposed an &amp;#8220;individual mandate&amp;#8221; requiring all Americans to have coverage.
Audio and pictures from the breakfast will be available soon on the Health Affairs Web site. For more on the breakfast, see Merrill Goozner&amp;#8217;s post in Gooznews on Health.
Camp said Democratic health reform legislation was &amp;#8221;dead&amp;#8221; after voters in Massachusetts elected Republica...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3197594</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:31:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3197594</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Trouble in Massachusetts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3197609&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FFuq8gN2Wdcw%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris MoodyYesterday, Cato released a new study, “The Massachusetts Health Plan: Much Pain, Little Gain,” which showed that official estimates overstate the gains in health insurance coverage resulting from a 2006 Massachusetts law by at least 45 percent.  The study also finds: supporters understate the law’s cost by nearly 60 percent; government programs are crowding out private insurance; self-reported health improved for some but fell for others; and young adults are responding to the law by avoiding Massachusetts.
Given that the Massachusetts health plan bears a “remarkable resemblance” to the Obama plan, the study should serve as a warning sign to members of Congress, says Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies.
The study has received coverage in Investor&amp;#821...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3197609</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:52:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3197609</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama’s Other Massachusetts Problem</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3182169&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FleTUXXseucI%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonEven if Democrat Martha Coakley wins 50 percent of the vote in the race to fill the late Sen. Ted Kennedy&amp;#8217;s (ahem) term, there are other numbers emanating from Massachusetts that present a problem for President Obama&amp;#8217;s health plan.
On Wednesday, the Cato Institute will release “The Massachusetts Health Plan: Much Pain, Little Gain,” authored by Cato adjunct scholar Aaron Yelowitz and yours truly. Our study evaluates Massachusetts&amp;#8217; 2006 health law, which bears a &amp;#8220;remarkable resemblance&amp;#8221; to the president&amp;#8217;s plan. We use the same methodology as previous work by the Urban Institute, but ours is the first study to evaluate the effects of the Massachusetts law using Current Population Survey data for 2008 (i.e., from the 2009 March suppl...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3182169</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:12:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3182169</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Reform: The Pursuit of Progress</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3175869&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FbMPuYqPwMdA%2F</link>
            <description>Healthcare (insurance) reform has passed in the Senate and final negotiations are happening before it moves on to the President&amp;#8217;s desk for signature. While the legislation is not perfect &amp;#8211; in fact some would say far from perfect &amp;#8211; it is a piece of legislation that is very much in keeping with our American philosophy, our constant pursuit of progress and change.
As the late Senator Kennedy&amp;#8217;s career on Capitol Hill demonstrated, change is usually incremental, usually negotiated and usually compromised. But at the end of the day, change usually amounts to progress.
I see tremendous progress, too, as I look back on a decade&amp;#8217;s worth of work to promote access to affordable quality health care using nurse practitioners in the role as primary care providers, thereby a...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3175869</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 11:22:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3175869</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Abortion Coverage And Health Reform: Bringing Evidence To Bear</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3171866&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F01%2F13%2Fabortion-coverage-and-health-reform-bringing-evidence-to-bear%2F</link>
            <description>Discussion:  As stated above, the median cost of first-trimester abortion care ($430) is almost twice the typical out-of-pocket health care expenses paid by young, uninsured individuals, and the median cost of second-trimester abortions ($1,260) is about four times typical out-of-pocket expenses. The cost of a first-trimester abortion represents 4 percent of income for uninsured females ages 25-34.
Females and individuals who have difficulties obtaining needed health care have relatively higher out-of-pocket expenses and thus will be more affected by a lack of abortion coverage. This is particularly true for women who need second-trimester abortion because of health risks or fetal impairments or who are already paying a large portion of their income on health care.
Furthermore, unins...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3171866</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:59:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3171866</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Dear Poor People: Please Remain Poor. Sincerely, ObamaCare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3171889&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqfHgYHyCgPg%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonIn a new study titled, &amp;#8220;Obama&amp;#8217;s Prescription for Low-Wage Workers: High Implicit Taxes, Higher Premiums,&amp;#8221; I show that the House and Senate health care bills would impose implicit tax rates on low-wage workers that exceed 100 percent.  Here&amp;#8217;s the executive summary:
House and Senate Democrats have produced health care legislation whose mandates, subsidies, tax penalties, and health insurance regulations would penalize work and reward Americans who refuse to purchase health insurance. As a result, the legislation could trap many Americans in low-wage jobs and cause even higher health-insurance premiums, government spending, and taxes than are envisioned in the legislation.
Those mandates and subsidies would impose effective marginal tax rates on lo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3171889</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:31:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3171889</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Care Reform: State Winners And Losers</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3149017&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2010%2F01%2F07%2Fhealth-care-reform-state-winners-and-losers%2F</link>
            <description>Back in October, as health care financing options were being hotly debated and proposals changing on an almost daily basis, one of us noticed an editorial on health care reform in West Virginia’s Martinsburg Journal. We were struck by the extent of opposition to financing the reform package through a tax on high earners. West Virginia is not heavily populated with high earners—it is one of the three states with the smallest percentage of residents with incomes of $500,000 or more—and it therefore wouldn’t be greatly burdened by a tax on high earners. So it was somewhat surprising that a West Virginia newspaper would be so strongly opposed to this financing approach.
This led us to think more generally about the redistributive implications of reform vis-à-vis the states. This is an...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3149017</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 15:49:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3149017</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>In the Air, On the Hill, On the Ground: Which Grade Matters Most?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3142541&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2F4pI2tBvkZXE%2F</link>
            <description> 
 
 
Healthy New Year everyone!
Like many people I’m starting the year with healthy – and preventive care – intentions. How about you?
That put a few items on my holiday ‘to do’ list:

Get a pap smear,  
Find H1N1 vaccine,  
Wrestle the results of a recent bone density scan (Dexa) out of the hands of the medical center and into the hands of my physician, and  
Confirm with Morris White, my trainer, that I’d continue workouts.

The pap smear was easy – this time. I’d not been able to get one during my late-summer vacation visit to the doctor because the appointment was two weeks prior to the annual date of the prior test. That required another trip. Holiday downtime was a good time to do that. Check that off the list.
In doing so, I finally found an H1N1 vaccine do...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3142541</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 11:00:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3142541</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>You Gotta Laugh: Life in the Trenches of the Health Insurance Business</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3126603&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FITYnQRZXMvU%2F</link>
            <description>Think you have maternity coverage? Think again.
Welcome to the first entry of the book I’ll be publishing in 2010 entitled: You gotta laugh: Life in the trenches of the health insurance business. Because I think Disruptive Women readers will find it useful, each month I’ll post an example of a health insurance problem that is so maddening and frustrating that we just gotta laugh at its absurdity.
My goal, however, is to find a way to improve health insurance for beneficiaries and I have some suggestions at the end of this post.                                                                                           
This month’s question: What do you do when you have it in writing from your in...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3126603</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:33:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3126603</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Revised Health Reform Bill Moves Forward In Senate</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3106719&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F12%2F19%2Frevised-health-reform-bill-moves-forward-in-senate%2F</link>
            <description>The 384-page Senate Manager’s Amendment to the upper chamber’s health reform bill arrived on Saturday morning, December 19, apparently backed up by the 60 votes necessary to get the amended legislation out of the Senate.  Democratic senators braved a record blizzard to pass the defense spending bill, the last impediment to clearing the floor for the final hours of debate on the health reform bill, and the clock has been set for adoption Christmas Eve.  It is likely that the drama is not yet over, particularly as progressives continue to grumble about the bill, but Senator Reid’s Christmas wish now seems possible.
Amendments to title I, the health insurance reform provisions of the bill, take up about a quarter of the Manager’s Amendment.  This post will discuss these provisions...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3106719</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 00:46:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3106719</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Yglesias, Defending Klein’s Slander of Lieberman</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3089261&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fd6Sn7DlE3js%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonBlogger Matthew Yglesias has a response to my post on Ezra Klein&amp;#8217;s slander that Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) is okay with the mass murder (or the mass negligent homicide) of hundreds of thousands of uninsured Americans.
Yglesias claims that only one of the three studies I cited speaks to what he claims is the central point: the Institute of Medicine&amp;#8217;s estimate of how many Americans die each year because they lack health insurance.  Yglesias is incorrect.  The central point/threshold question is whether giving the uninsured health insurance will save lives.  All three studies speak to that point, and all three all cast doubt on the intuitively appealing idea that giving uninsured people health insurance ipso facto saves lives.
To rebut the one study that Ygle...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3089261</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:19:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3089261</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FEHBP Plan Is No ‘Moderate Compromise’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3071132&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDr-VY5JMWbQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael D. TannerSenate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has announced that he has reached a super secret compromise on how to deal with the so-called public option for health reform.  While Reid said the agreement was too important to actually tell anyone what is in it, most of the details have been leaked to the press.
Rather than set-up a completely government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurance, Congress would establish a program similar to the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program (FEHBP), which currently covers government workers, including Members of Congress.  The FEHBP offers a variety of private insurance plans under a program managed by the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM).  Each year OPM uses the Federal procurement process to solicit bids from...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3071132</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:58:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3071132</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Do ‘Cadillac’ Plans Equal Cadillac Benefits?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3056601&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F12%2F03%2Fdo-cadillac-plans-equal-cadillac-benefits%2F</link>
            <description>Editor&amp;#8217;s Note: For more on the controversy over taxing high-cost health plans, see a &amp;#8220;Cadillacs Or Ambulances? The Senate Tax On &amp;#8216;Excessive Benefits, a Health Affairs Blog post by Joseph White and Timothy Jost published today.
The Senate Democratic health plan includes a provision, backed by the Obama administration, that would tax some &amp;#8220;Cadillac&amp;#8221; health plans to pay for health care reform.  One widely held assumption is that high-cost plans are expensive because they offer superior benefits.
However, in a Health Affairs Web First article released today, Jon Gabel of the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) and coauthors report that other factors – regional differences in health care delivery cost and the industry sector offering the coverage – were...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3056601</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:57:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3056601</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cadillacs Or Ambulances? The Senate Tax On ‘Excessive’ Benefits</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3056602&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F12%2F03%2Fcadillacs-or-ambulances-the-senate-tax-on-excessive-benefits%2F</link>
            <description>Editor&amp;#8217;s Note: For more on the controversy over taxing high-cost health plans, see &amp;#8220;Taxing Cadillac Health Plans May Produce Chevy Results,&amp;#8221; a Health Affairs Web First article by Jon Gabel and coauthors published today.
The Senate “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” draft legislation includes a steep excise tax on high-cost, so-called Cadillac insurance plans.  This provision is strongly supported by many economists and policy commentators, who believe that the tax could make the financing of U.S. health care more equitable and its provision more efficient.  Yet both propositions are highly questionable.
Mistaking Cadillac Prices for Cadillac Plans
The intent of the bill is to limit ability to pay for health insurance with pre-tax dollars.  The tax covers ...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3056602</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:50:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3056602</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Mental Health Parity Loopholes</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3056699&amp;cid=t_374886_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2009%2F12%2F03%2Fmental-health-parity-loopholes%2F</link>
            <description>While the national mental health parity law takes effect on January 1, 2010, it does not trump existing state laws that mandate that mental disorder diagnoses are treated and covered equally as their physical health brethren. If you are covered by health insurance, come January 1, your mental health treatment cannot be any more limited than your physical health coverage. California is one such state that has had such a mental health parity law on the books since 2000, so we have nine years of lessons from that state.
Recently, a study was released that examined how the law affected people who sought out mental health treatment. Shari Roan with the Los Angeles Times has the coverage. The study, conducted by Mathematica Policy Research and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Admin...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3056699</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 17:45:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3056699</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Orszag On Health Reform At Health Affairs Breakfast</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3052113&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F12%2F02%2Forszag-on-health-reform-at-health-affairs-breakfast%2F</link>
            <description>At a Health Affairs reporters breakfast this morning, White House Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag defended the ability of the health reform bill being debated in the Senate to “bend the cost curve” of health care costs. &amp;#8220;The bill that is currently on the Senate floor contains more cost-containment and delivery system reforms, in its current form, than any bill that&amp;#8217;s ever been considered on the Senate floor, period,” he said.
Orszag said the Senate bill meets the four pillars of cost control laid out in a recent letter to President Obama by 23 noted economists: no increases in federal government deficits; an excise tax on high-cost health plans; a Medicare commission to ensure continuing flexibility and reform; and delivery system reforms such as inc...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3052113</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:28:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3052113</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Need for Innovation: Our Health Care Crisis Cannot Be Solved by Insurance Alone</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3039784&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FQNfh6N-gAw4%2F</link>
            <description>In the face of acute primary care physician shortages and steady reductions in the number of physicians who are willing to accept Medicaid and Medicare, it is unclear whether our existing primary care system will be able to meet the needs of a universally-insured nation, as President Obama has expressed as a priority for his Administration.
Health care delivery is strained under tremendous pressure from the demands of chronic health issues, downward trends in third party payments, and while insurance coverage will address some of these issues, many of these problems may persist even if universal insurance coverage is achieved in the United States. So what else needs to happen to make healthcare reform a success?
In recent years, a series of “disruptive innovations” in the health care s...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3039784</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 14:35:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3039784</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Senate Health Reform Bill: A First Look</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3012350&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F11%2F19%2Fthe-senate-health-reform-bill-a-first-look%2F</link>
            <description>As readers of Health Affairs are undoubtedly already aware, the Senate Democratic leadership has released HR 3590, the 2,074-page Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.  The bill combines the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee bill marked up this summer and the Senate Finance Committee bill marked up earlier this fall.  On the whole, the combined bill resembles the Finance bill more closely than the HELP bill, but it does include important elements from the HELP bill, the most prominent of which is provision for the community health insurance (public) option. 
As has been widely reported, the CBO has scored the gross cost of the coverage provisions of the Senate bill at $848 billion over 10 years, less than the cost of the House bill, and as reducing the...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3012350</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:12:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3012350</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>New Trial For Cory Maye</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3008071&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FApisT5K9bx8%2F</link>
            <description>Great news &amp;#8211; for a change!  A Mississippi court has ordered a new trial for Cory Maye.
When Cato author Radley Balko was preparing his report on violent, no-knock, drug raids, he discovered the case of Cory Maye, who was then on death row for murdering a police officer.  On closer inspection, Radley thought the shooting looked like self-defense, not murder.  At Maye&amp;#8217;s initial trial, he had lousy legal representation.  Thanks to Radley&amp;#8217;s writings about the case, Maye secured top notch lawyers for his appeal.  With a new trial, Maye now stands a very good chance of getting out of prison altogether.  Congratulations to Radley Balko!
Previous coverage here. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3008071</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:27:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3008071</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>ObamaCare’s ‘Sweetheart Deal’ for PhRMA</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2981056&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FPkRxqYAXtvU%2F</link>
            <description>The New Republic&amp;#8217;s Jonathan Cohn reports that back in March, IMS Health projected slightly negative revenue growth for the pharmaceutical industry but recently changed that projection to 3.5-percent annual growth from 2008 through 2013.
&amp;#8220;What changed?&amp;#8221; Cohn asks. &amp;#8220;A major factor, according to IMS, was the emerging details of health care reform . . . Put it all together, and you have more demand for name-brand drugs . . . enough to boost revenue significantly.&amp;#8221; And:
&amp;#8220;If this bill is implemented,&amp;#8221; the report concludes on page 138, &amp;#8220;an increase in prices on new drugs can be expected.&amp;#8221;
How could this be happening?  Oh yeah:
That brings us back to the deal that the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America, which represents th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2981056</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:45:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2981056</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Abortion Funding and Health Care</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2977268&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FfbouaqOhHe0%2F</link>
            <description>President Obama&amp;#8217;s approach to health care reform &amp;#8212; forcing taxpayers to subsidize health insurance for tens of millions of Americans &amp;#8212; cannot not change the status quo on abortion.
Either those taxpayer dollars will fund abortions, or the restrictions necessary to prevent taxpayer funding will curtail access to private abortion coverage. There is no middle ground.
Thus both sides&amp;#8217; fears are justified. Both sides of the abortion debate are learning why government should not subsidize health care. Tip of the hat to President Obama for creating this teachable moment.
Meanwhile, Catholics should be outraged at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (to which my grandfather served as counsel). Yes, the USCCB helped prevent taxpayer funding of abortions in the H...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2977268</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:42:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2977268</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Pelosi Bill’s High Water Mark</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2971880&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FiuYpk8X2ArI%2F</link>
            <description>Democrats are having difficulty corralling 218 votes for the Pelosi bill because Americans do not want government to be as big and as powerful as the House leadership does. Pro-life Democrats do not want a government so big that it can force taxpayers to fund abortions. Pro-choice Democrats do not want a government so big that it uses subsidies to restrict access to abortion coverage. Other Democrats don’t want a government so big that it turns the United States into a welfare magnet.
The American people don’t want the Democrats’ approach to health care generally. The more time the public has to digest ObamaCare, the more they dislike it:

And the Pelosi bill is the most expensive and extreme version of ObamaCare.  Opposition will climb higher when the public learns the bill costs s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2971880</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 03:14:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2971880</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Swine Flu and H1N1 Vaccination for Tubal Reversal Patients</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2951018&amp;cid=t_374886_177_f&amp;fid=38133&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FTubalReversalBlog%2F%7E3%2Ftw-m3y-xjo0%2Fswine-flu-h1n1-vaccination-for-tubal-reversal-patients.html</link>
            <description>This article provides an overview of H1N1 infection and recommendations for vaccination, based on the most recent public health data, for women who are pregnant or seeking to become pregnant after tubal ligation reversal. (Source: Tubal Reversal Blog)</description>
            <author>Tubal Reversal Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2951018</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 20:28:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2951018</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>HR 3962:  The Affordable Health Care for Americans Act</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2943747&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F10%2F30%2Fhr-3962-the-affordable-health-care-for-americans-act%2F</link>
            <description>HR 3962, the Affordable Health Care for Americans Act, hit the House floor with a thud Thursday morning at 1990 pages, almost double the size of the bill we last saw before the Energy and Commerce hearings at the end of July.  The bill incorporates, of course, amendments from the House jurisdictional committees, but also ideas from the Senate Finance bill and some new initiatives as well. In addition, far more than earlier congressional versions of health reform legislation, the new bill includes important initiatives that will impact the American public quickly, an important consideration both substantively and politically.
The intent of this post is to describe what is in the bill and the longer-term politics and policies that the bill’s contents represent.  The politics de jour of t...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2943747</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:24:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2943747</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Yes, Mr. President, a Free Market Can Fix Health Care</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2920166&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FI8UNFfiDDkE%2F</link>
            <description>At his White House forum on health reform back in March, President Barack Obama offered:
If there is a way of getting this done where we&amp;#8217;re driving down costs and people are getting health insurance at an affordable rate, and have choice of doctor, have flexibility in terms of their plans, and we could do that entirely through the market, I&amp;#8217;d be happy to do it that way.
In a new Cato study titled, &amp;#8220;Yes, Mr. President, a Free Market Can Fix Health Care,&amp;#8221; I take up the president’s challenge and explain that markets are indeed the only way to achieve those goals.  I also explain how Congress can remove the impediments that currently prevent markets from doing so:

Give Medicare enrollees a voucher (adjusted for their means and health risk) and let them purchase any ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2920166</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:46:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2920166</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Universal Coverage Means ‘Willing to Let You Die Sooner’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2912160&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FHOoufWaiZ4k%2F</link>
            <description>I cannot disagree with Uwe Reinhardt&amp;#8217;s response to my previous post at National Journal&amp;#8217;s Health Care Experts blog. But his response bears clarification and emphasis.
Improving &amp;#8220;population health&amp;#8221; generally means &amp;#8220;helping people live longer.&amp;#8221;
To paraphrase, Reinhardt then writes:
If helping people live longer were our objective in health reform, we could do better than universal coverage. But health reform is not (solely or primarily) about helping people live longer. It is (also or primarily) about other things, like relieving the anxiety of the uninsured.
I applaud Reinhardt for acknowledging a reality that most advocates of universal coverage avoid: that universal coverage is not solely or primarily about improving health.
Will Reinhardt go further an...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2912160</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:24:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2912160</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Examining The Links Between Chronic Illness And Uninsurance</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2912151&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F10%2F20%2Fexamining-the-links-between-chronic-illness-and-uninsurance%2F</link>
            <description>This study analyzed data taken from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 1999 to 2006, focusing on those ages 18-64. According to their findings, 46.0 percent of those without insurance were previously unaware of their condition — as opposed to roughly half that number (23.2 percent) of those with insurance. Said the authors, &amp;#8220;The elevated risk of very poor diabetes control among the uninsured . . . is worrisome, given evidence of higher costs and elevated risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality with increasing HbA1c [hemoglobin A1c] levels. This finding suggests that insuring uninsured diabetics might reduce future health costs and rates of these complications.&amp;#8221; 
More discussion of the work by Wilper and coauthors can be found on the NPR He...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2912151</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:32:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2912151</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Should Congress Even Try to Achieve Universal Coverage?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2908581&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FF4OyERJiqJM%2F</link>
            <description>If the goal is to improve health, then the answer is clearly no.
Ironically, even though universal coverage is presumably about helping the sick, the Democrats’ pursuit of universal coverage demonstrates not how much, but how little they care about their neighbors’ health.
Economists Helen Levy and David Meltzer explain, in a book published by the Urban Institute, “There is no evidence at this time that money aimed at improving health would be better spent on expanding insurance coverage than on…other possibilities,” such as clinics, hypertension screening, nutrition campaigns, or even education.  In the Annual Review of Public Health, they explain further:
The central question of how health insurance affects health, for whom it matters, and how much, remains largely unanswered ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2908581</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:47:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2908581</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Broder: Health Overhaul Likely, Because Hardest Part Lies Ahead</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2898925&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FZE8sgxC9zbI%2F</link>
            <description>Yes, you read that right.  And I had to do the same sort of double-take when I read David Broder&amp;#8217;s op-ed in The Washington Post this morning.
Broder writes, &amp;#8220;Obama has steered the enterprise to the point that odds now favor a bill-signing ceremony.  But the hardest choices still lie ahead&amp;#8230;.&amp;#8221;  Whaa??  How can the odds be better than 50-50 if the biggest fights haven&amp;#8217;t even happened yet?
Broder&amp;#8217;s optimism continues, &amp;#8220;Two things will be needed to reach [a majority in the House and 60 votes in the Senate]: first, a plausible plan for making affordable and comprehensive health insurance available to millions&amp;#8230;. And second, a way of financing the coverage&amp;#8230;.&amp;#8221;  But that&amp;#8217;s been the whole challenge all along.  Is Broder actually ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2898925</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:12:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2898925</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why the Democrats’ Health Care Overhaul May Die</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2886415&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FhFjLimHBpTU%2F</link>
            <description>The problem that Democrats have faced from Day One is finally coming to a head.
The Left and the health care industry both want universal health insurance coverage.  The industry, because universal coverage means massive new government subsidies. The Left, because that’s their religion.
But universal coverage is so expensive that Congress can’t get there without taxing Democrats.

Sen.   Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) is the biggest opponent of Sen. Max Baucus’ (D-MT) tax on expensive health plans because that tax   would hit West Virginia   coal miners.
Unions   vigorously oppose that tax because it would hit their members.
Moderate   Democrats in the House oppose Rep. Charlie Rangel’s (D-NY) supposed “millionaires surtax” because they   know it would hit small businesses in their di...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2886415</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:45:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2886415</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>First Successful Reversal of Adiana Sterilization</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2879849&amp;cid=t_374886_177_f&amp;fid=38133&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FTubalReversalBlog%2F%7E3%2FLyjCUg4PVxg%2Ffirst-successful-reversal-of-adiana-sterilization.html</link>
            <description>The first successful reversal of tubal sterilization by the Adiana method was reported today by Dr. Gary Berger, Medical Director of Chapel Hill Tubal Reversal Center. The Adiana sterilization method uses radio frequency energy to cause tubal blockage and was approved for use in the US in July 2009. (Source: Tubal Reversal Blog)</description>
            <author>Tubal Reversal Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2879849</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:59:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2879849</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Keep Your Subsidies off My Ovaries”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2846348&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F4BthC-N0unI%2F</link>
            <description>In my recent Cato paper, &amp;#8220;All the President’s Mandates: Compulsory Health Insurance Is a Government Takeover,&amp;#8221; I explain that if Congress compels Americans to purchase health insurance, it would &amp;#8220;inevitably and unnecessarily open a new front in the abortion debate, one where either side—and possibly both sides—could lose.&amp;#8221;
Slate&amp;#8217;s William Saletan explains how the pro-choice side could lose:
This week, the Senate finance committee is considering amendments that would bar coverage of abortions under federally subsidized health insurance. Pro-choice groups are up in arms. After all, says NARAL Pro-Choice America, &amp;#8220;In the current insurance marketplace, private plans can choose whether to cover abortion care—and most do.&amp;#8221; If Congress enacts subs...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2846348</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:33:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2846348</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Individual Mandate Is Focus Of New Health Policy Brief</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2846335&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F09%2F29%2Findividual-mandate-is-focus-of-new-health-policy-brief%2F</link>
            <description>The complex health care overhaul underway in Congress would require nearly all Americans to have health insurance – a provision known as “individual responsibility” or an “individual mandate.” Supporters warn other reforms are not possible without this requirement.  But many opponents say such a mandate is unaffordable, and unacceptable in a free society. 
A new Health Policy Brief  from Health Affairs and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the latest in a series of briefs, examines this issue.
The leading health reform bills in Congress would impose this new national individual mandate in the context of many other changes as follows:

New rules would determine what minimal coverage is acceptable and spell out how much people should pay for it out of their own pockets. 
Cov...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2846335</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 02:59:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2846335</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wednesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2823953&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FMivduSGu4d0%2F</link>
            <description>Should more troops be sent to Afghanistan? Cato&amp;#8217;s Malou Innocent weighs in alongside the policymakers. 


What does the end of the missile defense system in Central Europe means for U.S.-Russian relations?


Signals indicate that the market just might be on the rebound. That&amp;#8217;s great,  but it&amp;#8217;s important not to get ahead of ourselves, says Johan Norberg.  &amp;#8220;We must never forget that the light at the end of the tunnel can be an approaching train.&amp;#8221;


A few thoughts on the new rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and what it means for Pakistan and India.


Michael Cannon continues his debate in the LA Times: The dirty little secret is that &amp;#8220;Obama-care&amp;#8221; isn&amp;#8217;t about reducing health care costs or making coverage more secure. It&amp;#8217;s about robbing...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2823953</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:02:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2823953</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Does Lack Of Insurance Cause Premature Death?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2820183&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F09%2F21%2Fdoes-lack-of-insurance-cause-premature-death%2F</link>
            <description>Truth is not only the first casualty of war, it is also the first casualty of serious public policy debate.
Last year, a report by Families USA made the astounding claim that 6 people die every day in Florida because they are uninsured. Seven die every day in Texas, 8 in California, and 25 in New York.
How was Families USA able to tally up all that carnage with such pinpoint precision? As Linda Gorman explains, these claims are based on a 15-year cascade of studies — each repeating the errors and misinterpreting or mischaracterizing the findings of the previous one and ultimately relying on data that is 37 years old.
It begins with a paper by Peter Franks et al. published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1993, estimating that being uninsured increased the probability...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2820183</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:15:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2820183</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama: ‘Nobody’ Considers Health Care Mandate a Tax Increase</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2814395&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F2xRntifTq7k%2F</link>
            <description>President Obama argued on TV talk shows this weekend that his proposed mandate for everyone to buy health insurance &amp;#8211; or face a large financial penalty &amp;#8211; is not a tax increase:
In a testy exchange on ABC&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8220;This Week,&amp;#8221; broadcast Sunday, Obama rejected the assertion that forcing people to obtain coverage would violate his campaign pledge against raising taxes on middle-class Americans.
&amp;#8220;For us to say you have to take responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase,&amp;#8221; Obama said in response to persistent questioning, later adding: &amp;#8220;Nobody considers that a tax increase.&amp;#8221;
Well, I consider it a tax increase, so I guess that makes me nobody.
The real question is whether this tax increase is a good idea. My answer is no....</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2814395</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:43:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2814395</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Have the Democrats Outsmarted the Republicans on Health Care?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2803887&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUJEALC3pR_E%2F</link>
            <description>In their attempt to defeat Obamacare, Republicans have focused their criticism on the public option, painting it as the most objectionable feature of existing proposals. Senator Max Baucus, (D-Mont.), has now proposed a plan without the public option. This leaves the Republicans in an awkward position, especially since Baucus&amp;#8217;s plan is projected to cost less than earlier proposals.
If Republicans oppose the Baucus plan, they surely risk the ire of voters who will be told during the mid-term elections, &amp;#8220;The Republicans blocked a plan that would have covered the uninsured and reduced the deficit.&amp;#8221;
The problem is, the public option was never the crucial issue; instead, it was the mandate to purchase insurance. Once government mandates insurance coverage, it gets to define wh...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2803887</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:26:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2803887</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>20-somethings Will Pay for Big Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2800367&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FCLSK4JSDpjQ%2F</link>
            <description>A front-page Washington Post story today notes that the cost of Obama-style health care reform will fall disproportionately on young adults.
Younger workers are typically more healthy than the population at large, and a significant share of them quite rationally choose not to buy health insurance, as my colleague Mike Tanner explains in a recent op-ed. The major health care plans on the table in Washington would force them to buy coverage. As the Post story explains:
Drafting young adults into any health-care reform package is crucial to paying for it. As low-cost additions to insurance pools, young adults would help dilute the expense of covering older, sicker people. Depending on how Congress requires insurers to price their policies, this group could even wind up paying disproportionate...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2800367</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 15:32:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2800367</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Census Bureau’s Coverage Estimates: What They Tell Us</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2788497&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F09%2F11%2Fthe-census-bureaus-coverage-estimates-what-they-tell-us%2F</link>
            <description>On the heels of the President’s speech on health care reform, the Census Bureau released to little fanfare new estimates of health insurance coverage from the Current Population Survey (CPS).   Between 2007 and 2008, the number of individuals without health insurance rose from 45.7 million to 46.3 million, increasing the ranks of the uninsured by 683,000.
The new estimates seem almost immediately outdated since they do not capture the full impact of the economic downturn as experienced by Americans today.  Nonetheless, much can be gleaned from these and other recent data on the uninsured to help Congress and the President craft a health care reform plan for the nation.
First, the number of uninsured in the U.S. is probably substantially higher now.   A recent Urban Institute study ...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2788497</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 21:31:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2788497</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Census Survey May Understate Medicaid Enrollment, Overstate Uninsured Ranks</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2788498&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F09%2F11%2Fcensus-survey-may-understate-medicaid-enrollment-overstate-uninsured-ranks%2F</link>
            <description>Widely cited estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau likely overstate the number of uninsured people and understate the number of people with Medicaid coverage because of an inability of people to recall their insurance status accurately from the previous year, according to a study published yesterday on the Health Affairs Web site.
The CPS, administered in February, March, and April each year, asks respondents whether they had health insurance coverage (including Medicaid) at any point in the previous calendar year. However, the CPS’s long recall period (fourteen to sixteen months) can lead to inaccurate responses, report lead author Jacob Klerman, a principal associate at Abt Associates in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and coauthors.
According to Klerman and his colleagues, CPS responses ar...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2788498</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 21:30:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2788498</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama’s Health Care Speech in Plain English</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2782010&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fr1sh67TTEv4%2F</link>
            <description>Hell of a speech last night, eh?  Here are a few of my favorite gems.
Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition.
Translation: I, Barack Obama, ignoring thousands of years of failed price-control schemes, will impose price controls on health insurance. I will force insurers to sell a $50k policies for $10k. What could go wrong? 
We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs per month. 
True. And your employer mandate would kill hundreds of thousands of low-wage jobs that would never come back.
They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime.   We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses…. And i...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2782010</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:24:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2782010</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Mr. President, Here Is Our Answer</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2774607&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FsQnzXQxW7fE%2F</link>
            <description>President Obama continues to portray the debate over health care reform as a choice between his plan for a massive government-takeover of the US healthcare system and “doing nothing.”  Those who oppose his plan are said to be “obstructionist” or in favor of the status-quo.  Yesterday, the President again said, &amp;#8220;I&amp;#8217;ve got a question for all those folks [who oppose his plan]: What are you going to do? What&amp;#8217;s your answer? What&amp;#8217;s your solution?&amp;#8221;
Well, I can’t speak for all his critics, but the Cato Institute has a long record of supporting health care reform based on free-markets and competition.  If the President wanted to know more he might have read my recent op-ed in the Los Angeles Times or Michael Cannon’s piece in Investors Business Daily.  H...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2774607</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:15:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2774607</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Affairs Briefing: Bending The Cost Curve In Health Spending</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2761832&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F09%2F03%2Fhealth-affairs-briefing-bending-the-cost-curve-in-health-spending%2F</link>
            <description>For decades, the United States and other nations have sought to tame the long-term growth of health spending.  Even as resources devoted to health care grow, they remain poorly distributed, and much of the health care purchased is of questionable value.  As the Obama Administration and Congress tackle health reform, expanding health coverage to millions of uninsured Americans while simultaneously “bending the cost curve” are co-equal goals. 
 The September-October 2009 edition of Health Affairs, titled “Bending the Cost Curve,” delves deeply into this issue. The journal will bring together key administration officials, lawmakers, and leading health policy experts, including Aetna Chairman and CEO Ronald A. Williams and Commonwealth Fund President Karen Davis, to discuss it at a...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2761832</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 15:17:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2761832</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Unstable Ground: The Need for Better Data to Make Better Health Care Policy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2757712&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F09%2F02%2Funstable-ground-the-need-for-better-data-to-make-better-health-care-policy%2F</link>
            <description>Imagine the following. You are the senior White House health policy adviser, and you&amp;#8217;ve been told to brief the president and his cabinet officials about the number of Americans who lack health insurance. The president turns to you, and you say: &amp;#8220;Mr. President. The government has four different national surveys that count the uninsured. Unfortunately, each survey has different estimates that range from 18.9 million to 45 million. Each one measures things distinctly, and we&amp;#8217;re not sure which, if any, of them is correct.&amp;#8221;
That was the situation facing Doug Badger, then the White House health policy adviser, in the middle of 2004. Following passage of the Medicare Modernization Act, the Bush administration was contemplating new polices for dealing with the uninsured. He...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2757712</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2009 17:09:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2757712</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Fact Or Fiction: The Role Of Government In Health Care</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2757714&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F09%2F01%2Ffact-or-fiction-the-role-of-government-in-health-care%2F</link>
            <description>The traditional summer break that provides members of Congress a respite from their official duties instead, in some areas, turned into a raucous, sometimes angry series of town hall meetings focused on the ambitious health care reform proposals of Democrats. The meetings have given reform opponents and advocates an opportunity to voice their opinions, although some of their exchanges have shed more heat than light on the issues, placing legislators in uncomfortable positions. Nevertheless, their impact has reverberated throughout the country because of extensive media coverage transmitted by television, newspapers, and countless bloggers. Much of the dialogue — which has often been contentious — has focused on whether the Democratic plans would transform health care into a government-...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2757714</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:23:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2757714</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Fate of Children &amp; Young Adults with Chronic Medical Conditions &amp; Disabilities.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2737688&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FJcs61y3LLh8%2F</link>
            <description>In the midst of furious showdowns on health care reform at town hall meetings, a moment of peace surfaced in Montana when President Obama drew bipartisan applause after calling a mother heroic.  This mother of two had voiced her concern about the Medicaid program she relied on for her child who has multiple chronic conditions.  The president reassured her and went on to discuss how our disease-care system does not proactively manage chronic conditions.
Children and young adults with chronic medical conditions and disabilities (CMCD) need proactive management now and for their entire lives.  Our health care system fails to serve the young people who need it the most.
Children with CMCD are completely dependent on adults for their health care.  Poor health management negatively affects t...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2737688</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:58:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2737688</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Role of Cable News in the Health Scare Debate</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2719664&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FTm3Ym7xCVk8%2F</link>
            <description>Last night I saw a sobering statistic, reporting audience numbers for Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC. It was instructive. Put in overly simplified terms, if 5 people are watching cable news, three of them are watching Fox News, one is watching MSNBC, and one is watching CNN. It seems to me that there is some embedded information here. Three people are being scared to death, while only two might be getting a somewhat more nuanced picture of the nation’s response to health care reform.
I have to admit that I was heartened to see MSNBC edge ahead of CNN. Rachel Madow is doing the closest thing to investigative reporting I can find on cable, though I think her colleagues at MSNBC, with a few exceptions, are not noticing this, even though her rankings keep swelling. She is also the “young” and ...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2719664</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 18:14:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2719664</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>New Poll: Are You Covered?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2670958&amp;cid=t_374886_125_f&amp;fid=38161&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dentalheroes.com%2Fdental-coverage-poll%2F</link>
            <description>The new Dental Heroes reader poll is up!
This week, we want to know if you currently have some form of dental care coverage?
 In light of the current economic downturn and the healthcare reform bill nightmare that&amp;#8217;s taking place in Washington, we think this question is quite prudent.
If you have a second to weigh in, please do so. Thanks!
Here&amp;#8217;s the poll
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll. (Source: Dental Heroes)</description>
            <author>Dental Heroes</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2670958</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 01:36:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2670958</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Washington Post Misrepresents Individual Mandates</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2645265&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FRsxZ4OyyBg4%2F</link>
            <description>Here&amp;#8217;s a poor, unsuccessful letter to the editor I sent to The Washington Post:
“Like Car Insurance, Health Coverage May Be Mandated” [July 22, page A1] paints a misleading picture of proposals to require Americans to purchase health insurance – i.e., an “individual mandate.”
First, the article lacks balance.  It cites three politicians who support an individual mandate but none who oppose it, a group that includes a majority of Republicans.  The article claims an individual mandate “has its roots in the conservative philosophy of self-reliance,” even though most conservatives, including the movement’s flagship magazine National Review, oppose the idea.  The closest the article comes to offering an opposing perspective is one conservative who has supported an indiv...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2645265</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:15:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2645265</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Price of Universal Coverage Just Went Up</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2637780&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F-LyPrNQ0mT4%2F</link>
            <description>Since at least February, President Obama and other elders of the Church of Universal Coverage have labored to create the impression that universal coverage is inevitable, because a sense of inevitability reduces its cost.  If interest groups think this train is leaving the station, they are less likely to stand in its way.  Lobbyists are more likely to cut whatever deal they can if their clients believe, &amp;#8220;It could have been much worse.&amp;#8221;  That&amp;#8217;s why Obama has demanded haste: the longer the process, the harder it is to maintain a sense of inevitability.
Here&amp;#8217;s a sampling of today&amp;#8217;s health care headlines from the non-partisan Bulletin News, which summarizes news media coverage:

Senate, Obama Back Off Healthcare Reform August Deadline.
Obama Rakes In Cash For ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2637780</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 19:15:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2637780</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cato Institute to Launch Ad Campaign Against Government-Run Health Care</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2630049&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FF_65iTumUiQ%2F</link>
            <description>The Cato Institute will launch an ad campaign Thursday highlighting under-reported poll data showing Americans’ concerns that current health care reform plans will raise costs, limit choice and reduce the quality of their health care.
The campaign will feature full-page ads in major national newspapers, in addition to radio spots focusing on why government-run health care cannot address the problems of growing costs and lack of coverage for many individuals and families. The campaign will expand in the weeks ahead.
&amp;#8220;Our goal is to help the American public navigate terms like &amp;#8216;a public plan&amp;#8217; and &amp;#8216;individual or employer mandates&amp;#8217; to understand what is really happening here,&amp;#8221; said Ed Crane, founder and president of the Cato Institute. &amp;#8220;The bottom li...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2630049</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 18:55:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2630049</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>My Question for the President</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2630050&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FncC9gk5xDgw%2F</link>
            <description>President Obama will hold a press conference tonight to answer questions about his health care reform proposal. This is what I would ask him:
Mr. President, during your campaign, you said, “I can make a firm pledge…Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.”  You also said that “no one will pay higher tax rates than they paid in the 1990s.”
Your National Economic Council chairman, Larry Summers, has written that employer mandates “are like public programs financed by benefit taxes.”  Under the House health reform bill, an uninsured worker earning $50,000 per year, with no offer of coverage from her employer, would face a 15.3-percent federal payroll tax, a 25-percent federal marginal income tax rate, an 8-percent reduction i...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2630050</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 18:41:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2630050</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Spend Less by Spending More</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2613828&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FK7n-a76jAF8%2F</link>
            <description>From CongressDailyPM:
Reacting to a statement by former GAO comptroller general David Walker that &amp;#8220;you can&amp;#8217;t reduce costs by expanding coverage,&amp;#8221; [White House National Economic Council Director Lawrence] Summers said President Obama rejects that view. &amp;#8220;We won&amp;#8217;t make progress in costs without addressing access,&amp;#8221; Summers said.
In other news, up is down, slavery is freedom, and if she says it&amp;#8217;s night convince her that it&amp;#8217;s day. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2613828</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 21:00:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2613828</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Better Way to Reform Health Care</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2610884&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FirSCpokG9Jo%2F</link>
            <description>From my oped in today&amp;#8217;s Investor&amp;#8217;s Business Daily:
As it turns out, &amp;#8220;universal coverage&amp;#8221; may not be so inevitable after all. Much to the chagrin (and apparent surprise) of President Obama and congressional Democrats, squabbling has erupted in earnest over who will spring for the exorbitant cost.
Fortunately, Obama has an exit strategy: &amp;#8220;If there is a way of getting this done where we&amp;#8217;re driving down costs and people are getting health insurance at an affordable rate, and have choice of doctor, have flexibility in terms of their plans, and we could do that entirely through the market, I&amp;#8217;d be happy to do it that way.&amp;#8221;
Well, there is a way: Let individuals control their health care dollars, and free them to choose from a wide variety of health p...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2610884</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:57:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2610884</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medicaid: Uniquely Prepared To Deliver On Health Care Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2605962&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F07%2F10%2Fmedicaid-uniquely-prepared-to-deliver-on-health-care-reform%2F</link>
            <description>For those of us who have made Medicaid the focus of our work, it never ceases to amaze us as we watch the great health care debate unfold how frequently we find ourselves saying, “Medicaid can do that.” Or, even more often, “Medicaid is doing that.”
These are heady times for big concepts for transforming health care delivery, but there is not always an obvious, real-world mechanism for implementing these innovations at scale. Just look more closely at many of the most-favored concepts of the day: covering the uninsured; accountable care entities; patient-centered medical homes; public reporting and performance measurement; pay-for-performance; health information technology for meaningful uses; reducing racial and ethnic disparities; and integrated preventive care for patients wit...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2605962</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:02:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2605962</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medicaid: Uniquely Prepared To Deliver On Health Care Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2591438&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F07%2F10%2Fmedicaid%25e2%2580%2599s-unique-capacity-to-deliver-on-health-care-reform%2F</link>
            <description>For those of us who have made Medicaid the focus of our work, it never ceases to amaze us as we watch the great health care debate unfold how frequently we find ourselves saying, “Medicaid can do that.” Or, even more often, “Medicaid is doing that.”
These are heady times for big concepts for transforming health care delivery, but there is not always an obvious, real-world mechanism for implementing these innovations at scale. Just look more closely at many of the most-favored concepts of the day: covering the uninsured; accountable care entities; patient-centered medical homes; public reporting and performance measurement; pay-for-performance; health information technology for meaningful uses; reducing racial and ethnic disparities; and integrated preventive care for patients wit...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2591438</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:02:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2591438</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Reform: Patient Rights, Patient Reponsibilities</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2576524&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FCUMEh6hQNJg%2F</link>
            <description>Should managed care sue patients?
We arrive at the dawn of yet-another health reform effort with laws and regulations already in place to protect patients. These arose in past decades when the healer-patient relationship was eroding, presumably at the hands of uncaring clinicians and for-profit medical enterprises.   
The list of those rights was extensive and today’s debates are adding to the mix – guaranteed coverage despite pre-existing conditions comes to mind. The discussion of patient rights has always been politically attractive and I won’t denigrate any one of them. I’m not just writing from a policy perspective, but a personal one as well. I’m a patient, too.
The discussions of patients’ rights, however, has neglected the flip side of rights—responsibilities on the...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2576524</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:43:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2576524</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wal-Mart Backs Employer Health Ins.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2570657&amp;cid=t_374886_111_f&amp;fid=36048&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FAHeartyLife%2F%7E3%2FTyTC1T6INLM%2F</link>
            <description>Wal-Mart Stores says it supports healthcare reform that will require employers to provide health insurance to employees. Most larger firms are against this, so Wal-Mart is setting itself apart from the trend. 

Under the new healthcare legislation that is being considered, &amp;#8220;lawmakers have proposed mandating that all but small employers provide insurance for workers or help pay for&amp;#8221; the 46 million uninsured people in the U.S.
I have to wonder if other firms will follow this lead, and vocally support employer mandated healthcare like Wal-Mart?
Image: sxc.hu.



Share and Enjoy:


	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	


Post from: Blisstree
Wal-Mart Backs Employer Health Ins. (Source: A Hearty Life)</description>
            <author>A Hearty Life</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2570657</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 22:17:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2570657</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How Many Uninsured Are There?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2510271&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEX0rLLmjFCE%2F</link>
            <description>The Wall Street Journal&amp;#8217;s Numbers Guy tackles the question:
The Census Bureau estimates that the number of uninsured amounts to 45.7 million people. But the agency might be over-counting by millions due to faulty assumptions&amp;#8230;
Even though legislation won&amp;#8217;t cover many of them, illegal immigrants are especially difficult to enumerate: Few raise their hands to be counted. Prof. [Jonathan] Gruber estimates they make up about 13% of the uninsured today, or nearly six million people of that 45 million number&amp;#8230;
Of the rest, some people are eligible for health insurance but don&amp;#8217;t know it and many can afford it but don&amp;#8217;t want it. About 43% of uninsured nonelderly adults have incomes greater than 2.5 times the poverty level, according to a report released Tuesday by...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2510271</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:53:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2510271</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Policy Lessons Of Health Care Cost Variations: A Roundtable With Bob Berenson, Elliott Fisher, Bob Galvin, And Gail Wilensky</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2522908&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F06%2F18%2Fthe-policy-lessons-of-health-care-cost-variations-a-roundtable-with-bob-berenson-elliott-fisher-bob-galvin-and-gail-wilensky%2F</link>
            <description>Editor&amp;#8217;s Note: Below is the transcript of a Health Affairs Blog Roundtable on Atul Gawande&amp;#8217;s New Yorker article on McAllen, Texas, and variations in health care costs. The roundtable used the article as a jumping-off point for a wide-ranging discussion on the policy implications of cost variations, delivery system reform, and other topics. Participants included Robert Berenson, an Institute Fellow at the Urban Institute; Elliott Fisher, Director of Health Policy Research at Dartmouth&amp;#8217;s Center for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences; Robert Galvin, Director of Global Health at General Electric (GE); and Gail Wilensky, Senior Fellow at Project HOPE. The roundtable was moderated by John Iglehart, Founding Editor of Health Affairs. 
JOHN IGLEHART: The subject of the first the...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2522908</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:41:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2522908</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama at the AMA: The cost of inaction is greater</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2510324&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35052&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FWomensBioethicsBlog%2F%7E3%2Fx7HC0AHQTk8%2Fremarks-of-president-barack-obama-to.html</link>
            <description>(Some key excerpts: the entire speech can be seen here.) Today, we are spending over $2 trillion a year on health care – almost 50 percent more per person than the next most costly nation. And yet, for all this spending, more of our citizens are uninsured; the quality of our care is often lower; and we aren’t any healthier. In fact, citizens in some countries that spend less than we do are actually living longer than we do.Make no mistake: the cost of our health care is a threat to our economy. It is an escalating burden on our families and businesses. It is a ticking time-bomb for the federal budget. And it is unsustainable for the United States of America.......But let there be no doubt – the cost of inaction is greater. If we fail to act, premiums will climb higher, benefits will ...</description>
            <author>Women's Bioethics Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2510324</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:08:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2510324</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Geography And The Keys To Health Care Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2522909&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F06%2F17%2Fgeography-and-the-keys-to-health-care-reform%2F</link>
            <description>Editor&amp;#8217;s Note: In the post below, Amitabh Chandra responds to criticisms of the Dartmouth Atlas and offers his vision of the lessons of the Dartmouth findings on variations in health care costs and practice styles. Watch the Blog tomorrow for a roundtable discussion on Atul Gawande&amp;#8217;s New Yorker article on McAllen Texas and the policy implications of the Dartmouth work. Roundtable participants will include Robert Berenson, Elliott Fisher, Robert Galvin and Gail Wilensky.
Since 1973, when Jack Wennberg and Alan Gittelsohn first documented geographic variation in health care, researchers at Dartmouth and their collaborators have compiled a large literature that helps us to understand the phenomenon of regional variation in health care utilization, and its uncertain link with patie...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2522909</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 17:06:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2522909</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Remarks of President Barack Obama to the American Medical Association</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2477563&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35052&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FWomensBioethicsBlog%2F%7E3%2Fx7HC0AHQTk8%2Fremarks-of-president-barack-obama-to.html</link>
            <description>Chicago, IllinoisJune 15, 2009From the moment I took office as President, the central challenge we have confronted as a nation has been the need to lift ourselves out of the worst recession since World War II. In recent months, we have taken a series of extraordinary steps, not just to repair the immediate damage to our economy, but to build a new foundation for lasting and sustained growth. We are creating new jobs. We are unfreezing our credit markets. And we are stemming the loss of homes and the decline of home values.But even as we have made progress, we know that the road to prosperity remains long and difficult. We also know that one essential step on our journey is to control the spiraling cost of health care in America.Today, we are spending over $2 trillion a year on health care ...</description>
            <author>Women's Bioethics Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2477563</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 02:12:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2477563</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Samuelson: Obama Would Increase, Not Reduce, Health Care Costs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2477542&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fcy8wOcJPGRw%2F</link>
            <description>Columnist Robert J. Samuelson, writing in this morning&amp;#8217;s Washington Post:
It&amp;#8217;s hard to know whether President Obama&amp;#8217;s health-care &amp;#8220;reform&amp;#8221; is naive, hypocritical or simply dishonest. Probably all three. The president keeps saying it&amp;#8217;s imperative to control runaway health spending. He&amp;#8217;s right. The trouble is that what&amp;#8217;s being promoted as health-care &amp;#8220;reform&amp;#8221; almost certainly won&amp;#8217;t suppress spending and, quite probably, will do the opposite&amp;#8230;
The president summoned the heads of major health-care groups representing doctors, hospitals, drug companies and medical device firms to the White House. All pledged to bend the curve. This is mostly public relations. Does anyone believe the American Medical Association can control t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2477542</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:02:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2477542</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ezra Klein: Socialized Medicine = Slavery</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2469443&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fs3I-nzII6w0%2F</link>
            <description>The Church of Universal Coverage really, really, really wants you to think that the Democratic health care reforms moving through Congress are not &amp;#8220;socialized medicine.&amp;#8221;  Last year, I wrote a paper about why they&amp;#8217;re wrong. On June 25, I&amp;#8217;ll be debating the issue at a Cato policy forum with the Urban Institute&amp;#8217;s Stan Dorn.
Today, The Washington Post&amp;#8217;s Ezra Klein lends his voice to the chorus of socialized-medicine deniers. Klein doesn&amp;#8217;t add much to the discussion, except for this: Klein (correctly) observes, &amp;#8220;Socialized medicine is a system in which the government owns the means of providing medicine&amp;#8221; (emphasis his).  Single-payer systems, like the U.S. Medicare program or France&amp;#8217;s health care system, are not socialized medicine b...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2469443</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 16:46:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2469443</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Online Insurance Scams</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2458186&amp;cid=t_374886_111_f&amp;fid=36048&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FAHeartyLife%2F%7E3%2FNcefKI_MCsM%2F</link>
            <description>There&amp;#8217;s nothing worse than seeing people get suckered into giving their hard earned money away to a scam. Accept maybe this - when someone gives their money expecting insurance coverage and getting nothing in return. Apparently online insurance scams are one of the latest trends in online crime.

One article says that the &amp;#8220;Federal Trade Commission and at least eight states have taken action against more than two dozen health cards for offering discounts services that don&amp;#8217;t exist.&amp;#8221;
If you suspect you&amp;#8217;re being scammed, contact the police. If you buy a discount card or other medical insurance type of protection online, pay attention to the following list of points.
1. You learn of the discount card from a blast fax or Internet popup ad.
2. They promise a certain ...</description>
            <author>A Hearty Life</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2458186</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2009 11:44:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2458186</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Live-Blogging A Conference: Trouble?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2453178&amp;cid=t_374886_149_f&amp;fid=35776&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpipeline.corante.com%2Farchives%2F2009%2F06%2F05%2Fliveblogging_a_conference_trouble.php</link>
            <description>There’s a report over at Genetic Future of some problems stemming from blogging a scientific meeting at Cold Spring Harbor. The organizers have a rule that reporters have to obtain permission from speakers before writing up a story on any given presentation, but no one thought about whether this covered bloggers. This caused a dispute between the blog's owner, the conference organizers, and Genomeweb about what was going on, and whose rules applied to whom.

This is a particular case of the larger blogs-versus-journalism question. I think it’s being resolved the right way: Cold Spring Harbor Labs will apply the same rules to people blogging, tweeting, or what have you as apply to people writing up stories for more conventional outlets. That makes sense to me, because in each case, ther...</description>
            <author>In the Pipeline</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2453178</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:31:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2453178</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How’s It Going In Massachusetts?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2452417&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F06%2F03%2Fhows-it-going-in-massachusetts%2F</link>
            <description>Despite economic hard times, Massachusetts still shows gains in insurance coverage and access to care as a result of its 2006 state health reform. However, some of the early gains in reducing barriers to health care and improving affordability had eroded by the fall of 2008, according to Urban Institute researchers in a new study published last week on the Health Affairs Web site [2-week free access.]
Lead author Sharon Long, a senior fellow at Urban, told the Boston Globe that the affordability problems that have started to resurface cannot be blamed on the state&amp;#8217;s overhaul, but on a much larger and troubling national trend. &amp;#8220;Health care costs, in general, are increasing faster than inflation,&amp;#8221; she said.
About one in five of the over 4000 adults surveyed in fall 200...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2452417</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 23:26:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2452417</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Economic Case for Health Care Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2452384&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F0Id0gvZR0s0%2F</link>
            <description>There&amp;#8217;s an old Yiddish saying that, “If my bubba had wheels she&amp;#8217;d be a trolley.” So goes the logic of the Obama administration in their paper released yesterday, “The Economic Case for Health Care Reform.” Their claim is that reducing health care costs would help the economy. Yes, if health care costs were reduced it would likely help the economy, though we should remember that the health care industry is part of the economy.
There is nothing in Obamacare, however, that will reduce costs. In fact, expanding coverage may cause costs to rise. One study by MIT&amp;#8217;s Amy Finkelstein suggests that the prevalence of insurance itself has roughly doubled the cost of health care. So, if Obama succeeds in expanding insurance coverage, it&amp;#8217;s very likely to increase the cost...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2452384</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:31:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2452384</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>52 Million Uninsured Americans By 2010</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2452418&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F06%2F02%2F52-million-uninsured-americans-by-2010%2F</link>
            <description>The number of uninsured Americans is projected to increase by at least 6.9 million by 2010 &amp;#8212; meaning 19.2 percent of nonelderly Americans would be uninsured. This is an increase of 2.0 percentage points from 2007, say Todd Gilmer and Richard Kronick of the University of California, San Diego, in a paper published May 28 on the Health Affairs Web site [2-week free access]. Gilmer and Kronick estimate that the number of uninsured Americans will reach 52 million in 2010.
Recession Impact
The current economic downturn is partially reflected in this projection because sluggish growth in personal income for American workers is a key factor driving the results. However, because this model is based on extrapolating from uninsurance rates among workers, it does not directly take into accoun...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2452418</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:39:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2452418</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Massachusetts Model: Massive Spending On Nonbenefit Costs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2452419&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F06%2F02%2Fthe-massachusetts-model-massive-spending-on-nonbenefit-costs%2F</link>
            <description>Plummeting coverage and soaring costs characterize the nation’s health insurance crisis. With much coverage for the nonelderly based on employment, job loss contributes to this misfortune. In response, Congress seems headed to emulate the 2006 Massachusetts “reform.” That’s an unpromising prescription because it seriously increases costs &amp;#8212; just the opposite of what President Barack Obama cogently and correctly asserts that we need.
The “reform” requires all adult residents to obtain medical care insurance through individual purchase if they are not covered by an employer-provided plan, Medicaid &amp;#8212; called MassHealth and limited to those with very low incomes &amp;#8212; or CommonwealthCare, a means-tested subsidized program for those with income above MassHealth’s limit...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2452419</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:12:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2452419</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Industry’s Cost-Control Initiative: Signaling Momentum For Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2441215&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F05%2F22%2Fthe-industrys-cost-control-initiative-a-positive-sign-for-reform%2F</link>
            <description>The recent confusion surrounding the health care industry&amp;#8217;s statement about reducing the growth in health care costs by 1.5 percentage points annually — it is a goal, the industry clarified, not a year-by-year target — underscores the need to put mechanisms in place to ensure that the industry&amp;#8217;s spending growth target is met. Nonetheless, I see their announcement as a clear sign that all stakeholders are looking toward the passage of comprehensive health reform legislation this year.
Limiting cost increases will bring relief to millions of American families and businesses, as well as stabilize our nation’s economy and federal and state governments. While a 1.5 percentage point annual reduction may sound modest, the leaders from insurance, physician, pharmacy, and medical ...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2441215</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 18:47:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2441215</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Autism votes</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2424382&amp;cid=t_374886_133_f&amp;fid=35096&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FAutismVox%2F%7E3%2F9EMba2qWJVU%2F</link>
            <description>New Jersey legislators are proposing a bill that would make it mandatory for insurance companies to cover treatments for individuals with autism. New York has already proposed reforms that would require private health insurance companies to pay for screening, diagnosis, testing and treatment, up to $36,000 a year. Connecticut has already passed legislation.
*   *   *
Photo courtesy of jimbowen030 (flickr.com)
NPR just ran an interview with Karl Taro Greenfeld that discusses his new book, &amp;#8220;Boy Alone: A Brother&amp;#8217;s Memoir.&amp;#8221; Of particular interest to me are the comments that are posted. Most are supportive; several are sharply critical of Greenfeld for what they see as his selfishness and lack of empathy. I can&amp;#8217;t help thinking what Ned might say if he writes a memoir o...</description>
            <author>Autism Vox</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2424382</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2009 23:09:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2424382</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Rational Proposal to Fix Healthcare</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2416778&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fv%2FFY1uterf56E%26amp%3Brel%3D1%26amp%3Bcolor1%3Dd6d6d6%26amp%3Bcolor2%3Df0f0f0%26amp%3Bborder%3D0%26amp%3Bfs%3D1%26amp%3Bhl%3Den%26amp%3Bautoplay%3D0%26amp%3Bshowinfo%3D0%26amp%3Biv_load_policy%3D3%26amp%3Bshowsearch%3D0</link>
            <description>The following guest post is written by Melinna Giannini, President, CEO, and Founder of ABC Coding Solutions (formerly Alternative Link), who has worked in the health insurance industry since the 1980s. She is one of the nation’s leading experts on contracting, billing, and practice management for nursing and other forms of integrative healthcare. Melinna designed ABC codes to fill gaps in national code sets used for managing healthcare reimbursement and outcomes analysis.
The U.S. healthcare system can no longer rely on medicine as its primary form of healthcare. Our U.S. medical schools cannot increase the physician workforce fast enough to keep pace with population growth and the needs of baby boomers.
The physician workforce decreased from 772,000 doctors to 633,000 doctors since 200...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2416778</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 17:53:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2416778</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Church of Universal Coverage Begins Its Campaign against that Pesky CBO</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2416803&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FcRUH9mrbSMI%2F</link>
            <description>Last Monday, when lobbyists for the six biggest health care industry groups joined President Obama to announce their support for reducing health care spending by $2 trillion over 10 years, I penned and voiced my suspicion that the real motivation was to pressure the Congressional Budget Office to assume that Democrats&amp;#8217; health care reforms would reduce spending, despite the lack of evidence.  My wife said that hypothesis sounded a little . . . conspiratorial.
Last Thursday, when it was revealed that there was no actual agreement and that the White House basically manipulated the industry to get a week&amp;#8217;s worth of good health care press, I started to doubt whether strong-arming the CBO was really the goal of that media stunt.  Then Jonathan Cohn set me straight.
In an article fo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2416803</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 14:33:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2416803</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The NHMA Forum on Health Care Reform offers an opportunity to impact health reform legislation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2414728&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FO4Y-MN-prmM%2F</link>
            <description>I wanted to let you all know about an excellent opportunity that has been presented to the National Hispanic Medical Association. NHMA has been invited to participate in the development of health care reform legislation for Senators Kennedy and Baucus, Congressmen Waxman, Rangel, and Miller and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
Their respective staff will be introducing and distributing their bills starting in June for public comment. We have been asked to submit our recommendations on reforming the system for inclusion into these bills by June 1st; this gives us a narrow window of three weeks or less to prepare a document for submission to congressional staff.
The magnitude of the debate is broad; Congress is asking us for specific strategies that respond to four topics: 1) the expansion...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2414728</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 18:54:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2414728</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health Reform: Will It Finally Happen?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2398561&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FwdeWhjQMKW4%2F</link>
            <description>Nearly 20 years ago, I had the opportunity to spend a summer working with the Congressional Caucus for Women&amp;#8217;s Issues. Of course, I was absolutely thrilled when they asked me to support the introduction of the Women&amp;#8217;s Health Equity Act. However, as I began to research the subject to prepare the fact sheets and advocacy materials to support the legislation, that excitement quickly turned to dismay.
As a bright-eyed college intern, I was shocked to learn about the underlying race and gender disparities within clinical trials and health research. I felt that same sense of disappointment when I started examining the race and ethnic disparities that remain in our health care delivery system today.
Kaiser Permanente recently ran a series of advertisements that highlighted the fact th...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2398561</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 14:53:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2398561</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Living Like A Refugee</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2398626&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=34902&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.futurepundit.com%2Farchives%2F006181.html</link>
            <description>Ever watch natural disasters on TV and wondered what it must be like to leave your home and stay in temporary shelters or extra rooms in homes or other sort... (Source: FuturePundit)</description>
            <author>FuturePundit</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2398626</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2398626</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>New State Introduces Autism Insurance Bill</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2387098&amp;cid=t_374886_133_f&amp;fid=37107&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Faspieweb%2F%7E3%2FFtUObfpwxMY%2F</link>
            <description>Michigan, a new state has just introduced legislation requiring insurance providers to insure those with Autism.In April of 2009, democrats in the Michigan House and Senate introduced bills that would require insurance providers to cover more therapies for Autism.  According to the democrats introducing the bill they want to follow suit with how Indiana now [...] (Source: AspieWeb.net)</description>
            <author>AspieWeb.net</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2387098</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 00:34:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2387098</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Swine Flu Response</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2382286&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F05%2F01%2Fthe-swine-flu-response%2F</link>
            <description>As the first H1N1 or so-called swine flu cases were diagnosed in Mexico, health officials all over the United States leapt into action. This is the test that they have been preparing for.
As the disease spread, public health professionals have been actively tracking the cases, working around the clock to analyze lab specimens and offering treatment to those with confirmed cases, dispensing antiviral medications from the Strategic National Stockpile, and letting the public know how to protect themselves and when to seek treatment.
The Administration has displayed strong, coordinated leadership, with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the White House conveying guidance and strategies based on t...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2382286</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 21:47:56 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2382286</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Earning less, paying more for health care: fighting a battle on two fronts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2375801&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2F33Nq52mHUKI%2F</link>
            <description>Today, April 28th, is Blog for Fair Pay Day. In recognition of this important day, our guest post by Lisa Codispoti, Senior Counsel for Health and Reproductive Rights, National Women’s Law Center, relates to health care and equal pay.
Between 2000 and 2006, health insurance premiums increased 87.5 percent—4 times more than wages. In addition to the burden of inflated health care costs, women are still paid only 78 cents for every dollar earned by men—with women of color earning even less. In a world where women are earning significantly less than men for comparable work, how can they also afford health care?
Pay inequity for women compounds the issues that already exist with our broken health care system. This is a system that makes unfair practices by insurance companies flourish, s...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2375801</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:30:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2375801</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Jobless and Diabetic: Some Folks We Know</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2358602&amp;cid=t_374886_134_f&amp;fid=34841&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.diabetesmine.com%2F2009%2F04%2Fjobless-and-diabetic-some-folks-we-know.html</link>
            <description>A few weeks ago, our community was shocked to learn that one of the most respected D-bloggers, Scott Johnson, was let go from his company. Although losing a job for anyone in this economy is a hard blow, it is especially worrisome for those of us with a serious, chronic medical condition like diabetes &amp;#8212; [...] (Source: Diabetes Mine)</description>
            <author>Diabetes Mine</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2358602</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 04:13:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2358602</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Pregnancy After Tubal Reversal: Dr. Monteith’s First Tubal Baby</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2342106&amp;cid=t_374886_177_f&amp;fid=38133&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FTubalReversalBlog%2F%7E3%2FkzoykbAUTBA%2Fpregnancy-after-tubal-reversal-dr-monteiths-first-tubal-baby.html</link>
            <description>The first tubal reversal baby born after tubal ligation reversal Dr. Monteith was born to proud parents from the great state of Alaska. This is an official announcement by the staff of Chapel Hill Tubal Reversal Center and we wish the parents and the new born the best of luck. Read more of this article to understand the new hope many parents are given as a result of tubal ligation reversal surgery. (Source: Tubal Reversal Blog)</description>
            <author>Tubal Reversal Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2342106</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 18:54:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2342106</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medicare Expands Coverage of PET Scans as Cancer Diagnostic Tool</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2326618&amp;cid=t_374886_136_f&amp;fid=37846&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthinfoispower.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F04%2F07%2Fmedicare-expands-coverage-of-pet-scans-as-cancer-diagnostic-tool%2F</link>
            <description>&amp;#8220;The Centers for Medicare &amp;#38; Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a final national coverage determination (NCD) to expand coverage for initial testing with positron emission tomography (PET) for Medicare beneficiaries who are diagnosed with and treated for most solid tumor cancers.  This decision applies to PET scans used to support initial diagnosis and treatment for most [...] (Source: Libby's H*O*P*E*)</description>
            <author>Libby's H*O*P*E*</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2326618</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 21:36:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2326618</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>News Flash to Health Reform Buddies: Insurance Coverage is Not Enough</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2306556&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FsWvdXfbV87Q%2F</link>
            <description>On April 2, Julie Connelly reported that “Doctors Are Opting Out of Medicare.1” The article focuses initially on specialists but quickly turns to primary care clinicians as well, noting that 29% of Medicare patients surveyed last year were looking for primary care physicians.
Note to my health reform buddies working towards universal coverage… apparently having insurance coverage is not enough.
It’s a surprise to me that it took so long for this problem to hit the presses. About five years ago I had the opportunity to travel across the country with a small group of medical and employer leaders, facilitating discussions between physician groups and local employers collaborating to improve access, quality and cost dynamics in their local areas. To prepare, I called local physicians t...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2306556</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 14:23:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2306556</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The U.S. Health System: The Rest Of The Story</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2284391&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F03%2F19%2Fthe-us-health-system-the-rest-of-the-story%2F</link>
            <description>Here is a paper with as many as 100 references that you almost never see cited in Health Affairs, or in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), or in the New England Journal of Medicine (at least not in their public policy articles). In fact, if you are a regular reader of these publications, I think you are going to be very surprised.
My colleagues Linda Gorman, Devon Herrick, Robert Sade and I discovered that public policy articles in the leading health journals (especially the health policy journals) tend to cite poorly done studies over and over again in support of two propositions: (1) Our health care system needs radical reform and (2) the reform needs to be modeled along the lines of the systems of other developed countries. At the same time, these articles tend to ...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2284391</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 12:43:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2284391</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Looking to a Failed Model for Health Care Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2255993&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FGGBkWpjziRk%2F</link>
            <description>CNN health care correspondent Sanjay Gupta, who was briefly considered for surgeon general in the Obama administration, reports that the administration is looking to Massachusetts as a model for its forthcoming health care reform proposal. That model would involve an individual mandate, an employer mandate, a “connector” with increased insurance regulation, and massive subsidies for the middle class.
Given that the Massachusetts plan is expected to run $2-4 billion over budget over the next 10 years, has failed to come close to universal coverage, has done nothing to reduce health care costs (indeed, may have driven up insurance costs), and has actually led to increased wait time for primary care physicians, that may not be the best model out there. In fact, perhaps the Obama administr...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2255993</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:33:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2255993</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Schism in the Church of Universal Coverage</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2256000&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F-R6xU_U7KBk%2F</link>
            <description>On the Diane Rehm Show last week, I predicted that all the lovey-dovey coalition-forming by the Church of Universal Coverage would fall apart as soon as people started talking about actual reforms instead of vague principles.
Today, The New York Times reports:
Two labor unions have pulled out of a broad coalition seeking agreement on major changes in the health care system.
The action, by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and the Service Employees International Union, shows the seeds of discord behind the optimistic talk at a White House conference on health care this week.
It also illustrates the difficulty of reaching agreement on two of the knottiest issues in the health care debate: whether to offer a new government-sponsored insurance option, and whether...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2256000</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:29:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2256000</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>This Is Why Universal Coverage Is a Religion — and Not about Compassion or Saving Lives</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2249686&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVsiJMtScOMw%2F</link>
            <description>I was invited to participate in an email/online/sorta exchange for the Washington Post yesterday.  Unfortunately, the effort was spiked after just a few rounds of emails.  But rather than let my participation go to waste, I thought I&amp;#8217;d post one exchange that I think highlights why I&amp;#8217;m not just being colorful when I describe supporters of universal health insurance coverage as the Church of Universal Coverage.  I could summarize the exchange, but I&amp;#8217;m lazy.  So I&amp;#8217;ll just copy and paste.
I wrote:
All the interest groups are meeting with all the right politicians and making all the right noises, thus the Church of Universal Coverage says the stars have aligned for fundamental reform&amp;#8230; Everyone is at the table right now because no one wants to be on the menu.  ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2249686</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:07:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2249686</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Len Nichols Is Wrong: This Debate Is about Socialized Medicine</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2249688&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FKxylx3UPX9U%2F</link>
            <description>Over at &amp;#8220;The New Health Dialogue Blog,&amp;#8221; my friend Len Nichols writes:
I am disappointed to hear the health reform conversation devolve once again into a contrived debate about a single payer, government-run health system. This is an old dispute about &amp;#8220;socialized medicine&amp;#8221; and one that has already been settled in the minds of a critical mass of policymakers.
A couple of things strike me about his post.
First, this debate is obviously about socialized medicine, and to argue anything else is absurd. We have a president who advocates single-payer. That president just held a health care summit to which he invited other single-payer advocates, but not a single free-market advocate. As I explain in this paper, all the bluster about &amp;#8220;public-private partnerships&amp;#82...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2249688</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:38:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2249688</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Up, Up and Away?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2227168&amp;cid=t_374886_109_f&amp;fid=34730&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychiatrist-blog.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F03%2Fup-up-and-away.html</link>
            <description>This is another one of my hypothetical questions.So you're a health care professional (if you're not, pretend) and you're on vacation far, far away. But before you left, you arranged for someone to cover your practice and you gave the covering doc an emergency number. Why? Why not.You're getting some much needed rest and relaxation-- you've left work behind and it feels so good not to worry about other people.  But back home, something bad has happened to one of your patients-- if you're a primary care doc, perhaps someone had an unexpected and fatal heart attack. If you're a shrink, may be a patient committed suicide. Whatever it is, it's awful, and it's done: there's nothing you can do now that would change the outcome.Do you want to know before you return home? And if you're the coverin...</description>
            <author>Shrink Rap</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2227168</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Mar 2009 15:31:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2227168</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>In Obama Reform Push, Medicare Leads The Way</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2222893&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F02%2F27%2Fin-obama-reform-push-medicare-leads-the-way%2F</link>
            <description>President Barack Obama opened his speech to Congress on February 24 calling for our nation to take responsibility for its future once again and finally face our long-term challenges, including our structural fiscal imbalances. He was clear that we will no longer ignore the challenge to reform our struggling health care system, nor will we continue to shirk the responsibility of providing quality, affordable health coverage to every American. The resounding message was simple: We cannot afford to put health reform on hold any longer. I could not agree more.
Rising health care costs are undermining the ability of U.S. businesses to compete globally, stifling entrepreneurship, and crippling American families. Meanwhile, health care cost growth continues to wreak havoc on our state and federal...</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2222893</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:44:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2222893</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Patient Power For Chronic Illness</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2182957&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F02%2F12%2Fpatient-power-for-chronic-illness%2F</link>
            <description>For a long time, I have believed the greatest potential for Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) is in the treatment of chronic illness. I even wrote some fictional vignettes in a “vision” chapter in the National Center for Policy Analysis’ Handbook On State Health Care Reform, describing how HSAs might work for diabetics and other patients. [...] (Source: Health Affairs Blog)</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2182957</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:22:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2182957</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Children’s Health Care And The Future Of Health Reform</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2132567&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F01%2F25%2Fchildrens-health-care-and-the-future-of-health-reform%2F</link>
            <description>On Thursday January 15, 2009 the House of Representatives passed a reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, CHIPRA by a vote of 289 to 139. On the same day the Senate Finance Committee approved a similar version of the bill by a vote of 12 to 7 and placed it on the Senate’s calendar. [...] (Source: Health Affairs Blog)</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2132567</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 22:34:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2132567</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The National Center For Health Care Technology: Lessons Learned</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2125497&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F01%2F22%2Fthe-national-center-for-health-care-technology-lessons-learned%2F</link>
            <description>A recent book, CRITICAL - What We Can Do About The Health-Care Crisis, authored by incoming “Health Czar” Tom Daschle, calls for the creation of a “Federal Health Board&amp;#8221; (FHB). Among other proposed Board functions, the FHB would “promote ‘high value’ medical care by recommending coverage of those drugs and procedures backed by solid evidence.”
This role sounds reminiscent [...] (Source: Health Affairs Blog)</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2125497</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:54:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2125497</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>An Alternative Prescription From Chopra, Roy, and Weil</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2098062&amp;cid=t_374886_149_f&amp;fid=35776&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpipeline.corante.com%2Farchives%2F2009%2F01%2F12%2Fan_alternative_prescription_from_chopra_roy_and_weil.php</link>
            <description>Well, we don’t even know who the new FDA commissioner is going to be under the Obama administration, but people are already making their bid for a change in direction. In Friday’s Wall Street Journal, you can find Deepak Chopra, Rustum Roy, and Andrew Weil with an op-ed titled “Alternative Medicine is Mainstream”. I think you can go ahead and silently append “. . .And Deserves Serious Mainstream Funding”.

My hopes for this piece were not high – Deepak Chopra, for one, I consider to be an absolute firehose of nonsense. Both he and Andrew Weil should be whacked with sticks every time they say the word &quot;quantum&quot;. But they manage to avoid that one here - the op-ed turns out to be a marbled blend of things that I can agree with and things that make me raise both eyebrows. Its gen...</description>
            <author>In the Pipeline</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2098062</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:33:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2098062</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Out-Of-Pocket Payments Up; Chronic Illness Key Driver</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2087161&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2009%2F01%2F07%2Fout-of-pocket-payments-up-chronic-illness-key-driver%2F</link>
            <description>A rise in chronic disease, particularly among baby boomers and older adults, was a key driver of the fact that consumers spent about 40 percent more out of pocket for health care in 2005 than in 1996, researchers report in the January/February 2009 issue of Health Affairs, a thematic volume on chronic illness.
The study shows that the [...] (Source: Health Affairs Blog)</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2087161</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:30:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2087161</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Pharmalot Is No More</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2084314&amp;cid=t_374886_149_f&amp;fid=35776&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpipeline.corante.com%2Farchives%2F2009%2F01%2F06%2Fpharmalot_is_no_more.php</link>
            <description>I noted with sadness yesterday that Ed Silverman has packed in the Pharmalot blog. He did an excellent job there, picking up a lot of industry news from all over. Most of it was in the “Trouble for Company X” vein, but that’s to be expected. Ed’s a good reporter, and “Things Going Fine Over at Company X” is not much of a story. If this item is correct, though, we’ll be seeing more of him, which I’m glad to hear. The newspaper business is in even worse shape than the drug industry, so I’m glad to see it when someone there lands safely. (People still need pharmaceuticals; they’re not so sure if they need newspapers so much). (Source: In the Pipeline)</description>
            <author>In the Pipeline</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2084314</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:28:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2084314</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Daschle: What Can We Expect Of The Health Czar In Waiting?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2040316&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2008%2F12%2F15%2Fdaschle-what-can-we-expect-of-the-health-czar-in-waiting%2F</link>
            <description>When Tom Daschle, President-elect Barack Obama’s designate for Secretary of Health and Human Services, published a book earlier this year titled Critical: What We Can Do about the Healthcare Crisis, I saw the favorable reviews and made a mental note to buy and read it. After Obama’s announced choice of Daschle for HHS secretary, this [...] (Source: Health Affairs Blog)</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2040316</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:38:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2040316</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Mining clinical trials</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2040535&amp;cid=t_374886_107_f&amp;fid=36698&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fminingdrugs.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F12%2Fmining-clinical-trials.html</link>
            <description>&quot;This (clinical data mining) application enables rapid extraction of information about institutions, diseases, clinical approaches, clinical trials dates, predominant cancer types in the trials, clinical opportunities and pharmaceutical market coverage.&quot; [10.1186/1745-7580-4-7](via open access news)In 2007 more than seven million people died from cancer. This means there is still a lot to do for helping patients and for reducing this number. This is also the reason why each new treatment option has to follow good design criteria and sufficient testing, called clinical trial design. Typical design criteria could be: assess the safety and effectiveness of a new medication or device on a specific kind of patient (e.g., patients who have been diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease)assess the safet...</description>
            <author>Mining Drug Space</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2040535</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 19:06:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2040535</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How Ray became our third metastatic liver cancer survivor</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1999158&amp;cid=t_374886_136_f&amp;fid=35300&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.metastaticlivercancer.org%2F2008-12-01-cancer-treatment%2Fhow-ray-became-our-third-metastatic-liver-cancer-survivor%2F</link>
            <description>Ray from UK hasn&amp;#8217;t an individual health coverage and therefore stopped his successful Avastin chemotherapy to stabilise his metastatic liver cancer. Read more about our other 2 metastatic liver cancer survivors Trish and Dan:
&amp;nbsp;

Dan Metastatic liver cancer survivor&amp;nbsp;
Trish Metastatic Liver Cancer Survivor

&amp;nbsp;
On one hand I am surprised how seemingly easy Ray talks about major medical insurance&amp;#8230; I still remember my peaceful hubby almost beating up the social worker of father&amp;#8217;s personal medical insurance because the social worker refused to coordinate the palliative care.
&amp;nbsp;
Like they say: all cancers are different, and it seems all people are different as well. You need to know that you will get overwhelmed with anger when you hear you or your loved one ha...</description>
            <author>Metastatic liver cancer</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1999158</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:00:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1999158</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Obama-Romney-McCain Health Plan</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1981192&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2008%2F11%2F21%2Fthe-obama-romney-mccain-health-plan%2F</link>
            <description>What are the prospects for health reform? That depends on how flexible the new president turns out to be. Although Barack Obama was highly critical of John McCain’s health plan during the election, he actually needs key elements of the McCain plan. He also needs key elements of Mitt Romney’s health reform enacted in Massachusetts, [...] (Source: Health Affairs Blog)</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1981192</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:01:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1981192</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama wins (here's the NYT coverage.)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1938956&amp;cid=t_374886_113_f&amp;fid=34603&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fginasmith.typepad.com%2Fgina_on_gina%2F2008%2F11%2Fobama-wins-heres-the-nyt-coverage.html</link>
            <description>Here&amp;#39;s the coverage from the NYT.&amp;#0160;Wow.
gs (Source: I'm Gina Smith)</description>
            <author>I'm Gina Smith</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1938956</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:21:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1938956</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Good reasons for a Californian to vote tomorrow.</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1930180&amp;cid=t_374886_113_f&amp;fid=34603&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fginasmith.typepad.com%2Fgina_on_gina%2F2008%2F11%2Fgood-reasons-for-a-californian-to-vote-tomorrow.html</link>
            <description>I got these from the folks at moveon.org today.
The Top 5 Reasons To Vote In California Or: Why It Still Means A Thing Even If It Ain&amp;#39;t Got That Swing 

Big margin = big mandate. The popular vote doesn&amp;#39;t put anyone in the White House, but it affects what presidents can do when they get there. Want Obama to be able to actually do the stuff he&amp;#39;s been talking about? Pass universal health care? End the war? Then we need a landslide. 
The other things on the ballot matter! There are important issues on the California ballot this year, and progressives all need to weigh in. You better believe our opponents will turn out and vote on them. Also, there&amp;#39;s Congress. Without more support in the House and Senate, Obama will have a hard time getting progressive laws passed. 
If you don&amp;#...</description>
            <author>I'm Gina Smith</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1930180</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:01:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1930180</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>AmeriCarePlans: A McCain-Obama Hybrid Proposal</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1930362&amp;cid=t_374886_87_f&amp;fid=35747&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthaffairs.org%2Fblog%2F2008%2F11%2F03%2Famericareplans-a-mccain-obama-hybrid-proposal%2F</link>
            <description>As a thirty-five year veteran of the debates and initiatives to reform the U.S. health insurance system, I am delighted that so much of the presidential campaign rhetoric, advertising, and general press coverage this month has included this subject. However, most of the rhetoric has focused on the “refundable tax credits” of Sen. John McCain [...] (Source: Health Affairs Blog)</description>
            <author>Health Affairs Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1930362</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:01:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1930362</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

