Genes 2 Brains 2 Mind 2 Me

Al Franken ably handles a “taxed enough already” crowd on healthcare debate topics … democratic process at its best … the frontrow presence of a 90 y.o. lady draws some focus on how young folks resent being saddled with future debt to pay for current payouts – no one seems to take note or care that she is there.  Go Senator Al!

Read Full Post »

Was sort of holding my breath with fingers and toes crossed these past few weeks, but now am given up.  Much like team Obama’s efforts to regulate the financial services industry (only slightly less of a clusterf**k than healthcare), its a slow motion trainwreck where the average taxpayer just ends up worseoff after all the political concessions.  Seems like the very folks who are most vocal are the ones who’d rather not change a thing.

This is my take on the doublespeak within the beltway:

BUSINESS: We are being crushed by rising healthcare costs.

INSURANCE: We only make a nickel on every $1 we pay out to doctors, and they are always raising their fees.

DOCTORS: We’re forced to treat the growing ranks of uninsured and must shoulder the burden when they cannot pay.

OK, so lets try to expand medicare and design a wider government managed plan…

BUSINESS: We can’t afford the higher taxes to pay for universal care and our employees don’t want to give up the plans they have.

INSURANCE: We don’t want to compete with the government-run plan since it will undercut ours.

DOCTORS:  We don’t want “evidence-based medicine” and to be told by the government what we can do and how much we can charge – we like our perverse incentives!

And don’t forget about Mr. and Mrs. middle-class USA who want top-o-the-line care but don’t want to pay more than they did in the 1960’s.

What a total bust. I think the Health 2.0 movement is doing something really interesting – outside the system – and also very key – something that can elevate the most needy, uninsured members of society to the forefront.

No more dwelling on the wreckage.  On to strategies that help.  More science & more Health 2.0!

Read Full Post »

Just a pointer to an amazing analysis on the politics of moving forward with a more comprehensive government sponsored healthcare option.  Sadly, but not surprisingly, the flow of lobbying funds predicts who will vote to maintain the status quo.

Read Full Post »

There is no doubt that -omics and digital-bio is improving healthcare, IF, you’re NOT one of the 50 million uninsured human beings in America who lack health insurance. As a fan of all things free-and-open, bioinformatic and health2.0, I was glad to read Timothy Stoltzfus Jost ‘s new book, Health Care at Risk: A Critique of the Consumer-Driven Movement. A review of the historical and economic foundations of the so-called ‘consumer-driven healthcare’ movement which is well underway (supported by leading candidates from both parties), Jost unpacks inefficiencies inherent to both private insurance systems (adverse selection – ‘sick people need NOT apply’) and to public systems (moral hazard and demand inducement – ‘hey dude, pass the twinkies and cigarettes, – no worries, I’ll just rely on my free healthcare’). The main arguments, from Jost, that stuck with me, are that the consumer-directed system, as it stands today, is one that is skewed to address the moral hazard conundrum, and this is not likely to resolve much of the current economic crisis since healthcare spending is distributed very asymmetrically (a tiny fraction of very sick people account for most of spending). Indeed, Jost suggests the current consumer-directed healthcare movement (pass off the first $5,000 spending to the consumer) is likely to make matters worse before they get better. While sobering, the book may prompt a redoubling of the focus of the many free-and-open bioinformatic and health2.0 efforts working to enhance care and access for all.

Read Full Post »

I much enjoyed the recent article, “Do Not Ask or Do Not Answer” in the August 25th Economist. As genetic data begins to trickle into the hands of consumers, the debate on genetic privacy grows more intense. On the one hand, the article notes that the SRY gene has long been used to price insurance (its the gene that determines the male vs. female pathway during embryonic development – sorry males) and that a look at one’s parents and siblings gives a fairly decent sense of one’s genetic liabilities. On the other hand, the article notes a study showing that folks who find they carry a potent Alzheimer’s risk gene are more likely to purchase extra health insurance – thus out-gaming the insurance industry to their discontent. Both hands having acknowledged the disconnect, the article turns to the search for new financial strategies for the future when consumers possess detailed knowledge of their own genomes (speaking of which, take a moment to browse Jim Watson’s genome). Some of the solutions noted were a form of compulsory universal coverage where neither side can outgame the other, HSA’s where out-of-pocket expenses are paid from individual tax free investment account and other new business models such as provided by RedBrick Health where benefits are maximized by optimizing participants behavior. The science is moving fast. Will the health insurance markets keep up?

Read Full Post »

If I may shill for the corporate medical industrial complex for a moment … I much enjoyed the video interviews found at the Corporate Research Group. Regina Herzlinger predicts universal coverage, but not a single-payer system – rather a system where consumers have choices. How to decide which plan to chose ???

Read Full Post »