A recent New York Times highlighted Maine’s attempts at comprehensive healthcare reform. Their experiences serve as a cautionary tale for Congress.   The state established a public health insurance plan, expanded Medicare and Medicaid eligibility, and banned insurers from refusing to cover people with pre-existing conditions, but those actions have done  little to insure more of its residents.  Contrary to the promises of public option supporters, health care costs have only continued to rise in the state.

Reasons for the high health care costs range from the state-specific to the general. Unlike the bill that recently passed the House of Representatives, Maine’s healthcare reform legislation didn’t include a mandate to buy health insurance plans. It’s a vicious cycle: forcing health insurance companies to offer policies to unhealthy people with pre-existing conditions raises the rates for younger people; young adults will be even less likely to buy health insurance if their premiums go up, which results in the insurer’s risk being spread among less people. In the end, the older, unhealthier population remains in the pool and must contend with less affordable health insurance. Therefore, there is a larger uninsured population.

Granted, Maine is a market dominated by just one private health insurance company (which, with its effective monopoly, can increase premiums to their liking); and its population is older, sicker, and poorer than the U.S. in general. Senator Olympia Snowe points to her state as a cautionary tale of what may happen if drastic changes are made too fast. Snowe is a Republican that supports healthcare reform but is against the public option. Budgeting problems have caused Maine to cap enrollment of its own public option health insurance plan at under 9,000. The federal government, unlike most states, is allowed to run a deficit. However, it isn’t exactly rolling in the money right now either.

The flu pandemic has left many concerned especially with talk of a vaccine shortage.  But that doesn’t mean there is a shortage on ways to prevent you from getting sick.  Here are three simple steps that will protect your health not just now but all year long.

Step 1  Be sure you regularly disinfect the kitchen sink, the trash can, the bathroom faucet and the tub. These places harbor a lot of germs. The champion of the contamination? The kitchen sponge. Clean it in the dishwasher weekly.

Step 2  Lace up your sneakers and take a brisk walk five times a week. Regular exercise can help reduce chances of catching a cold.

Step 3  Include probiotics in your daily diet to help your immune system ward off bad bacteria. Try yogurt, fortified drinks, or a tasty treat like the 90-calorie Attune Milk Chocolate Crip Probiotic Bar.

Lenneice A. Drew is an experienced journalist currently focused on healthcare reform. She is working to help others achieve better lives by finding affordable health insurance alternatives and reporting stories related to the healthcare industry. She lives in Miami, Florida.

Health insurance providers, both public and private, are looking for ways to cut spending. One of their strategies is to deny claims for treatments they deem unnecessary. The effectiveness-testing studies receiving funding in Congress’ healthcare reform bill is a case in point. While that’s a laudable goal, what if your doctor recommends an unusual course treatment?

Experts recommend that you never tell your health insurance plan that you are receiving an “investigational” or “experimental treatment; or if you are enrolled in a clinical trial. These phrases are codewords that make insurers more likely to look closer and reject your claims. First off, health insurance plans will cover treatment your physician considers medically necessary. When it comes to insurance, you obviously shouldn’t lie (that could lead to cancellation of your policy, leaving you uninsured); but you also shouldn’t give more information than is specifically asked for.

You may even be wrong about the experimental status of the procedure. Some procedures aren’t typically used, but are proven medically effective nonetheless. In that case, health insurance plans should cover it. Check with your doctor, even if he or she used wording such as wanting to “experiment with a treatment”. Don’t let semantics cost you!

Yes, you read that right. South Carolina Representative Joe “You Lie!” Wilson has proposed an amendment to the healthcare reform bill lumbering through Congress, which would require all congresspersons to enroll in the public option health insurance plan. He hasn’t switched sides and decided to vote for the Democrats’ bill; rather, his amendment is a stunt intended to point out what he sees as the failures of the public option.

Ironically, supporters of healthcare reform have pointed to the government-subsidized insurance enjoyed by senators and representatives as evidence that there should be a public option–if health insurance is good enough for our politicians, shouldn’t it be good enough for the rest of us? (In fact, although the federal government subsidizes their healthcare, it is actually administered by private insurers.) Wilson turns that strategy on its head, by saying that if a public option is suitable for average Americans, it should also be suitable for Washington D.C.

It’s quite unlikely the amendment will be ratified in the House. The current language simply allows Congress to sign up for the public option. Most Democrats probably won’t vote for this ‘poison pill’ provision; as they have admitted, most Americans would prefer to keep their existing health insurance. Republicans might vote for it as a lark, although they might refuse to dignify Nancy Pelosi’s bill with any type of ‘yes’ vote. Joe Wilson has 72 hours to get his own mandate into the bill, before it reaches the House floor.

With all the concerns over seasonal flu and swine flu (H1N1) vaccinations and whether the vaccinations will be delivered in time…you may be wondering if there is anything you can do on your own to protect yourself from the pandemic. Here are some home remedies that could save you from being infected.

1. Wash your hands with soap in warm to hot water. The amount of infection that could be transferred to other parts of the body can be reduced. Alcohol-based hand cleaners are also effective.

2. Avoid touching your eyes, nose or mouth. Germs spread this way.

3. Try to avoid close contact with sick people. If you must have close contact with a sick person (for example, hold a sick infant), try to wear a facemask or N95 disposable respirator

4. Clean your nose.  Dip a cotton swab in warm salt water and clean out your nostrils. Right before bedtime is a great time to do this. The salty water will cleanse your nostrils and prevent anything that may have settled in your nose from germinating further.

5. Bring on the Vitamin C. Vitamin C supplements and eating lots of foods that are high in Vitamin C can give your immune system just the boost it needs to ward off the flu and other virus’ that may be lurking around.

Lenneice A. Drew is an experienced journalist currently focused on healthcare reform. She is working to help others achieve better lives by finding affordable health insurance alternatives and reporting stories related to the healthcare industry. She lives in Miami, Florida.

Health insurance companies are constantly in search of ways to save money.  Some of their methods, such as refusing to cover those with pre-existing conditions that their underwriters deem too high risk, have drawn fire from consumers and politicians. Now, some insurers are promoting alternative medicine. With some exceptions, consumers pick up the majority of the costs of services like acupuncture and chiropractic, as well as herbal supplements. While most of these remedies are unproven, they have become increasingly popular with consumers. Therefore, promoting it seems to be a win-win situation for insurers.

Kaiser Permanente and Aetna are among the HMOs that offer dietary supplements and herbs to their patients. However, these supplements aren’t covered in most of their health insurance plans. If someone takes a conventional medication, the cost of their prescription will mostly be covered by their insurer, less a small co-payment. If they use a non-prescription herbal supplement instead, the patient must cover the entire cost out-of-pocket. The same applies when someone visits an alternative practitioner as opposed to a physician.  In that respect, it is financially advantageous for insurance companies to encourage the usage of alternative medicine–although they surely won’t admit it.

Some people want Congress to include alternative medicine coverage in the healthcare reform bill. Do you wish alternative medicine was covered in your health insurance plan?

I recognize that healthcare reform is a serious issue that has the potential to change the lives of millions of Americans. I also acknowledge that many people are worried that such a bill will endanger their existing health insurance plans; their fears shouldn’t be downplayed. However, when healthcare reform proposals are compared to “domestic terrorism”, isn’t that going a bit too far? North Carolina Republican Virginia Foxx recently took to the House of Representatives floor to express her vehement opposition to the Democrat-written bill. The representative was quoted in the Associated Press as saying that the nation has more to fear from the bill’s potential passage than it does from terrorists. While hyperbole is a standard feature of modern politics, Foxx has reached a new level.

One of the identifying features of terrorism is the intent to cause a feeling of terror in a population.  Many may disagree with Nancy Pelosi’s plans of healthcare reform that include a public option, but keep in mind that congresspersons of both parties genuinely believe that what they are doing will help America. They may be wrong–and their policies might have disastrous results–but neither Democrats nor Republicans are purposely trying to destroy the United States. Therefore, comparisons to the likes of Osama bin Laden are off-base.  The worst thing about her comments is that they serve to cheapen the legitimate concerns people have. Foxx doesn’t like the bill because she believes it will allow the government to force people to buy health insurance, raise taxes, and and give bureaucrats more power. These are all valid arguments that deserve to be debated, but some people may tune them out due to her inflammatory statements.

Our infamously long-winded Vice President once said that he tried to never question a person’s motives, no matter how much he disagrees with their policies. All of our politicians would do well to take that advice. Both parties are striving to achieve what they think is best for America. Their varied opinions on healthcare reform deserve to be discussed civilly, without resorting to the modern equivalent of Godwin’s Law. In my opinion, that would be best for us all.

(Image: U.S. Army under CC 2.0)

Although it seems like the Democrats’ healthcare reform bills have been zooming through Congress, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid predicts that there will soon be roadblocks.  To the chagrin of the Obama administration, Reid believes that a final bill won’t pass before the ball drops on Times Square and 2009 draws to a close. The White House wanted a bill passed prior to Ryan Seacrest’s countdown to the new year. Why is that so important? Well, 2010 is an election year; the entire Congress will be up for re-election. Judging from the few elections held yesterday, things don’t look good for the Democrats. Their prospects will be even worse if the fight to reform the health insurance industry continues to drag on, instead of  allowing the public’s memory to fade.

Unlike the House of Representatives, which is already close to voting on its bill, the Senate may not begin debate until December. There is some speculation that Reid is waiting for the final cost analysis from the Congressional Budget Office. He commented publicly that he doesn’t want to rush such an important bill. However, he is still striving to pass Obama’s top domestic priority by years’ end. They may be worried that waiting too long will make more likely that this administration’s attempt at providing more affordable health insurance will follow the failing path of Clinton’s.

This new development is just another example of why you shouldn’t wait for the public option if you can afford a health insurance plan now.

With all the controversy over the public option proposed by Democrats in their healthcare reform bills, the number of Americans who will actually be covered by the public option is surprisingly low. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi estimates that just six million (2%)  of the population under 65 years of age will choose the government run health insurance program. One out of five individuals who are buying insurance on their own or in a small group (and will participate in the insurance exchanges central to the House’s bill. would take the public option. The most important issue that has been lost in the debate is providing affordable health insurance to the nation, whatever form it takes.

The public plan might not be the panacea to increased health care costs its supporters claim it will be. The people most likely to be attracted to it will be those with pre-existing conditions private insurers are less likely to cover. Therefore, average health insurance quotes would be cheaper with a private plan, steering the healthier segment of the population away from the public option. Less stringent regulations that allow the less healthy to use more medical services and see more specialists would also drive up costs. (Private insurance companies sometimes limit their offerings based on profitability.)

All in all, the public option doesn’t seem to be as far-reaching as first expected, at least for now. Most Americans will continue to have health coverage through their employers. Senior citizens already have Medicare. What about the masses of low-income uninsured individuals and families? It turns out that most of them will be covered through Medicaid, another government program that will be expanded.

(Image: Speaker Pelosi under CC 2.0)

Last year, a representative from Texas was the true Republican maverick in the presidential race. Ron Paul may not have won the nomination, but he is still bringing his unique libertarian perspective to Congress’ table. His proposals for healthcare reform are no different. He recognizes that the current health insurance situation is untenable, but is against governmental involvement. Recently, he presented several intriguing bills to the House of Representatives.

  1. The Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act of 2009 would give Americans a 100% tax credit on their health care costs (e.g. prescriptions, hospital stays, doctor visits). Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) with high-deductible health insurance plans would also be tax-free. Low-wage employees who don’t file tax returns can have the credit refunded against their payroll taxes, so the bill would help those who need it most afford healthcare. Currently, only medical expenses that reach over 7.5% of an individual’s income can be deducted.
  2. Dr. Paul’s Coercion Is Not Health Care Act of 2009 would forbid the government from enacting a health insurance mandate. There has been some speculation as to the legality of such a mandate. Congressional Democrats, along with the Obama administration, believe that it has to be part of healthcare reform legislation. Their view is that universal coverage must include the young and healthy in order for the insurance pool to afford covering those with pre-existing conditions. This interference in the free market is anathema to Paul. Incidentally, if there is no public option, such a mandate might not be necessary.
  3. Finally, his Freedom From Unnecessary Litigation Act of 2009 would save money through indirect tort reform. This act would establish so-called “negative outcomes insurance”, which would pay off if a patient’s medical treatment goes wrong; it would also offer a tax credit to make the purchase more affordable. The goal is to decrease some of the unnecessary (and costly) testing done in order to avoid malpractice liability, as well as lessen the need for hospitals and physicians to carry billions of dollars in insurance.

As Paul is himself a doctor, his views on the healthcare industry are worth listening to. His opinions tend to be shortchanged in the House because he doesn’t walk in lockstep with either party’s platform, giving his bills little chance of passing.  However, many Americans–who fear socialized medicine, yet acknowledge that we need more affordable health insurance as soon as possible–could find something to applaud in his plans.