Why Fast Food Costs Less than Healthy Food

August 10th, 2010

Congress, for years, has been influenced by special interest groups. That’s no surprise to most of us.  However, there is one particular congressional issue that is harming the health of millions of Americans: The Farm Bill. Although, in the past, the Farm Bill was ostensibly meant to help the small American farmer remain competitive in a global market, it has morphed into something entirely different. As a result, health care costs have skyrocketed, and the eating habits of Americans have gone downhill.

When one refers to “The Farm Bill,” it generally encompasses every bill passed by Congress since the 1965 Food and Agricultural Act. These bills have a very important influence on what children are fed in their school lunches. Each bill provides billions of dollars in subsidies – primarily to Corn, Soybean, Meat, and Dairy. On the other hand, fruit and vegetable farmers are given only 1% of the subsidies.

How Farm Policy Affects Public Health Care

The 2006-2007 Annual Report of the President’s Cancer Panel had this to say about the country’s farm policy: “Current agricultural and public health policy is not coordinated—we heavily subsidize the growth of foods (e.g., corn, soy) that in their processed forms (e.g., high fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated corn and soybean oils, grain-fed cattle) are known contributors to obesity and associated chronic diseases, including cancer.”

The result? Our government actively supports unhealthy eating through its subsidies. Corn is turned into high-fructose corn syrup, while meat and dairy provides a low-cost, high-fat staple at below market rates. Ultimately it means that a Big Mac costs less than a healthy salad, which contributes to a nationwide obesity epidemic. At the same time Agribusiness is most profitable producing high-yield feed crops, so the government is also influenced by the big dollars of Big Agriculture.

In 2008, the Fairness in Farm and Food Policy Amendment, would have drastically changed the status quo, but the bill was ultimately defeated because Democrats feared they would lose valuable seats in the 2008 Congressional Elections. It was quashed 117 to 309.

Congress, for years, has been influenced by special interest groups. That’s no surprise to most of us.  However, there is one particular congressional issue that is harming the health of millions of Americans: The Farm Bill. Although, in the past, the Farm Bill was ostensibly meant to help the small American farmer remain competitive in a global market, it has morphed into something entirely different. As a result, health care costs have skyrocketed, and the eating habits of Americans have gone downhill.

When one refers to “The Farm Bill,” it generally encompasses every bill passed by Congress since the 1965 Food and Agricultural Act. These bills have a very important influence on what children are fed in their school lunches. Each bill provides billions of dollars in subsidies – primarily to Corn, Soybean, Meat, and Dairy. On the other hand, fruit and vegetable farmers are given only 1% of the subsidies.

The 2006-2007 Annual Report of the President’s Cancer Panel had this to say about the country’s farm policy: “Current agricultural and public health policy is not coordinated—we heavily subsidize the growth of foods (e.g., corn, soy) that in their processed forms (e.g., high fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated corn and soybean oils, grain-fed cattle) are known contributors to obesity and associated chronic diseases, including cancer.”

The result? Our government actively supports unhealthy eating through its subsidies. Corn is turned into high-fructose corn syrup, while meat and dairy provides a low-cost, high-fat staple at below market rates. Ultimately it means that a Big Mac costs less than a healthy salad, which contributes to a nationwide obesity epidemic. At the same time Agribusiness is most profitable producing high-yield feed crops, so the government is also influenced by the big dollars of Big Agriculture.

In 2008, the Fairness in Farm and Food Policy Amendment, would have drastically changed the status quo, but the bill was ultimately defeated because Democrats feared they would lose valuable seats in the 2008 Congressional Elections. It was quashed 117 to 309.

Induced Labor Doubles Odds Of Having A C-section

July 29th, 2010
Expecting mothers who induce labor are 1/3 more likely to require a c-section, according to a recent study.

Expecting mothers who induce labor are 1/3 more likely to require a c-section, according to a recent study.

Not many mothers look forward to having a c-section. If you’re a first-time mother, and you have your labor induced, you could be upping the odds that you’ll end up having a c-section to deliver your baby. And without affordable family insurance, a first-time mother could find the costs of a C-Section to be much more prohibitive than a traditional delivery.

A study that involved 7,800 first-time mothers, revealed that those mothers whose labor was induced rather than having it start naturally were twice as likely to need the assistance of a c-section to deliver their babies. An estimated 44% of the women in the study had their labor induced. Research data estimated that 20% of those who ended up having a c-section were failed induction attempts.

The rates of women who are having their labor induced are rising as is the number of women who require a c-section. Labor inductions have risen almost 23% as of 2006. In 2007, c-sections were performed on almost 1/3 of all U.S. births.

Read the rest of this entry »

Iraq Faces a Mental Health Epidemic

July 8th, 2010

Imagine if your house was damaged as a result of being bombed in a military war. Now imagine if your house was bombed three times within a matter of years. Or imagine seeing your family and neighbors lying wounded and dying in the street of your hometown. These are the sort of mental health issues that residents of Iraq have to learn to cope with everyday. The question then becomes “Is the country equipped to deal with an epidemic of people who are experiencing mental illness?”

Iraq’s mental health dilemma

Living Conditions in Iraq

According to Iraq’s psychiatric association, Iraq has a mere 100 psychiatrists that must provide mental health care for a population that borders on 30 million [see PDF from World Health Organization]. And, even though the war appears to be winding down, there are more and more citizens of Iraq seeking medical treatment for their mental health issues that are a direct result of the war. The reality is that Iraq’s ability to deal with the onslaught of mental health patients lacks greatly.

As a result of this gross imbalance, Iraqis are turning to self-medication as a means of coping with the trauma they have suffered. Prescription drug abuse is currently the number one substance abuse issue in Iraq, and it grows by the day.

Iraq’s mental health needs on the rise

The country’s largest mental health institution, Al-Rashad, has had an increase of 10 percent in the number of patients, and they’ve had to turn patients away. Al-Rashad is a government-funded facility, and is the only long-term mental health institution in Iraq.

As more and more citizens of Iraq search for help in dealing with their emotional and physical scars, it appears that the mental health community will struggle to find ways to help and accommodate them.

Shortage of Nurses and Doctors Challenge Health Reform

June 30th, 2010

You can’t read a newspaper or a blog these days without reading more depressing news about the economic crisis, but there are some situations where – instead of a slump – business is booming; one of those is the medical school business, where a predicted doctor shortage is seeing many schools expanding to accommodate increased recruitment and enrollment.

Just 25 years ago, experts warned that a surplus of doctors was contributing to rising health care costs due an increase in unnecessary procedures. In response, many medical schools capped enrollment. Now, it seems, the problem is a shortage rather than a surplus.

Physician Shortage Happened Over Years

Warnings of a crisis-level doctor shortage have been abounding for several years, and the apparent crisis is apparently closer than ever. In response, medical schools are expanding with new classrooms, laboratories, and staff. Additionally, new medical schools are under development all over the country, from Michigan to Texas.

Americans over the age of 65 will expand rapidly beyond 2011, eventually burdening the health care system and leading to a high demand for health care workers.

Americans over the age of 65 will expand rapidly beyond 2011, eventually burdening the health care system and leading to a high demand for health care workers.

According to Dr. J. James Rohack, a Texas cardiologist, the reason behind the seemingly contradictory boom of the medical school business is actually fairly logical: The population is expanding, and people are living longer. That means the country’s need for trained and educated medical staff will increase too.

Doctor shortages are already rampant in rural and poor areas, partly because many new graduates choose higher-paying specialties rather than becoming primary care physicians. Medical experts admit that increasing enrolment isn’t necessarily the answer, but that it will help alleviate the problems caused by the shortage.

Nurse Shortages Threaten Health Care Quality Now

The doctor shortage is compounded by a problem that at present is even more of an issue for the healthcare system: a severe nurse shortage that is currently a much greater threat to the quality of healthcare.

The U.S. faces an impending shortage of health care workers - most notably nurses.

The U.S. faces an impending shortage of health care workers - most notably nurses.

It has been estimated that more than 200,000 nursing positions are currently unfilled across the country, and the shortage is expected to get even worse as the baby boom generation hits retirement. The shortage leads to decreased quality of patient care, with an increased risk of delays in healthcare, medical errors, and safety hazards.

Curiously enough, the problem isn’t that there’s a lack of people interested in entering the profession: The problem is that nursing schools simply don’t have the resources and faculty needed to train the number of nurses that the country needs. Thousands of applicants are turned down every year while facilities across the country struggle to fill vacant nursing positions.

Comparing Health Options: Primary Care vs Specialist Care

June 25th, 2010
The American College of Physicians suggests that you opt out of specialist care and go for the primary care physician. Of course, health insurance companies will love for you to do that, too!

The American College of Physicians suggests that you opt out of specialist care and go for the primary care physician. Of course, health insurance companies will love for you to do that, too!

When it comes to choosing between a primary care physician (PCP) or a specialist, you’re often caught between two differing perspectives: 1. You choose the primary care physician for their knowledge of your other conditions, their wide-ranging experience, and their relative low expense when compared to specialists, OR 2. You choose a specialist because of their in-depth understanding of a particular condition and their track record treating a condition. In most cases a PCP will offer personalized health care, while a specialist will generally be less patient-facing.

What does the American College of Physicians suggest? The group believes the feds should pay more upfront for primary care, because doing so would lower costs in the long run by preventing expensive complications and helping patients to avoid hospitalization.

Weighing the Pros and Cons when Making Health Care Choices

Let’s take a look first at the good side to this proposed idea. If more money is given to primary care to begin with, rather than reimbursements later, then people would be getting the best in first-round care right away. Like noted above, this might help stave off the need to even be seen by specialists, if problems are addressed quickly and nipped in the bud before specialists need to step in.

Read the rest of this entry »

COBRA Subsidies Have Expired

June 2nd, 2010

American Unemployment Rate

Bad news if you’re about to become unemployed: COBRA health coverage is no longer cheap. After more than a year of expanded federal subsidies for COBRA, congress allowed the help to expire on June 1st.

In March of 2009, under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, COBRA health coverage costs were cut by 65% with the help of the federal government. This meant that the average family in California only had to pay about $390 for coverage – a far cry from the average cost of around $1,107 before the subsidy (according to a Families USA study).

Now that COBRA help has expired, you’re left with two options for individual or family health insurance:

  1. Pay the full cost of COBRA coverage – which is basically the same coverage you received from your previous employer when you worked with them. However, now that the subsidy has expired, you will need to pay the full cost – which currently averages around $1,100 for a family.
  2. Opt for an affordable alternative to COBRA. You can request a free quote for health insurance here to see if you can save money with a private alternative.

COBRA Insurance Extension “Unlikely”

Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis said in a statement that “if the [COBRA] extension is not approved immediately, millions of Americans could lose the safety-net programs they deserve and desperately need.” Unfortunately, congress is in a cost-cutting mood, so they’re not likely to extend COBRA subsidies.

CNN estimates that nearly 10 million people are collecting unemployment insurance, and 46% of the 15.3 million jobless Americans have remained unemployed for six months or longer. Despite a comprehensive health reform bill, COBRA coverage remains as expensive as it always has been, and the government is no longer willing to subsidize its costs.

Coordinating Care and Insurance Affordability

May 24th, 2010
Pills

Coordinated Health Care

In a recent article released by the Wall Street Journal’s Health Blog, it was noted that a study in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) found that the newer theory of “coordinating care” just doesn’t save patients money. What is coordinating care? The WSJ article describes it this way: “Get a nurse or another health professional to keep track of treatments and doctor visits for patients with complex, chronic diseases such as diabetes or heart disease. The coordinator should communicate with doctors and help the patients keep on top of things like their drug regimens. Then the patients won’t end up with as many costly hospitalizations.”

Now that we know coordinating of care doesn’t reduce health care and insurance costs, are there other things that we should be taking into consideration here? Read on to see what this study looked at and what implications it has.

Read the rest of this entry »

Health Insurance a Large Concern for Small Businesses

May 14th, 2010

Small Business

During a Committee meeting, Michael Beene, a senior health adviser for the National Association for the Self-Employed (NASE) shared that small businesses are ending up spending 5.5% of their total sales on health insurance. What’s worse: That figure has increased by almost 50% since 2005.

How is the Economy Effecting Insurance for Small Businesses Now?

“The escalation of health costs is most strongly felt by solo practitioners, who are spending more of their total sales on health insurance compared to three years ago,” Beene told lawmakers. “With such a large percentage of revenues going to health coverage, we can see why this expenditure is one of the first to be decreased or cut when business owners are faced with hard economic times.”

The way things stand right now, a sole proprietor cannot fully deduct their health insurance costs come tax time. Employees and business owners pay for their health care with pre-tax dollars, while a sole proprietor simply can’t do it. These self-employed business owners experience the 15.3% tax on their self-employed health insurance premiums.

There is a glaring inequality seen here, and it simply encourages employees to work for larger firms so they can easily have access to health insurance; it also encourages small business owners to withhold insurance, because they simply can’t afford to pay the taxes to provide it.

Will our country eventually begin pushing out small businesses, because employees are migrating to larger businesses who can provide health care? Will it eventually be small business owners standing alone against big corporations? I certainly hope not. This country was founded and built on the entrepreneurial spirit, and squashing it would be a great crime. Among all of the other things it is facing, this new administration needs to look at tax relief for small businesses so they can have health insurance not only for themselves but for the employees who help their businesses run.

So what options are available to small business owners even before changes in the structure take place? Doing your research and getting clear on what will and won’t work for your business is a crucial step in getting or maintaining your small business health insurance. You can also request a quote, right here, at Affordable-Health-Insurance.com

A Look at Department of Health Head Kathleen Sebelius

April 12th, 2010

P1020318The torch of the state of the United States health care system has been passed, and it has been passed to Kansas Govenor Kathleen Sebelius. A Democrat, Sebelius was President Obama’s second choice for the position, and she received the call to duty after the first choice, Tom Dachle, withdrew his name after revelations about his sticky unpaid taxes. The nomination came during the first week of March in 2009, and Sebelius said it was a responsibility that she could not refuse. Who is this new face in Obama’s administration, and how will she go about tackling one of the largest crises facing our country right now?

Who is Kathleen Sebelius?

Barn - Clinton, Kansas

Sebelius was most recently the 44th Governor of the state of Kansas, and is only the state’s second female Governor. She has been in Kansas politics since 1986, when she was first elected to the Kansas House of Representatives. In 1994, she became the 1st Democrat in 10 years to win the position of state insurance commissioner. She’s no stranger to health insurance and health care issues either-she wouldn’t take any campaign contributions from insurers and blocked a proposed merger of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas with an Indiana-based company. It was the first time in the corporation’s history that any attempts at acquisitions hadn’t been allowed. In 1995, Time magazine named her one of the five best governors in Americans, noting that she had successfully been able to eliminate the $1.1 million that she had inherited upon taking office, getting rid of waste in the state government and supporting public education. All of this was done without raising taxes.

What Health Issues Are at Hand?

Wrong Way Go BackFortunately for Sebelius, things can’t get much worse than they are right now. That probably isn’t much of a comfort to her though, as the task she’s facing is definitely a formidable one. With the health care and health insurance system struggling with people getting turned away left and right for insurance, and the sick not being able to afford the care they need, things are in dire need of a drastic makeover. President Obama has said that he plans to release $155 million out of the $787 billion economic stimulus package to support 126 new health centers to give people more access to primary and preventative health care services. Many people have been comparing the changes Obama is gearing up for in the health care industry to those attempted by the Clinton administration, but the key difference is this: the recession America is in has everyone calling for change, no matter how radical it may have seemed years ago. Time will only tell how Sebelius is able to handle the massive task that lies ahead, but putting money toward opening new care centers is a good start. A good question to ask is: Are these centers aimed at only serving those who currently carry health insurance, or will they just be public service centers in which all comers can receive proper medical and attention?

I certainly hope it’s the latter, because with many people continuing to lose jobs and unable to afford health insurance, the unemployed need all the support they can get.

Creative Commons License photo credit: ProgressOhio