Is This Why the Europeans Don't Get Sick Like Americans Do?

Story at-a-glance

• Despite spending twice the amount per capita on health care, the United States ranks last in health and mortality analysis of 17 developed nations
• Americans are near the bottom in nine key areas of health, including low birth weight; injuries and homicides; teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections; HIV and AIDS; drug-related deaths; obesity and diabetes; heart disease; chronic lung disease; and general disability
• At 75.6 years, American men have the lowest life expectancy among the countries reviewed, and American women ranked second-to-last at 80.7 years. The infant mortality rate in the US is equally abysmal, with 32.7 deaths per 100,000, while most others range between 15 and 25 deaths per 100,000
• The authors of the report "GMO Myths and Truths" took a science-based approach to evaluating the available research, arriving at the conclusion that most of the scientific evidence regarding safety and increased yield potential do not at all support the claims. The evidence demonstrates the claims for genetically engineered foods are not just wildly overblown – they simply aren't true. GE foods have been shown to be less nutritious than non-GE foods, and pose distinct health risks and are inadequately regulated
• While failing to pin-point the source(s) of Americans’ failure to thrive, the answers are not hard to deduce: adhering to government-sponsored health- and dietary guidance has led Americans astray

By Dr. Mercola

According to a new health analysis bearing the revealing title: US Health in International Perspective: Shorter Lives, Poorer Health¹, Americans come in dead last in a comparison of 17 affluent nations.

The research was unable to uncover any single cause or “rallying point for action.” Instead, it calls for more research to “ferret out the effects of our current policies.”

C’mon! You’ve got to be kidding me.

Considering the fact that human health tends to be primarily affected by a) nutrition, b) exercise, and c) toxic exposures, do they seriously believe that we can improve public health while ignoring these three basic areas?

What Does the Human Body Require to Be Healthy?

A staggering two-thirds of American adults are overweight, and more than one-quarter of adults fall into the obese category. One in four Americans is pre-diabetic or diabetic. It should be obvious that diet and exercise are critical factors here. The National Institutes of Health even states that four of the six leading causes of death in the United States are linked to unhealthy diets.

The question is why are so many people unable to regulate their weight and insulin sensitivity? The following points are well worthy of careful consideration when pondering this issue:

• One of the first five ingredients in most prepackaged, processed foods (which account for about 90 percent of most people’s food bill²) is high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which has repeatedly been shown to be a driving factor behind being overweight and having poor health outcomes. HFCS is pervasive and in many processed food items some individuals would never expect, including so called diet foods and 'enhanced' water products. Even most infant formulas contain the sugar equivalent of one can of Coca-Cola.

  Furthermore, soy is another common ingredient on all processed foods and soybeans can be severely and systemically contaminated with high amounts of the potent herbicide glyphosate. Additionally, over 85 percent of all corn grown in the US is genetically engineered (GE)³, which further increases the risk of high glyphosate contamination.The safety of either of these items has never been proven. According to a recent report by the Environmental Working Group (EWG)⁴, Americans are eating their weight and more in GE foods each and every year.

• Thirty-three percent of American adults are also completely sedentary, and more than half of adults over the age of 18 never engage in any vigorous leisure-time physical activity lasting 10 minutes or more per week.
• According to a study by the EWG⁵, blood samples from newborns contained an average of 287 toxins, including mercury, fire retardants, pesticides, and chemicals from non stick products. Of the 287 chemicals EWG detected in umbilical cord blood, it’s known that 180 cause cancer in humans or animals; 217 are toxic to your brain and nervous system; and 208 cause birth defects or abnormal development in animal tests. Clearly, when babies are born loaded with toxic chemicals, it’s a sign that toxic exposure is too high.
• While there are many types and routes of toxic exposure, one would be remiss to overlook Americans use of pharmaceutical drugs, as drugs have, on average, 70 different potential side effects, and are responsible for the premature death of at least 106,000 Americans per year, when taken as prescribed. Americans pop the most pills of any other nation, and that includes children. Americans also receive the most amount of vaccinations.

So.... let’s think... What could possibly be the root of Americans’ failure to thrive? The Atlantic⁶, reporting on the findings writes:

“In presenting their findings... the authors seemed to be urging the U.S. to do some soul searching. Our culture 'cherishes independence' and 'wants to limit the intrusion of government in our personal lives,' said Steven Woolf, director of the Center for Human Needs at Virginia Commonwealth University, the panel chairman.
While those values serve us in some ways, he said, our resistance to regulation 'may work against our ability to achieve optimal health outcomes.'"

Aha! So it’s Americans’ striving for independence and freedom of choice that is to blame for such poor dietary choices and health outcomes?! They mean to tell us that we’re all so inept at making healthy choices, we need to abandon our independent spirits and embrace more nanny state regulations that might finally whip us into shape. Honestly, I feel like I’m reading something out of The Onion... It’s all so backwards.

Why Do Americans Consume Such a Bad Diet?

For the sake of brevity, I will limit my comments to the issue of diet here. But first, let’s consider a few of the questions we need to ask:

• Do Americans purposefully consume excessive amounts of fat-promoting, health-harming HFCS because they love it and refuse to eat foods that don’t contain it, or are there other reasons why Americans can’t seem to control their waistlines?

  And do they really intentionally consume far too many carbohydrates, sugar and processed foods in place of healthy fats like avocados, olives, coconut oil, butter, nuts, eggs and olive oil, which cause them to be adapted to burning carbs as their primary fuel rather than fat, or is this type of diet a more or less inevitable side effect of NOT thinking independently and seeking out real nutritional facts, but rather mindlessly buying what’s available in the store and advertised as healthy on TV?

• Do Americans really want to consume more genetically engineered foods than any other country?
• Do freedom-loving Americans who “cherish independence” seek to buy more or less whole, unadulterated, unprocessed foods that might help improve their health and, at the very least, reduce toxic exposure?

I propose considering the following facts before blaming America’s failing health on the average shopper’s pesky determination to make independent, foolhardy choices:

• The US government subsidizes the very crops identified as being the most harmful to human health and the environment; the top three being corn, wheat, and soybeans. And nearly all of the corn and soybeans grown are genetically engineered varieties.

  By subsidizing these, the US government is actively supporting a diet that consists of these grains in their processed form, namely high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), hydrogenated soybean oil, and meats loaded with antibiotics – all of which are now well-known contributors to obesity and chronic disease. These junk-food subsidies make it much cheaper to buy a burger, fries and soda from a fast-food restaurant than it is to buy grass-fed beef and veggies. It's not that these foods necessarily cost more to grow or produce; rather the prices for the junk foods are being artificially reduced by the government.

• The US further promotes use of HFCS in food manufacturing by imposing import tariffs on foreign sugar, raising the price of sucrose above those in other countries.
• When the dangers of HFCS finally began to seep into the American consciousness, consumer demand forced many companies to reformulate their processed foods using other types of sweeteners, or ditching sweetening agents altogether. Today, you can find a number of food products marked “No HFCS” and government intervention had nothing to do with this beneficial change.
• The US government has repeatedly refused to take any action to label genetically engineered foods, despite overwhelming public support and demand for labeling.
• The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has repeatedly harassed, raided, and shut down small farms producing healthful organic and raw foods, such as raw dairy and cheese, along with private co-ops procuring and delivering such foods to health-conscious customers.

Americans Die Earlier and Live in Poorer Health

These are examples of Big Government making health decisions for you. How have they been working out so far? The proof is in the pudding, and the featured report⁷ tells us that what we’ve been doing so far is NOT working.

According to the report, Americans die earlier and live in poorer health than people in other developed nations, which included Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands and the U.K.

Of these 17 affluent countries, the US ranks last overall, and near the bottom in nine key areas of health, including low birth weight; injuries and homicides; teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections; HIV and AIDS; drug-related deaths; obesity and diabetes; heart disease; chronic lung disease; and general disability. At 75.6 years, American men have the lowest life expectancy among the countries reviewed, and American women ranked second-to-last at 80.7 years. The infant mortality rate in the US is equally abysmal, with 32.7 deaths per 100,000, while most others range between 15 and 25 deaths per 100,000.

Interestingly, the US lags behind all these nations even though smoking rates in the US are far lower than many of the other nations, indicating that, apparently, there’s more to good health than quitting smoking. Or, alternatively, that even smokers can enjoy a modicum of health IF they’re able to compensate with other healthy lifestyle strategies. So, again, how are more nanny state regulations going to improve the situation when they clearly are not willing to accept the sources of the problem in the first place?

The truth is, in order to regulate away this problem, the US government would have to cut all ties with industry and eliminate its conflicts of interest and massive revolving doors with the very industry it is mandated to regulate.

The likelihood of that happening appears slim to none, considering that Big Ag and Big Pharma are two of the biggest and strongest lobbying groups of all business sectors vying for favors from our legislators⁸. And they’re getting them—which is how we got into this abhorrent mess in the first place, where what is good is portrayed as bad, and that which is bad is ignored. The answer is to promote more independence of choice, and limiting the intrusion of government in our food choices—the very things these reviewers claim are part of the problem... The report also found that Americans:

• Have a long-standing pattern of poorer health that is strikingly consistent and pervasive over the course of their lifetimes. Overall, Americans die and suffer from illness and injury at rates that are unnecessary
• Even affluent Americans with higher education and insurance who engage in healthy behaviors (such as not smoking and maintaining a healthy weight) are in worse health than similar people in other nations
• Consume the most calories among peer countries
• Have more alcohol-related accidents
• Spend more than $8,600 per person per year on health care, which is more than twice the amount spent by the UK, France, and Sweden

How Can the Wealthiest Industrialized Nation be the Sickest?

Since the mid-1990s, the number of Americans suffering from at least three chronic illnesses nearly doubled. Life expectancy has decreased and infant mortality has increased. Illnesses once rare are now common, with some approaching epidemic levels. For example:

• Autism now affects one in 88 children (CDC), compared to one in 25,000 in the mid-1970s
• Type 2 diabetes rates in the U.S. increased by 176 percent between 1980 and 2010
• Celiac disease is four times more common now than 60 years ago
• Alzheimer's disease is rising at alarming rates. It's estimated that 5.4 million Americans (one in eight older Americans) now has Alzheimer's disease, and nearly half of those age 85 and older have it; AD rates have doubled since 1980
• New infectious diseases are increasing in number, according to a 2008 study

In his documentary, Jeffrey Smith makes a convincing argument that one of the primary forces driving these illnesses is America's changing food supply. And one of the most profound changes is genetically engineered food. Proving GE food is causing Americans to be sick is a tall order, but the evidence presented in this film is very compelling and should not be ignored.

GMO Report Disproves FDA's Safety Claims

There is a significant compilation of scientific evidence that casts serious doubt on the claims made by industry and government officials about the safety of GE foods. Consider this report by The Atlantic⁹ The authors of the report "GMO Myths and Truths"¹⁰ took a science-based approach to evaluating the available research, arriving at the conclusion that most of the scientific evidence regarding safety and increased yield potential do not at all support the claims.

In fact, the evidence demonstrates the claims for genetically engineered foods are not just wildly overblown – they simply aren't true. Not only are GE foods less nutritious than non-GE foods, they pose distinct health risks, are inadequately regulated, harm the environment and farmers, and are a poor solution to world hunger.

The authors of this critical report include Michael Antoniou, PhD, who heads the Gene Expression and Therapy Group at King's College at London School of Medicine in the UK. He's a 28-year veteran of genetic engineering technology who has himself invented a number of gene expression biotechnologies; and John Fagan, PhD, a leading authority on food sustainability, biosafety, and GE testing. If you want to get a comprehensive understanding of genetically engineered foods, I strongly recommend reading this report.

11 Basic Guidelines for General Health and Longevity

Leading a common sense, healthy lifestyle is your best bet to produce a healthy body and mind, and increase your longevity. Unfortunately, the pharmaceutical industry, the food industry, and even government itself sure won't make it easy for you to avoid the garbage that ruins your health. The following guidelines form the basic tenets of optimal health and healthy weight—foundational strategies that will not change, regardless of what marvels modern science comes up with next. For more comprehensive guidance, please see my fully updated nutritional plan, which takes you from beginner’s stage to advanced:

1. Eat a healthy diet, paying very careful attention to keeping your insulin levels down (my free nutritional plan will help guide you through your dietary changes with minimal effort)
2. Replace sweetened drinks (whether they’re sweetened with sugar, HFCS, or artificial sweeteners) with plenty of pure, clean water
3. Avoid all genetically engineered foods. There are nine primary GE food crops, but their derivatives are in over 70 percent of supermarket foods, particularly processed foods. GE ingredients can hide. For example, every can of soda containing high fructose corn syrup most likely contains GE corn. Make sure none of the following are on your grocery list, unless they are USDA certified organic:

   Soy
   Cottonseed
   Corn

   Canola Oil
   Hawaiian papaya
   Alfalfa

   Sugar from sugar beets
   Some varieties of zucchini
   Crookneck squash

   Avoid any product containing aspartame, which is derived from a GE organism. And avoid any milk products that may have rBGH. I recommend consuming only raw, organic milk products you've obtained from a trustworthy local dairy farmer. The Institute for Responsible Technology has put together a helpful Non-GMO Shopping Guide you can download and print. They even have an iPhone app.

4. Optimize your gut flora with fermented foods, such as fermented vegetables, which you can easily and inexpensively make at home
5. Consume healthy fats, like butter, eggs, avocados, coconut oil, olive oil, and nuts, especially macadamia nuts which are higher in fat and lower in protein
6. Eat plenty of raw food
7. Exercise regularly. Make sure to incorporate high intensity interval training at least once or twice a week
8. Get an appropriate amount of sunlight to optimize your vitamin D levels
9. Limit toxin exposure
10. Get plenty of sleep
11. Manage your stress

Let’s face it, government health recommendations and regulations relating to diet and health have failed miserably, and the featured report delivers the somber statistics of where we’re at on the global scene. While spending twice as much on health care per capita, we’re not getting results. I believe we’ll keep seeing more of the same until or unless we change our stance on what a healthy diet is, and what constitutes a healthy lifestyle. We need to move away from the idea that being on a dozen medications means you’re doing something right for your health... This is NOT health care. This is disease management, and it comes at a very steep price, namely your longevity.

Until or unless the US government takes industry to task, our regulators and legislators cannot be trusted to usher Americans toward better health. In the meantime, it is up to YOU to take control of your health, and do what is right for you, to live a healthier, longer, drug- and disease-free life. Proper nutrition, exercise, and avoidance of toxins are three critical factors to address in this process, and this website contains literally tens of thousands of freely available articles to help you do just that.

By buying organic, you will dramatically reduce your exposure to pesticides, hormones and antibiotics, as those are used on nearly all GE crops. When shopping locally, know your local farmers. Many are too small to afford official certification, but many still adhere to organic, sustainable practices. The only way to determine how your food is raised is to check them out, meeting the farmer face to face if possible. Yes, it does take time but is worth it if you are really concerned about your family's health.

Technorati Tags: GMO,GMO Food sources,FDA,healthy diet,Dr. Mercola

Five Health Care Issues To Watch in 2012

Not to be a Grinch, but "Road to Reform" doesn't celebrate the 12 days of Christmas.

We do, however, cherish the 10 years of staggered Affordable Care Act implementation.

It's the gift that keeps on giving for health wonks -- and columnists on the health reform beat.

After a packed 2011, here are five issues springing out of last year's reform law that bear watching in 2012.

1. The Supreme Court battle over ACA

It's an open question: Are those 10 years of reforms even constitutional?

The high court is poised to give its answer next year.

Health wonks already have circled March 26-March 28 on their calendars, when the justices will devote a record five-and-a-half hours of oral argument to discuss the Affordable Care Act's legality.

The current schedule:

• Day 1: Whether the court can even rule on the ACA before 2014, when its major provisions take effect.
• Day 2: Whether the ACA's individual mandate is constitutional.
• Day 3: Whether striking down the mandate means striking down the law, and if the Medicaid expansion is permissible.

The case matches the Obama administration against the National Federation of Independent Business and 26 states. Based on split lower-court decisions and the current roster of justices, predictions about the high court's verdict -- whether the law will be upheld, partially struck or fully struck down -- are all over the map.

But veteran court watchers do offer one near-guarantee: A hearing in March means a ruling by June.

2. The payment reforms contained in ACA

Regardless of the law's long-term future, a bevy of ACA cost-control pilots and quality-improvement initiatives will formally debut in the coming weeks.

The sheer momentum of these initiatives could reshape how the industry pays for care.

"It should be a landmark year as several key programs -- the Pioneer ACO Model, the Shared Savings Program, the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Initiative and the Health Care Innovation Challenge -- all launch across 2012," the Advisory Board Company's Rob Lazerow told California Healthline.

(The Advisory Board Company produces California Healthline for the California HealthCare Foundation.)

Notably, the Pioneer program -- which includes six California organizations among its 32 participants -- goes online on Jan. 1. The HHS initiative is designed to reward health systems that are already prepared to assume new risks as "accountable care organizations" -- for example, by taking on more population management responsibilities.

Meanwhile, the $1 billion Innovation Challenge is a grant-making program that incents new workforce and care delivery models. Provider applications are due next month.

Lazerow, who's spoken with dozens of hospitals and health systems, added that "leaders of progressive organizations are excited" to choose from the range of voluntary payment innovations.

3. The health insurance exchanges mandated by ACA

The Obama administration's final rule on health insurance exchanges is slated to be released in early 2012, about two years before the Jan. 1, 2014 deadline for states to have them up and running.

Critics are saying that might be too late.

Launching a health insurance exchange will require months of technical work and considerable financial investment. As Health Access details, California is moving quickly to get its exchange up and running. But many other legislatures continue to wrestle -- especially with the law facing unresolved court challenges --  between crafting their own insurance exchanges or defaulting to a yet-to-be-defined federal alternative.

HHS is expected to announce details of that fallback option by June. But the actual federal exchange may not be ready by 2014, either.

"It will be an enormous uphill battle to get this thing launched on time," health industry consultant Robert Laszewski told Kaiser Health News. "[Federal officials] have a Herculean task, even if everyone was cooperating."

4. The health IT needed to bring ACA to life

The insurance exchanges aren't alone in needing an injection of technical know-how.

Achieving the ACA's promise of affordable, quality care will require health care providers to adopt sophisticated technologies that monitor patients and enable effective data transmission.

At the center of this effort is the government's meaningful use incentive program to encourage electronic health record adoption. John Lynn, a blogger at Health IT Blog Network, predicted that next year would see more of the same; 2012 "will be all about Meaningful Use: Meaningful Use, ACOs, Meaningful Use ... and a little more Meaningful Use covered in Meaningful Use," according to Lynn. 

EHRs' rise also will allow providers to start combing through large health information sets. Writing in iHealthBeat -- California Healthline's sister publication -- Jane Sarasohn-Kahn notes that data analytics for addressing readmissions rates "should take off in 2012," given the ACA's financial incentives for controlling hospital readmission rates.

Meanwhile, health IT expert Brian Ahier flagged another pending development: The Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT's pending rule on Nationwide Health Information Network (NwHIN) governance.

The proposed rule -- which ONC is expected to publish in early 2012 -- will address a number of key health IT policy and governance questions, Ahier told California Healthline. For example, it will establish "rules of the road" for all NwHIN participants to be confident in the health information exchanges' security and confidentiality, he said.

5. The election to decide ACA's future

Austin Frakt -- a health economist and blogger at The Incidental Economist -- has spent weeks writing about the Medicare premium-support debate, health care cost controls and a range of other reform topics.

Yet Frakt knows that next November is already casting a long shadow over his policy debates.

"As a policy wonk it pains me," Frakt said, "[but] the election is more important to long-term health policy than anything else in 2012."

Simply put, if President Obama wins re-election -- and the Supreme Court upholds the law -- the ACA is probably here to stay.

(It’s not inconceivable that economic issues or a major backlash could force Obama to retreat from a Democratic law; President George H.W. Bush oversaw a repeal of President Reagan's Medicare Catastrophic Care Act.)

But if a Republican takes the White House, the ACA's future is immediately in flux. Although it would be very difficult for that president to roll back the law entirely, given the steady implementation of reforms and the health industry's own push to keep the law alive.

And more than the ACA is in the balance next year. A Republican victory might mean a turn toward premium support models after all, with the Wyden-Ryan Medicare reform plan gaining favor among the GOP presidential candidates.

Publishing Break

"Road to Reform" will return in 2012 -- making predictions about what 2013 holds for health care, no doubt -- as California Healthline goes on a publishing break starting Friday.

And to help you have a very wonky holiday, here's one last national roundup of reform news for 2011.

Administration Actions

• HHS on Monday rejected Michigan's request for a waiver from the medical-loss ratio regulations under the federal health reform law (Baker, "Healthwatch," The Hill, 12/19). Under the rule, private insurers must spend at least 80% in the individual market or 85% in the group market of their premium dollars on direct medical costs (Zigmond, Modern Healthcare, 12/19). Officials said insurers that are unable to meet the MLR standards could stop providing coverage, resulting in higher costs and fewer options for consumers (Anstett, Detroit Free Press, 12/19).
• Last week, HHS rejected Florida's request for a waiver from the medical-loss ratio rule under the federal health reform law (Bandell, South Florida Business Journal, 12/15). Under the rule, private insurers must spend at least 80% in the individual market or 85% in the group market of their premium dollars on direct medical costs (Pecquet, "Healthwatch," The Hill, 12/15). Florida officials said the MLR rule it could disrupt the state's private health insurance market, which includes only a few companies but covers for about 840,000 individuals (Fineout, AP/Miami Herald, 12/15).
• This week, the Department of Justice said that the federal health reform law has helped the department recover about $2.4 billion in health care fraud cases in 2011. The federal government recovered about $1.8 billion from drugmakers, which led to states recovering another $421 million from the industry in cases involving illegal pricing, false claims and FDA violations (Baker, "Healthwatch," The Hill, 12/19). Tony West of DOJ's civil division said a joint DOJ-HHS task force created by the Obama administration "essentially raised health care fraud to a cabinet-level priority" (Pickler, AP/Miami Herald, 12/19).
• Last week, CMS released draft regulations that outline procedures for drugmakers and device makers to report payments to physicians, as required by the Physician Payment Sunshine Act under the federal health reform law (Yukhananov, Reuters, 12/14). Under the proposed rule, manufacturers covered by Medicare, Medicaid or CHIP must disclose all payments or transfers of items of value to physicians and teaching hospitals (CQ HealthBeat, 12/14). Manufacturers would face a fine of $150,000 for failing to report payments, and $1 million for knowingly failing to disclose the data (Reuters, 12/14). Public comments on the proposed rule will be accepted until Feb. 17 (CQ HealthBeat, 12/14).

Effects on States

• The federal government faces substantial technical, political and financial obstacles in developing a health insurance exchange on behalf of states that do not set up their own. Through the federal exchange, individuals and small businesses will be able to access a website comparing insurance policy offerings by price, coverage and quality. In addition, the federal exchange must be able to help applicants determine if they are eligible for Medicaid, federal subsidies or various tax credits. The exchange also will include a Federal Data Services Hub that will unite data from different agencies, such as the Internal Revenue Service (Appleby, Kaiser Health News/Washington Post, 12/20).

In the States

• In a study released recently, the Colorado Health Institute reported that the number of primary care physicians in the state would need to increase by between 83 and 141 by 2016 to meet the health care needs for the estimated 510,000 residents who will gain health coverage under the federal health reform law. Researchers said that when the law's individual mandate takes effect in 2014, as many as 380,000 residents will obtain coverage through private plans and an additional 130,000 individuals will obtain coverage through Medicaid, resulting in between 256,010 and 432,420 additional annual visits to physicians (Sealover, Denver Business Journal, 12/12).

On the Campaign Trail

• Republican presidential candidate and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's (Ga.) record on health care could put him at odds with many Republican voters. Interviews and records indicate that Gingrich that he supported the individual mandate in the federal health reform law, telling health care executives in a May 2009 conference call, "We believe there should be a must-carry; that is, everybody should have health insurance." He also has been active in promoting several recent programs that have given the federal government a larger role in the health care system, a prospect with which many Republicans disagree (Rutenberg/McIntire, New York Times, 12/16).

On the Hill

• Last week, House Republicans acknowledged that they would not be able to repeal the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act before the end of the year but pledged to revive repeal efforts in 2012 (Pecquet [1], "Healthwatch," The Hill, 12/13). The long-term health care program, which was created by the federal health reform law, was intended to provide coverage to workers if they become unable to care for themselves because of injury or illness. GOP lawmakers said the House Ways and Means Committee will begin markup on a CLASS repeal proposal early next year (Pecquet [2], "Healthwatch," The Hill, 12/13).

Rolling Out Reform

• The Obama administration's efforts to ease some of the federal health reform law's requirements on insurers, employers, physicians and other groups has garnered "cautious praise" from some overhaul opponents. For example, the administration has exempted nearly 1,500 employers and health plans from measures that prohibit caps on benefit and granted waivers to exempt insurers from medical-loss ratio rules. Observers say the efforts could alleviate the possible political backlash during President Obama's re-election campaign, but many allies of his administration are frustrated with the strategy (Levey, Los Angeles Times, 12/14).
• In its first year, CMS' Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation launched 12 initiatives -- from accountable care organizations to primary care projects -- that are reshaping how people think about the U.S. health care system, according to a recent Commonwealth Fund report. The report outlined CMMI's achievements over the past year, highlighting a dozen initiatives that have helped the health care industry move toward more coordinated, integrated care. The federal health reform law allotted $10 billion to CMMI, which was launched in November 2010 to help it test payment and service delivery models that aim to reduce spending and boost care quality (Fiegl, American Medical News, 12/15).

Studying Its Effects

• In a survey released last week, the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions reported that nearly 75% of physicians are concerned about physician shortages, longer wait times and crowded emergency departments as more people gain health coverage through the federal health reform law. Nine out of 10 respondents polled also believe that their insurance reimbursements will be lower because of the law. The poll of 501 physicians also found that about 44% believe the health reform law was "a good start," but another 44% said the law was "a step in the wrong direction" (Radnofsky, "Health Blog," Wall Street Journal, 12/13).
• Last week, CDC's National Center for Health Statistics reported that the number of uninsured young adults nationwide has dropped by 2.5 million since the federal health reform law took effect in 2010. A provision in the overhaul allows dependents up to age 26 to remain on their parents' health insurance plans. According to HHS policy analysts, about 10.5 million young adults ages 19 to 25 were uninsured when the provision took effect in the third quarter of 2010, but that figure dropped to about eight million by the second quarter of 2011 (Alonso-Zaldivar, AP/San Francisco Chronicle, 12/14).
• In a study released last week, the UC-Berkley Center for Labor Research and Education reported that more than one million additional U.S. residents could gain health coverage if a provision in the federal health reform law is modified. The provision stipulates that if workers contribute more than 9.5% of their incomes toward employer-sponsored health benefits, they qualify for federal subsidies to purchase health plans through state insurance exchanges (Pecquet, "Healthwatch," The Hill, 12/13). The report recommended that the provision be modified to determine affordability based on the cost of a family plan (Bunis, CQ HealthBeat, 12/13).

by Dan Diamond, California Healthline Contributing Editor
Source: California Health LIne  -  h/t to MJ

Related:

Why Justice Clarence Thomas Should Not (Needn’t) Recuse Himself…  And Why Justice Elena Kagan Should (Must)