Stanley Feld M.D., FACP, MACE Menu

Results found: 95

Permalink:

“War on Obesity”

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

It might be easier to win a “War on Obesity” than it is to win a “War on Terror”. At Least you can see the enemy in the “War on Obesity”. I suspect winning the “War on Terrorism” will cost us money after victory. The “War on Obesity” will save us money.

“Prevention is the Cure” for many chronic diseases. Prevention of disease is totally dependent of patient compliance. In other words, it is the patient’s responsibility. It is the healthcare system as well as the medical care system to provide the appropriate education so that patients can fulfill their responsibility.

I received the following comment from Fred van Beuningen. I found his comment worth the spotlight. It highlights the fact that you, the audience, are out there and thinking, as well as getting angry with the present healthcare system.

The healthcare system collapses because it treats -by and large- symptoms and people’s lifestyles leading to societal diseases fuelled by industry eager to sell us fat, sugar and additives. Another -big- idea, empower people to live a healthy life. Translate old esoteric knowledge of healthy lifestyle into practical advice and reward people for the improvement of their lifestyles: inspires and leads to less costs. Shareholders in pharma need not to worry, they can buy other stock and have children too.
Fred van Beuningen

Thank you Fred

We like ourselves better when we are free to responsible for our own well-being. A healthcare system has to be developed that allows us to have personal responsibility for our care and respect for our decision making about our care. The responsibility of society is to provide appropriate and valid information to help us make responsible decisions. Patient should have a free choice of lifestyle.

Successful personal responsibility for our health should be the goal. There could also be a dividend for maintaining our health. We should think innovatively as the auto insurance industry has with no fault insurance as well as penalty for poor driving. The original Medical Saving Accounts proposed by John Goodman were just that. It created a monetary incentive for not only our learning to maintain our health, but reaching that goal of good health. However, congress never allowed the MSA to be on a level to playing field with traditional insurance. The insurance industry was protecting its power in order to continue to make money with traditional insurance. I will discuss this in detail in the later. Over time, after the insurance industry figured out how to maintain its power and control of the money spent, our political system under the influence of the insurance industry’s vested interest discounted the value of the MSA and called it Health Saving Accounts.

Doing the right thing has taken a back seat to protecting the insurance industry’s vested interest. The result is the false hope created by the present Health Savings Account. HSAs are presently the hot insurance vehicle. HSAs create a minimal incentive for the patients. They might act as a transient deterrent to spending. Additionally, in a price opaque environment the Savings Account portion of the HSA is meaningless.

I believe it is a charade to pretend to have done something that will repair the healthcare system with HSAs. What has been done has been to create a false hope, as we have seen so many times in the past. We saw the promise of HMO’s and the promise of Manage Care evaporate because they were ill structured band aids to real Healthcare Reform. People insured with HSAs are still patients in the insurance companies’ panel and under the insurance industry control. The patients are told what is covered and what is not covered. They are not free to choice nor have monetary incentive to choose. Price is opaque and I suspect will remain opaque as long as the hospital and insurance industry can avoid Price Transparency. There is no prevention of complication of chronic disease incentives in these HSA plans. Remember, 90% of the cost of healthcare is spent on chronic disease complications. The prevention of the complications of disease is dependent on education and self responsibility.

Physicians can not prevent chronic disease or the complications of chronic disease. It is the responsibility of the patient to prevent chronic diseases and its complications. The patient has to change his lifestyle. Poor lifestyle choices lead to chronic disease and it’s complications! It is the obligation of the medical community to teach the patients how to make these changes. We have been deficient in this task, partly because education and lifestyle training and observation are time consuming and non-reimbursed.

The insurance industry and Medicare system has not recognized the value of cognitive services nor preventive services. They might be learning. However progress is very slow. My interpretation is they are not interested in figuring out that patient self determination can save a lot of money. At least they are giving lip service to the concept that “Prevention is the Cure”. They are very slow in paying for educational centers of excellence for diabetes, osteoporosis, heart disease and chronic lung disease. If they were serious about doing something, it would be done and we would be on our way.

There has not been enough media publicity about “Prevention is Cure”. Presently the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologist has a program called the Power of Prevention. Clinical Endocrinologists visit public schools and discuss the importance of diet and exercise and healthy lifestyles to prevent obesity and diabetes.

Unfortunately Fred is correct. The food insurance through the media throws much money at eating more and paying less. The patient reward is paying less for a hamburger, getting fat, and then getting diabetes. The food industry’s reward is more business. Society’s reward is higher health care cost. If the government really got behind the concept of preventing obesity, as they did cigarettes in 1959, our obese country would start to change.

A large portion of society is taking solution to the problem into its own hands. People are trying to live healthy lifestyles. Unfortunately industries with little value have been developed to service their desire under false pretense and no evidence. The megavitamin business is a 21 billion dollar a year business. There is little scientific evidence that taking megavitamins will have any impact on preventing chronic illness. Yet, the megavitamin business has grown yearly and continues to grow. Part of the reason for its growth is the mistrust developed for traditional medicine and physicians.

The latest rage is the organic food business. It is intuitive that ingesting large amounts of pesticides will kill us. It kills the bugs. Is it scientific to assume ingesting residual pesticides if any is present will kill us? It could be, but no one has proven it to date. The same argument and counter argument holds for genetically engineered food. Are we a people who make decisions on hearsay, media stories and beliefs, or on facts? Unfortunately, the media is the message, the facts be dammed.

I do not know the answer to organic foods’ value, but no one has proven any added value yet.

What seems clear is we are spending a lot of money on worthless stuff as people get heavier and heavier. We know obesity causes chronic disease. We should demand that the government declare “War on Obesity”.

Permalink:

How Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett and Jamie Diamond Can Disrupt The Healthcare System

Stanley Feld M.D., FACP,MACE

Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett and Jamie Diamond should try this disruptive approach in their venture into healthcare reform.

All the other approaches that have been tried have not worked or have become unsustainable. Most of the approaches have been unfair to consumers and the majority of taxpaying Americans.

The only way to empower all the consumers in a healthcare system is to encourage them to become responsible for their health and healthcare dollars.

I believe it can only be accomplished by providing easily understandable financial incentives for consumers to save money for themselves.

Providing financial incentives to consumers to save money for themselves can be disruptive to the present models used to pay for medical services just as Amazon has been disruptive to retail sales.

The delivery of medical and surgical care has advanced tremendously in the last sixty years.

At the same time medical care has become unaffordable and the cost of healthcare has become unsustainable.

The incidence of obesity has risen every year. Over fifty percent of Americans are obese.

Obesity begets many chronic diseases and subsequently the complications of these diseases.

Physicians can treat these complications fairly well. However the treatment of chronic disease complications are costly.

How do you decrease the incidence of obesity in America?

Physicians must attack the core causes of obesity.

Among those causes are excess food intake, lack of daily exercise, mental depression, cultural milieu and/or a combination of all of the above.

The cure of obesity depends on the ability to eliminate these core drivers. Financial incentives can get patients involved in eliminating the core drivers of obesity.

The responsibility for obese patients’ healthcare depends on patients’ lifestyle, popular cultural milieu, and patient education.

In America, it is almost impossible to buy a meal in any level restaurant without excess calories.

How do you get people to be responsible for their health and healthcare dollars?

The one key element ignored by policy makers to decrease obesity is to give obese consumers of healthcare financial incentives to concentrate on trying to lose weight.

Obamacare went in the wrong direction. It limits personal liability for their obesity. It does not promote personal responsibility

The only incentive Obamacare provided was the incentive to overuse the healthcare system.

This was especially true for patients on Medicaid. They had zero premiums and deductibles. The only deterrent to accessing medical care was physician availability.

Physicians refused to participate in Medicaid because of low professional reimbursement. Low reimbursement by the government was necessary because of the decreases in funding and participant overuse of the system.

Obamacare planned to cure the shortage of “medical providers” by increasing the number of “valid medical providers” who could bill on their own, such as nurse practitioners and certified physician assistants.

However, the defect there is that patients were not under the supervision of physicians engaged in their care. It ignores the patient physician relationship that is so important to effective medical care.

If Jeff Bezo, Warren Buffet and Jamie Diamond (BBD group) are serious about Repairing the Healthcare System for their employees as a nonprofit organization, they should consider my Ideal Medical Savings Account.

http://stanfeld.com/?s=My+Ideal+Medical+Savings+Account

The Ideal Medical Savings Accounts (MSA) are tax-sheltered accounts used to pay for non-catastrophic medical expenses. These non catastrophic medical expenses account for the bulk of the cost of medical care.

Money left from the Medical Savings Account at the end of the year is put into a consumer’s retirement account.

The MSA provides the financial incentive to not overuse the healthcare system.

Warren Buffet understands the money making potential of re-insurance. He is heavily invested in re-insurance companies.

If one of the BBD Groups employee’s gets sick and spends of all of his MSA money, reinsurance provides first dollar coverage for the illness.

The BBD Group could teach employees how to shop for price and value. Insurance companies are supposed to shop for value. However the shopping is never to the patient’s advantage. It is to the advantage of the insurance company.

 Critics always claim this is unrealistic:

  1. The claim is that patients are not smart enough to shop for price and value. 2. Are you supposed to shop around from the back of the ambulance?

 The critics’ use the ambulance argument to eliminate the possibility of consumers using their own judgment to make price decisions.

Patients are smart enough to figure out which hospital they want to go to before they get into the ambulance.

Emergency care represents only 6% of health care expenditures.

But emergency care represents only 6% of health expenditures.”

“For privately insured adults under 65, almost 60% of spending is on elective outpatient care. “

ttps://www.wsj.com/articles/the-health-reform-that-hasnt-been-tried-1507071808

The critics argument is that consumers do not know how to shop prices. Consumers are smarter than the critics think. It would be easy to teach consumers to shop prices.”

ttp://stanfeld.com/the-failure-of-the-republican-establishment-to-repeal-and-replace-obamacare/

“My Ideal Medical Saving Account provides that financial incentive to not overuse the healthcare system. All the articles about my ideal medical saving accounts are attached to this link.

http://stanfeld.com/?s=My+ideal+Medical+Savings+Accounts

 Likewise, nearly 60% of Medicaid money goes to outpatient care.”

 Medicaid patients also overuse the healthcare system.

Most Medicaid patients can understand the MSA’s financial incentive.

“ For the top 1% of spenders—a group responsible for more than a quarter of all health expenditures—a full 45% is outpatient.”

These patients can be identified as outliers and educational vehicles can be created to decrease this overuse of the system. It would save the re-insurance company a great deal of money.

In my opinion Medical Savings Account are better than Health Savings Accounts. Medical Savings Accounts take the money out of the healthcare insurance company’s hands and deliver it to consumers retirement accounts.

Both HSA’s and MSAs have the unique advantage of providing the financial incentive to for consumers to save money for themselves.

When people have savings to protect in HSAs, the cost of care drops without harmful effects on health. 

 The financial incentives decrease the overuse of the healthcare system.

According to a 2012 study in Health Affairs if even half of Americans with employer-sponsored insurance enrolled in this kind of coverage, U.S. health expenditures would fall by an estimated $57 billion a year.”

 https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hpb20160204.950878/full/

 My ideal Medical Savings Accounts provide an even a greater financial incentive and should decrease costs even further.

“ MSAs should be available to all Americans, including seniors on Medicare. Given that seniors use the most health care, motivating them to seek value is crucial to driving prices lower.”

MSAs should also apply to Medicaid recipients. The details for Medicaid recipients can be found in my article “My Ideal Medical Savings Accounts Is Democratic. “

The maximum contribution to MSAs should be raised to $6000 or $7000 dollars. If a consumer gets sick and experiences a cost of more that $6000 he should receive 100% (first dollar) coverage through the BBD group’s provided reinsurance policy. A reinsurance policy would cost the BBD Group less than $6000 a year.

The total insurance package to BBG Group employees should cost the BBD Group $12,000 rather than the present cost of $18,000.

BBD is a self insured association. The association has elimated the multiple middlemen in the present healthcare system.

 When a person with an MSA dies, the funds should be allowed to roll over tax-free to surviving family members.

This financial incentive should be included in My Ideal Medical Savings Account.

“The information that patients require to assess value must be made more transparent. 

2014 study on magnetic resonance imaging showed that price-transparency programs reduced costs by 18.7%.”

A consumer driven system would force providers to compete for patients. Information on price could easily be provided to consumers by the government and the healthcare insurance industry.

At present healthcare prices are not transparent. Consumers are not motivated to shop prices. The BBD Groups leverage with its employees would force transparency.

“The most compelling motivation for doctors and hospitals to post rates would be knowing that they are competing for price-conscious patients empowered with control of their own money.”

 In this age of technology and rapid communication telemedicine should be promoted and paid for. One way to do it is to permit physicians to practice telemedicine across state lines. It would supply instant access to expertize at an affordable cost.

Everything possible should be done to encourage consumer responsibility and provider competition.

The present tax code does the opposite. Consumers in-group plans provided by large and small corporations receive their healthcare insurance from the corporation with tax-free dollars.

The larger the corporation the more leverage the corporation has for negotiating the premiums with the healthcare insurance companies.

The BBD Groups volume of consumers would have tremendous leverage with providers.

The younger and healthier the corporate employees are the lower the premiums.

The formation of associations with large memberships of all ages would lower the cost of healthcare. Large associations would have great leverage in negotiating price with providers. They would also spread the risk.

Self- insured associations such as the BBD Group would also spread the risk and lower the cost.

Tax deductibility must be given to these “individual” insurance policy holders and association policy holders so they are, in reality, paying for healthcare insurance with pre-tax dollars the same as the corporate group plan policy holders.

These simple changes in the law would result in an affordable healthcare system that was market driven by consumers. The changes would force providers and the healthcare insurance industry to become competitive.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

 All Rights Reserved © 2006 – 2018 “Repairing The Healthcare System” Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

 

Permalink:

What Is Reality?: America Is Heading Toward Financial Disaster

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

The United States cannot afford to provide universal healthcare coverage under a single party payer. The country is in financial difficulty without expanding Medicare.

“Bernie Madoff is small-time compared to the federal government. Really. You want Ponzi schemes? The new Obama-Democrat budget deficit is $1.8 trillion, four times larger than it was only last year. The national public debt has increased by more than 10 percent since Inauguration Day.”

Social Security and Medicare are underfunded entitlement programs. Medicare for the entire country is not viable.

These are the published numbers for 2008.

  • Social Security’s unfunded liabilities stood at $13.6 trillion.
  • Medicare’s unfunded liabilities are more than $30 trillion.
  • Medicaid, another severely underfunded and politically untouchable entitlement program, only adds to the total.
  • The federal government’s current entitlement bill, including future obligations-based only on promises it has made in the past — is greater than $57 trillion.”

The first Baby Boomers started drawing early retirement benefits from Social Security last year.”

78 million people are going to stop working, stop paying taxes, stop paying into retirement programs and start drawing Social Security and Medicare benefits. The federal government has made explicit and implicit promises to millions of retiring citizens. It does not have the funds to keep those promises without a big hike in taxes.

“According to a recent forecast by the Congressional Budget Office shows that Medicare and Medicaid alone are going to crowd out everything else the federal government is doing by mid-century”

In order to get close to funding our current obligations it is estimated that the income tax rate will have to increase to 66%. With all the bailouts and economic stimulus packages the federal government’s debt can only get worse.

Yet the game of who can have better sound bites and who can win is the only thing that is important to President Obama, the healthcare insurance industry, and the Democratic congress.

Healthcare reform should not be about a National Healthcare Insurance Exchange or universal healthcare with a single party payer. This is not going to fix the healthcare system. It will make our financial problems worse. Our government officials should face reality. It should do what all physicians know needs to be done.

It should be passing legislation to create a less polluted environment. It should revise the Farm Bill. It should eliminate the use of corn syrup. It should fight obesity with public service educational campaigns. It should create an insurance product that provides consumers with financial incentives to stay healthy. It should eliminate the causes of administrative waste and defensive medicine. These should be the areas of discussion in order to repair the healthcare system. These bold topics threaten powerful vested interests and are politically explosive.

America should set up a healthcare insurance system that provides incentives consumers to demand better foodstuff and a healthier environment. Consumers should own their healthcare dollars and be able to save what they do not use. (ideal medical savings account).

The federal government should make the conversion to functional electronic medical records easier and less costly to physicians (ideal electronic medical record). We should have major tort reform to decrease the intolerable cost of defensive medical.

These are areas in which the healthcare reform debate should be focused. If the Republican Party wants to seize the initiative from the Democratic Party and excite the citizens of our country they need to act .

Instead, we have a silly debate pitting the new media (Democratic Party) against the old media (Republican Party) over systems we cannot afford. The new media will win. Americans lose no matter which side wins.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

Permalink:

 Changing The Rules: It Is Just The Beginning

 Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP, MACE

A proposal to cut Medicaid payments to some insurers with excessive reserves stirs concern from healthcare insurers.

Progressive politicians refuse to believe that entitlement programs like Medicaid are not viable. Politicians should be looking at creative ways to structure the Medicaid form of insurance for both physicians and patients.

https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2018/01/22/proposal-to-cut-medicaid-payments-to-some-insurers-with-excessive-reserves-stirs-concern-206875

I have not written a blog lately because both the Democrats and the establishment Republicans in both the house and the senate disillusion me. Neither house or senate members are interested in being creative.

Neither body knows how medicine works.

These politicians have no interest in doing what is best for the people who elected them. They are only interested in maintaining power and extending their power over the people they govern.

The result will be to decrease to quality of care to patients forever.

In the meantime there have been news stories on how different corporate organization and big businesses are trying to take over medicine.

Many readers have noticed that emergency clinics are popping up in every city and town.

I believe these emergency clinics centers are in reality real estate plays waiting for so that big corporations, like Aetna; to buy them out in order to expand their plans to take over medical care.

It feels similar to the proliferation of small banks in the 1980’s. These new small banks’ plan was to grow and be bought out at a premium by larger banks in order to enlarge the sale premium.

When the defective program (Medicaid) is a failure one should learn from that failure. One should not continue to try fixes to the program (Medicaid) when each fix creates greater dysfunction.

One should institute another plan that might work. However, government officials continuously apply an additional patch that leads to more unintentional consequences.

This week New York State governor Andrew Cuomo put another patch on its failed Medicaid system. I predict this patch will lead to more unintended consequences. The result will be to make Medicaid coverage worse for its New York State’s Medicaid recipients.

Governor’s Cuomo’s initial mistake was expanding Medicaid at President Obama’s request. He then compounded the mistake by subsequently allowing illegal immigrants in the state to receive Medicaid coverage.

It is not wise to take a financially failed system and expand it. It is much better to change the system.

Now Governor Andrew Cuomo’s budget is proposing to cut Medicaid payments to certain health insurance companies with excess reserves, a move that is alarming insurers because of its intent and its ambiguity.

“The proposal, part of the $168.2 billion executive budget released last week, says that any Medicaid managed care or long-term care Health Maintenance Organization that has excess reserves across all lines of business would be subject to a prospective cut in Medicaid rates.”

 Why would an insurance company want to participate in these programs?

The immediate unintended consequence is that the insurance company that found a defect in the payment schedule for HMO’s and managed care would leave the Medicaid market.

The second unintended consequence is it would discourage companies from having incentive to make a profit.

“Under current law, all Health Maintenance Organizations are subject to minimum reserve requirements,” said Erin Silk, a spokeswoman for the Department of Health. “This policy will provide the commissioner with the discretion to make rate adjustments to plans holding reserves in excess of the statutory requirements for reasons that cannot be explained or justified.”

The state did not project any savings from this proposal.”

The state cannot run Medicaid without insurance companies being the administrative service providers. It is the same old story. This comes on top of a proposed fourteen percent tax on for-profit insurers as well as the state receiving a cut of the proceeds when a nonprofit insurer converts to a for-profit insurer as a result of the new tax law.

Governor Coumo wants this additional money because he thinks the insurance industry is going to have a windfall from President Trump’s new tax law. He figures the state will collect $640 million dollars more as a result of this move.

“There were 3 million New Yorkers enrolled in these types of plans in 2014, according to a report from the United Hospital Fund.”

The insurance industry gave the usual illogical reason for opposing Cuomo’s proposals.

These insurance companies are there to make money. They are not going to let Coumo out of his commitment. I believe they will walk away from providing administrative services for the states Medicaid insurance coverage.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

Please have a friend subscribe

Subscribe in NewsGator Online

Subscribe in Bloglines

Enter your email address:

Permalink:

Consumers Need To Take Back Their Medical Care And Healthcare Dollars

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

A consumer driven healthcare system is the solution to the dysfunctional and unaffordable healthcare system that americans are presently experiencing.

President Trump wants to create the conditions for consumers to take responsibility for their medical care and their healthcare dollars.

The negative noise in the mainstream media should be ignored.

The Obamacare health insurance exchanges have failed. The Democrats and establishment Republicans should realize that the health insurance exchange plan was a defective system that it can not be repaired with patches and more money.

President Trump has signed an executive order to permit private associations to sell insurance. There are many associations that a person could belong too. Consumers could shop for the right association at the right price.

Democrats are behaving as if associations are a foreign enemy.

UnitedHealth has contracted with AARP (an association) to sell Medicare supplemental insurance. UnitedHealth sells this insurance across state lines.

USAA has contracted with Humana to sell Medicare supplemental insurance and Medicare Drug coverage.

There are many supplemental plans that consumers can choose from in these associations. These plans are sold across state lines and are competitive.

The government has to change the tax law to treat individual healthcare insurance plans bought through the associations to be paid for with pre-tax dollars just as the employer sponsored group plans do.

However, associations selling healthcare insurance are only the first step in empowering consumers.

A well-known retired physician (DEF M.D.) sent me his view on what consumers need to be aware of to survive any healthcare system. He calls it

“My Three Rules For Survival”

Remember my three rules for survival:

1) Stay the hell away from doctors.

They always either want to do something or prescribe something, and all too frequently do both.

A large part of this physician reflex is their need to practive defensive medicine. Physicians are afraid they might miss something and get sued.

Major tort reform is necessary in most states. Defensive medicine accounts for $250 billion to $700 billion dollars in unnecessary expenses each year.

I have outlined the steps necessary to remedy the malpractice (tort) crisis and its resulting overuse of testing and medication.

If anyone in President Trump’s administration wants to review the issue in full click on this link.

http://stanfeld.com/?s=Tort+reform

Nobody confronts the reality you mentioned , people are too fat, they drink too much and smoke, AND they don’t even think about the importance of, and benefits from, exercise.

 I started a war on obesity many years ago. Public officials and poly wonks have ignored my suggestions.

It would be worthwhile to read my post about obesity.

http://stanfeld.com/?s=war+on+obesity

The cost to all of us (including them) of all this denial of personal responsibility is huge!  We need to find ways to get people to focus on taking care of themselves, or to create cost incentives that will encourage them to do so.

While you are in this reading mood you should check out my pleas for the importance of patient responsibility.

ttp://stanfeld.com/?s=patient+responsibility

We simply cannot continue on the path we are on. I don’t recall ever seeing a patient on a “scooter”, and many in wheelchairs that are obese, and only getting fatter and fatter over time.

     2) Take as little medicine as you can.

Pharmaceutical manufacturers are continuing to drive up the cost of their products and are making enormous profits as a result.  Data is available re: the necessity of people getting medicines that they don’t really need, especially if taken long term on an ongoing basis.

To that, one can add the cost of unnecessary procedures that often leave patients worse off than they were before.  Direct to the public advertising of prescription medications creates demand that is often unaccompanied by benefit.

More and more current information regarding side effects and late effects of medications need to be provided, and not just put into the “fine print” on the package stuffers.

     3) Stay out of hospitals.

 They are dangerous places, with a high prevalence of patient injuries and deaths due to various sorts of medical errors that occur all too frequently, despite a host of quality improvement projects that are well-intended, but would be better in terms of effectiveness if they were made public on a regular basis.

 Scott Atlas makes good arguments for encouraging patients to “price shop” for services they must have.  To that information should be appended information about outcomes of what is proposed, which could, over time, become both hospital-specific and physician-specific.

I have expanded on Scott Atlas’ Wall Street Journal article in my last blog.

http://stanfeld.com/the-plan-to-empower-consumers-of-healthcare/

Most doctors and most hospitals have not much of a clue as to the outcomes of the services they provide their patients.

And, that is probably plenty for today.  DEF”

Consumers need to be educated to become aware of the many pitfalls involved in their new responsibility.

The educational process can be accomplished with online information and chat sessions. The government could provide the education necessary.

Consumers also need financial incentives to be encouraged to be responsible for their care and their healthcare dollars

This can be accomplished with my ideal medical saving accounts.

http://stanfeld.com/?s=ideal+medical+savings+accounts

Then and only then can we have a consumer driven healthcare system that will lower the cost of healthcare.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

 All Rights Reserved © 2006 – 2017 “Repairing The Healthcare System” Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Please have a friend subscribe

Permalink:

Listen Up: It Is All About Personal Responsibility

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

In my last blog I continued my War on Obesity. I started this war in 2007.

There has been little progress in this war because of cultural conditioning and a lack of emphasis on personal responsibility.

Every New Year’s Day millions of Americans make New Year resolutions to lose weight. They are initially successful. They then regain the weight they have lost.

If America is going to solve the healthcare systems unsustainable cost, it is going to have to solve the increasing Obesity problem.

The National Institute of Diabetes (niddk.nih} recently published Overweight and Obesity statistics:

  “More than two-thirds (68.8 percent) of adults are considered to be overweight or obese.”

 “ More than one-third (35.7 percent) of adults are considered to be obese.”

 “ More than 1 in 20 (6.3 percent) have extreme obesity.”

 “ Almost 3 in 4 men (74 percent) are considered to be overweight or obese.”

Each year the obesity problem gets worse. Companies have sprung up selling weight loss formulas. These companies advertise their great success.

However, most of the iconic personalities used in their advertising have regained their weight after experiencing mild or significant weight loss.

This study was conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

NHANES III was designed to provide nationally representative data to estimate the prevalence of major diseases, nutritional disorders, and potential risk factors.

  • Sixty-three percent of men and 55% of women had a body mass index of 25 kg/m2 or greater.

 

  • A graded increase in the prevalence ratio (PR) was observed with increasing severity of overweight and obesity for all of the health outcomes except for coronary heart disease in men and high blood cholesterol level in both men and women.

 

  • With normal-weight individuals as the reference, for individuals with BMIs of at least 40 kg/m2 and who were younger than 55 years, PRs were highest for type 2 diabetes for men (PR, 18.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.7-46.8)

 

  • Women (PR, 12.9; 95% CI, 5.7-28.1]

 

  •  Gallbladder disease for men (PR, 21.1; 95% CI, 4.1-84.2) and women (PR, 5.2; 95% CI, 2.9-8.9).

 

  • Prevalence ratios generally were greater in younger than in older adults.

 

  • The prevalence of having 2 or more health conditions increased with weight status category across all racial and ethnic subgroups.

 

The Prevalence Ratio of Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes is 18.1 for men and 12.9 for women.

Therefore Type 2 Diabetes is very prevalent in both Obese and Overweight men and women.

 

  • Up to 75% of adults with diabetes also have hypertension, and patients with hypertension alone often show evidence of insulin resistance.
  • Hypertension and diabetes are common, intertwined conditions that share a significant overlap in underlying risk factors (including ethnicity, familial, dyslipidemia, and lifestyle determinants) and complications.
  • These complications include microvascular and macrovascular disorders. The macrovascular complications, which are well recognized in patients with longstanding diabetes or hypertension, include coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, stroke, congestive heart failure, and peripheral vascular disease.
  • Although microvascular complications (retinopathy, nephropathy, and neuropathy) are conventionally linked to hyperglycemia, studies have shown that hypertension constitutes an important risk factor, especially for nephropathy.

Eighty percent of the treatment costs for diabetes and hypertension to the healthcare system is the result of the treatment of the complications of hypertension and diabetes.

In order for a healthcare system to be sustainable diabetes and hypertension must be cured. It is essential that each must be recognized early and treated aggressively.

Patients must be taught to be “the professor of their disease” so they can self-manage the control of their disease. Blood pressures and blood sugar are changing continuously. Patients live with their disease 24/7.

This takes a lot of personal responsibility and personal discipline.

Equally important is the morbidity resulting from the complications of diabetes and hypertension, two diseases that result from obesity.

Complications from the onset of both hypertension and diabetes take about eight years to develop. This is the reason to diagnose and discover Pre-Diabetes at the onset.

  • The shared lifestyle factors in the etiology of hypertension and diabetes provide ample opportunity for non-pharmacological intervention.
  • Thus, the initial approach to the management of both diabetes and hypertension must emphasize weight control, physical activity, and dietary modification.

Lifestyle intervention is remarkably effective in the primary prevention of diabetes and hypertension. These principles also are pertinent to the prevention of downstream macrovascular complications of the two disorders.

This is the where my story of the importance of personal responsibility comes in.

A restaurateur, in his early 50’s, who runs a large restaurant in Dallas, that I frequent, was slowly gaining weight. At 269 lbs. he had difficulty standing on his feet all day long. He was being treated for hypertension and hyperlipidemia (high cholesterol).

His physician told him he must lose weight. He informed him of his risk factors for the complications of these diseases.

This was all he needed hear. The thought of having to quit the job he loved and the possibility of dying from the complications of his diseases was enough to make him decide to loss the weight.

He was told he would be fine if he lost the weight.

He has lost 70 lbs.so far without assistence. He has decided to be personally responsible for his weight loss.

He now gets up at 5 am each morning and exercises for one hour each day before work.

He has stopped eating his wonderful pasta dishes. He eats nothing that is white.

Every time I meet a friend at the restaurant, the restaurateur sits down at our table for a chat. We usually talk about how great he is doing in the weight loss department.

I had initiated an obesity program at Endocrine Associates of Dallas P.A. in the mid 1980s. A California clinical endocrinologist, with whom I did my endocrine fellowship with, had a very successful obesity program. He convinced me to start one at EAD.

Patients on large doses of insulin were totally off insulin after two weeks. It was successful until the patients graduated from the program.

Unfortunately the recidivism rate (regaining weight) was around 80%. This rate was not dissimilar to the national overage at the time.

EAD stopped the program.

In my view there were not enough patients who turned the corner and stuck to the program.

I believe the restaurateur has turned the corner. This fellow has turned the personal responsibility corner to control his food intake and exercise output. I do not believe he will regain his weight.

He has exhibited personal responsibility for his health and well-being.

If only physicians could solve the obesity problem so easily, the cost of healthcare would plummet to sustainable levels.

The development of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus would also plummet and the cost of the treatment of its complications would vanish.

Social change is necessary in restaurants and fast food chains.

People have to be taught to eat wisely in restaurants and at home.

People have to be provided with education about the perils of obesity.

People have to understand the natural history of obesity.

People have to be motivated to not only maintain their health. They have to be given financial incentives to control their health.

This can only be achieved with a consumer driven healthcare system in which people are provided with incentives to control their healthcare dollars.

My ideal medical savings account will provide all the appropriate incentives for all people of all economic levels.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” is, mine and mine alone.

All Rights Reserved © 2006 – 2017 “Repairing The Healthcare System” Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Please have a friend subscribe

 

Permalink:

I Told You What To Do 8 Years Ago: Part 3

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

I told you about all my ideas necessary to repair the healthcare system 8 years ago. None of the ideas have changed

Politicians and their healthcare policy wonks have not implement or supported any of theses ideas. The adoption of Obamacare has made the healthcare system worse.

“The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident, which everybody has decided not to see.”

Any Rand, The Fountainhead

It is a pity that the public votes for people who hold their vested interest and their quest for power above the needs of the people.

It is worse that the traditional media works as a special interest group to support the politicians’ quest for power over the people.

Our government is getting further from the solution to the problems of our healthcare system in order to force consumers to be more dependent on big government and less responsible for themselves.

The end game will be a disaster for Americans, our freedoms and our financial well-being.

My ideas do not support the vested interests of secondary stakeholders. I support consumers’ interest. Many of these secondary stakeholders are abusing the healthcare system. They take advantage of consumers.

The government is one of those secondary stakeholders that cause dysfunction in the healthcare system with its endless regulations.

The government regulations are written to control physicians and patients..

Consumers’ health and their healthcare dollars must be the responsibility of the consumers. A consumer driven healthcare system is the only way to stop the evolving medical care and financial disaster.

This week the progressives in Colorado blew my mind. They want to eliminate Obamacare because it has failed and replace it with a state run single party payer system.

This group has 200,000 signatures to petition that its proposal be put on the 2016 ballot.

In the small print they are proposing a $25 billion dollar tax increase to pay for the proposal.

Obamacare has resulted in increasing the cost and dysfunction of the healthcare care system. The adoption of this single party payer system will make it worse.

I am sure many people in Colorado are unaware of the progressives’ stinking thinking.

However, the petition is the first step in President Obama’s scheme to make thing so bad that the people beg the government to take over the entire healthcare system.

This tactic is right out of Saul Alinsky’s playbook and right up Hillary Clinton’s alley.

Meanwhile, “What Have I Said So Far? Spring 2007 Part 3 is republished below.

Maybe people will start paying attention to what is happening in our healthcare system before it is too late.

For more details on each proposal please click on the links.

“What Have I Said So Far? Spring 2007 Part 3

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP, MACE

 

The following are additional solutions necessary for the Repair of the Healthcare System

Disease management systems can be developed in primary care physicians’ offices because there are not enough specialists to take care of all the patients with chronic disease.

 Treating chronic diseases this way should lower the complication rate for chronic diseases. The result should be a reduction in the cost of healthcare by at least 45%.

 

Measurement of quality should be all of the above. However, the key measurement of quality is the medical outcome as it relates to the financial outcome. If you prevent a $50,000 complication utilizing $1,000 of treatment you have a leveraged financial outcome as well as an excellent medical outcome.

The main question is, “was the complication of the chronic disease avoided?” We are misguided when we start believing that measuring the percentage of our patients we measure cholesterol on, or the percentage of patients on whom we do colonoscopies or bone densities is a measure of quality of care.

It is simply one element of quality medical care and it should not be rewarded as the Pay 4 Performance advocates are suggesting. This thinking makes us vulnerable to another false hope of reducing complications of chronic diseases.

 

  • Increasing obesity in our population is a huge health risk.The government should declare war on obesity. It should strive to eliminate the many stimuli we are exposed to. It should institute a gigantic public media campaign to explain the health risks and the stimuli in society to overeat.

    The most important need is to put the patient in charge of his disease management. The patient must be responsible for his care and in control of his health care dollar. We do not need more schemes destined to fail such as;

the California and Massachusetts mandates. We do not need the Pay 4 Performance scheme that will distort the healthcare system even further.

We need some common sense infused into the development of a healthcare system that is driven by the patients and not the facilitator stakeholder for the purpose of the facilitator stakeholders’ bottom line.

If patients do not want to take care of themselves they will suffer medically and financially.


These are some of the solutions I have proposed. We need the political will and leadership to institute and execute these solutions.

Responsibility for follow up care and compliance must be the patient. The physicians are the teachers educating patients to be experts in their disease self- management.

In the present system the penalty to the patient is bad health. The new system should have a clear message of good health and financial reward. It is much cheaper for all the stakeholders in the long run.

The patient has to;
• Be responsible for the purchase of care.
• Have ready access to care.
• Be responsible for the appropriate adherence to care and medication regime given by the physicians.
• Be rewarded for excellent lifestyle changes and avoidance of complications of disease.

If this is accomplished, and it can be with appropriate leadership and the demand by the consumer, we can repair the healthcare system.”

It is almost past time to start listening and demanding a “consumer driven healthcare system.”

Consumers have Patient Power and do not even know it.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone

 All Rights Reserved © 2006 – 2015 “Repairing The Healthcare System” Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

 Please have a friend subscribe

Permalink:

Confusion About The Ideal Medical Saving Account: Part 2

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Why will President Obama’s Healthcare Reform Plan fail? Medicare and Medicaid have unrelenting increases in its yearly deficits. Both programs as well as the available private health insurance do not provide incentives to consumers or physicians to improve the healthcare system.

Consumers, who have healthcare insurance have been passive until now. “If I get sick my insurance will take care of me.”

As more people get sick they realize they are uninsured.

Therein lies the problem with President Obama’s Healthcare Reform Plan. It forces the consumer to be dependent on the government rather than to be responsible for health and healthcare.

Sometimes patients cannot help it if they get sick. Some illnesses are genetic. Some illnesses are environmental. Many illnesses are preventable.

Healthcare reform should put an emphasis on disease prevention. It should provide incentives for consumers to prevent disease and incentives for physicians to teach patients to avoid complications once they have a chronic disease.

Prevention of the onset of chronic disease and the complications of chronic disease require motivated consumers. It also requires the elimination of environmental hazard that precipitate chronic disease. There are many examples of environmental hazards (air pollution, toxic wastes, cigarette smoking, and obesity to name a few).

Let us take obesity as an example.

Is there any language provided in any of the bills before congress addressing the obesity epidemic?  No, yet obesity predisposes consumers to Type 2 Diabetes and coronary artery disease. Medical care of these two problems cost the nation $400 billion dollars a year.

 

In a March 26, 2008 article in the New York Times, New York City was declared Fat City? Ten (10) million pounds were gained in 2 years according to the April issue of Preventing Chronic Disease, a medical journal published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“About 173,500 adult New Yorkers became obese and more than 73,000 received new diagnoses of diabetes from 2002 to 2004, according to a new study by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Put another way, “the citywide weight gain totaled more than 10 million pounds in just two years,” the city noted in a news release summarizing the study.”

President Obama should be concentrating his efforts on how to motive people to lose weight in order to avoid the onset of Diabetes Mellitus and Heart Disease. He and his healthcare reform team should study my “War on Obesity.”

None of the necessary steps are being taken by the administration to solve Obesity in America. Without a solution to the obesity epidemic, the Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus epidemic will continue and the cost of President Obama’s new entitlement plan will escalate.

How should President Obama motivate people to be responsible for their own care? He should provide incentives. He should propose and enforce regulations that provide consumers with a healthier food environment.

A first step would be to deal with farm subsides that encourage obesity. It can be done. He must also provide effective education to the public to combat obesity. He must provide economic incentives to consumers to exercise and lose weight. This can be accomplished by the ideal medical savings account.

President Obama should become serious about dealing with malpractice reform. The cost of defensive medicine is $750 billion /year. Consumers must be educated to demand tort reform. Defensive medicine would affect the remaining balance in their medical savings accounts. Consumers should be taught to demand an explanation for the tests from their physicians. Consumers could be taught to waive physicians’ liability if there is no good reason for a test. Physicians have not been sued for tests they have done. They have been sued for tested they have not done.

President Obama should be spending money on a system that encourages innovation (the ideal medical savings account) rather than spending and wasting money on a new entitlement for a healthcare system that is broken.

I will repeat my answer to your question. Your employer or the government pays for your ideal medical savings account.  The entire policy (the $6,000 deductible and the $6,000 high deductible policy) remains tax deductible to your employer.

You have the responsibility to use the first $6,000 wisely and remain healthy. If you do not spend it you keep it in a trust account tax free for retirement and not for future healthcare needs. If you use it before you retire you pay ordinary income tax plus a penalty. If you spend more than $6,000 you receive first dollar healthcare coverage.

If you are self employed and qualify for government aid or a subsidy the government pays for healthcare premium. If you are on Medicaid the government remains the payor.

All citizens would have the same healthcare coverage. Everyone would be responsible for their choice of lifestyle. President Obama would instantly have 300 million consumers repairing the healthcare system. It would take major control of the healthcare system out of the healthcare insurance industry’s hands.

Stimulating innovation would decrease the cost of healthcare while insuring everyone. It would improve wellness and quality care.

Expanding an entitlement is not the answer to Repairing the Healthcare System.

 

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.

Permalink:

Public Option vs. Ideal Medical Savings Account: Part 4

 

Stanley Feld M.D.,FACP,MACE

Politicians and healthcare policy makers have not included consumer driven healthcare in the healthcare reform debate. They have not included tort reform in the debate either.

The debate is about a public option. President Obama is going to redefine his meaning of the public option in his message to congress. He will make it sound benign. It will not sound like a government takeover of healthcare. He will omit the details and consequences of the bill.

President Obama must know the government cannot afford a public option. He knows he must control costs somehow. His policy makers believe the only way to control cost is by total government control over the healthcare system. Ultimately the goal is a single party payer system.

This way of thinking about the problem is wrong. Government control does not reduce costs in most projects. It usually increases costs. The President is focused on reducing physicians’ and hospitals’ reimbursement. He believes they are the reason for increasing costs. Medicare has continually decreased reimbursement to physicians and hospitals. Yet costs have increased.

To some extent decreased reimbursement leads to increased utilization but it is not the principle reason for the increase in utilization. A principle reason is an increase in the need to practice defensive medicine. Plaintiff attorneys deny it. The Massachusetts study confirms that defensive medicine leads to a large increase in utilization and costs.

Physicians are an easy target because they are not well organized. The Democrat controlled government is timid about attacking the plaintiff attorneys and tackling tort reform. Defensive medicine results in about a $700 billion dollar a year cost to the healthcare system

Howard Dean said it a few weeks ago. “Congress will not face the issue of tort reform because it does not want to take on plaintiff attorneys.” Consumers can solve this for congress by signing a valid limited liability waiver. Patients can put their own cap on damages. It would not require any courage on the part of congress or the President to face this difficult political issue. All congress and the President have to do is declare the waiver valid.

Texas and California have had the courage to place caps on damages. It has been very successful. If there were caps on damages and they were effective the need for defensive medicine practices would decrease.

The public does not trust congress or the President with control over its healthcare coverage. The public experience with unintended consequences of government control is obvious to all.

Recent examples are the unintended consequences of the bank bailouts, Goldman Sachs bailout, the economic stimulus package promise, the auto bailout, and the war in Afghanistan. All these bailouts are increasing the deficit at the expense of the taxpayers and future generations.

The public mistrusts the healthcare insurance industry as much as it mistrusts the government to control healthcare. The healthcare insurance industry has restricted access to care and rationed care. It has not reimbursed physicians and hospitals in a timely fashion. It has found it is cheaper to pay the negotiated settlement rather the medical bills for its insured.

Nancy Pelosi is right about one thing and only one thing. The real villain is the healthcare insurance industry. However, she does not understand with a public option she is not controlling the healthcare insurance industry fees for administrative services. The government outsources administrative services to the healthcare industry and will still be subject to grotesque administrative services fees.

The healthcare insurance industry has lobbied to change the law to increase co pays to 35-40% of bills so it can lower premiums to affordable levels. Increasing deductibles and lowering premiums would satisfy President Obama’s goal of affordable premiums. At the same time, it will increase the out of pocket cost of medical care for consumers who might need to use their “affordable healthcare insurance.”

The healthcare insurance industry will be forced to offer insurance to consumers with preexisting illness at an affordable cost. Some states have a high risk pool. The premiums in the high risk pools are at least 11/2 times higher than normal premiums and have higher deductibles. High risk patients must be put into the general insurance pool.

There has not been a word in the healthcare reform discussion about patient responsibility for their health. We are in the middle of the worst Obesity epidemic in American history. President Obama should declare a War on Obesity. He should promote legislation that could help eradicate obesity. He should provide patients with financial incentives to eliminate obesity and adhere to prescribed therapy. Obesity is a leading driver of increasing healthcare costs. The costs will only become grater as the obesity epidemic continues.

It is time consumers took control of their own health care dollars and their own health and well being. The defensive medicine/tort reform issue can be solved by consumers. Obesity can be solved with the government rewriting farm subsidies and a substantial public service health campaign to change our eating habits.

A consumer driven healthcare system along with the ideal medical savings accounts could solve many of the healthcare system’s problems without total government control. The government’s job should be to help with educating the public, negotiating prices that are transparent and fair and enforcing regulations to create a level playing field for consumers among the other stakeholders.

The opinions expressed in the blog “Repairing The Healthcare System” are, mine and mine alone.