Progress in the fight against cancer and other debilitating chronic diseases will be grinding to a halt unless the country fixes its health care system. So states the American Cancer Society as it announces plans to devote its entire $15 million dollar advertising budget for this year to the consequences of inadequate health care.
Although the organization usually devotes its advertising dollars to prevention and early detection campaigns, the group admits that cancer rates are not dropping as rapidly as hoped. They add that recent research show linkage of lack of health insurance to delays in detecting malignant cancers. John Seffrin, CEO of the ACS stated that they had concluded that advances in prevention and research would have little lasting impact if Americans were unable to afford cancer screening and treatment.
The campaign has been initiated to facilitate faster progress toward reduction goals of cancer incidence and death rates, 25% and 50% respectively, over 25 years ending in 2015. Current trends indicate that actual reductions are projected to fall far short, perhaps as much as half, of these goals.
While cancer death rates continue to decline, studies have shown that earlier diagnosed malignancies would enable the rates to fall faster. And insurance status frequently determines whether a person’s cancer is diagnosed early or later.
In a somewhat related theme, the AFL-CIO union movement has announced that they will initiate their own campaign for health care reform on Labor Day. The goals presented are noteworthy and include cost control, comprehensive high quality care, prevention, and the right to choose one’s own physician. The campaign also calls for a strong government role to curb corporate greed and a lowering of employer costs while asking them to pay their fair share. The AFL-CIO unions are mobilizing a 1-million-member health care Emergency Mobilization Team, which will work with a broad coalition of grassroots organizations, to move the nation toward a reformation of the health care system.
It is unclear at this time the extent of reform the AFL-CIO will endorse and the ACS has stated its intent to remain apolitical in recommending specifics with respect to reform. But Mr. Seffrin of the ACS states, “The ultimate control of cancer is as much a public policy issue as it is a medical and scientific issue”.
It seems that almost everyone in America knows that health care reform is long overdue and some call for mandatory health insurance. But universal insurance coverage is not good enough. Private plans that compete by offering various levels of premium amount are rapidly increasing the numbers of the underinsured, individuals who will face financial hardship or bankruptcy, if they should develop cancer or other major chronic disease. Don McCanne of the Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) states as follows; “Good public policy, such as a comprehensive national health insurance program, saves lives. Bad public policy, such as encouraging underinsurance in the private market, kills”.
Let the discussion begin!
will endorse the Conyers bill specifically. That’s what we need to be hearing. In just the last six months, two of my acquaintances put off cancer treatment in one case and a doctor’s visit that would have revealed cancer in the other case. Both people were uninsured. As far as I’m concerned, health insurance corporations, in their fight to protect profit, have blood on their hands.
i have a new book that came recommended from one who fights for health reform. It is called “The revolution will not be funded” and it describes how corporate grants and other funding mechanisms really tie up the non profits insofar as their support for single payer
Imagine you’re a farmer out in the country. You know what type of crops to plant and when to plant them. You take pride every year when you see your goods being sold to market and fell good about providing nutrition for both youth and adults. You know very well that some of your crop will spoil before they make it to the shelves. However, there is nothing you can do to prevent this, once it leaves your farm, someone else has the responsibility of delivering or storing your crop.
Now imagine that about half of the population in the big cities has a great idea to stop crops from spoiling. They protest that the government should be the ones to grow and ship the crops. These idea holders have little knowledge of farming, but have heard that in some countries, government run farms appear to be just as efficient as ours. This is the basis of their argument. The government should run all farms and see that the shipment is delivered in a timely fashion, to ensure there are no spoiled products.
As a farmer you know that spoiled crops are inevitable, unless you grow them right next to the store. But there are many who hold you responsible, for what is really the nature of produce. Although it’s clear to you and all other farmers, that it’s just the reality of farming, but to try and change the opinions of those in the far away cities would be impossible.
Those who cling to this new idea are happy to consume your crops. However, they haven’t a clue as to what it takes to make them grow and to ship. They just want fresh produce and don’t care to educate themselves about what farming is about.
The following year’s political season is filled with promises of government collectivization of farms. “Fresh produce” for all they say. This appeals to many, and the polls indicate that most people are in favor.
With dust in their eyes, they cannot recognize the benefits of the current system. They can pick and choose which ever store they wish to shop at and always have a variety of produce to choose from. They can complain to the store management if the tomatoes are never fresh. Management, in turn, will probably call a new produce vendor to keep his customers happy.
Shortly after the elections, an agricultural collectivization act is past. All farms are now government run. The harvest is expensive, but the government does its best and it turns out to be a great season. The Gov. then ships the harvest to the cities and the inevitable occurs. There are some spoiled goods. Now the city folk find themselves in a tight spot. Who can they complain to, and who would listen? Now they are stuck.
I know the idea of Free Health care for all seems great, but it is a trap. You will be stuck with what ever the government says. What if you really needed a surgery and the Gov. deems it unnecessary or what if a preventable mistake occurs during a procedure? Maybe you feel your doctor is incompetent but he’s going to be your surgeon, who do you turn too?
The reality is that your grievances will be ignored, you may be denied a life saving treatment or possibly a therapy that would improve your life. Today we have choices upon choices, and doctors are fully aware that you may drop them at any time. They save lives and alleviate pain, but at the end of the day, they still need to feed their families. So long they compete for our $, Dr.’s will always be at the mercy of the consumer. If you place your health in the hands of the government, you will no longer have control of your health, it will belong to the Feds.
Less Gov. is Better Gov. So Long It’s a Fair Gov.
http://www.InsureMeDFW.com