Showing posts with label business of healthcare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label business of healthcare. Show all posts

Dec 13, 2024

More Shitty Healthcare Tricks

Ignoring (ie: normalizing) this kind of shitty corporate behavior is how we get to the point where people start to think it's OK to eliminate the "undesirables".



UnitedHealth Is Strategically Limiting Access to Critical Treatment for Kids With Autism

Secret Playbook:
Leaked documents show that UnitedHealth is aggressively targeting the treatment of thousands of children with autism across the country in an effort to cut costs.
Critical Therapy:
Applied behavior analysis has been shown to help kids with autism; many are covered by Medicaid, federal insurance for poor and vulnerable patients.
Legal Questions:
Advocates told ProPublica the insurer’s strategy may be violating federal law.

There was a time when Sharelle Menard thought her son would never be able to speak. She couldn’t soothe Benji when he cried, couldn’t read him books he could follow, couldn’t take him out in public. “The screaming, and screaming, and screaming,” she said. “He would get so frustrated because he couldn’t communicate.”

Benji was nearly 3 when he was diagnosed with severe autism and soon after started a specialized therapy to help him develop basic skills. After two years in treatment, his murmuring gave way to small words, with “bubbles” among the first. To celebrate, Menard powered up a bubble machine she found at the dollar store, and for hours, they watched the iridescent orbs drift over their porch.

Menard, who is raising Benji alone in south-central Louisiana, began to picture a future for her son that diverged from the stories she’d heard about some kids with similar diagnoses, who grew up still unable to manage their frustrations and had to live in nursing homes or institutions.

But now, she’s worried again.

The insurer that has been paying for her son’s therapy, UnitedHealthcare, has begun — to the befuddlement of his clinical team — denying him the hours they say he requires to maintain his progress. Inside the insurance conglomerate, the nation’s largest and most profitable, the slashing of care to children like Benji does have a reason, though it has little to do with their needs. It is part of a secret internal cost-cutting campaign that targets a growing financial burden for the company: the treatment of thousands of children with autism across the country.

ProPublica has obtained what is effectively the company’s strategic playbook, developed by Optum, the division that manages mental health benefits for United. In internal reports, the company acknowledges that the therapy, called applied behavior analysis, is the “evidence-based gold standard treatment for those with medically necessary needs.” But the company’s costs have climbed as the number of children diagnosed with autism has ballooned; experts say greater awareness and improved screening have contributed to a fourfold increase in the past two decades — from 1 in 150 to 1 in 36.

So Optum is “pursuing market-specific action plans” to limit children’s access to the treatment, the reports said.

“Key opportunities” are outlined in bullets in the documents. While acknowledging some areas have “very long waitlists” for the therapy, the company said it aims to “prevent new providers from joining the network” and “terminate” existing ones, including “cost outliers.” If an insurer drops a provider from its network, patients may have to find a new clinician that accepts their insurance or pay up to tens of thousands of dollars a year out of pocket for the therapy. The company has calculated that, in some states, this reduction could impact more than two-fifths of its ABA therapy provider groups in network and up to 19% of its patients in therapy.

Internal company documents reveal the strategy by Optum, a UnitedHealth Group subsidiary, to prevent ABA providers from participating in its network. Credit:Obtained by ProPublica
The strategy targets kids covered through the company’s state-contracted Medicaid plans, funded by the government for the nation’s poorest and most vulnerable patients. To manage Medicaid benefits, states often pay private insurers a fixed amount of funds per patient, regardless of the frequency or intensity of services used. When companies spend less than the allotted payment, they are typically allowed to keep some or all of what remains, which federal investigators and experts acknowledge may be incentivizing insurers to limit care.

United administers Medicaid plans or benefits in about two dozen states and for more than 6 million people, including nearly 10,000 children with autism spectrum disorder. Optum expects to spend about $290 million for ABA therapy within its Medicaid plans this year, and it anticipates the need increasing, documents show. The number of its Medicaid patients accessing the specialized therapy has increased by about 20% over the past year, with expenses rising about $75 million year-on-year.

So Optum — whose parent company, UnitedHealth Group, earned $22 billion in net profits last year — is “heavily investing” in its plan to save millions by limiting access to such care.

In addition to culling providers from its network, the company is scrutinizing the medical necessity of the therapy for individual patients with “rigorous” clinical reviews, which can lead to denials of covered treatment. Optum has developed an “approach to authorizing less units than requested,” the records state.

Mental health and autism experts and advocates reviewed ProPublica’s findings and expressed outrage over the company’s strategy. Karen Fessel, whose Mental Health and Autism Insurance Project helps families access care, called the tactics “unconscionable and immoral.”

“They’re denying access to treatment and shrinking a network at a time when they clearly know that there is an urgent need,” she said.

United and Optum declined a request ProPublica made more than a month ago for an on-the-record interview about their coverage of behavioral health care. They have not answered questions emailed 11 days ago, citing the Dec. 4 killing of UnitedHealthcare’s CEO as the reason. In an email, a spokesperson said “we are in mourning” and could not engage with a “non-urgent story during this incredibly difficult moment in time.” Offered an additional day or two, the company would not agree to a deadline for comment.

Benji, who is now 10, requires 33 hours of weekly therapy to be able to progress, his therapists have concluded. They have documented the consequences of having even a few hours less: toppled furniture, scratched-up classroom aides, a kid in unremitting tears, unable to learn. But in a letter to Menard, Optum said it was refusing to pay for the full hours, stating that her son had been in therapy for too long and was not showing enough progress to ultimately graduate from it.

“Your child still has a lot of difficulty with all autism-related needs,” Optum wrote. “Your child still needs help, but it does not appear that your child will improve enough to end ABA.”

The response confounded experts who spoke with ProPublica, who said such an approach misunderstands the long-term nature of his condition. “Challenges that often come with autism shouldn’t be looked at like an injury that you’re going to get better from quickly and then the treatment can stop,” said Christa Stevens, who directs state government affairs for the advocacy group Autism Speaks. “Treatment may still be medically necessary even if it’s for skill maintenance or the prevention of regression.”

The company’s denial also appears to contrast with recent professional guidelines for the therapy — which are cited as a reference in Optum’s own clinical criteria — that state “there is no specific limit on the duration of a course of treatment.”

The appropriate duration of treatment, according to those standards and experts interviewed by ProPublica, should be based on the patients’ needs, as evaluated by the clinicians working directly with the patients.

“This is a very blunt instrument to chase after excessive costs,” said Tim Clement, the vice president of federal government affairs at the nonprofit group Mental Health America.

Several advocates told ProPublica the company’s strategy is legally questionable.

The federal mental health parity law requires insurers to provide the same access to mental health and physical care. As ProPublica recently reported, United has gotten in trouble in the past for targeting therapy coverage in a way that violates the law; while denying the allegations, it agreed to a multimillion-dollar settlement. It continues to use arbitrary and one-size-fits-all thresholds to scrutinize its therapy claims, ProPublica previously found.

It would raise legal questions if the company restricted ABA more stringently than comparable physical care, the advocates said.

“Medicaid managed care organizations are subject to the parity act,” said Deborah Steinberg, a senior health policy attorney with the nonprofit advocacy group Legal Action Center. The company may be violating Medicaid regulations, she said, which require managed care organizations to maintain networks sufficient to provide covered services to all enrollees.

Last year, the federal government formally affirmed that ABA therapy is a protected benefit, and it recently investigated health plans for entirely excluding its coverage; legislators have passed laws in every state requiring insurance companies to pay for it.

“Yes, this therapy can be expensive,” said Dan Unumb, an attorney and president of the Autism Legal Resource Center. “But solving the problem by denying kids access to medically necessary care is a terrible solution.”

“What Happens if We Withdraw the Care?”

Benji was making progress about three years ago.

For more than 33 hours a week in the specialized therapy, his clinicians broke down the learning process into basic steps, using repetition and positive reinforcement to affirm behaviors. The state’s Medicaid contractor, UnitedHealthcare, covered the bill.

Researchers have found that about a quarter of kids diagnosed with autism are severely affected; these children are often minimally or non-speaking or require extensive assistance for basic daily needs. “Things a lot of people take for granted,” said Menard. While experts continue to debate which therapies are most effective and appropriate for these kids, ABA is one of the most widely recommended.

By 7, Benji had accumulated a few dozen words, and his aggressive, prolonged tantrums had grown less frequent, allowing his mother to take him grocery shopping and to mass on Sundays. It was time for him to go to school, she thought.

Menard enrolled him in their public school district, St. Martin Parish. He attended Breaux Bridge Primary twice a week in a special education classroom and continued therapy the other days. Menard urged the district to allow a therapeutic technician to shadow him in school, but it refused. (The district declined to respond to ProPublica’s questions, citing privacy restrictions.)

With the diminished hours of treatment, Benji grew increasingly disruptive. “It was a disaster,” said Menard. He snapped a swing in gym class and struggled to sit still during lessons. When teachers tried to give him instructions, he hit them. His speech plateaued and eventually regressed.

Menard, who cleans pools for a living, grew to fear the moment her phone rang. School employees, unable to soothe Benji’s tantrums, frequently called her to take him home. One morning last spring, they told her Benji had lashed out when an aide tried to persuade him to work, aggressively poking their hand with a pencil. He hadn’t broken the skin, but after a dozen incidents, the situation was becoming unsalvageable. The district made her sign a behavioral contract, his second in two years: If Benji didn’t behave, he could be suspended or expelled.

Menard felt she had no choice but to withdraw Benji. She enrolled him full time in a home-study program run by his therapy group, Aspire Behavioral Health Center in Lafayette, which costs about $10,000 a year in tuition, a substantial portion of her paycheck. That was in addition to the therapy cost, which his insurance still covered.

Benji’s clinicians determined he needed direct support for most of the day and told Optum they wanted him to scale up his therapy from 24 hours a week to 33. They expected the insurer would approve the request; after all, it was less than what was previously covered and only nine hours more than it was currently paying for.

But Optum denied the increase in a letter to Menard this past May. “Your child has been in ABA for six years,” the insurer wrote. “After six years, more progress would be expected.”

The response disturbed Whitney Newton, Benji’s behavior analyst and a clinical director at Aspire; it didn’t seem rooted in the established medical standards for the treatment. She’d seen firsthand how critical the therapy had been to his growth. “We know what he needs. It’s in our scope of practice and it’s our right as the provider to determine that,” she said. “They’re cutting and denying an unethical amount.”

Newton has worked with Benji since he was 3. Credit:Annie Flanagan, special to ProPublica
The center’s founder, psychologist Joslyn McCoy, has grown accustomed to battling insurers. Her practice serves about 160 patients between the ages of 2 and 19 across five centers, and many have Medicaid coverage. In 2022, Louisiana expanded its Medicaid parameters, allowing parents with higher incomes to access coverage for children with complex medical needs.

“What I’m seeing is that children now have this ticket to access this care, but then once they go to try to access it, it’s being denied,” she said.

Nearly two years ago, Optum selected her center for a payment integrity audit, demanding to inspect its clinical and billing records. After her team turned over thousands of pages of documentation, Optum conducted a separate in-person quality review.

Internal company records show Optum is targeting ABA providers for scrutiny based on how much they invoice and how many services they provide. Groups like McCoy’s can be flagged for patterns that providers told ProPublica are typical in the delivery of ABA therapy: billing on weekends or holidays, serving multiple family members in one practice, having long clinician or patient days, providing an “above average delivery” of services, or abruptly increasing or decreasing the number of patients or claims.

McCoy said that a company executive who visited her office for the quality review told her that she approved of the center’s work and thought Aspire should expand across the state.

But Optum has continued to challenge her patients’ individual therapy claims.

When her team received the denial for Benji’s care, McCoy set out to gather hard evidence to demonstrate the necessity of his treatment. “It’s what we call a reversal to baseline, where we will withdraw the treatment for a short period of time,” McCoy said. “The reason is to demonstrate what happens because we’re curious, too: What happens if we withdraw the care?”

Much of the therapy is driven by positive reinforcement; for example, if Benji pays attention and engages in his academic exercises, he can take a break to play on his iPad. But the reward is contingent on him not hitting anyone for at least 10 minutes at a time. During the experiment, the clinicians took away the possibility of his reward, and without an incentive, they had limited leverage to manage his behavior.

At first, Benji lightly hit the staff, they said, as though testing the limits. But when there was no response to his behavior, it began to escalate. He tossed chairs and flipped tables. He pushed Newton into a bookshelf, which collapsed to the ground. He hit walls and windows, eventually turning his fists on his aide. They stopped the experiment early, both for his safety and theirs.

Once they resumed the interventions, Benji was able to calm down.

Newton drafted a report, including line charts that quantified his behavior with and without the interventions and photographs of her team’s injuries. She faxed it to Optum, asking the company to reconsider the denial.

The insurer did not change its decision.

“The Need Is Not Going Away”

Last month, inside a cubicle decorated with posters of Minions and Mario Brothers, a behavior technician placed a laminated card with an image of a sneaker in front of Benji.

“What is this?” she asked him.

Benji paused, rubbing the edge of his baseball cap and pursing his lips. “Sh,” he said, stuck on the consonant.

“Shoes, that’s right,” the technician responded. She pulled out another card, showing a slice topped with white frosting. “Is this cake?”

“No,” Benji said.

“Is this cake?” she repeated, before adding, “yes.”

“Yes,” echoed Benji, but her correction appeared to frustrate him. He hit the technician on the leg, softly but with determination.

“We’ll let it go,” she warned with a sugared voice, “but hands to self, OK?”

After 10 minutes, a timer beeped. It was time for Benji’s reward, getting to hear a reggaeton hit by Daddy Yankee. “It’s a big reinforcer here,” Newton said.

Even though Optum denied the additional hours of treatment, Benji has continued to receive them. “We’re giving the hours even if they were not approved,” McCoy said. “We don’t think it would be safe for him to do what the insurance is saying.”

Next month, a state administrative law judge will hear an appeal for the additional hours. If the request is approved, Benji’s clinicians will be paid for the six months of services that they’ve provided without reimbursement.

Even if that happens, their battle with the insurer will go back to square one. Each insurance authorization typically lasts for only six months, and soon after the hearing date, the clinicians will have to request coverage for his treatment again.

They will be doing so at a time when internal records show Optum has deployed more than 90 “care advocates” to question clinicians about the medical necessity of their patients’ ABA treatment, using “quality initiatives to decrease overutilization and cost.”

Optum is focusing on states whose Medicaid plans yield the highest costs for ABA therapy, including Arizona, Nebraska, Tennessee, Virginia, New Jersey, Indiana and Louisiana, where Menard and her son live. ProPublica reached out to the state Medicaid programs with questions about their oversight of United’s practices. Arizona’s Medicaid agency told ProPublica that all managed care organizations, including United, are required to provide timely services within their networks, and that the agency has been closely monitoring ABA networks. (Read its full response.) No other state Medicaid agencies responded to ProPublica’s questions.

Autism experts said such a strategy may not only be harmful to children, it could also ultimately be more expensive for states, as children age and require more intensive services, like residential or nursing care.

“If these kids get the intervention they need as children, then there will be tremendous cost savings over the course of their lives,” said Lorri Unumb, an attorney and CEO of the Council of Autism Service Providers.

Menard worries about what will happen to her son’s hard-fought gains if he can’t get the level of therapy he needs. And even if the additional nine hours are approved, she fears that with the next authorization, they could face a more drastic denial that could be challenging to overturn.

“This motivation and momentum — when you lose that,” she said, “it’s so hard to get it back.” She doesn’t believe that Benji needs to be fixed or cured or changed from who he is. She just hopes the therapy helps him to be better able to advocate for himself and, ultimately, be safe. “There’s nothing else that I’ve known to work,” she said.

McCoy resents being put in the position of scaling back care that her patient needs because an insurer is refusing to pay. “It puts us in a tough place, because we don’t want to discontinue therapy of our client who’s not ready,” she said.

When such denials become common, it disincentivizes clinicians from working with insurance companies, she said, and can ultimately drive clinics into the ground. “The patients can’t afford it,” she said, “so eventually the private provider goes out of business.”

But even if children like Benji get pushed out of treatment, there is no shortage of children seeking care. McCoy’s center currently has a waitlist of about 260 children.

How UnitedHealth’s Playbook for Limiting Mental Health Coverage Puts Countless Americans’ Treatment at Risk

That list may likely expand. Internal documents show Optum is aiming to exclude from its network about 40% of Louisiana groups that offer ABA therapy. About 1 in 5 children whose treatment is covered by the company's Medicaid plan in the state could lose access to care.

“If the insurance company wants to deny all of our clients, we’re going to replace them,” she said. “The need is not going away.”

Dec 10, 2024

The Shooter Speaks


Luigi Mangione's "manifesto".

“To the Feds, I'll keep this short, because I do respect what you do for our country. To save you a lengthy investigation, I state plainly that I wasn't working with anyone. This was fairly trivial: some elementary social engineering, basic CAD, a lot of patience. The spiral notebook, if present, has some straggling notes and To Do lists that illuminate the gist of it. My tech is pretty locked down because I work in engineering so probably not much info there. I do apologize for any strife of traumas but it had to be done. Frankly, these parasites simply had it coming. A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy. United is the [indecipherable] largest company in the US by market cap, behind only Apple, Google, Walmart. It has grown and grown, but as our life expectancy? No the reality is, these [indecipherable] have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit because the American public has allwed them to get away with it. Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument. But many have illuminated the corruption and greed (e.g.: Rosenthal, Moore), decades ago and the problems simply remain. It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play. Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.” 

Dec 7, 2024

Today's Reddit


Things haven't changed much. My experience was eerily similar when my mom died - in 1986.

We need something a lot better than this shit.

I don't know what the system needs to be, or look like, or whatever, but we have to come up with something. And whatever it is, it needs to be without the blood-sucking rent-seekers.

Healthcare insurance companies gotta go.

Posted by u/Pattyxpancakes this is so fucking depressing. Fuck US healthcare
byu/Liverpool_Fan_06 infacepalm

Dec 5, 2024

Followup

Here's a weird-ish little something that tags along after that healthcare CEO got popped in NYC.


People will only be pushed so far.


Apr 4, 2024

Profit-Taking Is The Norm

Smaller companies - the ones producing about 3% of the industry's revenue - came out with more than half of the new drugs.

While the big dogs - the ones raking in 86% of the revenue - produced only 36% of the new drugs.



Opinion
No, Big Pharma’s high prices don’t drive innovation

This year, for the first time, a handful of prescription drug manufacturers will negotiate with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services over how much taxpayers will pay for their costly drugs. Big pharmaceutical companies have long argued that such price negotiations will lower their profits, reducing their ability to innovate. But is that true?

Not according to an analysis we published at our think tank, the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity. Our research shows that the biggest drug companies largely fail to turn their enormous profits into discoveries. Instead, most innovation is taking place at small, unprofitable start-ups, whose drugs are largely excluded from Medicare’s new price negotiation system. When it comes to pharmaceutical innovation, smaller is better.

For our analysis, we reviewed 428 recent drug approvals by the Food and Drug Administration and surveyed financial data from more than 4,000 pharmaceutical and biotech companies. We found that large companies, defined as those with more than $10 billion in annual sales, produced 86 percent of the industry’s revenue but that only 36 percent of the drugs approved by the FDA. By contrast, emerging start-ups with less than $500 million in annual sales or less than $200 million in annual R&D spending produced 3 percent of the industry’s revenue but discovered more than half of all newly approved drugs.

You’d think that the biggest drug companies with the biggest R&D budgets would have the most productive research labs. But it doesn’t work that way.

Large companies tend to be bureaucratic, risk-averse and much more focused on increasing profits from their existing drug product lines. That’s partly because their largest and most influential shareholders care more about quarterly returns than long-term success. As a result, big companies overinvest in low-quality but “safe” ideas and underinvest in better but risky ones.

By contrast, smaller companies are nimbler and can better attract top scientific talent. The most creative scientists work at start-ups where they often have more freedom. Start-ups also let them generate far more wealth through stock options rather than through modest year-end bonuses at behemoths like Eli Lilly or AstraZeneca.

If large companies’ labs are so unproductive, you might ask, why are so many of the world’s top-selling drugs manufactured by bigger companies? Because of the FDA’s high regulatory costs. Smaller companies can’t always afford to conduct the large billion-dollar clinical trials required for approval. As a result, big companies treat emerging start-ups like their farm team, buying off their best drugs, raising their prices and reaping the profits.

Don't start thinking those high regulatory costs are always just unfortunate happenstance. Sometimes, the big companies lobby extra hard for costly regulation, in order to keep the smaller guys down, and make it easier for themselves to buy properties (eg: drug patents) at a bargain price.

And don't forget the billions in federal government research grants and subsidies funded through NIH.

US Tax Dollars Funded Every New Pharmaceutical in the Last Decade 

The good news is this is beginning to change. Emerging companies are increasingly taking their best drugs to market by themselves. In 2013, only 23 percent of successful drugs developed by emerging companies reached FDA approval under the original developer. By 2022, that share increased to 75 percent. If this trend continues, patients will benefit from a more competitive and diverse ecosystem of drug developers.

Opponents of drug-price negotiation on Wall Street and in Silicon Valley have no problem with large multinationals gobbling up smaller companies. Mergers and acquisitions, they argue, enable investors in those smaller companies to generate quicker returns, incentivizing further investment in start-ups.

But investors also make money if start-ups take their innovations all the way to market. In fact, over the long term, investors can make more money if start-ups become multibillion-dollar success stories rather than selling out at an earlier stage for lower acquisition prices. A more diverse ecosystem of successful, profitable biopharmaceutical companies will lead to more innovation, not less.

The drug negotiation provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act were designed with these considerations in mind. The law exempts from its process any drug representing more than 80 percent of a company’s sales to the Medicare program, effectively excluding emerging start-ups with one FDA-approved medicine.

And more affordable medicines benefit all Americans, not just seniors in Medicare, because all taxpayers fund the program through payroll taxes.

That’s why President Biden has proposed expanding Medicare price negotiations from 20 drugs a year to 50, a reasonable idea that would reduce the federal deficit and Medicare premiums. People often think the only way to make Medicare sustainable is to raise taxes or cut benefits. But reducing what Medicare must pay for the care seniors receive can also help accomplish this goal.

We can do other things to lower drug prices while protecting innovation. First, we can eliminate the Inflation Reduction Act’s punitive tax for companies that refuse to negotiate with the Medicare program. In a true negotiation, manufacturers should have the right to walk away from Medicare. They rarely will, given the value of Medicare’s 65-million-person market, but the right to do so will incentivize Medicare to negotiate in good faith.

Second, we can reduce red tape at the FDA and enable more drugs to reach patients after compelling midstage clinical trials. We already do this for cancer and HIV, and there’s no reason we shouldn’t do it for chronic diseases when scientifically appropriate.

The real barrier to innovation in drug development isn’t manufacturers’ ability to charge extortionate prices; it’s the ever-increasing cost of navigating the FDA’s approval process. In the rest of the economy, innovation drives lower prices for valuable goods and services. The pharmaceutical industry — and its regulator — should follow suit.

Aug 26, 2021

Today's Tweet



Life here in good ol' USAmerica, Inc.


 

Apr 29, 2020

Long Term Shit

Making the COVID-19 tests free didn't make them any more accessible.

I'm still not able to get tested if I'm not symptomatic.

Turns out that for a whole bunch of my fellow humans here in USAmerica Inc, another effect of this whole thing is that we've been forced to see that too many folks won't go in for the test even if they are symptomatic for fear of finding out they're in need of hospitalization - which makes them even more fearful that they can't afford to be cared for.

(yeah, it's The Independent, but still) Independent:

Around one in seven Americans would not seek medical if they developed a fever or dry cough because of concerns over costs, a new poll has found.

It suggests that almost 35 million people might avoid seeing a doctor for the symptoms, which are known manifestations of Covid-19.

The new poll was conducted by Gallup and non-profit organisation West Health and published on Tuesday. It further found that 9 per cent of people would avoid healthcare even when the question was “framed explicitly as believing [they] have been infected by the novel coronavirus“.

May 1, 2019

Back Off, Lady

Social media is a good thing - when it's a platform for good things to be done.

CNN:

About 1,700 decks of cards have been delivered to the office of a Washington state senator who said nurses "probably play cards for a considerable amount of the day," the senator said in a statement Wednesday.

Republican state Sen. Maureen Walsh apologized on Monday after facing a backlash for comments she made debating a bill, HB 1155, that would provide uninterrupted meal and rest breaks and mandatory overtime for nurses and certain health care employees.
Walsh said last Tuesday on the senate floor, "By putting these types of mandates on a critical access hospital that literally serves a handful of individuals, I would submit to you those nurses probably do get breaks. They probably play cards for a considerable amount of the day."

An open letter posted by Facebook user Shy Braaten called for people to send a deck of cards to the senator, and included her PO Box.

The letter reads, "I don't know any nurses who play cards, Senator Walsh. I know nurses who care for babies who were born with their spines on the outside of their bodies and brains that won't stop bleeding. I know nurses who hold infants that can't stop crying because they were born addicted to heroin and methamphetamines."

The letter is signed, "One of the millions of people who love a nurse."

Walsh issued a lengthy statement on Monday apologizing and said, "I was tired, and in the heat of argument on the Senate floor, I said some things about nurses that were taken out of context -- but still they crossed the line."


Gotta love the bullshit these "conservative" assholes are always willing to shovel when they issue the non-apology-apology for having said things that reveal what they really think: "...taken out of context..." - and - "...in the heat of the moment..."

If we check her donor list, do you suppose we might find a check from the hospital business group that stands to lose leverage over their nursing staff if things change a bit?

Maureen Walsh is too fucking typical of the system of Coin-Operated Politicians that we're allowing to kill our democracy.

https://ecuactionfund.org




Jul 22, 2018

Today's Tweet



And back we've gone - to the good old days - when men are men, and people suffer and die because they can't afford treatment for easily-manageable conditions - because some of us are just too fuckin' stoopid.


Sep 20, 2017

High Level Fuckery

...of the lowest order.

First, I gotta bail on my general editorial tenet of not playing the same bullshit game the GOP plays when referring (eg) to the "Democrat Party". 

Now, most of ya'll know I have no problem calling lots of folks names - bonehead, rube, fuckwad or whatever.  But I've always referred to the parties as Dems and Repubs - maybe it's just my quiet still voice telling me, "You never go full dickhead", dickhead.

I dunno, but at this point, I'm suspending that particular standard, and going with my new nickname for the GOP:

Ratpublicans

Cuz holy fuck, kids, this Graham-Cassidy thing is nothing but the most cynical piece of shit to come down the pike in a good long time.

Vox, Jeff Stein:

In interviews with Vox on Tuesday, nine Republican senators primarily argued that their “Hail Mary” bill — spearheaded by Sens. Lindsey Graham (SC) and Bill Cassidy (LA) — would return federal power to the states, giving them greater flexibility to improve their health systems locally. “The heart of the legislation takes the policymaking role of Washington and sends it to the states,” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said.

Far less clear is exactly how Graham-Cassidy would pull off this feat without resulting in millions of Americans losing their insurance — and the number of millions is still unknown, since any vote would likely have to come before the Congressional Budget Office completes its analysis of the bill. The GOP senators insisted that the tens of billions in cuts to federal health spending proposed in the bill would not result in coverage losses because, they said, the states would have more flexibility.

“They can do it with less money,” said Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), who was unable to explain how or why.

Other Republican senators, meanwhile, fell back on political explanations for a bill that experts warn could result in millions losing their insurance.
“If we do nothing, it has a tremendous impact on the 2018 elections,” said Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS). “And whether or not Republicans still maintain control and we have the gavel.”

Imhofe says it saves lots of money, but he can't tell us how.
Cruz hits the old standby - premiums are skyrocketing under Obamacare.


Kennedy, arguing the states' rights angle, and trying to explain his proposed amendment to prohibit states setting up their own single-payer system: "We have plenty of federal rules that apply to every state, but we still agree with states’ rights."


And in case you missed it, The Koch Bros et al, have told the RNC the 2018 money well is dry unless Obamacare is repealed (see Pat Roberts above).

By STEVE PEOPLES, Associated Press

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) — At least one influential donor has informed congressional Republicans that the "Dallas piggy bank" is closed until he sees major action on health care and taxes.

Texas-based donor Doug Deason has already refused to host a fundraiser for two members of Congress and informed House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., his checkbook is closed as well.

"Get Obamacare repealed and replaced, get tax reform passed," Deason said in a pointed message to GOP leaders. "You control the Senate. You control the House. You have the presidency. There's no reason you can't get this done. Get it done and we'll open it back up."

Sep 15, 2017

Cut Snip Hack Tear Shred


Vox, Sarah Kliff:

The Trump administration has informed government-funded Obamacare outreach groups of deep impending budget cuts next year, with some nonprofits having budgets slashed by as much as 98 percent.

“We’re letting 11 navigators go today, which leaves us with five navigators for the entire state,” says Brian Burton, director of the Southwest Louisiana Area Health Education Center. His funding was cut from a $1.07 million grant this year to $297,000 next year.

The Health and Human Services Department announced August 31 that it would cut funding for the health law’s in-person assistance program by 41 percent. Late Wednesday night, the administration sent each group its individual budget. It shows widespread variation in how big those funding cuts will be.

Louisiana and Indiana, for example, will have the outreach funding coming into their states cut by 80 percent. Maine, however, will have its budget held constant — while Kansas will only see a 9 percent funding cut.

Outreach groups are responding to the cuts by laying off staff and scaling back the geographic areas where they provide assistance.

Any time there's a significant decrease in Spending (government or otherwise), there's a downward push on the economy, and that has always cost us more than we've "saved".

As the funding is cut, the negative impact in those geographic areas left under- or un-served will be greater than it will be in the more densely populated and/or richer areas.  So I guess we can expect another hard round of "it may be tough for you Real Americans right now, but it's OK because you're helping us fuck over those big-city moocher-minorities, and we all know that's what you think is the most important thing".

Torpedoing the ACA is bad enough, but providing nothing to replace the economic benefits
of the ACA is a plain ol' straight up shitty thing to do.

So I have to ask the 'why' question.  It's not like they don't understand how an economy works.

I may be feeling paranoid, but that don't mean nobody's out to get me.

Jul 10, 2017

Goin' Back


Recently, 43 disabled protesters were arrested outside of Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell's office, and the clips went viral on social media. Since then, activists have kept up the pressure on the Republican health bill with similar actions across the country. For this short documentary, The Atlantic traveled to the heart of the disability rights movement in the San Francisco Bay Area to learn why some people with disabilities fear the Republican health plan. Mary Lou Breslin of the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund says cuts to Medicaid could ultimately cost 3 million people with disabilities their freedom, and erode "40 years of hard won gains by the disability rights movement."

This documentary was produced as a project for the USC Center for Health Journalism's California Fellowship.

Taking an axe to Medicaid will prob'ly not leave all of these folks without some kind of coverage - it will just make sure that the Rent-Seekers and Profit-Takers will collect even more tax dollars than they're getting now.

The GOP is using that reliable scare-word, "Socialism", so they can change Medicaid to something that's more lucrative for their buddies and their in-laws.  Which equates to an effort to morph the thing into "Socializing Cost in order to generate Private Profit".

It's weird because the guys who're always bitching about the incompetence and inefficiency of Da Gubmint are the ones who're taking one of the very few federal programs that is actually cost-effective, and making it grossly inefficient by trying to shoehorn it into a business model based almost solely on an ideological belief - which obviously doesn't work for such things - which is why we hit on the idea of Medicaid in the first fuckin' place.

We've tried this All-Things-Privatized before. The whole world has tried this before - it was called Monarchy (aka: Daddy State - in one form or another).

240 years ago, some smart guys figured out that that was a pretty fucked up way to do things if the point of the exercise is to live your life without having to pay rent on the air you breathe, and the water you drink, and the dirt you grow your own food in.

And yet, for reasons passing understanding, the rubes who're always yelling "American Exceptionalism" are the ones enthusiastically buying into the plan to take us back to Government-By-Class-Based-Economic-System, to which the US was founded to be the fucking exception.

Feb 4, 2017

Back To The Gilded Age

A little reminder of the damage a bad president can do.

Vox:
Since the election of Donald Trump, there’s been a lot of discussion in medical circles about bringing a Silicon Valley ethos to drug innovation in America.
This idea is embodied in Peter Thiel, the billionaire founder of PayPal, who has reportedly been helping the president vet a pool of candidates to lead the Food and Drug Administration.
Thiel, a libertarian iconoclast, has repeatedly made the case that the FDA gets in the way of drug innovation by making it too difficult for new medicines to get to the market. Some of the FDA candidates he’s identified — including Silicon Valley’s Jim O’Neill and Balaji Srinivasan — have similarly argued that the agency should dump its requirement that drugs be proven effective before reaching the market, and that we’d be better off if the FDA operated more like a “Yelp for drugs.” In other words, bringing the same speedy and disruptive approach to medical regulation that Silicon Valley brought to the taxi and hotel industries, for example, will unlock cures — fast.
But Thiel and his pals miss a very important point about developing new drugs: Manipulating biology isn’t the same as manipulating computer code. It’s much, much harder. Speeding up medical innovation will take a lot more than just stripping down the FDA — it’ll take huge leaps forward in our understanding of biochemistry and the body. Health care is also different from taxis and hotels in another key way: Consumers can’t really judge the safety and quality of medical products by themselves.

So, like, one of the things Da Gubmint is there trying to do for you is to keep some asshole from killing your dog.  If you can't quite work yourself up to giving a fuck about people, maybe you could think about finding a little compassion for their fucking house pets.

More from the Vox piece:
One of the key notions that undergirds the Peter Thiel view of the FDA is that if the agency just got rid of some of the pesky restrictions for drug approval, we’d usher in another golden age in drug development. (Thiel declined our interview request.)
To test this idea, I asked a longtime pharmaceutical scientist (and conservative), Derek Lowe, for his views. In his 28 years in the lab, Lowe has seen hundreds of thousands of compounds tested on a huge variety of drug targets, and never, not once, has he brought a drug to market.
The reason? “We don’t know how to find drugs that work,” he said.
For every 5,000 compounds discovered at this "preclinical" phase of drug development, only about five are promising enough to be tried in humans. That’s a success rate of 0.1 percent.
Drug innovation comes from painstaking tinkering and a dash of luck. “It’s very tempting for someone who has come out of IT to say, ‘DNA is code, and cells are the hardware; go in and debug it’,” Lowe said. “But this is wrong.”
Let's just try to remember one or two itty-bitty things, OK?


You were supposed to have read that shit way back in high school, y'know.

Sep 2, 2016

This Shit Is Bullshit

I've been listening in on this one for a while, and I think I've got my bearings now.

In short - this is more or less about a ConservaDem who needs to go the fuck away.  I don't want anyone to hurt him; I'm not wishing he'd get Ass Cancer and die after enduring long, bloody, painful attempts to save his miserable worthless hide; I just want him to be unemployed for a good long time.  I want him to live in a shitty basement for about 10 years while he works an occasional odd shift at The Dollar Store and has to eat what he can find in the dumpsters behind the local liposuction clinic.

Sen Joe Manchin D-WV
Seriously - fuck that guy.

In case you haven't heard, Joe Manchin's daughter (Heather Bresch) is the asshole CEO who has blown up the price on Epi-Pen.

According to reports, Bresch got her first job at Mylan working in the factory basement, when her well-connected dad asked the company’s then-CEO, Milan Puskar, for a favor. Later, a scandal erupted when it was discovered that West Virginia University, which had received a $20 million donation from Puskar and whose president was a Manchin and Bresch family friend, had awarded her an MBA although she had not completed the required coursework.
The school president and other administrators were forced to resign, but Bresch survived the controversy and has done very well indeed in the pharmaceutical business, rising through the ranks and at the same time learning how to adroitly manipulate government and its regulations — lessons for which life in a successful political family with its network of friends and colleagues prepared her well.
I guess what grates on my soul in the worst way possible is this: 

The drug is not the issue, the Epi-Pen itself is the issue. Epinephrine is pretty cheap and available as a generic - but the delivery method is the key. The Epi-Pen is amazing, and it's ridiculously effective and easy to use, and it's saved more than a few lives; and it's a great little peace-of-mind thing - and it's patented, which is the key to the whole banana.  

So Mylan expects a full and vigorous effort to enforce its patent rights under US Federal Law - at tax-payer expense of course - but they get to shift the jobs overseas; they get to dodge a shitload of the taxes by hiding out in The Netherlands, and they can jack the price by 500%, etc etc etc. And that little parlay is what pumps enough profit into Mylan's coffers to "justify" paying Ms Bresch almost $19 Million last year.

It's fucking immoral - and that's before we take a look at the campaign contributions bullshit that helps perpetuate it, because it's part of a fucked up System of Interlocking Interests that makes it profitable to hold people hostage while the people who take those hostages are doing it legally, and so, are completely out of the reach of "justice".

That's gotta change.

Like I said, I'm really not wishing for harm to come to any of them, but a well-placed runaway cement truck wouldn't exactly hurt my feelings.

Fight The Power

Jan 16, 2015

Some Charts

So Obamacare isn't quite the disaster we were told it would be.  In fact, it's begininning to work very much like it's supposed to work, which isn't as good as it could be, but a shitload better than what we had before.

More people have coverage, which means the risk is spread thinner, which means the average cost goes down some, which means more people can get coverage, which means etc etc etc - gee it's almost as if there's some kind of Basic Principle Of Economics at work or something.

Anyway, The Commonwealth Fund did their survey, and guess what:





For the first time there are fewer working people without coverage.
For the first time, there are fewer working people struggling to pay their doctor bills.
For the first time, there are fewer working people putting off a visit to the doctor due to cost.

For the first fucking time - seems vaguely significant to me.

And yet it still seems like we've got a particular bunch of rat-bastard politicians trying to pull a very standard maneuver - where they fuck something up and then stand aside and say, "Hey look everybody - it's all fucked up.  We need to trash this thing and start over" 

("so we can take the credit for solving a problem we caused in the first fucking place" - that's the part you don't ever say out loud).

These people have no soul and no honor.

hat tip = Democratic Underground

Dec 22, 2013

Lost In The Shuffle

Way too many times, when we're busy sniping and ducking fire, we forget to look at what's actually happening.

WaPo:
Over at Health Affairs, Andrew Steinmetz, Ralph Muller, Steven Altschuler and Ezekiel Emanuel decided to see how health reform looked to hospital executives. They surveyed 74 C-Suite executives from institutions that, on average, employed 8,520 workers and saw annual revenues of $1.5 billion. The survey wasn't scientific by any means, but in a speculative conversation that's proceeding mostly by anecdote, these individuals have a better vantage point on the changes that health reform is making to actual health-care systems than virtually anyone else.
The results? Hospital executives think health reform is going to make the health care they deliver a whole lot better -- and a bit cheaper:
Fully 65 percent indicated that by 2020, they believe the healthcare system as a whole will be somewhat or significantly better than it is today. And when they were asked about their own institutions, the optimism was even more dramatic. Fully 93 percent predicted that the quality of care provided by their own health system would improve. This is probably related to efforts to diminish hospital acquired conditions, medication errors, and unnecessary re-admissions, as encouraged by financial penalties in the ACA.

These are the guys who make money on your being sick.  Not like the docs and nurses who mostly earn every penny trying to take care of us - an awful lot of these guys are cut-throat MBA types with no clinical background, who often speak of their patients as products, and who just as often believe they can't afford the luxury of having honest human emotions when it comes to the business of healthcare.

65% of 'em think healthcare in USAmerica Inc will be better under ACA.
91% think the cost aspects will improve.
And 93% are convinced that the quality of care at their own facilities will improve.

How can there possibly be any question as to why Repubs (and their Press Poodles) are constantly slagging Obama and "Gubmint Healthcare"?