LyrArc Article Gist
Generic version of Zocor by Merck to reduce bad cholesterol is now available and can substitute for Lipitor which costs $2 to $3 per day. This generic can be bought at Costco at 10 cents per day. Generics can have a huge impact on cost for patients and for the country's medical bill and for affordable health care its very important to achieve affordable health care.

LyrArc Article Gist
This review of Acemoglu and Robinson in the MIT News is relevant to the situation faced today. The two professors at MIT and University of Chicago, have provided two books relevant to today's crises, the first "When Nations Fail" in 2012 about the need for inclusive nations, and the second "The Narrow Corridor" about the importance of the role of individual and society in sustaining democracy. Their point in the first book "When Nations Fail" in 2012 coming after the financial crisis caused by banking excesses stated that the nations fail when they are not inclusive.  In practice it is about " the system being rigged" to favor some groups as the Republican party and Mr. Trump say has happened. The banks and lobbyists, pharmaceutical industry and lobbyists, tech industry and lobbyists, leading to a system where individual and society are pushed into a corner. Social theorist and economists fail to look at things in practice such as profit seeking behaviours and unethical behaviour that goes unchecked, which continued after the financial crisis into the election of 2016, with charges of rigged systems.  This week Germany's DW.com oped pages covered New York with the statement that treatment in New York costs $15,000 for coronavirus infection illness yet many New York residents in the worst affected neighborhoods would find a $500 expense difficult to bear. Early closing of schools to control infection rate was resisted by Mayor De Blasio of New York because many parents depended on schools for lunches for their kids. The situation had been allowed to deteriorate to that level.  In their second book the MIT authors are saying that the role of the individual and society are important to check that of the state (for example if it is perceived as being rigged by the influence of lobbying of legislators and politicians as the Republican party and Mr. Trump have maintained). It is only when it is checked and there is some tension is there the possibility of democracy and democratic processes, say the two MIT authors. In the absence of this the states and elites of politicians and business interests supporting the leaders and their common behaviours, become a perpetual state, in effect a one party rule of two parties with similar behaviours and interests in the state. A situation that allowed the outshoring of American manufacturing and European manufacturing to China including critical infrastructure, essential infrastructure over 2 decades even over the protests of Mr. Lighthizer since 2010. As the twin crises evolved in Europe of austerity policies after banking excesses in Europe, and the migration crisis of migrants coming from North Africa and the wars in the Middle East, a similar situation began to develop in Europe as the political elites entrenched in Germany, France, and Spain faced new voices. The tensions that arose were constructive bringing in the role of society and individual that the MIT authors say are so necessary for the narrow corridor of democratic process to function. New parties emerged in France with Macron's La Republique En Marche, Podemos and Ciudadanos in Spain, and in Germany with the SPD and CDU shrinking till the revival of Merkel for her handling of the pandemic. Coming from an intuitive way born from experience in East Germany, Germany's recent president Joachim Gauck, civil rights activist  came up with the same ideas. He is a Lutheran pastor in former East Germany who struggled against the government of the German Democratic Republic (former communist East Germany) for a role for individual and society against the state. We profiled and quoted him in "The Way Forward"  column in Lyrarc.com. Gauck's point was that  having diverse groups in the conversation is important, not excluding others from outside in the conversation is important. Gauck called  debate "the oxygen of democracy,"  that needed to be maintained.  Genuine democratic process is hard to sustain, it happens only when the role of individual and society is given prominence, so that only a narrow corridor exists for democracy, a narrow space in which can be sustained only if the effort is there, the goodwill is there, and the grace of Divine Providence.  It is fragile and it is critical to sustain.   In this sense the sometimes heated debate in the U.S. and Europe, Asia and Latin America about words such as- austerity, community, solidarity, migration, New York Mayor De Blasio's choice between school lunches and infections, about infrastructure, pharmaceutical prices, infrastructure, outshoring, jobs sent overseas, manufacturing locally, made in USA or made in India or made in France, Atmannirbhar Bharat, misallocation of capital starving health and public services, are all relevant and essential for democracy. This includes the discussion to avoid use of the military in protests in American cities in the middle of a pandemic which just crossed the 2 million mark in cases in the U.S., that was taken up by Defense Secretary Esper. In it lies the hope for democracy and many voices. Der Spiegel recent look at the pandemic how it happened in China, closes with the line- you need more than one voice in society. A constant reminder that many voices be heard, counseling patience, but also that wise choices be made with divine providence.           ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany went through a period of stagnant growth and persistently high unemployment leading to reforms of the welfare system and entitlements under the Schroeder administration. The reforms led to lower unemployment benefits and an effort to get the unemployed take up jobs. Instead of unemployment benefits that amounted to half the salary indefinitely, unemployment benefits ended in 12 months under the reforms, and workers were forced to take up jobs or dig into their savings. The cuts to benefits led to more of the unemployed taking jobs that were not their first choice with lower incomes. Unions agreed to defer wage demands and wages remained relatively flat for a long period. The "kurzarbeit" system of government subsidizing employers to retain workers during economic downturns, helped cushion the workforce from ups and downs in the economy. Unemployment which was in double digits a decade ago, is now 6.1%. The system still preserved some other aspects of generous benefits- parental leave of 14 months at two-thirds salary, vacation time and publicly sponsored health insurance. Recent changes include raising the retirement age to 67 from 65. The Organization of Economc Cooperation and Development estimates that the 200,000 jobs saved in Germany during the recession of 2008-2009 cost the government $7 billion. Government funds helped companies retain workers by paying a portion of worker salaries and averting layoffs.This comes to $35,000 per job. Compare this with the $38.9 billion allocated to a loan program at the Energy Department under the U.S. stimulus. 8050 jobs were created under this program according to the Washington Post- for the money spent so far in Sept 2011- 2 years into the loan program, of $19.3 billion. This comes to $2.4 million in government guaranteed loans per job. The Energy Department says that 33,000 jobs were saved under the $5.9 billion that was given to the auto industry under this program for investments in manufacturing to improve fuel efficiency. This comes to $178,000 per job. The Energy Department and Congress estimated a 5%-10% loss on the $38.6 billion loan program for loans that go sour, such as the Solyndra solar company $535 million loan. This comes to $1.9 billion at 5% loss and $3.8 billion for a 10% loss. The purpose of these figures is to show the cost of programs when the programs fail to achieve job goals or produce too little for the investment. The $3.8 billion loss under the program is over half the $7 billon Germany invested for the 200,000 jobs saved as estimated by the OECD. That ranks as a far superior investment than the Energy Department program. For the U.S. there are aspects of German reforms such as "kurzarbeit" that bear emulation, with serious questions about the effective use of the U.S. stimulus funds. For the rest of Europe the stingier unemployment benefits, raising the retirement age to 67, and other reforms send a different message. From the average German the message is: we made the tough changes, the rest of Europe cannot expect Germans to pay higher taxes while they put off similiar changes. Italy needs to change its retirement age, just as the Germans have done. As Chancellor Merkel puts it: "People in countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal shouldn't be able to retire earlier than in Germany. It's important for everybody to put in effort to make it roughly equal. Germany will only help when others really make an effort." Which is why Greece, Spain, Italy, even France are faced with making serious changes. This isn't stalling when it comes to euro bonds, from the German perspective. And it isn't about the lack of committment to the idea of a European Union, as all major political parties in Germany, the CDP, the SDP and the Greens, all strongly support the idea of a European Union. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The EU's competition commissioner to crackdown on pharmaceutical companies that are delaying the entry of generics drugs with various tactics that are anticompetitive. EU has raided the offices of several marge drug companies and retrieved documents that show this activity was going on. About 5% of medical bills or 3 billion euros coud have been saved from 2000 to 2007, if companies had allowed generics to enter the market earlier and not resorted to these antitcompeitive strategies. Like paying off generics companies or having so many patents on the ingredients of the drug, in one case 1300 patents on one single drug, and then suing the generics companies to tie up the case in the courts.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist cites the Dartmouth Atlas Project which shows differences in cost across the country for health outcomes and spending involving Medicare. It cost $5000 per person in Salem, Oregon in 2006, $8000 in San Francisco, and more than $16,000 in Miami, with outcomes for health tending to be better in places where the costs were lower. This is one of the statistics that Peter Orszag of the Congressional Budget Office uses to come up with his estimate of 30% waste in health care spending in the United States. Prof. Skinner at Dartmouth and Prof. Garber at Stanford point out that of most health systems around the world the American system is "uniquely inefficient" and wasteful. The Economist cites information that the American system is twice as costly per person for healthcare than the Swedish system, and that it costs twice as much in Minnesota as in Miami. A poll done for the Economist shows 52% of the people in the UA are dissatified with the quality of care, 40% think the system needs fundamental change, and 29% think that it should be fundamentally rebuilt. The lack of uniform coverage is also causing turmoil in the system. About 49 million are uninsured, and a quarter or more are able to buy insurance and do not buy it because it is so costly, has exclusions and coverage is inadequate. But these people also end up in the emergency rooms along with the indigent costing the whole system tens of billion of dollars for costly late interventions that could have been avoided with preventive care early on. With the economic crisis and rise in joblessness, the dire condition of state and local budgets, the situation has probably drastically worsened, and the system near breakdown. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Comparative effectiveness research will be conducted to evaluate what is the best treatment for any ailment or disease or health problem under the $1.1 billion allocated for this in the Stimulus Plan. What are the alternative methods of treatment, what is the effectiveness of each treatment, what are the comparative costs and so on. Is it better to treat neck pain with surgery or acombination ofphysical therapy, exercize and medications? If there is ablockage of arteries in the lower leg and leg pain, how does drugs and watchful waiting compare with surgery? For chronic heart failure how does home monitoring of blood pressure and weight and exercise in addition to medications provide an alternative route as opposed to just medications. Dr Fisher of Dartmouth Medical School cites these as examples of questions that can be asked in comparitive effectiveness research. The money will be available to the Health and Human Services Department and will be used over several years. About 15 federal employees will form a council to coordinate the research and advise President Obama and Congress on how to use the money. In 2007 the US spent $2.2 trillion, or 16% of GDP, on health care, and the Congressional Budget Office says it will grow to 25% of GDP at the rate its growing by 2025 if left to its own devices. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Of the people asked the question "what issue do you see as the most important for health care" 44% in a NBC/WSJ poll said they considered Cost as the biggest issue, and 37% said that they considered the Uninsured as the biggest issue, 11% said quality of care was the biggest issue. The President is focussing on cost as he develops the health care plan. He is also saying that to provide health care for all and cover the uninsured without controlling costs would break the bank. Another thing that the White House shows it has learned from previous failed attempts, is that it is doing this with an open Health Care Forum with participation of different sides in the health care discussion. Clinton's effort in 1993 ran into problems because it was developed secretively, and without much discussion, and little effort to get different people's views. The previous attempt also waited too long after the election, and this time the President is moving quickly when he enjoys large popular support. Its also true now that there is serious concern especially in this downturn of what a threat spiralling costs of health care are becoming to the future prosperity of the American people. This time the leaders in Congress are setting an aggressive schedule to get health care palns legislation on the floor by June and get a floor vote in August 2009....

LyrArc Article Gist
Rising costs in the French health care system.

LyrArc Article Gist
One in six dollars generated by the U.S. economy goes to pay for health care, almost twice the average for rich countries. It hurts America in many ways; by being a burden on the taxpayer when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid paying for the poor and the elderly, on companies being one reason GM went bankrupt, it eats up federal and state budgets, rising costs make any form of future coverage for all unsustainable, and it robs other priorities such as infrastructure building and other national scale investments. The Economist says that if it had to design a system from scratch, it would go for a system based mostly around publicly funded health care. For the uninsured the solution of an employer mandate is now well accepted, so this is not an issue. What is an issue is how to make the new system affordable? Here the Economist says that whether in stages or in one move, the tax deductability of employer paid health insurance, which is costing the U.S. government $250 billion ayear, has to go. It is necessary to remove this deduction, and its something all interests involved will have to swallow, as other savings are smaller and will not be adequate. The deductability of insurance makes the true cost of insurance transparent, so it supports gold plated insurance. This does not make cost control the pressing priority it needs to be. So the deducatability of employer paid health insurance hurts both ways. The other necessary action is in the area of moving out of the current culture where most doctors work on a fee-for-service basis, where the more tests they prescribe or procedures they perform the greater their incomes. This acts as a perverse incentive, and has aruinous effect in mushrooming health care costs in America. Cutting back on unnecessary tests and procedures, and prescriptions , would save 10% to 30% of health costs says the Economist. And it says this has been proven with the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and Kaiser Permanente in California showing that cutting back doesn't hurt care and outcomes., so much so that cutting back would occur along with improved outcomes. But Americans with employer paid insurance just take things for granted as its not much out of pocket expense for them. THis creates the lack of a force for controlling costs even as employers are shouldering abigger and bigger burden, and the employee who thinks he is doing fine actually is seeing more of his salary dollars going to pay for his health insurance. In a way the consumers of health care are stuck with the perception that they are not somehow paying for these mushrooming costs and too manytests, procedures and prescriptions. This perception leads them a false sense of comfort with the system they are in, and a fear of something new fanned by the medical lobbies, that any change will impact users negatively. This makes the whole discussion on health care or the process of finding solutions to become an exericize in which terms like "rationing" and "choice" play a distorting role. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. health insurance company WellPoint Inc. will offer higher payments to primary care physicians. This is part of new strategy to reduce emergency room visits and costs after deterioration in a patients condition by relying on primary care physicians for better care at the outset. Payments to primary care physicians will be increased by 10%, with higher payments when the results show better quality and preventive care. WellPoint has a network of 100,000 primary care doctors. Physicians who meet certain goals such as lowering the overall cost of a patient's health care costs will be given an incentive of 20-30% of the savings realized. The new effort will add 1-2 percentage points to the 6-8% of the $100 billion that Wellpoint pays for claims processed each year. WellPoint's management sees a reduction in medical costs of about 20% by 2015 as a result of such efforts.

LyrArc Article Gist
Peter Orszag's role in the healthcare debate and the formulation of health care policy proposals. One proposal of Orszag, who heads the Congressional Budget Office, is to set up a new agency with powers to cut spending and implement changes in Medicare. Says Orszag, "one of the reasons we have such disjointed and skewed incentives is that we have an excessively political process." At a recent meeting with House Democrats, one Congresswoman said her top priority is winning higher payments for oxygen suppliers, and Orszag was taken aback. For years officials have been trying to cut payments to oxygen and medical equipment suppliers, which are said to be inflated. When a new competitive bidding process was set to take effect last year, industry supporters in Congress were able to delay the plan, and these supporters are still fighting to block changes says the WSJ. Here is a 40 year old Orszag, with degrees from Princeton and London School of Economics, who got his early experience in the Clinton adminstration at age 24. He then followed this with a number of policy oriented jobs, ending with appointment to head CBO in 2007. And he faces the whole system of Congressmen from both parties beholden to interests in the healthcare industry, who provide the donations for them to finance their election campaigns. Dan Eggen describes this in the Washington Post, 7/21/2009. Max Baucus of Montana, and to some extent Grassley of Iowa, are senators from both parties who Eggen points out are beholden to the healthcare industry because of large donations they receive from the interests in the healthcare industry. These interests want to see their payments system protected. The further escalation in health care costs, which would make the whole healthcare system unaffordable even as it delivers poor results, can only be prevented by making cost control an exercize that is not influenced by healthcare industry donations. Jackie Calmes describes the huge hurdles in achieving a deficit neutral move to universal health care in the U.S. in the NYT 6/26/2009. See the link. The exchange between Grassley and Orszag on the issue of the $177 billion in savings needed from the payments to health insurers under the Medicare managed care plans- which allow seniors to obtain Medicare coverage outside the government run program -went as follows. These are dubbed overpayments by outside experts and efforts have been made to cut them in Congress. When Mr Grassley raised concerns about the impact of such cuts in a hearing, -and Grassley has opposed the cut for this overpayment to insurers- Orszag responded saying: "I very firmly believe that capitalism is not founded on excessively high subsidies to private firms. This is what this system delivers right now." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The startling truth about health "reforms," - they won't control spending, and without that the whole system of health care will rapidly become unaffordable and unsustainable. Obama's Council of Economic Advisors points out in new report that since 1975 annual health spending per person, adjusted for inflation has grown 2.1 percentage points faster than overall economic growth per person. At this rate health spending which was 5% of the GDP in 1960, and is 18% of GDP today, would grow to 40% of GDP in 2040. Medicare and Medicaid would increase from 6% of GDP now to 15% in 2040, or equal to three fourths of federal spending. Employer paid insurance premiums for families which grew 85% in inflation adjusted terms from 1996 to $11,941 in 2006, would increase to $25,200 by 2025 and $45,000 in 2040. This would force employers to reduce take home pay. Samuelson says the uncontrolled health spending is singlehandedly determining national priorities, reducing discretionary income, raising taxes, widening budget deficits and squeezing other government programs, while it is producing large amount of waste in medical spending. See the link to Prof. Tyler Cowen of George Mason University in NYT, 6/14/ 2009, who cites the habit of doctors to write many expensive tests as one of the prime culprits in the wasteful spending. And in the process it delivers higher cost for lower overall quality of health for the American people. This at a time when many European countries provide live examples of doing it in a better way- lower cost, better health. The serious problem with the Obama health reforms says Samuelson is that it talks about restraining spending but may end up increasing spending. Its talk about controlling spending he says is good intentions, but based more on hopeful thinking, public realtions and risks becoming cosmetic reform. Because to really control spending will require coming to grips with its fundamental cause- hospitals and doctors are paid mostly on a fee-for-service basis and reimbursed by insurance, private or governmental. Such a system encourages doctors and hospitals to provide more services, expensive tests, favors heavy use of expensive medical technologies to increase profits, and for patients to expect them. Samuelson puts his finger on the root of the problem - there is no incentive and every disincentive for all the players in this game , doctors, hospitals and patients to seek reform of this system. For doctors and hospitals the hope would be that this cosmetic "reform" would leave the system basically unchanged, and patients to continue with a lifestyle and expectations that do not not acknowledge the fact that a lot of healthcare does not come from spending but from preventative care, education, good eating and exercize habits, and healthy lifestyles. And the uninsured are no exception, they would simply start consuming the expensive care for lower quality of overall health like everyone else. With this kind of situation confronting us, the views of Samuelson, and Professor Tyler Cowen of George Mason University, as welll as a growing chorus of informed public opinion on this subject, is that insuring the uninsured is a good idea, but doing it within the bounds of the present system, can only increase the costs. And too much is at risk, to rely on what Samuelson calls a scattershot of measures to control costs made up by Congress such as "evidence -based guidelines," "electronic record-keeping," "bundled payments to hospitals, to give the illusion of progress that won't make a serious difference. A sweeping restructuring of health care is needed, that would overhaul "fee-for-service" payment and reduce the fragmentation of care. It will also need what has not even be touched on adequately in the debate. This is the massive need for education in the schools about nutrition, eating, exercize, healthy lifestyles. It would also require opinion leaders in each field from sports and other fields to lead by example and with constant public presence, the media, and companies to form a partnership with private institutions to change existing eating habits and lifestyles that encourage obesity, smoking, fast food eating habits, large portions in restaurants....

LyrArc Article Gist
The health care system is designed to encourage procedure based specialist practices and discourages the patient understanding education and monitoring that occurs with a well designed preventive family physician practice. As a result a patient only spends 30 minutes ayear on average with family physician compared to one hour in other developed nations. In the USA there has been a steady decline in the level and quality and extent of family care and the close one on one rapport with well trained family physicians who enjoyed their work and understood their patients and kept up with their health conditions and provided good and regular advice on these conditions. There is no money in this care as a result first you provide an environment where a whole range of medical conditions can flourish and expand, and then you hit them with a whole series of tests to rule out specific medical conditions. It is a perfect way to expand the testing and let testing flourish, so it would appear that if someone had wanted to start with a goal of letting testing proliferate unhindered then this would be the perfect way to design it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The costs of fraud in medical care from spurious Medicare claims to kickbacks for unecessary services is estimated at $125 to 175 billion. Costs of unnecessary care from overuse to unnecessary lab tests are between $250-325 billion. The amount wasted for on treatment for preventable conditions such as heart disease and diabetes. is $25-50 billion. This number is much higher when all the complications from obesity are figured in. These amounts alone add up to $500 billion. Add to it the problems and the costs of medical errors leading to bad drug reactions or other misdiagnosed procedures which cost an estimated $75-100 billion and the the total is upto $600 billion. These amounts are not going to be tackled by computerization of medical records. The whole manner and ways in which medicine is practiced today and the manner in which the public takes care of its health would have to change for an impact to be made in these numbers.

LyrArc Article Gist
John Cochrane, professor at the Booth School of Business, University of Chicago points to the simple truths about U.S. healthcare- out of control pricing because of the pathologies created by previous laws and regulations. He points out that costs are high in healthcare because regulations keep them high. Supply of new doctors is controlled because Congress and the AMA made it that way with a cap on residency programs and AMA opposing the expansion of medical schools. In a system of open competition new hospitals and health care businesses would challenge old ones which is not happening in a regulated market with regulations working to limit competition for the firms already in the business and with the influence to limit competition. Insurance costs for major expenses in an open and deregulated competitive market without the regulations would be so much lower than todays costs that its likely we would not even need a mandate such as the one the Obama healthcare law imposes.

LyrArc Article Gist
Typical of so much of what is written about the World Health Organization and its role in the pandemic, this podcast in the WSJ fails to quickly convey the critical function of the WHO as an early warning system the world has depended on, including China. The H1N1 epidemic originated in Mexico. Asian countries including China and India depended on very quick response from the country where the epidemic originated  in allowing entry into the affected area for experts from advanced countries such as the U.S. The global response was then coordinated across countries quickly with complete transparency. The head of China's CDC himself faced a problem with transparency with the provincial authorites in Wuhan. 1.    Fundamentally this quick entry was denied the U.S. Request by U.S. to China was made on Jan. 6 for U.S. team to go to Wuhan, quick permission was denied and given only about 6 weeks later on Feb 16. This delay is the crux of the problem for the U.S.. Taiwan confirmed human to human transmission on Jan. 1, the WHO was saying this was not clear as late as Jan. 14. These costly delays are what the U.S.  letter is about.  The head of the CDC China Gao Fu called Dr. Redfield head of CDC in the U.S. on the next day after he suspected Wuhan provincial authorites were vague about what was happening. Gao Fu was alarmed when scanning the internet on December 30, 2019, about rumors of a vaguely worded lung disease in internal memos of Wuhan. He called Wuhan authorites and was not getting clear answers on that day, then deciding on December 31 to send his own team to Wuhan, as reported in German magazine Der Spiegel- Hackenbroch, Zand, 05/20/2020.  Der Spiegel says in its special report on the early period in Wuhan that Gao Fu was so alarmed about what was happening enough to be in tears in his series of calls with Dr. Redfield in the immediate days that followed. The date was shortly after the GAO Fu sent the team to Wuhan, December 31 and New Years Day 2020, as reported in Der Spiegel. See the link to Lyrarc gist of Der Spiegel's "A Failed Deception: The Early Days of the Coronavirus in Wuhan."  2.  President Trump points out the standards of the WHO- in the concluding point of his letter to WHO- when a three time prime minister of Norway, Gro Brundtland was head of the WHO during the SARS crisis of 2003. She acted quickly and decisively and no time was lost. It is this failure of the early warning system under the new president of the WHO after 2017 Dr. Tedros that alarms the U.S.  with about 100,000 deaths.  3.  This failure it can now be said was partly a result of a election in 2017 for the position of WHO president which was flawed. This was the first time a WHO head, an important position was put up for an election. The Executive Board was responsible for this appointment since the founding of the WHO as part of the UN, based in Geneva, Switzerland, after World War II. This system worked. The election was clearly a bad process for appointing the president of the WHO which should be done entirely on the capabilities of the person holding this position not on a flawed voting process. It is flawed because India and Bangladesh hit by a cyclone during the coronavirus have suffered greatly, as have other countries, but had only 2 votes for 1.5 billion people, when Barbados (385,000 population) and Laos (7 million) which had less than one  hundredth the population had the same number of votes. The U.S. had one vote. The election resulted in lobbying and a process in which many candidates stayed away because they simply would not go through such a process. The position was too important to the world- most of the advanced countries had forgotten about the danger of epidemics to let this happen by 2017, as shown in the way the austerity years led to cancellation of the preparations for pandemic in France and Britain. The austerity years and neglect of public health during these tech boom years in the western world made it possible for this to happen. 3.   Along with the 1 month ultimatum action is already being taken to restore the effectiveness of the importance of the Executive Board. The head of the health ministry in India, Dr. Harsh Vardhan, has been appointed the new chairman of the Executive Board on May 22. This restores the voice of billions of people in Asia in the process, and brings the major countries with the greatest risk in a pandemic into the decision process for tackling the pandemic, this includes the rest of the world.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How companies like United Health are lobbying aggressively to shape the new helathcare legislation to their benefit. BW says the health insurers like United Health, Aetna and Wellpoint are already winning through clever and effective lobbying of Congress. Former Senator Tom Daschle works as aconsultant for United Health. Senator Conrad who has led aeffort to replace the public plan with nonprofit medical cooperatives, which would be a weaker competitive threat to insurers, is also influened by the insurers. United Health's CEO Helmsley and its person working with Congress on healthcare Simon Stevens met with Conrad on June 4. When lawmakers in Congress cite consulting group Lewin Group, that 88 million or 56% of those with employer provided coverage would desert private insurance for a government run program, they are quoting acompany owned by United Health. The Congressional Budget Ofice says these numbers are too high. United Health has used savy presentations on how to cut costs, and help Blue Dog and other Democrats articulate their positions, to gain influence in shaping the plan to their interests. United Health thus counts a lot with Matheson, and Mike Ross of Arkansas, who are prominent with the 52 Blue Dog Democrats. and with Senator Mark Warner of Virginia. And United Health put together an effective lobbbying group, even hiring the chief of staff of House Democratic leader Steny Hoyer. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein says that for the 85% of the people who have healthcare the Obama proposals are not a good deal. The Obama proposals mean higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of healthcare for the uninsured group over 10 years. This lower income group has no coverage despite the $300 billion Medicaid program. Feldstein says there surely must be better and less costly ways of getting this lowincome group healthcare. Raising the top income tax rate to 45% from 35%- as a result of letting the Bush tax cuts expire and adding aproposed health surcharge on higher income individuals- would actually lower revenues for the government, as it would change behavior of high income individuals in ways that lower their taxable inome. The result is higher deficits and higher taxes when even without this large deficits are projected for the future. How to slow the rapid growth in healthcare spending? The Obama plan is to cut spending on Medicare. Feldstein sees the govenment's effort aimed at reducing the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reduced payments to providers. Will this result in enough of acost reduction to make the system work. And if the cost reductions are too heavily weighted towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare, even though it is structured to allow cost escalation. Feldstein offers no solutions to the problems of cost escalation except to suggest that the Obama plan does not really tackle the cost escalation issues directly with providers, and instead burdens the national finances to an extraordinary degree. And the need for apause and reflection....

LyrArc Article Gist
Estimates show the 50 million Americans enrolled in Medicare today will increase to 80 million by 2030, according to the program's actuaries. Simple demographics as the baby boom generation ages is making controlling the deficit without controlling increase in health care costs as both sides in the fiscal cliff negotiations are attempting to do can only lead to defunding critical areas such as education, R&D and infrastructure, and breaching the safety net for lower income Americans. Health care spending took up 7% of GDP in 1960, increasing to 17.9% of GDP in 2010. Federal spending on healthcare has grown to about 25% in 2012 from 10% in 1960, and is projected to increase to about 33% in ten years by the Congressional Budget Office.

LyrArc Article Gist
Elizabeth Rosenthal looks at Obamacare's contribution to cost containment in 2013-2014. Rosenthal says its is a kind of delicate maneuvring at the edges, because serious work needs to be done. The fee-for-service and many of the drivers for increases in medical costs, the old system of pricing, are still in place. In 20 years at the current rate and after Obamacare health care will still take 25% of the U.S. budget if nothing is done. Healthcare costs are about half that of the U.S. in some of the advanced European countries. She calls Obamacare a trickle down theory of cost containment becaue it leaves most of the drivers for cost increase in place and works at the margins. Princeton economist Uwe Reinhardt calls it an ugly patch on a somewhat ugly system. Rosenthal cites the armies of consultants anticipating every move to reduce prices, and working on "strategic billing'' to increase revenues for hospitals and doctors. For those who say the prices are now up more slowly than in the past, Michael Chernew of the Harvard Medical School, has this to say- its like a diet, reminding us that that we haven't even lost weight, just gaining weight slower than before. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Samuelson points to the risks to the American economic growth from excessive health care costs. This is hurting take home pay and shows up in consumer spending. It is hurting government spending in other areas such as needed infrastructure spending and efforts to reduce the deficit. This hurts private capital investment to create jobs because of lower demand from constricted consumer spending. The U.S. budget has as its largest single expense 27% on health care compared to 20% on defense the next largest expense, with growth in health care spending taking this to one third of the budget in coming years. Without addressing health care, says Samuelson, the Supercommitte in Congress even if successful at deficit reduction will basically have failed to do its job, and it did not have the time, resources or conviction to do this. According to a new study from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), U.S. healthcare spending per person is $7,960 per person in 2009. This compares with Norway $5,352, Britain $3,487, France $3, 978, an OECD average of $3,233. Life expectancy in the U.S. is 78.2 years, compared to Japan 83 years, OECD average of 79.5 years. Chile and the Czech Republic have life expectancy equal to the U.S. Except for cancer care where the five year survival rate is 89.3% in the U.S. and the OECD average is 83.5%, the U.S. lags far behind in much needed critical areas such as diabetes and asthma. Rates of emergency hospitalization for asthma are 3 times that in France and 6 times that in Germany and Italy. The U.S. has fewer doctors per thousand population and higher cost per medical procedure- with more frequent use of the costliest procedures- creating a supply shortage that induces higher prices, and less preventive and early action care through physician visits. The number of practicing U.S. doctors is 2.4 per thousand population in the U.S. compared to 3.1 per thousand for the OECD average; and number of annual doctor consultations 3.9 per capita in the U.S. versus 6.5 for the OECD average. Appendectomy cost $7,962 in the U.S., $5,004 in Canada and $2,943 in Germany. Coronary angioplasty cost $14,378 in the U.S., compared to $9,296 in Sweden, and $7,027 in France. Knee replacement cost $14,946 in the U.S., $12,424 in France, and $9,910 in Canada. Knee replacements, angioplasties and MRI exams are twice as common in the U.S. compared to the OECD countries. ...