Only in the past few years have I realized the forward thinking demonstrated by all those episodes of Star Trek I watched as a child. To many of the followers, the show attacked more than just space exploration but incorporated limitless technological and sociological advances. When discussing this with a former Trekkie roommate of mine, he immediately rattled off many advanced thought processes the show promoted, particularly the arguably first interracial kiss aired on tv involving James Kirk and Lt. Uhura.
Many of the technologies from the tv show have come to fruition over the years including that of the cellular telephone based off of the Star Trek communicator. My hopes are that medicine will soon advance to that of Star Trek.
Many studies have been done involving stem cells over the past decade. Only recently has technology been able to create stem cells from human tissues, rather than use embryonic stem cells, to be used for regenerating various tissue types mostly still in the laboratory. In order to do this skin cells need to be cultured and bathed in chemicals and drugs to alter their growth and development abilities to act as stem cells. These cells in turn can be placed in vivo and respond to chemical signals from neighboring cells in order to differentiate to cells of the body's own form and function, potentially to restore cellular functions that have been lost. Results so far have been promising, but there are still many kinks to work out.
At some point in the future, I believe we will have the medical technology similar to Star Trek's healing laser in the form of an injection. Utilizing the methodology of turning our own body's cells into stem cells, chemicals may one day be locally injected into some damaged tissue. This would manipulate the remaining living cells into stem cells momentarily, only to be differentiated into cells reestablishing their normal form and function from our own body's cellular signaling. Medical practice such as this may be a long way off but will one day change medicine as we know it.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Health Care Overhaul
It is impossible to know all of the effects this bill will have on the health of American people. What we do know is that the health care system is quite broken and much of the system needs to be changed to result in a positive outcome. Patchwork will no longer work for everyone it's intended to help. Everyone from patients to insurance companies to government rely on each other in this system and each deserves their own share in benefits and sacrifices.
I am surprised to find myself hopeful in the outcome of this bill. There would be no progress without the passing of a sweeping overhaul at this point because the production of smaller bills would never find their way through the politics of Washington. The health care system and the economy are not too fragile to withstand these changes. Though this bill may be imperfect, the bill will be under the scrutiny of repeals, representative elections, public opinion and all the pliability our great system of government and our economy allow.
I am surprised to find myself hopeful in the outcome of this bill. There would be no progress without the passing of a sweeping overhaul at this point because the production of smaller bills would never find their way through the politics of Washington. The health care system and the economy are not too fragile to withstand these changes. Though this bill may be imperfect, the bill will be under the scrutiny of repeals, representative elections, public opinion and all the pliability our great system of government and our economy allow.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
What are we reforming here?
I stole this off of Nick's facebook page. It's a quick overview of why malpractice reform hasn't been an issue in our health care debate. An argument I have heard is that this type of reform needs to be done on the state level.
Why medical malpractice is off limits.
It appears to me that the cost of medical care is skyrocketing and needs to be reduced by all measures leading to the increasing cost of care. The three factors as I see it leading to the immense cost of health care are malpractice insurance, compensation for low pay to doctors from government plans, and compensation caused by uninsured individuals not paying a dime. (by compensation I mean if one person doesn't pay anything or very little, people who do pay, pay more)
The health care bills as they stand will decrease the cost of care compensating for uninsured individuals by insuring more people, but government plans including medicare and medicaid and future government options do not and will not pay out enough to adjust for this compensation. These programs pay doctors next to nothing for their efforts which alone increase the cost of health care for those with private insurance. Adding on the additional cost of malpractice insurance, private insurance companies will not be able to afford to handle this burden.
A bill in congress, the medicare physician fairness act of 2009 bill 1776, which would have increased the amount paid to physicians as standardized payment from levels set in 1996(thats right 1996, everyone knows that health care costs much more now than it did in 1996), was shot down last month.
So of the three things in my mind leading to the insurmountable cost of health care, the only one addressed in these bills is insuring the uninsured, but this will not bring down the cost of health care alone.
Why medical malpractice is off limits.
It appears to me that the cost of medical care is skyrocketing and needs to be reduced by all measures leading to the increasing cost of care. The three factors as I see it leading to the immense cost of health care are malpractice insurance, compensation for low pay to doctors from government plans, and compensation caused by uninsured individuals not paying a dime. (by compensation I mean if one person doesn't pay anything or very little, people who do pay, pay more)
The health care bills as they stand will decrease the cost of care compensating for uninsured individuals by insuring more people, but government plans including medicare and medicaid and future government options do not and will not pay out enough to adjust for this compensation. These programs pay doctors next to nothing for their efforts which alone increase the cost of health care for those with private insurance. Adding on the additional cost of malpractice insurance, private insurance companies will not be able to afford to handle this burden.
A bill in congress, the medicare physician fairness act of 2009 bill 1776, which would have increased the amount paid to physicians as standardized payment from levels set in 1996(thats right 1996, everyone knows that health care costs much more now than it did in 1996), was shot down last month.
So of the three things in my mind leading to the insurmountable cost of health care, the only one addressed in these bills is insuring the uninsured, but this will not bring down the cost of health care alone.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Best news this week
the public option was actually the american medical association's baby in health care reform, which is why the AMA actually agreed to support this. the american medical association's idea behind giving everyone baseline crappy insurance would be that doctors receive less money per person, but more people would be able to pay something for their care and gradually the cost of health care would go down because hospitals will no longer be eating so much of the unpaid medical bills. the missouri state medical association has chosen not to support the public option plan probably for the sake of rural medicine not getting enough support.
white house ready to drop public option
white house ready to drop public option
Sunday, May 3, 2009
The Secret Socialist
Last Friday, Obama condemned investors in Chrysler for not making sacrifices in order to allow Chrysler to have more money to recover with after filing chapter 11. The sacrifices the Obama administration wanted the group of hedge fund investors to make were accepting a fraction of the money owed to them from their investment. Obama was quick to point out the sacrifices the United Auto Workers association and company owners have made to help the Chrysler, A.K.A. those responsible for running the company into the ground, but has decided to point the finger at investors for wanting what their investment has due to them.
The investors already made sacrifices by maintaining a stake in Chrysler in hopes that the company would rebound as their stakes dropped in value. Furthermore, the hedge funds do not have a responsibility to the company they have given money to, they have a responsibility to the American people who put their pensions into those hedge funds. If anything, Chrysler, who has misused investors' money, has a responsibility to the investors to give them the return owed to them. The hedge funds tried to make deals in the best interests of their investors only to be rejected by the white house administration.
Obama wants to make investing U.S. tax dollars in a failing company look like a good idea by taking money from those who already have taken the risk of investing their own money in it. He outrageously believes capitalism and investment banking should curve to his demand. Despite what Obama thinks, people who have money do contribute immensely to society and his beloved auto companies. They should not be condemned for not getting wrapped up in his politics of helping the UAW association, a largely democratic contributor, maintain their cushy jobs producing a less than valued product. It appears that the Obama administration is attempting to manipulate the facets of capitalism which make this a free country, but the investors and the consumers have spoken and this ship is not worth saving. The government needs to get out of the private sector.
Oh yeah...and the new investors in Chrysler besides the government and the UAW: GM's lending company. Didn't we learn our lesson about lenders making bad investments and becoming large and insolvent less than half a year ago?
The investors already made sacrifices by maintaining a stake in Chrysler in hopes that the company would rebound as their stakes dropped in value. Furthermore, the hedge funds do not have a responsibility to the company they have given money to, they have a responsibility to the American people who put their pensions into those hedge funds. If anything, Chrysler, who has misused investors' money, has a responsibility to the investors to give them the return owed to them. The hedge funds tried to make deals in the best interests of their investors only to be rejected by the white house administration.
Obama wants to make investing U.S. tax dollars in a failing company look like a good idea by taking money from those who already have taken the risk of investing their own money in it. He outrageously believes capitalism and investment banking should curve to his demand. Despite what Obama thinks, people who have money do contribute immensely to society and his beloved auto companies. They should not be condemned for not getting wrapped up in his politics of helping the UAW association, a largely democratic contributor, maintain their cushy jobs producing a less than valued product. It appears that the Obama administration is attempting to manipulate the facets of capitalism which make this a free country, but the investors and the consumers have spoken and this ship is not worth saving. The government needs to get out of the private sector.
Oh yeah...and the new investors in Chrysler besides the government and the UAW: GM's lending company. Didn't we learn our lesson about lenders making bad investments and becoming large and insolvent less than half a year ago?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
