Saturday, November 9, 2024

Concierge Medicine---Consider it


Direct Primary Care, with a monthly prepaid contract.

If you are young and fairly healthy with minor issues this plan costs less than your health insurance plan. You can supplement it with a major medical plan.







Unger’s blog | SignatureMD

Friday, November 8, 2024

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1901 - An illuminating accident - NobelPrize.org


Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1901

Born: 27 March 1845, Lennep, Prussia (now Remscheid, Germany)

Died: 10 February 1923, Munich, Germany

Affiliation at the time of the award: Munich University, Munich, Germany


 Röntgen studied cathode radiation, which occurs when an electrical charge is applied to two metal plates inside a glass tube filled with rarefied gas. Although the apparatus was screened off, he noticed a faint light on light-sensitive screens that happened to be close by. Further investigations revealed that this was caused by a penetrating, previously unknown type of radiation. X-ray radiation became a powerful tool for physical experiments and examining the body's interior.



The Nobel Prize in Physics 1901 - Speed read: An illuminating accident - NobelPrize.org

Salivary Enzyme Behind Our Carb Cravings May Have Unexpectedly Ancient History – NIH Director's Blog

                   

In today's world our diet is far different from that of prehistoric man and even that of several centuries ago. Modern diets now contain many processed and genetically modified wheats, grains and domesticated animals such as cows, poultry, and pigs.
These foods are altered by freezing, and preservation.  In addition to those alterations they are not fresh, nor eaten immediately after harvesting or processing.
The packaging is often plastic leading to contamination with micro plastic particles.
Studies reveal microplastic particles in water, and in our blood stream. Microplastics are not biologically active and remain for indefinite periods.  It is not yet known what effects this will have on living systems.

Microplastic particles in blood



Microscopy of Intestine. A,B controls. C,D post ingestion of MP

Digestion involves much more than just your stomach. The digestive process that fuels your body begins in your mouth each time you take a bite of food and chew. An enzyme in your saliva, called amylase, then starts to break down complex carbohydrates—or starches found in many fruits, vegetables, and grains—into simpler sugars to give you their sweet flavor followed by a burst of energy.

Amylase is the reason we’re so good at turning starch into calories, but it isn’t the same for everyone. There’s plenty of genetic variation in the number of salivary amylase genes (AMY1) our cells carry and, therefore, in how much of this essential starch-busting enzyme people have. Studies have suggested a link between changes in amylase gene copy numbers over time and both the rise of agriculture and starch-heavy diets. Now a study in Science , supported in part by NIH, suggests that extra copies of AMY1 are not only connected to our ability to effectively digest carbs, but also may be more ancient than previously known, arising even before modern humans split from Neanderthals and long before the advent of farming.

Genomic studies reveal the amylase protein has evolved since paleolithic times.

The new findings come from a research team led by Omer Gokcumen  at The University of Buffalo, NY, and Charles Lee  of The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT.

JAX Farmington, CT

JAX Bar Harbor, ME

This variation in amylase genes would have afforded our ancestors dietary flexibility, allowing them to adapt as diets changed over time. But these discoveries aren’t only fascinating from an evolutionary or historical point of view. They may also lead to new understandings of genetic differences among people today, with potentially important implications for our metabolisms, nutrition, and health.
















Salivary Enzyme Behind Our Carb Cravings May Have Unexpectedly Ancient History – NIH Director's Blog

Wednesday, November 6, 2024

Lawmakers aim to block Medicare payment cuts to doctors, but clock is ticking

Lawmakers in Congress are working to prevent planned Medicare payment cuts to physicians, much to the relief of a host of healthcare organizations.



Republicans and Democrats have sponsored a bill to avoid Medicare’s scheduled reduction in physician payments for 2025. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services have proposed a 2.8% cut in payments to doctors next year.  This despite the annual inflation rate of 2-5% annually.
The AMA said that Medicare payment rates have dropped 29% over the past 20 years, when including the higher costs of running practices. Doctors and their advocacy groups have said the continued cuts in recent years could hurt access to care, as physicians leave the profession or they opt not to accept Medicare patients.
On Tuesday, lawmakers introduced the legislation, dubbed the Medicare Patient Access and Practice Stabilization Act. U.S. Reps. Greg Murphy, R-N.C., and Jimmy Panetta, D-Calif., are the prime sponsors, but other lawmakers, Republicans and Democrats alike, are backing the measure.

In addition to averting the cuts, the legislation would give doctors increases in payments that are equivalent to half the Medicare Economic Index, which reflects changes in the annual operating costs for physicians.

“Medical inflation is much higher and the cost of seeing patients continues to rise,” Murphy said. “Unfortunately, reimbursements continue to decline, putting immense pressure on doctors to retire, close their practices, forgo seeing new Medicare patients, or seek a less efficient employment position. 

Many physicians merged with other physicians or agreed to be purchased by venture capitalists, supposedly improving effficiency having a larger group, and consolidating management.   None of this proved to be true, and the downward spiral has continued.

This bipartisan legislation would stop yet another year of reimbursement cuts, give them a slight inflationary adjustment, and protect Medicare for physicians and patients alike."

Lawmakers aim to block Medicare payment cuts to doctors, but clock is ticking

How are emergency departments in the US going to deliver high-quality care

How are emergency departments in the US going to deliver high-quality care if payments to emergency medicine practices continue to decrease from private insurance companies, government insurers, and patients - all at the same time? 

A strong emergency medicine system needs a stable funding source to deliver 24-7 care to acutely ill and injured people, no matter where they live or who they are. Do we really want to skimp on life-saving care?

Check out the article, "UnitedHealth Emails Reveal Tension Over Cuts to Doctor Pay" in Bloomberg by John Tozzi. Excerpt:

Doc Pay Cuts Sparked Strife at Insurer

UnitedHealth Group systematically cut its payments to out-of-network doctors for emergency department (ED) visits and mental health care, sparking internal tension, according to newly unsealed court documents reported by Bloombergopens in a new tab or window.

The records open a window into the workings of its UnitedHealthcare unit, the largest U.S. health insurer, and shed light on a bitter battle between financial heavyweights in the $5 trillion U.S. medical system,"UnitedHealth Group Inc. systematically cut what it paid for emergency room visits and mental health care to doctors outside of its network, sparking internal tension over how those changes were handled and the potential effect on members, newly unsealed court documents show.

The records open a window into the workings of its UnitedHealthcare unit, the largest US health insurer, and shed light on a bitter battle between financial heavyweights in the $5 trillion US medical system. Doctors have long blamed the company for refusing to fully cover their bills, with private equity-backed physician groups filing a string of lawsuits accusing it of shortchanging clinicians from outside of its insurance network.

...The senior vice president questioned plans to cut reimbursement levels for out-of-network emergency room visits. UnitedHealth had already reduced payments from 450% of what Medicare pays — the benchmark that many insurers use as a starting point for their own figures — to 250%, and the company planned to drop it further to 150%, according to the email.

How can an emergency room visit be out of network?  A patient with a critical condition such as crushing chest pain, loss of consciousness, stroke is taken to the nearest level I or II emergency deparrtment, by law. To do so otherwise would be against standard of care.

At the April trial, an executive testified that the company didn’t move forward with the deepest cuts, according to a transcript.

Such a cut would have put UnitedHealth below national averages: Employers and private insurers paid on average about 250% of Medicare’s reimbursement in 2022, researchers from the Rand Corp. reported, counting both in-network and out-of-network rates. Providers often accept discounted payments in exchange for network agreements that give them greater access to patients.

hashtag #emergencymedicine

#American College of Emergency Physicians

#American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM)

#Society of Emergency Medicine Physician Assistants (SEMPA)

#Society for Academic Emergency Medicine

#Society of Physician Entrepreneurs

Numerous employers brought suite against UHC

‘Californian Votes Really Matter’: What the Election Could Mean for Reproductive Health | KQED

Dr. Sophia Yen finds it difficult to talk about the future her daughters could face under a second Trump presidency without tearing up.

Yen, co-founder of an organization specializing in reproductive care, fears their access to such vital care could be further limited if former President Donald Trump wins the election. And she’s not alone.

“How do I get two girls through college?” Yen asked, pointing to the fact that 1 in 4 undergraduate women have reported being sexually assaulted.

Nationwide, she said, reproductive rights have “already gone back. And we need to fix it.”

After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, spurring some states to limit access to abortioninfant mortality rates increased — in Texas, by as much as 13%. Pinning down the maternal mortality rate is harder. According to a recent study from the Commonwealth Fund, women were more at risk of dying at or around childbirth in states with stricter abortion laws. In Texas, the maternal mortality rate rose 56% from 2019 to 2022, while nationally, it ticked up 11%, according to the research nonprofit Gender Equity Policy Institute.

According to a Gallup Poll released this summer, 54% of Americans identify as pro-choice, maintaining “historically high levels” of support for abortion rights since the overturning of Roe v. Wade. And 32% of registered voters said they would only vote for a candidate that shared the same views as them on abortion, up 8 points since 2020.

In an election featuring two candidates with wildly differing views on abortion who are polling extremely closely, Bay Area residents and experts are left to wait and see what the future of healthcare holds.

Even though state laws protect the right to an abortion in California, Yen — who is also a professor at Stanford Medical School — said the stakes are still high for abortion-rights voters in the Bay Area.

“For Californians, we think we’re protected,” she said. “But we’re not.”

In truth the Dobbs Act, rescinding the Federal decision to allow abortions, the Dobbs act moves the dedecision to the states.   Many states have already passed laws allowing abortion under certain circumstances.















Friday, November 1, 2024

Better Surgery?

Stop the B.S.

A decade ago, a Pew survey found that 92% of Americans preferred financial 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 over upward 𝗺𝗼𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆. If we asked for a healthcare equivalent today, the answer would be the same: people want a stable, functional, reliable healthcare system more than the latest drug, device, or procedure.

Yet, the system churns out endless “progress” and “innovation”:
💊 A new drug with fewer side effects!
🪚 A better surgical technique with less bleeding!
🩸 A blood test that cuts ER visit times by 12 minutes!

Medical research never asks: How do we make care feel stable and dependable? Where are the innovations that get you an appointment in 1 week instead of 2 months? Where is the NIH grant focused on creating day-to-day reliability?

Maybe we’re just building products that don’t fit what the “customer” wants. Do we have no product-market fit?

Survival

We talk a lot about fixing healthcare, but none of it matters if the people delivering care cannot survive the system themselves. More than ...