The Reality of Health Care: A Huge Disparity in Need

HEALTH CARE: MYTH AND REALITY

A MAJOR MYTH, One promoted by the current administration, employers and insurance companies: the American health care problem could be solved if we could convince Americans to take more personal responsibility for maintaining healthier lifestyles and giving them a greater freedom of choice in purchasing health insurance.

BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT REALITY OF HEALTH CARE is depicted by the associated diagram. The second panel states a startling fact: it takes only 5 cents of the health care dollar to pay for the health care of the lowest-cost 50 percent of the population, and notice that the highest-cost 1 percent requires 22 cents of the health care dollar. For that 1 percent, the per-person cost now exceeds $39,000 per year.

This diagram tells us that there is no way the heaviest users of health care can pay for that health care. Therefore, in a responsible society the payment for health care must be a societal, not an individual, responsibility. The only way we can exercise that responsibility is to establish a system of single-payer universal health care. We must get the for-profit health insurance industry out of the loop, as is called for by H.R. 676, the "United States National Insurance Act."

Mayors Back Universal Health Care

Yesterday, the U.S. Conference of Mayors unaninously adopted a resolution in support of the "United States National Health Insurance Act," H.R. 676. Known also as the "Improved and Expanded Medicare for All Act," H. R. 676 is sponsored by Rep. John Conyers of Michigan and 90 members of Congress.

This is an excellent bill that, unlike the proposals of Senators Obama and McCain, actually addresses health care and guarantees everyone in the country affordable health care by forcing the highly profitable private health insurance industry out of the loop. That is a necessary action if the country is to have an effective health care system like that of all other modern countries.

The backing of HR 676 by the nation's mayors is highly significant because the mayors, far more so than most elected officials, are closer to the people and more free of pressure from the pressures of health insurance industry and pharmaceutical industry lobbying efforts that hope to maintain the staus quo. The fact that the mayors are backing HR 676 indicates that the public is increasingly in favor of universal health care. We may be closer to an effective universal health care system than many have thought possible.

New reviews of Mired

From Midwest Book Review's California Bookwatch Health and Medicine Shelf:

A shocking note Americans don't know about medical bills: They don't reflect the costs of the medicine itself. "Mired in the Health Care Morass: An Alaskan Takes On America's Dysfunctional Medical System for his Uninsured Daughter" is the tale of accomplished author and geophysicist Neil Davis's fight against the American Health care system and how it is extorting Americans when they are at their most vulnerable - when they are ill themselves or deathly concerned for the well being of their loved ones. With advice to fight these corrupt practices and get the more correct and proper hospital bill, [this book] is highly recommended for anyone who has been scorned by the American health care system and for community library social issues shelves everywhere.

And from Humane Medicine, a Canadian publication, comes this:

Davis’s book is an important contribution to the literature on the American Health Care System since it is written by a consumer rather than a professional provider of medical services. Davis structured the book around the experiences that his family endured when his adult daughter, Patricia, was diagnosed with lung cancer....

Given all of Davis’ discoveries, he concluded that there are four criteria for an effective health care system. First, an effective health care system provides comprehensive health coverage for all citizens. If not, the poorest individuals will get inadequate health care. Second, a health care system ensures that health care is distributed to citizens according to their ability to pay. Otherwise, the poorest members of that society are penalized by paying a higher proportion of their financial resources for health care. Third, each health care system should provide uniform payment for necessary health care services. Fourth, prescription drug prices must be regulated, either by fixing drug prices or regulating pharmaceutical industry profits. For this to occur, the government must assume the primary role in operating the health care system.

Thus, in conclusion, this book will be especially relevant to consumers of heath care and is an eye opener for those who may be seriously ill in the United States and are trying to understand why receiving health care creates serious financial difficulties for them.

Another four-star review from LibraryThing

A review from April 25 on LibraryThing:

The many charts and statistics he uses to illustrate his findings can be hard to understand at times, but believe it or not they accurately illustrate his point that the complexity of the American system creates expense. He skewers some fondly held myths about the U.S. Health care system and shines light on the health care systems in other nations. He also gives his prescription for how the U.S. Health care system can be changed.

Neil Davis has experiences in being a consumer of health care that most of us never hope to have, but which will become increasingly commonplace as the health care becomes increasingly broken. His answers to the health care crises (universal, uniform payments, distributed to patients regardless of ability to pay, regulation of drug companies) are well thought out and do not come from a place of a particular political ideology but instead from his own experiences and research. His book is well researched and a convincing call to radically overhaul the American health care system from someone who has experienced the worst that the American health care system has to offer.

John Conyers reprints a list of four myths about universal health care by Dr. Marcia Angell. Davis sums up an answer to her myth #4, "Claims the government can't do anything right," in his index (look up "Mistrust in government").

HR 676 Universal Health Care

I have been looking closely at health care reform and related matters for the past two years, and it seems like I learn something new every day. It embarrasses me to admit that just this week I became aware of HR 676 (The United States National Insurance Act) introduced into the House of Representatives by Rep. John Coyers (D-MI) in January 2007. This bill contains all the right provisions for setting up a first-rate universal health care system in this country. Unlike the proposals of the leading presidential candidates that continue the role of private insurance companies, HR 676 basically calls for eliminating them altogether, and turning the health care system into one having the delivery of health care as the first priority. In essence, the proposal calls for a complete conversion to a non-profit health care system.

The proposal has several key features. One is that it provides complete coverage for all medically necessary services including long-term care, prescription drugs, dental care and eye care. Another is that it provides for all United States residents and visitors. The act totally eliminates co-pays and deductibles, and it prohibits for-profit insurers from selling insurance covering services duplicating those provided by the universal health care system. Under this act, patients would have complete freedom of choice in providers, hospitals, clinics, and practices. In recognition that all this cannot happen in one day, the bill calls for a conversion to a not-for-profit health care system to take place over a period of fifteen years.

Financing for the program would be provided by an employer payroll tax of 4.75%, and employee payroll tax of 4.75%, a 5% health tax imposed on the top 5% of income earners and a small tax on stock transactions. The end effect would be a small reduction in overall health care spending.

I don’t see anything wrong with any provision of the bill; in fact it looks to be well thought out. One pleasing thing is that the bill is gaining support in Congress and elsewhere. When first introduced, the bill had 25 co-sponsors, and by April 2008 it had 90. Eighty-nine of these are Democrats, one is an Independent, but none are Republicans. No commentary needed here.

You can read the full text of the bill at:

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.676:

Another positive review

The fifth review from LibraryThing, giving it four stars:

Less of a personal journey than an exploration into the true costs of medical treatment in the United States today, and where the money goes. For anyone concerned with injustice, inequalities, or lack of checks within the system; or anyone who is concerned that they cannot afford the medical care they or their loved ones need, this clear and non-judgmental book written by a layman with no preconceptions or industry biases is highly recommended.

More reviews from LibraryThing

Two more LibraryThing reviewers have written about Mired. The first one gave a mixed review, but had this to say:

Most patients have no idea how health care billing works until they are faced with a financial crisis. A book like Mr. [sic] Davis' would be very helpful in leading them through the process, especially if they live in Alaska.

The second reviewer said this:

A myriad of books have been written on this topic; however, Mr. Davis' strength lies in the fact that he writes it from the perspective of a consumer. It could be argued that he is not qualified to write a book about the health care industry as merely a consumer. Certainly, economists may be more capable of addressing the macro issues of national healthcare, and pundits the political ramifications; however, that really isn't the purpose of Mr. Davis' book. Rather, it reads like a good summary (with a clearly liberal bent) on the state of the health care industry.

And, unlike economic and political pundits, Mr. [sic] Davis doesn't shy away from actually providing a solution. As he says, "What is needed is single-payer universal healthcare ... the most economical form is a fully socialistic system like the United Kingdom's (and the VA system as well) in which the government owns and operates the hospitals and hires healthcare providers."

(Davis recommends a single-payer arrangement like France's system or Canada's, rather than socialized medicine.)