Latest Drugwonks' Blog
While Nebraska has been the target of much criticism and the central focus of the special deals that tainted the process of securing Senate passage of a health care bill, there are other states that received equally insidious protections.
A Drugwonks reader recently emailed me in an uproar about President Obama’s home state of Hawaii being on the receiving end of a special deal as well in the Senate bill.
Not giving the claim much credence initially, I looked into it and, lo and behold, she was right.
The Hawaii Reporter explains the specific exemption in the bill:
“H.R. 3590 also includes a provision requested by Senator Akaka which preserves Hawaii’s system of employer-mandated health care. A large percentage of Hawaii residents have health insurance because of the state’s employer-mandated health care system which depends on a long-standing exemption from the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act includes a provision that is intended to preserve Hawaii’s unique ERISA exemption and the employer-mandated insurance that the exemption enables.”
Hawaii has a law that mandates employers provide robust health plans to employees who work at least 20 hours a week. It is a law that has been on the books since 1974.
The Senate health bill has no such employer mandate.
This comment from Honolulu arbitrator and labor lawyer Michael Nauyokas stands out:
“We don’t need the feds to go in and mess up our system.”
One might argue the state of Massachusetts sent Congress that exact same message last week on behalf of the other 49 states.
Something that was ignored throughout the long ponderous, hollow debate over healthcare reform is clearly articulated by Jim Pinkerton:
"Healthcare is a great driver for the economy. It's the biggest employer, and medicine--not "health insurance"--is a product that people want to consume, sometimes desperately, ravenously. And not just Americans, but people around the world. So if that's not an economic engine, what is? Isn't that what we want?
But the argument has to be made. And alas, since, 98 percent of the discussion over healthcare has been over controlling costs--that is, shrinking the healthcare sector, perhaps provoking a recession in one of the few vibrant sectors of the economy--then it's little wonder that the country doesn't think of healthcare and medicine as an economic driver.
Serious Medicine Strategy has always been an economic strategy--now is the time to make that case."
seriousmedicinestrategy.blogspot.com/2010/01/democrats-slam-brakes-on-health-care.html
"Healthcare is a great driver for the economy. It's the biggest employer, and medicine--not "health insurance"--is a product that people want to consume, sometimes desperately, ravenously. And not just Americans, but people around the world. So if that's not an economic engine, what is? Isn't that what we want?
But the argument has to be made. And alas, since, 98 percent of the discussion over healthcare has been over controlling costs--that is, shrinking the healthcare sector, perhaps provoking a recession in one of the few vibrant sectors of the economy--then it's little wonder that the country doesn't think of healthcare and medicine as an economic driver.
Serious Medicine Strategy has always been an economic strategy--now is the time to make that case."
seriousmedicinestrategy.blogspot.com/2010/01/democrats-slam-brakes-on-health-care.html
The movie Extraordinary Measures chronicles the story and struggle of John and Aileen Crowley to find a treatment to save the lives of their two children, both of whom have Pompe Disease, an irreversible and rare disorder that prevents the body from breaking down glycogen (a form of sugar). Glycogen accumulates around the heart and skeletal muscles leaving children unable to walk or breathe on their own. I won't provide a movie review here since information about this new release is available everywhere, except to say that Extraordinary Measures is a family movie in two important ways.
First, it is a movie that parents and kids (13 and up in my opinion) can and should see together. It demonstrates the power of love and the determination parents have, even under the most dire circumstances, to provide children with hope and happiness each moment of their life. It shows that you can go up against and use the system to make a difference and that the "system" will invest in that risk and reward it. However the movie shows that making a miracle involves going against the grain, which is why meaningful change or advances take time. And the movie does the best job of explaining the interesection of capital, science, passion and faith the constitutes the process of biomedical innovation. A thoughtful, impactful movie about biotech and drug development? Extraordinary Measures is that and more because it ties the process of innovation to the ultimate purpose and people who benefit.
Second, the movie itself is the culmination of a process that has created a family of relatives, friends, supporters around the Crowleys. I was fortunate to have attended a post-movie reception that Geeta Anand, the gifted and gracious author of The Cure held in NYC yesterday. The group that gathered (including the Crowleys) -- including people involved in the movie, Geeta's literary agent (and mine) Joelle Delbourgo, former associates, etc. shared not only in the success of her book but in the spirit the book, the movie and the release of both have created: A sense that while anything may not be possible, nothing great happens without passionate intensity, friendship and cooperation and support of those you love. Such is the recurring source of hope.
Seeing the movie and reading The Cure will allow you to share in that experience. Few movies have been made to convey such a message. You read more about Extraodinary Measures and The Cure at the link below.
http://www.thecurebook.com/
First, it is a movie that parents and kids (13 and up in my opinion) can and should see together. It demonstrates the power of love and the determination parents have, even under the most dire circumstances, to provide children with hope and happiness each moment of their life. It shows that you can go up against and use the system to make a difference and that the "system" will invest in that risk and reward it. However the movie shows that making a miracle involves going against the grain, which is why meaningful change or advances take time. And the movie does the best job of explaining the interesection of capital, science, passion and faith the constitutes the process of biomedical innovation. A thoughtful, impactful movie about biotech and drug development? Extraordinary Measures is that and more because it ties the process of innovation to the ultimate purpose and people who benefit.
Second, the movie itself is the culmination of a process that has created a family of relatives, friends, supporters around the Crowleys. I was fortunate to have attended a post-movie reception that Geeta Anand, the gifted and gracious author of The Cure held in NYC yesterday. The group that gathered (including the Crowleys) -- including people involved in the movie, Geeta's literary agent (and mine) Joelle Delbourgo, former associates, etc. shared not only in the success of her book but in the spirit the book, the movie and the release of both have created: A sense that while anything may not be possible, nothing great happens without passionate intensity, friendship and cooperation and support of those you love. Such is the recurring source of hope.
Seeing the movie and reading The Cure will allow you to share in that experience. Few movies have been made to convey such a message. You read more about Extraodinary Measures and The Cure at the link below.
http://www.thecurebook.com/
Let the big government types defend comparative effectiveness generated decisions that exclude and undermine the health of minorities... We are supporting a different, more compassionate and equitable approach...
Prospective Health Consortium: Development and Assessment of Predictive Tools in Disease Prevention and Wellness Promotion
We are proud to support the launch of a consortium that would develop and evaluate a tool for health risk assessment and treatment selection based on predictive information relatively unique to that individual that can be used to reduce disease and promote wellness in medically underserved communities.
The idea of a consortium is based on discussions held in May at Brookings Institution at a meeting entitled “A Critical Path for Personalized Medicine”. That meeting -- chaired by Dr. Mark McClellan and Sir Michael Rawlins -- discussed ways to demonstrate how predictive or personalized medicine could be used to improve the quality of care and health outcomes. In particular, Ralph Snyderman MD, Chancellor Emeritus of Duke University Medical Center and CEO of Proventys, called for an evaluation of an tools bringing together the latest technologies to predict events and enable intervention before damage occurs. Combining personalized risk prediction and strategic health-care planning will facilitate what Snyderman calls ‘prospective health care’.
Maggie Mahar -- another liberal health care "expert" -- on why a bipartisan healthcare effort should not be pursued:
"Conservatives blame the sick for being sick, and they fault the poor for being poor. Health care reform must be compassionate, and it must be equitable."
Read more here.
"Conservatives blame the sick for being sick, and they fault the poor for being poor. Health care reform must be compassionate, and it must be equitable."
Read more here.
ITP? Not ASAP.
John Dalli, Commissioner-designate for Health and Consumer Policy (SANCO) has pledged new initiatives to break the deadlock on Commission proposals to liberalize controls on the provision of prescription drug information to patients. And we all know how fast Brussels operates.
As Pharma Times reports:
- In the new European Commission, the move of responsibility for the pharmaceutical industry from the Directorate General (DG) for Industry and Enterprise to DG Health and Consumer Safety (SANCO) has been welcomed by consumer and patient groups. One of the reasons holding back progress on the information directive has been concern that it was drafted by DG Enterprise and Industry - whose responsibilities include regulatory and industrial policy for the pharmaceutical industry – rather than DG Sanco, which is concerned with consumers and public health.
While countries including Denmark, Sweden and the UK support the Commission’s proposals, a number of others – including France, Germany and Spain - oppose any move to liberalize controls on the provision of prescription drug information, for reasons including the fact that the draft does not distinguish sufficiently between “information” and “advertising.” They also believe that the industry should have no role in the provision of information to patients and that the proposals would drive up health costs by increasing demand and because of the need to set up monitoring mechanisms.
John Dalli, Commissioner-designate for Health and Consumer Policy (SANCO) has pledged new initiatives to break the deadlock on Commission proposals to liberalize controls on the provision of prescription drug information to patients. And we all know how fast Brussels operates.
As Pharma Times reports:
- In the new European Commission, the move of responsibility for the pharmaceutical industry from the Directorate General (DG) for Industry and Enterprise to DG Health and Consumer Safety (SANCO) has been welcomed by consumer and patient groups. One of the reasons holding back progress on the information directive has been concern that it was drafted by DG Enterprise and Industry - whose responsibilities include regulatory and industrial policy for the pharmaceutical industry – rather than DG Sanco, which is concerned with consumers and public health.
While countries including Denmark, Sweden and the UK support the Commission’s proposals, a number of others – including France, Germany and Spain - oppose any move to liberalize controls on the provision of prescription drug information, for reasons including the fact that the draft does not distinguish sufficiently between “information” and “advertising.” They also believe that the industry should have no role in the provision of information to patients and that the proposals would drive up health costs by increasing demand and because of the need to set up monitoring mechanisms.
Don’t think about Scott Brown as the 41st vote against healthcare reform. Consider him the 1st vote towards a new, more thoughtful approach. A more honest approach. An approach that doesn’t require Uncle Sam to become Uncle Sam, MD. An approach that doesn’t tax the middle class, gut Medicare and abolish Medicare Advantage. An approach that doesn’t put the power of government reimbursement decisions into the hands of a politically appointed panel without any oversight by elected officials. Perhaps even an approach that takes into consideration reform via a partnership between government and the private sector (a la Part D). And maybe even an approach that considers allowing Americans to buy insurance policies across state lines so that we can all benefit from a significant economy of scale and radically lower premiums. A study by University of Minnesota shows that Congress could boost by more than 12 million the number of people who have health insurance without spending taxpayer dollars. The change required is to allow people to buy health insurance across state lines, so they can shop for less expensive policies. For example, a typical health-insurance policy in heavily regulated New York costs more than three times as much as in less regulated Iowa ($388 a month versus $98 a month for the same coverage).
But – for starters – how about an approach that’s open and transparent.
But – for starters – how about an approach that’s open and transparent.
What exactly about the Scott Brown victory does Ezra (the mind of moment) Klein not get?
"There's nothing about Scott Brown's victory that needs to derail health-care reform in particular, or the rest of Obama's 2010 agenda in general. But if Democrats decide to cower and hide, they can end Obama's presidency on Brown's behalf.
That said, I really wonder what the Democratic Caucus thinks will happen if they let health-care reform slip away and walk into 2010 having wasted a year of the country's time amidst a terrible recession. It won't be pretty, I imagine. If health-care reform passes, the two sides can argue over whether it was a success. If it fails, there's no argument."
voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/
I have heard that petulant "it's all about me" tone before.. It's the gift that keeps on giving to those of us seeking sensible health care reform consistent with the need to sustain job creating biomedical innovation... I hope Klein and others keep pushing Dems to ignore the outrage of the voters... It will produce more Scott Browns.
"There's nothing about Scott Brown's victory that needs to derail health-care reform in particular, or the rest of Obama's 2010 agenda in general. But if Democrats decide to cower and hide, they can end Obama's presidency on Brown's behalf.
That said, I really wonder what the Democratic Caucus thinks will happen if they let health-care reform slip away and walk into 2010 having wasted a year of the country's time amidst a terrible recession. It won't be pretty, I imagine. If health-care reform passes, the two sides can argue over whether it was a success. If it fails, there's no argument."
voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/
I have heard that petulant "it's all about me" tone before.. It's the gift that keeps on giving to those of us seeking sensible health care reform consistent with the need to sustain job creating biomedical innovation... I hope Klein and others keep pushing Dems to ignore the outrage of the voters... It will produce more Scott Browns.
Center for Medicine in the Public Interest is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization promoting innovative solutions that advance medical progress, reduce health disparities, extend life and make health care more affordable, preventive and patient-centered. CMPI also provides the public, policymakers and the media a reliable source of independent scientific analysis on issues ranging from personalized medicine, food and drug safety, health care reform and comparative effectiveness.
