D.C. Circuit guts ObamaCare

Well medical students loans today are much higher with less chance of a traditional income level plus inflation plus more malpractice insurance costs plus a drop in reimbursement for services rendered, so it's a little more complex then your statement.

It's why there was a push to boutique medicine for the wealthy to escape from the current trap new physicians find themselves in.
 
Since there certainly are going to be issues with the federal subsidies

Yeah issues would be one way of putting it.
When processed cookies are 5 times cheaper then raw carrots, you could say that there are some issues.

Some years ago two nutrition experts went grocery shopping. For a dollar, Adam Drewnowski and S. E. Specter could purchase 1,200 calories of potato chips or cookies or just 250 calories worth of carrots. It was merely one example of how an unhealthy diet is cheaper than a healthy one. This price difference did not spring into existence by force of any natural laws but largely because of antiquated agricultural policies. Public money is working at cross-purposes: backing an overabundance of unhealthful calories that are flooding our supermarkets and restaurants, while also battling obesity and the myriad illnesses that go with it. It is time to align our farm policies with our health policies.

There is no dearth of policy options. Research groups such as the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation in Princeton, N.J., recommend leveling the playing field by extending subsidies and insurance programs more widely to fruit and vegetable producers. The government can also use its own purchasing power, through school lunch programs and institutional buying decisions, to fill people’s plates with healthy choices. The imperative, however, is clear: any new farm bill should at the very least remove the current perverse incentives for people to eat unhealthily.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fresh-fruit-hold-the-insulin/?page=1
 
It's complicated due to the EBT program. There are 46 million Americans on food stamps. When the number was smaller, then food banks (spiritual or otherwise) could supplement and offer some extra nutrition and calories for these folks. As the number persisted and grew, there was more competition for food bank resources.

The average American is not used to a vegetarian diet and doesn't know how to mix protein sources in order to get a balanced amino acid profile. If the amino acids are not balanced, then the ability to create new proteins is compromised in the human body. You get protein deficiencies.

Fortified foods were put into place especially since women can be pregnant and not know it and get neural tube defects in the unborn. However since Americans are notorious ill educated on nutrition, then while ordinary vitamin intake is of dubious value (for when more people are middle class then they're likely to eat more variety) as any excess is usually excreted, but with so many on Food Stamps, I'd bet we start to see a whole lot of issues with things like reduced trace mineral intake. The natural thing to do in the American diet when limited by a severe budget, is to fall into a pattern of serving the same foods over and over, and hence that variety is not there.

Additionally Americans forgo vegetables and less expensive fruit, but instead chose starches and processed food and JUICE. Juice is of dubious nutritional benefit. That fresh orange juice is anything but. The food companies store juice in vats as orange season and harvest comes around, removes the oxygen from the tanks to prevent oxidation, and then reintroduces flavor enhancers in order to alter the stale flavor of storing it this way. They also can spike the Vitamin C artificially.

Because there's not very much money given on the EBT (Food Stamp) program, then a lot of parents try to find filling foods versus managing nutrition and that a significant factor. Too much starch and the body processes it, and then stores the extra calories as fat.

Few Americans elect to grow food in their yards but grow grass and flowers. They don't tend to plant nut and fruit trees. One can actually purchase seeds and plants which produce food (like transplants for the cabbage family i.e. broccoli, cawliflower, and cabbage) with the EBT program. Since you can pinch off the main head of broccoli when it first comes in, then that plant will produce three times the number of florets, but gardening is becoming a totally lost art in America.

If people would grow at least some of their food, and dehydrate it versus freezing or canning, then the shelf space is much smaller. Since freezer space is quite limited and uses electricity, what some homesteaders do is purchase frozen veggies on sale, dehydrate them, and then use them as needed later.

No matter what we do as a nation to cut healthcare costs, unless we get the patients to also invest in these kinds of skills (nutrition, gardening, harvesting, storage) then the primary preventative maintenance won't be in place. Then the medical team is trying to play catch up to fix many years of abuse of the patient's body.
...
Say you have an elder patient with diabetes who lives with their child and their spouse. As diabetes progresses, and as the patient ages, then they lose the amount of sensation in their feet. This couples with the natural decline of the disease plus circulatory issues. The patient begins to have a small wound and it can run down hill very rapidly. If we had the primary care giver merely checking their parent's feet for these wounds, then a lot of medical issues with infections and even amputations could be lessened or outright prevented from occurring.

It's those kinds of things that improve the patient's health and save money simply by the patient and their family being vigilent.

In the UK, their chemist (what we call a pharmacist) can prescribe some common medications. Here one must see a physician to have that happen. It might not work here, but perhaps it's one simple way to cut costs and save time. One of the main issues might be polypharmacy, but the chemist/pharmacist is using a database so that should be catching that. Much of pharmaceuticals is automatically dispensed in America with a form of robotics to count pills though. I wonder if we tried it, would it cause more problems? I don't know. It's putting a lot of responsibility on the pharmacist, and truly most of the people behind the counter are pharm-techs, so things could really slip through the cracks.
 
Yeah, it's a multifaceted problem. All of the true savings are through managing healthy lifestyle. It's hard to affect that, 'cept at the local/close community level
 
Yeah issues would be one way of putting it.
When processed cookies are 5 times cheaper then raw carrots, you could say that there are some issues.

Raw carrots are incredibly expensive by comparison to ship and store, plus they don't keep. The cookies keep easily. People always freak about how expensive fresh vegetables cost compared to processed and stored foods, and yes, grain subsidies impact these markets but that isn't the reason the foods you want to be cheap aren't cheap. They're not cheap because the distribution on them is insane and people want to eat them year-round out of growing season because they never bother to think about crap like growing seasons, or irrigation, or refrigeration, or fuel costs, or spoilage pre-merchant and at merchant.
 
I'd say most food consumers, even ones who think they're informed, have lost touch with reality (of food).
 
Urbanization caused specialization to occur in civilization. The need for specialists and the need for land for agricultural reasons pushed the farmers out and the specialist in to the cities. If you were to look at population density in the USA then something like 80 % are in urban areas. Obviously the preponderance of these folks cannot grow their own food, or even part of it without intentional set aside places to do so.

But if we alter the paradigm and return to some of our ancestral ways, then we could grow some of our own food ourselves. Dehydrated foods is the way to go for 100 practical and economic reasons. The fad of fresh produce cannot work in America with so many out of work (and don't push some spurious economic data at me. Look at how many have left the rolls in frustration for not being able to find meaningful work) then what they once could eat is no longer possible. This means either growing some food themselves, and spending a lot of energy doing so, and a lot of time learning that old skill.

If the consumer is detached from their own self-preservation through managing their health, and the consumer thinks that a pill will fix them, then we cannot expect for things to change in American society. First, Americans don't take their pills. Compliance and polypharmacy result in needless poor outcomes. Second, it was lie taught by the greedy pharmaceutical companies that this model would work. Third, the reason those pills are expensive is most new drugs FAIL to work in clinical trials, and so all of the investment was lost by the drug company. To recoup their losses, they charge more. Since bulk sales and certain governments negotiate lower prices, then at some point, the drug companies HAVE to charge more, or cut their staff and alter production towards that purpose.

This annihilated the pharmaceutical workforce in America from 1990 onwards. The result was firing a ton of American workers, shipping the product for repacking first to Puerto Rico (there were government subsidies for doing so) then to China and the Pacific Rim. We lost those high paying middle class jobs, but yes, we had more generic drugs. But then in some cases, the same pharmaceutical companies then re-hired some of those workers, but with less benefits and way less wages. It was entirely self-destructive.

The same thing happened with infant formula. As the female workforce increased, then more infant formula was sold, for people didn't like to pump their breast milk and for a variety of personal reasons. While breast milk, especially during the collostrum period, is much more beneficial for jump starting the infant's immune system, people stopped doing it.

But as government contracts for the poor became the norm through the Womens Infant and Children program (WIC) this improved access to infant formula but people paid for a product that is naturally formed. Government contract resulted in more negotiation of prices such as to lower profits. This resulted in a cutting of the workforce, a significant alteration of production for making and storing and shipping infant formula, and resulted in harming the nutritional companies who make them. This also reduced the Middle Class in America, for not only did they lose their jobs, but other suppliers for those companies as well as companies that served the employees lost out.
 
Raw carrots are incredibly expensive by comparison to ship and store, plus they don't keep. The cookies keep easily. People always freak about how expensive fresh vegetables cost compared to processed and stored foods, and yes, grain subsidies impact these markets but that isn't the reason the foods you want to be cheap aren't cheap. They're not cheap because the distribution on them is insane and people want to eat them year-round out of growing season because they never bother to think about crap like growing seasons, or irrigation, or refrigeration, or fuel costs, or spoilage pre-merchant and at merchant.

Part of the distribution cost on carrots being insane is that about one third of all the carrots sold in the US pass through a single processing plant.
 
Massive consolidation of agricultural production, processing, and distribution is not our friend. But policies that aim to combat this are not the policies that are in the popular zeitgeist. People want to whine about Monsanto soybeans and GMOs instead. Not targeted subsidies that smooth out the supply chain while incentivizing natural rainfall produce and scaling inversely with scale of assets. Or they want to make foods affordable to the poor cost more with some asinine assumption that this will magically invent high quality food access and affordability for lower income families in food deserts. Pah.
 
As claimed in this thread, some doctors are already struggling with loans. Take away subsidies and insurance and there will be less money flowing in as revenue.

It's not just the loans for medical school that these new physicians face, but higher malpractice insurance costs, less reimbursement from Medicare/Medicaid/Managed Care, AND the fact that the entire time they attended undergrad, grad, and residency, then they amassed DEBT while having zero income. Compare that with someone else.

The minimum is three years of residency. Quite frankly a ton of physicans see that if they only become a Ped or Fam Physician, then they're SCREWED. So they go longer and this can significantly add to their debt.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703389004575033063806327030
When Michelle Bisutti, a 41-year-old family practitioner in Columbus, Ohio, finished medical school in 2003, her student-loan debt amounted to roughly $250,000. Since then, it has ballooned to $555,000.

It is the result of her deferring loan payments while she completed her residency, default charges and relentlessly compounding interest rates. Among the charges: a single $53,870 fee for when her loan was turned over to a collection agency.

"Maybe half of it was my fault because I didn't look at the fine print," Dr. Bisutti says. "But this is just outrageous now."

Michelle Bisutti borrowed $250,000 to pay for medical school. The debt has since ballooned to $555,000. Andrew Spear for The Wall Street Journal
.
To be sure, Dr. Bisutti's case is extreme, and lenders say student-loan terms are clear and that they try to work with borrowers who get in trouble.

But as tuitions rise, many people are borrowing heavily to pay their bills. Some no doubt view it as "good debt," because an education can lead to a higher salary. But in practice, student loans are one of the most toxic debts, requiring extreme consumer caution and, as Dr. Bisutti learned, responsibility.

Unlike other kinds of debt, student loans can be particularly hard to wriggle out of. Homeowners who can't make their mortgage payments can hand over the keys to their house to their lender. Credit-card and even gambling debts can be discharged in bankruptcy. But ditching a student loan is virtually impossible, especially once a collection agency gets involved. Although lenders may trim payments, getting fees or principals waived seldom happens.

http://www.amsa.org/AMSA/Homepage/Publications/TheNewPhysician/2003/tnp2.aspx
Drowning in Debt

As tuitions rise, medical students struggle with excessive loans.
The New Physician September 2003
by Jennifer ZeiglerVolume 52, Issue 6

What's the price of becoming a physician? For Kevin Rufner, a third-year M.D.-M.P.H. student at Tufts University School of Medicine, it will be one-quarter of a million dollars by the time he graduates. And that's not counting the thousands of dollars he will pay over the years in loan interest. By the time he finishes residency and begins paying back his $250,000 to the government and private lenders, his monthly loan repayment will look very much like a home mortgage.

Thanks to his enormous debt load-large even by medical-student standards-Rufner has made a difficult decision recently. Interested in working in international public health, he realizes the low pay associated with such jobs is not going to make a dent in the financial monkey growing on his back.

"For myself and for a lot of the others in the program, most of us look at doing public health 10, 15 years down the road, after our loans are paid off, which is a shame."

So instead, he's turned to a more profitable primary care specialty-maybe internal medicine with its $120,000 starting average, which is what his financial aid office tells him he will need to earn after residency to make his loan payments. In fact, he says most of his classmates have turned to other specialties for the same reason.

"The hardest part for me is why am I doing the M.P.H. now? I'm going to need to spend the first part of my career doing another discipline just to pay off my loans. I think a lot of public-health people have the idealism that money's not going to be a factor." They would be wrong in assuming so. Experts have been tying rising student debt to decreases in family practice and surgery residents for several years. With primary care's low pay and surgery's long residency, extending the amount of time loan interest accrues before beginning payment, these fields can become specialty pariahs to a student facing more than $150,000 in loans. Future physicians will also say that post-residency fellowships are less appealing if applicants have large debts to pay off.

Medical student debt has been rising at an annual rate between 5 percent and 7 percent throughout the 1990s, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), and a Council on Graduate Medical Education study found the average debt increased 211 percent between 1985 and 2000. These increases mean the average newly minted physician went from owing $59,885 in 1993 to $103,855 in 2002.

Not unrelated, tuition hikes have been staggering at many schools, particularly at public universities as states struggle with budget deficits in the billions. And since each tuition hike means more loans for all but about 17 percent of medical students who unbelievably graduate debt-free, financial aid officers worry that future physicians are reaching loan levels they won't be able to manage with today's lower reimbursements and the higher costs associated with medical practice.

Hitting students' pocketbooks

The news isn't encouraging. As endowments take a blow from the sluggish economy, schools have increased tuition. Georgetown University medical students will see a 3 percent increase to $33,600 for tuition fees this year, which Dr. Ray Mitchell, the dean of medical education, says is the target for annual increases. "My heartbreak is that we don't have as much grant money as we need," he says. "Clearly the earnings of the endowments are down."

Drexel University College of Medicine students are digging into their pockets for the $34,000 it will cost them to attend this year, reflecting a 5 percent increase. "We have tried to maintain tuition at the 50th percentile of the private medical schools," says Dr. Barbara Schindler, Drexel's vice dean for education and academic affairs. In fact, Schindler is right on target for private school tuition hikes, which mostly hover between 3 percent and 5 percent this year.
 
As claimed in this thread, some doctors are already struggling with loans. Take away subsidies and insurance and there will be less money flowing in as revenue.

I can agree with this in two words.
 
It's very hard to increase people's health habits at the government level. I'm not so sure that Americans are that much less healthy than other developed nations, though it's not a checkmark in the way people handle the society.


Not that hard. Just tax it. Look how much it's reduces smoking.
 
Well, if you look waaaaay up, I was talking about why the American system for healthcare is so much more expensive than the French system. There are a few explanatory variables. I was under the impression that 'decreased fitness levels' was one.


No. The extra cost of the American healthcare system has nothing whatsoever to do with the condition of the patients. It's all in the profit motive of the providers and insurers.
 
Not that hard. Just tax it. Look how much it's reduces smoking.

?

Cigarettes have been taxed for decades. Didn't seem to make any difference. If you put on a sufficient tax that it makes a difference you get the same black market that you get from outright prohibition.

The reduction in smoking has a lot of potential causes, but I don't think taxes are very high on the list. I'd say the huge 'secondhand smoke' campaign that has produced a 'you smoke near me I respond as if assaulted' environment was the most effective move, myself.
 
Raw carrots are incredibly expensive by comparison to ship and store, plus they don't keep. The cookies keep easily. People always freak about how expensive fresh vegetables cost compared to processed and stored foods, and yes, grain subsidies impact these markets but that isn't the reason the foods you want to be cheap aren't cheap. They're not cheap because the distribution on them is insane and people want to eat them year-round out of growing season because they never bother to think about crap like growing seasons, or irrigation, or refrigeration, or fuel costs, or spoilage pre-merchant and at merchant.

I thought that carrots like potatoes keep in the ground for a long time ?
It seems carrots can be stored all year round, but once removed from the ground last only 4 weeks.

How much are canned carrots in America vs cost of raw carrots vs cookies ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrot#Storage
 
Back
Top Bottom