Why we should repeal ‘ObamaCare’

No, I'm not one of the conservatives who is currently harping that ObamaCare should be repealed because it goes too far. The thing that galls me is that the Democrats are the ones that sold us out by creating ObamaCare; under the guise of taking care of ‘the people’ they gave a giant gift to the insurance corporations. It doesn’t seem any different to me than the Bush Administration’s Medicare Drug policy that really was a gift to Big Pharma. Sure, let’s pay for drugs for seniors, but without any cost containment built in—that’s what they did and requiring everybody to buy health insurance is the same.

It’s looking like the courts could very well overturn ObamaCare. Why? Because the consensus seems to be that there is no precedent for the Government to force a citizen to buy a product from a company. Some people claim that auto insurance is an example of that, but it isn’t. The difference is that no one is forced to drive and if they choose to exercise that privilege they have to be insured. You don’t want to buy car insurance? Great, then don’t drive. In health arena you can’t choose to skip the circumstances that might necessitate your need for healthcare and consequently you need coverage as no one, other than folks like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, are financially capable of self insuring.

But if everyone needs coverage, should the government be forcing people to buy it? NO!!! The government should be providing it.

“Oh no! Not that! Not government healthcare!!” Well, yes, that’s how it should be. The idea of forcing people to buy a product from a corporation that is dedicated to its own ends (growth and profit) leaves the consumer at their mercy. The insured can be preyed upon, and as we have seen, premiums can go up logarithmically (mine have doubled about every four years), consuming a larger and larger portion of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In the last 30 years the cost of healthcare has gone up from 7% to 21% of the GDP; that’s a 300% increase!

“But what about the tax burden that would create?” Funny you should mention that. I finally figured out that every dollar ‘taken’ out of my pocket, whether a tax or an insurance payment, is another dollar I don’t have to spend on something I really want or desire. So you can take another $15,000 a year out of my pocket in taxes to pay for ‘Medicare for All’ and I would be at a break even point.

The employed that receive their insurance through work and don’t feel like they really pay for it are wrong. Employers have to look at the cost for an employee. The more they spend on insurance for the employee the less they can pay in other forms of compensation. Salaries could go up at no additional cost to employers if they weren’t burdened by paying for employee insurance.

Sure, I know we are in the midst of an economic crisis. We have to cut expenses, not add new ones. But the economic crisis has to be treated in a holistic fashion. The problem isn’t the cost of healthcare; it’s that we spend so much on being the military bully of the world. 44% of the federal budget goes to defense; it is the biggest entitlement program in not only our federal budget, but in the entire world.

Our military budget comprises 46% of the entire world’s military budget. The next ten nations after us only comprise 26% of the total, and most of those countries are our allies. The boogey man that the military has us believing in to the point that we need hundreds of military bases all over the world is just a scare tactic. The greater likelihood is that our being in every other nation’s face causes most of our problems. If we didn’t antagonize the world to the degree we do, we would likely not need nearly the same levels of defense.

While I’m on this rant, the Republican chant to eliminate Medicare and give seniors a voucher to buy private insurance amounts to the same thing—a gift to insurance companies. No matter how big the voucher is, the price of insurance will continue to skyrocket and become unaffordable to a large segment of the senior population.

Let's get our priorities straight and value our most precious natural resource: our citizens.

Friends, Romans, Blue Shield, lend me your ears

Does anyone know a health insurance executive of integrity who is a person of conscience? I need to get their ear.

Today a patient of mine was denied insurance benefits, by United Health Care, for Non-Surgical Spinal Decompression (NSSD). The request was denied because of "a lack of high quality peer reviewed studies published in leading medical journals to support its use."

This did not come as a surprise. While NSSD has over 15 years of anecdotal data to support its safety and effectiveness, this is the standard of what I hear time and time again. When I spoke to the peer review doctor, Dr. Ayers, she told me that she had no authority to override the guidelines. I asked her if epidurals and surgery would be provided for a patient with this diagnosis and she said, "yes". I asked her is she was aware that neither of those options had the supportive literature for safety or effectiveness and she said, "yes". So when I asked her if this looked like a case of "the pot calling the kettle black", she agreed.

No person of conscience would allow people to be forced into a more dangerous, more expensive and less effective medical procedure. Only a corporation operating under the mandate that profits are the only thing that matters would behave that way.

Is it that the insurance companies want the cost of health care to go up?-- Would you rather have a percentage of a 500 million dollar a year industry or one trillion dollar a year industry? Or, is it that they want to scare people away from any treatment by only offering the most egregious option. I don't know, I do know that they constructively make it impossible to get an ear to listen to reason.

“Your Prescription will be $93,000, sir. Would you like me to put it in a bag for you?”

Pharmaceutical companies have a new strategy; the development of drugs that will cost in the $100,000 per patient range. And the best news for the Dendreon Corporation, the manufacturer of Provenge, is that Medicare has agreed to pay $93,000 per patient for it with your tax dollars! That’s right. This is a treatment for TERMINAL prostate cancer patients that will extend their life by four months, as compared with two months for the previously existing drug.

Sales people have long known that it is easier to sell one person something for $1,000,000 that one hundred people something for $10,000. The pharmaceutical industry has taken that to heart and is concentrating on medications in the $100,000 range.

Dendreon Corporation claims that the reason for the high cost is that they put $1 Billion into research and development. Oh really? Who says? Their accountants? Does anyone really trust accounting these days? Accounting has become a creative pursuit like painting and music composition. Should we be sending in forensic accountants to check out the R and D cost claims before agreeing to pay $93,000 per patient?

And, unfortunately this medical treatment doesn’t do anything to positively impact our nation’s overall health; it just allows someone to live a couple extra months at an unbelievably high cost that will be paid by tax payers. Now that’s an entitlement program! The patient gets a couple extra months to live and the pharmaceutical company makes $100K per patient. Who is really winning here?

That same $100,000 could fund a fitness program for hundreds of children to prevent obesity and resulting health problems such as diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Or, nutrition programs for children, in our own country, who are malnourished. These are everyday health issues that would provide us greater bang for our buck.

This is the same dilemma that we face in so many areas. When the basic needs of our nation like medicine, fuel, insurance are for profit industries, then the opportunistic profit seeking corporate culture has a field day. “Maximize profits” is the war cry of the modern corporation. But lost from the contemporary equation are the public’s best interests. Okay, I know this sounds a little socialist. So what’s wrong with that? When people are having the money sucked out of their pockets, it doesn’t matter whether it’s tax dollars or corporate greed, they become poorer as a result.

The fact is that the modern corporation has nothing to do with the founding principles of our nation. The founding fathers had been abused by the British corporations in colonial America. As a result they created corporations with limited powers, temporary charters, and public benefit as the main mandate. They even held corporate leaders legally responsible for corporate misdeeds. This is all very different than what corporations morphed into through court interpretations of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was suppose to give rights to the freed slaves.

Perhaps we should have a serious look at nationalizing some of these industries. I, for one, would like to start with the Health Insurance Industry. Big Oil would be nice, too. But let’s not forget to take a look at Big Pharma. Perhaps they could be directed to intervene where the greatest public good would be served instead of where the largest and quickest profits could be made.

“The government is incapable of administrating such things”, you say? Well I remember when the government (NASA) put a man on the Moon. Don’t tell me the government is incapable. At least you can vote politicians out of office. Try to vote out the CEO of Aetna or Bristol Myers Squibb.

Keep reading between the lines.

Puzzled by the Puzzle of Back Pain!?!?

The Health and Wellness section of the L.A. Times today had and article entitled "The Puzzle of Back Pain". I could not believe what I was reading and was compelled to send an email to the writer, Karen Ravn.

I'll just post the email I sent and leave it at that, without any additional rant. It is my great wish that she would contact me so I could pull away the curtain on many of these issues and expose what is really going on between the lines.

Dear Ms. Ravn,

I’m puzzled and even shocked by your article about back pain “The Puzzle of Back Pain” in today’s L.A. Times. You really drank the Kool Aid on the medical party line. I sincerely invite you to contact me to get some direction about articles that would help the public become enlightened about this and other healthcare issues. After 30 years in the healthcare profession I have valuable insights to share.

You may have noticed our nation is in the midst of a health care crisis. Corporate medicine on all levels, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, certain physician specialty groups are financially protected to the detriment of our nation’s health and financial well being. With 75% of all bankruptcies in the U.S. being related to medical bills, AND, 65% of those had health insurance, we have a boondoggle of giant proportions going on that is comparable to the financial industries tricks that darn near destroyed our economy.

You quote Dr. Richard Deyo, stating that “surgery can be very effective for certain conditions: ruptured discs…etc.” As a professor of “evidence based medicine” at Oregon Health and Science University Dr. Deyo ignores the fact that there is no high quality peer reviewed studies published in leading medical journals to support his contention.

Epidural steroid injections are not recommended by the American Academy of Neurology for the treatment of radicular lumbosacral pain in their 2007 clinician guidelines due to a lack of “evidence” of benefit. This war cry of “Evidence Based Medicine” is consistently used to manipulate the system when convenient and forgotten when it serves the right person’s purposes.

Certainly no article about back pain should ignore the benefits provided by Doctors of Chiropractic. According to Pran Manga, PhD, MPhil, health economist, "There is an overwhelming body of evidence indicating that chiropractic management of low back pain is more cost-effective than medical management." ( Manga P, Angus D, Papadopoulos C, Swan W. "The Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Chiropractic Management of Low Back Pain." Funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health, August 1993.)

He is not alone in his assessment. Numerous international and American studies have shown that for nonspecific back pain, manipulation was heads above all other treatments. In fact, Anthony Rosner, PhD, testified before the Institute of Medicine: "Today, we can argue that chiropractic care, at least for back pain, appears to have vaulted from last to first place as a treatment option." (Testimony before the Institute of Medicine: Committee on Use of CAM by the American Public, Feb. 27, 2003.)

My specialty in Non-Surgical Spinal Decompression also stands as a vital option for those with debilitating back pain caused by herniated or degenerative discs and spinal stenosis along with radicular pain, and helps them avoid surgery. Ironically, patients have to pay out of pocket for these services as most insurance companies claim a lack of “high quality peer reviewed studies published in leading medical journals to support its use”. Yet, they still pay for the surgeries and epidurals even though they lack the same standard of proof and cost much more.

I would like to encourage you to contact me and do a real story that strips away the myths and B.S. that hurt everyday people. My contact info is below. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Dr. Bruce Shannahoff, D.C.

Patient Conan M. is able to dodge the surgeon's knife!

Conan M. was referred to us by his chiropractor, Dr. Cindy Summers of Burbank, CA. His MRI revealed a 8mm x 12mm x 22mm disc herniation at C6/7. His neurosurgeon recommended he have spinal fusion surgery without delay. Conan completed his seven week program of care, and NO MORE PAIN, NO DISABILITY, AND THANKFULLY, NO SURGERY. A couple of months later his post care MRI revealed the herniation was gone! Watch this video to hear his story and how happy this guy is.

Aetna outraged?

Aetna Insurance Co. is suing six New Jersey doctors for what it calls “unconscionable “ medical bills. One example was some alleged billing of $56,980 for a bedside consultation, another for an ultrasound alleged to have been charged at $59,490.

Of course those charges, if true, were ridiculously high. But what’s really going on between the lines. It’s the large insurance corporation trying to gain control over “out of network” physicians. You see for all the political ranting about the importance of our “free market” system, the insurance corporations believe that only applies to them. They should be able to double their premiums every three to four years and lower the coverage at the same time.

When managed care hit the pick your own doctor policies in the 1980s the insurance companies were in effect forcing doctors to join as member physicians. That meant that doctors had to agree to the insurance company’s determination of the value of their service. If the doctor agreed they were then listed in the directory and patients knew that their only financial responsibility would be their deductible and copayment. If you went to an out of network doctor the co pay amount could be higher because the out of network doctor could charge at a higher price and the patient would be responsible for the difference between what the insurance paid and the doctor’s charge. But along the way somehow it became okay for the insurance company to pay a smaller percent of their allowed charges to the out of network doctors.

Think about that for a moment. Two licensed physicians performing the same service but one gets paid more than the other because they are “in network”. The insurance companies were allowed to blackmail the doctors into signing up as “in network” and give up their rights to free market pricing. In fact, former California Governor Pete Wilson passed a bill that allowed doctors to have different prices for the same service. Previously it had been illegal to have different charges for the same service so that doctors couldn’t charge less to their cash patients and charge the insurance companies more. But that had to change to allow the doctors to begin charging the insurance companies less than cash patients.

Of course once the insurance companies got the doctors under their thumb, they started lowering their reimbursements for procedures each year. This is all part of the decline in the quality of health care that has occurred over the last few decades.

In 2007 Aetna tried to impose caps on out of network doctors and the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance said, “No.” They were fined $2.5 million. In 2009 Aetna, UHC, Cigna and WellPoint were forced to pay $90 million to settle underpayments to out of network physicians by the New York Attorney General.

So what this amounts to is Aetna and the other big insurance companies are fighting back by trying to take the offensive. Claiming that out of network doctors are ravenous scoundrels taking advantage of the poor insurance companies and their insured. And, that they must be controlled—by the insurance companies who will be best able to determine a fair price (is my sarcastic tone coming through?).

First off, anyone who doesn’t ask in advance what a service will cost is silly. You do it with the auto mechanic or with a home contractor, why wouldn't you do it with medical services. If the doctor has an outrageous price, fire them and go somewhere else. But, to put the insurance companies in charge of the value of the doctor’s services is akin to putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop. Remember, corporations are solely motivated by their own bottom line profit. Ask any CEO what his fiduciary responsibility is to the shareholders. The fact is that they have taken advantage of us, the premium payers, doctors, employers, everyone, in every opportunity they could. And will continue to unless they are stopped.

Health care reform could make things better, but most citizens have been bamboozled into thinking that the government can’t be trusted with the administration of health care. But if you stop and think about it, neither can the for profit insurance companies. At least we can vote politicians out of office. Can you vote the CEO of Aetna out of office? Well I suppose you could if you were a wealthy elite and owned many millions of shares of Aetna stock, but then you probably wouldn’t want to because it would hurt your portfolio earnings.

Also, sometimes the value of something extends in ways that can’t be measured with numbers. If health care isn’t profitable but provides greater health and productivity to our community increasing the quality of individuals’ lives how does one measure that in terms of corporate profit? You can’t, but the corporation’s mandate doesn’t care, because bottom line profit is the goal.

I for one will be interested to see if those doctors were really charging the outrageous fees claimed, but if they were, and it was legal to do it, is that any different than the big insurance companies doing whatever they want because they can get away with it.

At some point it’s my hope that we can get back a sense of fairness in our culture instead of the “if I can get away with it, why not” attitude. That applies to corporations and individuals alike.

Peace and keep reading between the lines.
for more information about my practice, go to http://www.818NewBack.com

Pre and Post MRI Success Documented!!

These images are the key pre and post images of a 30 y.o. male patient of ours. His original disc herniation in his neck measured 7mm x 12mm x 22mm. The post MRI demonstrated virtually a complete reduction in the herniation. All the patient's pain and neurological deficits are gone. I love this stuff!!

Video From Patient's Grateful Daughter

Blue Shield -- Warm and fuzzy?

Last week Blue Shield announced they would not be raising premiums. They got notice on the front page of the L.A. Times and looked to be trying to make things better in light of our current health care crisis in the U.S. But, reading between the lines, it turns out that this premium freeze only affects the private pay policies. The Employer sponsored policies will go up. Private pay policies only make up 8% of the health insurance policies in the U.S. The other 92% are employer sponsored. So it looks like Blue Shield isn't really giving up much but still got a lot of positive corporate press.

Meanwhile the health insurance premiums that basically double every three to four years, cover less and become increasingly more difficult for people to obtain continue to spiral out of control. The medical cartel is doing just fine. Insurance, Big Pharma, and certain physician specialties (unfortunately, me not being one of them :>)) are doing great. But Americans are going broke. 75% of all bankruptcies in the U.S. are over health care bills and 2/3 of those HAD INSURANCE.

People worried about the Health Care Reform Bill. Like an abused child reaching out to their abusive parent as the child protective services are taking them away, Americans fell prey to rhetoric like: "death panels" "higher taxes" and the likes. Well, I for one can pay extra taxes if I don't have to pay insurance premiums. To the tune of $12,000 a year to be exact. That's exactly what I pay for health insurance for my family, and that's with a $10,000 deductible!!

Death panels? They are already here. The insurance companies routinely deny coverage for what they claim are "investigative services". Yet, they pay for other procedures that are proven not to work. A girl at my daughters' high school was denied a liver operation all her doctors recommended, but could not get approval for. She died the day after the insurance company was finally beaten into submission.

Read between the lines.