Re: Question! / Universal health care

[Guest guest]

I'm posting this as an informational repIy to Jack's comments about health care coverage for all, and don't intend for it to be an invitation for a political discussion. I'm sure that some people currently without coverage would become covered under a universal health plan, but as many unhappy Canadians have found, and Canada is often referred to as an example for the US, we would be waiting more than 4 months, on average, to see a specialist, the category of providers which seems to dominate the posts for this group. Even the father of the Canadian system is now saying it's not financially viable. Massachusetts' example is already over budget, and they can't get thousands to even sign up, and their answer is to threaten financial penalties. And with Medicare as our only national example, other posts have reflected how cutting provider's pay is one of the only ways they know how to deal with financial shortfalls, taking money away from Medicare Advantage (private Medicare plans that have shown to do a better job than our government with the same money) to stave off cutting providers reimbusements...which are already near 50% of regular physician charges...and the reason why many docs don't participate in Medicare.

Have you ever had to deal with any of the 20 or so doctors or 40 or so clinicians, including nurses, in the entire Medicare system? ( From a former senior official at Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.) United Healthcare alone employs 600 or so doctors, and 12,000 clinicians. In other words, be careful what we wish for.

Dale Snellbaker

Cell

[Guest guest]

I've been on medicare for 17 years with supplemental insurance that costs me only $31.00 a month. My co-pays have been modest, usually $15.00. I've never had a problem with any medical personnel, except my current pulmo and that's because he is reticent to provide info.

On the other hand, my medical problems until my dx of IPF have been negligible, and even those, including the lung biopsy, have been low cost. My onlly med is for hypothyoidism and costs less than $10 a month.

I guess I'm not the poster boy for universal health care, but I believe the system is out of whack and something needs to be done help those without the means to help themselves. I would certainly be happy to pay the additional taxes needed to fund it.

Jack79/IPF - UIP/dx06/05 Maine

Re: Question! / Universal health care

I'm posting this as an informational repIy to Jack's comments about health care coverage for all, and don't intend for it to be an invitation for a political discussion. I'm sure that some people currently without coverage would become covered under a universal health plan, but as many unhappy Canadians have found, and Canada is often referred to as an example for the US, we would be waiting more than 4 months, on average, to see a specialist, the category of providers which seems to dominate the posts for this group. Even the father of the Canadian system is now saying it's not financially viable. Massachusetts' example is already over budget, and they can't get thousands to even sign up, and their answer is to threaten financial penalties. And with Medicare as our only national example, other posts have reflected how cutting provider's pay is one of the only ways they know how to

deal with financial shortfalls, taking money away from Medicare Advantage (private Medicare plans that have shown to do a better job than our government with the same money) to stave off cutting providers reimbusements. ..which are already near 50% of regular physician charges...and the reason why many docs don't participate in Medicare.

Have you ever had to deal with any of the 20 or so doctors or 40 or so clinicians, including nurses, in the entire Medicare system? ( From a former senior official at Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.) United Healthcare alone employs 600 or so doctors, and 12,000 clinicians. In other words, be careful what we wish for.

Dale Snellbaker

Cell

[Guest guest]

Dale

Without taking this too far I do want to point out one thing. While I

don't agree with taking from anyone, the logic of reducing the medicare

advantage payments is as follows. The intent was to pay to the insurers

the amount medicare would otherwise spend directly including

administrative costs. Right now 20% of the people are covered on

advantage plans. The amounts medicare is paying the insurers is

approximately $13 billion a year more than they would be spending on

those same patients if they were on regular medicare plans per the

recent GAO report. Now I also know those people get extra benefits that

you don't get on regular medicare and those benefits are significant.

Now, the cuts to the medicare advantage payments are over time and there

is hope that those can be averted or replaced with low income

supplements or something positive still done. I know there is immediate

intent by some to put forth bills to keep those cuts from going into

place. By no means has this solved everything. It's just one small

battle of many to come. The only thing it has stopped is just for today

it has prevented many doctors from leaving the program, a reduction in

respiratory rehab, and the implementation of the bidding on durable

medical equipment which was going to cut what we receive dramatically

while putting many medical equipment suppliers out of business.

There are still many problems including prescription drug costs (mine go

to over $1000 per month after my next prescription for 4 months) no

consideration for mobility outside the home, lack of vision or dental

benefits, no hearing aid coverage, and others. I think its ridiculous

that disabled don't have the same medicare rights as elderly in term of

available plans. I can tell you that while in some areas doctors were

ready to revolt, in the DFW area the durable medical equipment was about

to become a nightmare.

Playing with the rules every year is a bit ridiculous. Doctors getting

paid the same they were in 2001 isn't right. As to Medicare Advantage

Plans I know many are on them and are very happy with their service.

Some aren't as pleased. Unfortunately in Texas they are pretty limited

to PFFS and no doctors in my area accept them so not an option for me at

all.

I think its a shame that cutting medicare benefits in any way ever

became a choice for reducing government spending. There just seem to me

to be too many better areas to cut. There are already too many on

medicare not taking their prescriptions because of cost, not getting

supplemental plans or advantage plans because of cost, not seeing

doctors because they can't pay the copays, and not getting the equipment

they need because they supplier won't address their individual

situation.

>

> I'm posting this as an informational repIy to Jack's comments about

> health care coverage for all, and don't intend for it to be an

> invitation for a political discussion. I'm sure that some people

> currently without coverage would become covered under a universal

health

> plan, but as many unhappy Canadians have found, and Canada is often

> referred to as an example for the US, we would be waiting more than 4

> months, on average, to see a specialist, the category of providers

which

> seems to dominate the posts for this group. Even the father of the

> Canadian system is now saying it's not financially viable.

> Massachusetts' example is already over budget, and they can't get

> thousands to even sign up, and their answer is to threaten financial

> penalties. And with Medicare as our only national example, other posts

> have reflected how cutting provider's pay is one of the only ways they

> know how to deal with financial shortfalls, taking money away from

> Medicare Advantage (private Medicare plans that have shown to do a

> better job than our government with the same money) to stave off

cutting

> providers reimbusements...which are already near 50% of regular

> physician charges...and the reason why many docs don't participate in

> Medicare.

>

> Have you ever had to deal with any of the 20 or so doctors or 40 or so

> clinicians, including nurses, in the entire Medicare system? ( From a

> former senior official at Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.)

> United Healthcare alone employs 600 or so doctors, and 12,000

> clinicians. In other words, be careful what we wish for.

>

> Dale Snellbaker

>

> Cell

>

[Guest guest]

Jack

You make me jealous. My supplemental is $196/month, my prescription plan

is $66 and my out of pocket costs on prescriptions will exceed $5000

this year. In addition I have spent considerable on equipment not

covered by anyone. One medication? Well, I do take one thats about $10 a

month for hypothyroidism too. Its all the others that are killers.

Actually, I'm fortunate in that I can get the care I need. Its those who

can't that I feel for and I'm disturbed by anything that makes it more

difficult instead of easier.

>

> I've been on medicare for 17 years with supplemental insurance that

costs me only $31.00 a month. My co-pays have been modest, usually

$15.00. I've never had a problem with any medical personnel, except my

current pulmo and that's because he is reticent to provide info.

> On the other hand, my medical problems until my dx of IPF have been

negligible, and even those, including the lung biopsy, have been low

cost. My onlly med is for hypothyoidism and costs less than $10 a

month.

> I guess I'm not the poster boy for universal health care, but I

believe the system is out of whack and something needs to be done help

those without the means to help themselves.. I would certainly be happy

to pay the additional taxes needed to fund it.

>

> Jack

> 79/IPF - UIP/dx06/05 Maine

>

>

>

> Re: Question! / Universal health care

>

>

> I'm posting this as an informational repIy to Jack's comments about

health care coverage for all, and don't intend for it to be an

invitation for a political discussion. I'm sure that some people

currently without coverage would become covered under a universal health

plan, but as many unhappy Canadians have found, and Canada is often

referred to as an example for the US, we would be waiting more than 4

months, on average, to see a specialist, the category of providers which

seems to dominate the posts for this group. Even the father of the

Canadian system is now saying it's not financially viable.

Massachusetts' example is already over budget, and they can't get

thousands to even sign up, and their answer is to threaten financial

penalties. And with Medicare as our only national example, other posts

have reflected how cutting provider's pay is one of the only ways they

know how to deal with financial shortfalls, taking money away from

Medicare

> Advantage (private Medicare plans that have shown to do a better job

than our government with the same money) to stave off cutting providers

reimbusements. ..which are already near 50% of regular physician

charges...and the reason why many docs don't participate in Medicare.

>

> Have you ever had to deal with any of the 20 or so doctors or 40 or so

clinicians, including nurses, in the entire Medicare system? ( From a

former senior official at Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.)

United Healthcare alone employs 600 or so doctors, and 12,000

clinicians. In other words, be careful what we wish for.

>

> Dale Snellbaker

>

> Cell

>

>

[Guest guest]

jack... Whooo. Quick. Tell me what supplemental insurance you have at $31/month. wow. I'm with RBCBS and I pay $116, copay is only $5 and generic meds are $5 for my thyroid....

MamaSher, age 69. IPF 3-06, OR./ NasturtiumsDon't fret about tomorrow, God is already there!

Re: Question! / Universal health care

I'm posting this as an informational repIy to Jack's comments about health care coverage for all, and don't intend for it to be an invitation for a political discussion. I'm sure that some people currently without coverage would become covered under a universal health plan, but as many unhappy Canadians have found, and Canada is often referred to as an example for the US, we would be waiting more than 4 months, on average, to see a specialist, the category of providers which seems to dominate the posts for this group. Even the father of the Canadian system is now saying it's not financially viable. Massachusetts' example is already over budget, and they can't get thousands to even sign up, and their answer is to threaten financial penalties. And with Medicare as our only national example, other posts have reflected how cutting provider's pay is one of the only ways they know how to deal with financial shortfalls, taking money away from Medicare Advantage (private Medicare plans that have shown to do a better job than our government with the same money) to stave off cutting providers reimbusements. ..which are already near 50% of regular physician charges...and the reason why many docs don't participate in Medicare.

Have you ever had to deal with any of the 20 or so doctors or 40 or so clinicians, including nurses, in the entire Medicare system? ( From a former senior official at Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.) United Healthcare alone employs 600 or so doctors, and 12,000 clinicians. In other words, be careful what we wish for.

Dale Snellbaker

Cell

[Guest guest]

Humana must be online as well. I'll check it out later. BCBS is a bit more expensive but they pay for so many things and many

of them I have no copay, like labs and imaging.

I know our premiums will increase next year again...Rich pays $123...but the benefits are so good we're hoping we can on. We figured out one day that we pay over 5k just in insurance premiums each year...including car and house besides health.

MamaSher, age 69. IPF 3-06, OR./ NasturtiumsDon't fret about tomorrow, God is already there!

Re: Question! / Universal health care

I'm posting this as an informational repIy to Jack's comments about health care coverage for all, and don't intend for it to be an invitation for a political discussion. I'm sure that some people currently without coverage would become covered under a universal health plan, but as many unhappy Canadians have found, and Canada is often referred to as an example for the US, we would be waiting more than 4 months, on average, to see a specialist, the category of providers which seems to dominate the posts for this group. Even the father of the Canadian system is now saying it's not financially viable. Massachusetts' example is already over budget, and they can't get thousands to even sign up, and their answer is to threaten financial penalties. And with Medicare as our only national example, other posts have reflected how cutting provider's pay is one of the only ways they know how to deal with financial shortfalls, taking money away from Medicare Advantage (private Medicare plans that have shown to do a better job than our government with the same money) to stave off cutting providers reimbusements. ..which are already near 50% of regular physician charges...and the reason why many docs don't participate in Medicare.

Have you ever had to deal with any of the 20 or so doctors or 40 or so clinicians, including nurses, in the entire Medicare system? ( From a former senior official at Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.) United Healthcare alone employs 600 or so doctors, and 12,000 clinicians. In other words, be careful what we wish for.

Dale Snellbaker

Cell

[Guest guest]

Jack my big complaint with our health insurance is the price and the fact that with type 2 diabetes We haven't found an insurance co. that will cover . He has had a stint in his heart and the diabetes so he in currently uninsured. I stress about this issue like no other. SS does not make for a good retirement plan. In '87 our planned retirement went out the window so we went to plan B. no debt by retirement. well it hasn't been and won't be as it was BUT we have more that enough (as long as doesn't have a problem.) If it's not one thing its something else. Gotta love the Bushs. Love and Prayers, Peggy   IPF  2004,  Florida"Worry looks around, Sorry looks back,  Faith looks up."

[Guest guest]

Peggy, I love shrubbery but not the

Bushes!

It seems to me that SS and Medicare are set up to purposely confuse

anyone needing them. The insurance companies and the ppharmacutical

companies wrote the rules!!! So I guess who gets the best care!

Z fibriotic NSIP/05

Z 64,

fibriotic NSIP/o5/PA

And “mild”

PH/10/07 and Reynaud’s too!!

No, NSIP was not

self-inflicted…I never smoked!

Potter,

reader,carousel lover and MomMom to

Darah

and Sara

“I’m gonna

be iron like a lion in Zion” Bob Marley

Vinca

Minor-periwinkle is my flower

Peggy wrote:

Jack my big complaint with our health insurance is the

price and the fact that with type 2 diabetes

We haven't found an insurance co. that will cover . He has

had a stint in his heart and the diabetes so he in currently uninsured.

I stress about this issue like no other. SS does not make for a good

retirement plan. In '87 our planned retirement went out the window so

we went to plan B. no debt by retirement. well it hasn't been and won't

be as it was BUT we have more that enough (as long as doesn't have

a problem.) If it's not one thing its something else.

Gotta love the Bushs.

Love and Prayers, Peggy

IPF 2004,

Florida

"Worry looks

around,

Sorry looks back,

Faith looks up."

[Guest guest]

Bruce,

Thanks for the reference to the GAO report...hadn't been aware of it.

To all.... it's apparent that some are referring to Medicare Supplement plans, and separate Part D Rx plans, when they mention premiums of $169 and $66, respectively. The separate Medicare Advantage plans combine Medicare Parts A and B as well as Part D, and generally have low, e.g., the $31 mentioned, or no premiums, besides the $96 for Medicare Part B. Part D is generally the same, whether as a stand alone or as part of an Advantage plan.

These plans are administered entirely by the insurance carrier and Medicare is out of the picture. For those not clear on the differences, I encourage you to inquire, and look for information, e.g., from AARP (not my favorite organization) leading up to the year-end and open enrollment periods when certain plan changes can be made. United Healthcare/Secure Horizons, for example has a special plan, in some states, called Evercare, that provides a special level of care for people with certain conditions, including COPD, Asthma, and Diabetes.

I would be happy to discuss further off line.

Dale

Dale Snellbaker

Cell

[Guest guest]

Actually the medicare.gov site has some excellent information and an

engine to search every plan available in your state.

Yes, clearly I was referring to supplement and Texas and being disabled

rather than retired. Every state is different so no universal statements

as to what is best for anyone.

>

> Bruce,

>

> Thanks for the reference to the GAO report...hadn't been aware of it.

>

> To all.... it's apparent that some are referring to Medicare

Supplement

> plans, and separate Part D Rx plans, when they mention premiums of

$169

> and $66, respectively. The separate Medicare Advantage plans combine

> Medicare Parts A and B as well as Part D, and generally have low,

e.g.,

> the $31 mentioned, or no premiums, besides the $96 for Medicare Part

B.

> Part D is generally the same, whether as a stand alone or as part of

an

> Advantage plan.

>

> These plans are administered entirely by the insurance carrier and

> Medicare is out of the picture. For those not clear on the

differences,

> I encourage you to inquire, and look for information, e.g., from AARP

> (not my favorite organization) leading up to the year-end and open

> enrollment periods when certain plan changes can be made. United

> Healthcare/Secure Horizons, for example has a special plan, in some

> states, called Evercare, that provides a special level of care for

> people with certain conditions, including COPD, Asthma, and Diabetes.

>

> I would be happy to discuss further off line.

>

> Dale

>

> Dale Snellbaker

>

> Cell

>