Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Big Pharma And The Health "Insurance" Industry Come Up With A Comedic Routine That Leaves Me In Stitches.

When I first heard The New York Times was abandoning its long held position as the nation's newspaper of record in favor of a Steven Colbert-like satirical take on the news of the day, I was skeptical. I mean, I understand times are tough in the journalism field, and I understand they probably take a lot of heat from people who think an editorial position slightly left of center makes them a tool of the vast liberal conspiracy I am so desperately searching to join, but really, they are the best paper we have in this country, and abandoning that position to take on papers like The Onion, who excel an the satire, seemed like a risky thing to do. 


WASHINGTON — Doctors, hospitals, drug makers and insurance companies will join President Obama on Monday in announcing their commitment to a sharp reduction in the growth of national health spending, White House officials said Sunday.

The officials said the plan could save $2,500 a year for a family of four in the fifth year and a total of $2 trillion for the nation over 10 years. That could make it less expensive for Congress to enact comprehensive health insurance coverage, a daunting challenge facing the Obama administration.


Drug makers? Insurance Companies? Committed to reducing the growth of national health care spending? Oh my God that's comedy gold!!!!! BBBBBBWWWWWAAAAAAHHHHHAAAAAAA!!!!! The New York Times did it! This was the funniest thing I've read in a paper in ages!

Except I lied to you. It was a real news story. Which makes it even funnier. 

Drug Makers. Committed to reducing the growth of national health care spending. Really? So.....they're gonna stop making bullshit like Paxil CR? Auarlgan? Niravam? Proquin XR

Don't count on it. 


Probably not. But they are very committed to reducing the nation's health care costs. 

And the insurance companies, they'll be giving back the extra $5.2 billion a year they soak the taxpayers for with their bullshit "Medicare Advantage" plans, whose whole purpose was that they would save us money? 

Sure. Just as soon as my cat Spooky learns how to fly.  

Perhaps I'm being too cynical. I mean, according to the Times, Aetna, Humana, UnitedHealth and Wellpoint put out a proposal along these lines clear back in December, right after an election that ended an administration that cared far more about ending lives in the Middle East than saving them at home. They sure didn't seem to come up with many proposals during that administration though. Oops. There goes that cynicism again. Fine. They want savings? Let's see if we can find them some:

1) Eliminate Aetna, Humana, UnitedHealth and Wellpoint.  Replace them with a non-profit system. Savings: $7.5 billion dollars in profit these companies earned off the backs of the ill in 2008.

2) Pay drug companies the same rate for Medicare/Medicaid eligibles as they were being paid before Medicare Part D took over. Savings: $2 billion dollars a year. 

3) End the Medicare Advantage insanity. Savings: $5.2 billion dollars a year. 

Holy crap I just saved almost $15 billion dollars right off the top of my head. I am in a health care savings groove, but you ain't seen nothin' yet. Hang on:

4) Scrap the whole stupid system we have here and make a Xerox copy of Canada's. Savings: $1 trillion dollars. I'm not kidding you. Canada spends about 55% on health care per person compared to what we do. In 2007 we spent $2.4 trillion dollars on health care. Do the math. 

And for those of you who don't like Canada's health care system, I'll point out we could throw in a couple hundred billion dollars to improve it and still be spending a hell of a lot less than we do now. You're getting ripped off, sucker.

Of course the people doing the ripping off don't want you to know this, which is why they are acting like they wanna play nice all the sudden. After you punched them in the nose by electing someone who's threatening to stand up for you. 

See what happens when you punch them? Punch them again. When you hear their happy talk ask them where they've been since they last waxed publicly about their commitment to hold down costs. Which just happened to coincide with Hillary Clinton mounting a credible threat to break their backs. Punch them again. It's all they understand.

And for the love of God do not let the person you elected to stand up for you sit back down. 

10 comments:

DKLA said...

I spotted that live broadcast (all 15 minutes of it) in hopes of details. Elizabeth Cohen's (CNN) responses after the announcement what really made my day.

"They either ride the bus like everyone else, or get run over by it."

Either someone starts cooperating or a national healthcare system will pop up.

I really hope its the latter

Someone is going to screw up from the insurance side or Big Pharma to give a greater excuse for government intervention. Greed has an amazing way of popping back up in these issues.

A punch in the face every year as a reminder sounds good (more should be encouraged for desired effect). Excellent topic DM!

kitrona said...

Awesome article. Thanks for pointing it out. :)

Anonymous said...

I'm too young to be as cynical as I've become--wait, maybe I'm finally growing up. I could hardly believe my ears and eyes when I heard the same story over and over, with no mention of pharmacists or anyone working on behalf of patients. Although, I'm inclined to believe most physicians have the best interest of their patients' health in mind when they are working as medical doctors (and not as boutique specialists). I listened to some health care advocates on the Diane Riem Show and guffawed when someone brought up extending benefit accessibility to 'alternative providers' such as chiropractors, natural healing, and nurse practioners. Why not have the new health benefit packages include shamen, alchemists, and noon-day witches?

Kate said...

Hey! And to make you feel even more warm an fuzzy inside: today Secure Horizons called to tell me my patient's PA for Cozaar has been approved through 2032!!

2032!!! Doesn't that make you feel *secure*?

The man is 60 years old. I wonder how much money we could have saved *not* paying the person who had to process/approve that particular PA.

*sigh*

Disability Insurance said...

Great post, I too feel sorry for your system. Finding lame excuses as this one to "look good" in the eyes of the average American is just wrong. So much money goes to these companies and they decide to do the heroic act of reducing their profits. Canadian system is not perfect either but it is on a whole different level when compared to the US one. Anyways, thanks for a great article,

take care, Lorne

Anonymous said...

Long time reader, first time commentator ... I'm all for pointing some of the blame at the insurers and big pharma. How could you totally absolve the patient and the providers in your list of healthcare savings? 2 additional areas for substantial savings:
1. Wellness - Fat and stupid is no way to get through life and usually is a short life with much state/employer-subsidized healthcare. Add wellness incentives and consumer-driven healthcare and cost containment is long-term gain.
2. End-of-life decisions - Medical care at the end of life consumes 10% to 12% of the total health care budget and 27% of the Medicare budget. Grandma is fighter so we need to get that extra round of chemo/surgery, extended inpatient/skilled nursing care stays. 2 weeks and $400K later you find out she really wasn't that much of a fighter.

Full disclosure ... I am a pharmacist working for a health insurance company which offers Commerical, Medicaid and Medicare Advantage + D. That PA for Cozaar I would have redirected to Atacand or Micardis, whichever the biggest rebates generates (often the reality, sorry to say but trying to change here).

Anonymous said...

Point 2 of Health Insurance Pharmacist's comment, though the issue is brought up, what is there to say about it?

We don't do healthcare strictly on numbers on the frontline. As the CVS commercial seems to say; every patient is an individual or some such.
Pharmacist ethics aren't based on the idea that 'you're in that 95th percentile, therefore you get treated with full benefits', as far as I know and in my gut, believe.

Is the gist that a patient doesn't receive full insurance benefits because 'THE PLAN' doesn't provide for feisty 90 yr li'l ol' grannies who've been stuck with diagnosis, say, a certain grade of colon cancer? If that's the gist of the comment, then to be sure, there will be a lot of controversy, and controversial issues, such as how long is this or that popular movie star going to hang on with such and such diagnosis, and why didn't my dearly beloved Nobel prize winner have advantage of such and such FDA-approved therapy?

This pick and choose notion that surrounds who is to receive health benefits, and what sort seems to be some of the foundation of fear in a democratic society, and why the ill-informed might seek the services of a less than legitimate alternative provider over that of a physician and pharmacist.

And, there is also the matter of not pursuing therapy for even legitimate illness. How many times did we hear stories about skilled nursing facilities providing inadequate care, and/or people being placed in certain institutions to 'perish' because they were temporarily ill and no advocates to pursue the matter of looking just a little further.

Anonymous said...

Mike Leavitt, G Dubya B's Secretary of Health and Human Services, was governor of Utah. Everyone seems to think he's a lawyer or some such-- au contraire, he's just the richest insurance salesman in the state. An insurance salesman, in charge of HHS... no conflict there, eh? It also is not mentioned that he was on the Board of Directors of Utah Power & Light Company, a locally owned and operated company for over a hundred years. UP&L did not lay anyone off during the Great Depression, but while he and DeeDee Corradini were directors not only were there layoffs for the first time in the company's history, but that same company has been sold three times since then. And now Walgreens has asked Leavitt to advise them on how to conduct their business. Three weeks ago they had a Summit meeting of sorts and included this loser as one of the honored guests. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Anonymous said...

big pharma....are those the ones that gave us the cardizem patent extender model? cardizem, cardezem sr, cardizem cd and when you think they can't do it again...cardizem la.

Or how about explaining to the little old lady her why her quinine went from 10 cents to five dollars a capsule...

how much profit did the middlemen make last year (insurance/pbm's)? boy they sure provide the healthcare.....end sarcasm.

pharmacy student said...

The officials said the plan could save $2,500 a year for a family of four in the fifth year and a total of $2 trillion for the nation over 10 years. That could make it less expensive for Congress to enact comprehensive health insurance coverage, a daunting challenge facing the Obama administration.

I think the keyword here is 'could' but will not happen.