Archive for the ‘Human Rights’ Category

Health Care Insurance in the United States

Sunday, June 7th, 2009

We just got our new healthcare costs for next year.   An 11.3% increase.   This means that out monthly healthcare costs will jump from $885.98/mo ($10,631.76/yr) to $986.40/mo ($11,836.80/yr).   That’s $1205.04 more per year.

And this is the cheapest insurance our provider offers.  We each pay a $2,500 deductable before we see any benefits coming back to us.

Am I deeply disgusted?   You bet.   I’m not going to get 11.3% more services for the extra money I’ll pay – just the same services as before.

I really wonder what is making healthcare costs rise so strongly here in the US if I’m not getting more services?

One thing I’d be willing to bet on:  The health insurer companies are not in danger of going under.  If their costs rise, they just pass it on to those who buy their policies.

Things are unraveling in this country day by day.   And those corporate interests who have captured our pharmaceutical and medical systems stand above the fray and continue to milk us for their profits.

Have you ever asked yourself why an operation that costs $30,000 in the US costs $6000 in India?   Oh, you say, “It’s because the quality of the medical care in there is sub-standard?”   Not so.   It is equivalent.   Read this: or this .   And if you are still curious, Google for “medical costs in India” or “Medical costs in Thailand” for more.   It’ll be an eye-opener.

New Zealand and its socialized medical system is looking better and better to me everday.

Are medical costs the leading cause of U.S. bankruptcies?

Friday, June 5th, 2009

– This story and the one before it both illustrate what is so very wrong with the fact that the U.S. is the only industrialized western nation without universal health care.   And why?  Because corporate interests have captured our system and they are not about to forego their immense profits for the benefit of mere people.

– Read this to see how it could be:

– And read these to see the ways things are going very very wrong: and

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

At least 62 percent of all U.S. family bankruptcies result from medical expenses, reports a study released yesterday in The American Journal of Medicine—an increase from the 46 percent the reseachers found in 2001.

Analyzing data from 2,314 randomly selected 2007 (pre-mortgage-meltdown) bankruptcy filings revealed that most of those who had claimed bankruptcy because of medical expenses had health insurance, owned homes, were in their mid-40s and had middle class incomes.

High out-of-pocket expenses for those already insured and the loss of private insurance were the primary reasons for medical bankruptcy, report the study authors—many of whom are active members of Physicians for a National Health Program, a group that advocates for a single-payer system.

More…

Healthcare and Bankruptcy

Friday, June 5th, 2009

— By Kevin Drum | Wed June 3, 2009 11:03 PM PST

On the campaign trail, Barack Obama frequently cited research showing that medical expenses were a contributing factor in 55% of all personal bankruptcies.  A new study says he was wrong. It was actually more than that:

The study found that medical bills, plus related problems such as lost wages for the ill and their caregivers, contributed to 62% of all bankruptcies filed in 2007….Medical insurance isn’t much help, either. About 78% of bankruptcy filers burdened by healthcare expenses were insured, according to the survey, to be published in the August issue of the American Journal of Medicine.

….Most people who filed medical-related bankruptcies “were solidly middle class before financial disaster hit,” the study says. Two-thirds were homeowners, and most had gone to college.

The study does not suggest that medical expenses were the sole cause for these bankruptcies, but it does identify them as a contributing factor. The increase in such filings occurred despite a 2005 law aimed at making it more difficult for individuals to seek court protection from creditors.

Among bankruptcy filers, those without insurance reported average medical expenses of $26,971.  Those with private insurance reported average medical bills of $17,749.

More…

Milestone Study On Blood Pressure Medications Confirmed

Sunday, May 17th, 2009

diuretic– I wrote before here about these findings on the expensive blood pressure medicines that Big Pharma are pushing.   They are not the best options.

– A large study in 2002 showed clearly that simple diuretic pills which cost pennies a day work better than the expensive pills from Big Pharma.   Now, a new study has clearly replicated these findings.

– Once again, we have a contest between those who want what’s best for people against those who hold the maximization of profits as their highest goal.

– Big Pharma has millions and millions of dollars available to spread their message.   Do you think they are going to use these funds to inform the public that there are better and cheaper alternatives to their products?

“Evidence from subsequent analyses of ALLHAT and other clinical outcome trials confirm that neither alpha blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, nor calcium channel blockers surpass thiazide-type diuretics (at appropriate dosage) as initial therapy for reduction of cardiovascular or renal risk”

– This particularly galls me because I take Diovan for borderline high blood pressure – and it costs me about $140 a month.   Nice, eh?

= = = = = = = = = = = – – – – – – – – – – – = = = = = = = = = = =

New research supports the findings of a landmark drug comparison study published in 2002 in which a diuretic drug or “water pill” outperformed other medications for high blood pressure. A scientific team including investigators from The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston reports the findings in the May 11 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.

About one in three adults in the United States has high blood pressure, which, according to the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), can lead to a host of health problems including heart failure, coronary heart disease, stroke and kidney failure.

The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) is the largest high blood pressure treatment trial ever conducted and compared the impact of four classes of blood pressure drugs on 42,418 high-risk patients between 1994 and 2002. High blood pressure in adults is defined as 140/90 mm Hg or above.

“We looked at data since the trial ended to make sure our message hasn’t changed. And, it hasn’t. Diuretic drugs work as well or better than other medications in preventing heart failure,” said Barry Davis, M.D., Ph.D., study co-author, Guy S. Parcel Chair in Public Health and director of the Coordinating Center for Clinical Trials (CCCT) at The University of Texas School of Public Health.

More…

– Read this and get a copy to your doctor.  Chances are that he or she are getting most of their information from Big Pharma and Big Pharma’s certainly not going to tell them.

– Extra credit reading:

Healthcare in Holland

Tuesday, May 12th, 2009

– I hear from my conservative friends, and read in portions of the U.S. press, about how terrible socialized medicine is; the long waits, the shabby service and the absence of advanced medical technologies.

– I’ve interacted some with the health care system in New Zealand and that hasn’t been my finding at all.

– And, watching Michael Moore’s movie, Sicko, has convinced me that it is probably not the case in Canada, Britain or France as well.

– A friend of mine who moved to Exeter in Britain last year has writen on her Blog about about her experiences of the British system and I thought it sounded pretty good.

– Now, here’s an article from Mother Jones about a family that’s just spent 18 months in Amsterdam and their take on it is positive as well.

Sounds like there might be a pattern here, eh?

– I personally think that the big corporate world has captured the American medical system in its net and has turned it into a system for the generation of profit rather than a system that puts our health first.   I also think that the more these folks can convince us (the American public) that socialized medicine is a terrible evil, the longer that can continue to avoid losing their cash-cow.

– Think I’m cynical?   Read on.

=== === === === === === ===

So what does Russell Shorto think of Dutch healthcare after spending 18 months in Amsterdam?

My nonscientific analysis — culled from my own experience and that of other expats whom I’ve badgered — translates into a clear endorsement. My friend Colin Campbell, an American writer, has been in the Netherlands for four years with his wife and their two children. “Over the course of four years, four human beings end up going to a lot of different doctors,” he said. “The amazing thing is that virtually every experience has been more pleasant than in the U.S. There you have the bureaucracy, the endless forms, the fear of malpractice suits. Here you just go in and see your doctor. It shows that it doesn’t have to be complicated. I wish every single U.S. congressman could come to Amsterdam and live here for a while and see what happens medically.”

More…

The article referenced within this article is very much worth a read as well.  You can see it here:

Food safety at a crossroads

Saturday, May 2nd, 2009

By Zhou Li

In the wake of the melamine scandal in China, attention has turned to food safety issues. But tighter safety standards are of little help without robust moral standards, writes Zhou Li.

Last year’s melamine-in-milk scandal led to sombre reflection in China. According to the health ministry, 294,000 babies and infants acquired kidney stones due to drinking contaminated milk; 154 became seriously ill and six died.

The event has been seen as a failing of the dairy industry, a problem with supply chains and corporate governance. But the melamine scandal was not simply a business issue.

Plenty of energy has been expended handling these incidents, but our efforts have been misdirected. These events cannot be prevented until we realise that simply pursuing the culprits after the event is an ineffective response.

Unfortunately, this is where most of our attention is now focused. It is also naive to think that external supervision, such as the new food safety law, or internal controls, such as Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) or ISO certification, will solve the problem.

The underlying cause of the melamine scandal was the food industry’s pursuit of profit – and the complete lack of moral standards of those involved.

Where there are no moral standards, there is scope for public harm in the pursuit of profit. Members of the public only know about food products at the point of consumption; there is no knowledge about the long-term or hidden dangers. One party can make a profit, while the other suffers. Honest manufacturers cannot survive, and neither can healthy patterns of consumption.

A moral vacuum means that members of the public pay with their health and environment. And this is a rising price that is difficult to quantify. Bad money drives out good; poor quality milk drives out high quality; unethical businesses drive out ethical ones; and bad systems take over from good systems.

More…


When is enough?

Thursday, April 30th, 2009

tree_huggerI’m a liberal – I make no bones about it.   I believe women are my equals and that people of all shades and sexual proclivities have the same rights that I do.  I believe that governments should exist to serve their people and not merely to maximize opportunities for Capitalists.

In short, on most questions, if there’s a liberal and conservative axis, you’ll find me on the liberal end of things.

But, I have some exceptions – places where liberals might shun me.

If an individual’s committed violent crimes repeatedly and is obviously incorrigible, I see no point in the state locking them up and feeding them for the rest of their never-to-be-paroled life.   Terminate them – and let’s move on.   When you’ve got a cancer, you cut it off.

Guns?   I’m not at all sure that we all need military assault rifles.   But, I do like what the U.S. Second Amendment says … and why it says it.   When governments lose their way, citizens need a way to have their say.

Nanny States?   I think they go way too far sometimes.   As the Buddhists say, ‘Everything in balance’.   Laws should be balanced and mete out the same punishments to both the rich and the poor.  And victim-less crimes should be recognized as the oxymorons that they are.

And I’m all for cultural diversity – to a point.   If your culture believes that you are one of the chosen or the saved and you also believe that I’m not, or if your culture believes that women belong to men, or if your culture believes in slash and burn agriculture, or female genital mutilation, or in casual and needless cruelty to animals, or that some men are just better than others and thus have a right to rule them, then I think it’s probably time for for your culture to go – sorry.

But, if you like to wear a small square hat and dance outside at the new moon, or paint your house bright red, blue and gold, or if carrying a dagger and wearing turban are your thing, or if you are a strict vegetarian or anything else that doesn’t mess with our common biosphere or with other’s folk’s rights, then good on ya, I say.

We all need to live and let live, honor and respect each other and realize that this small planet belongs to all of us.   If your cultural beliefs deprives some people of their freedoms, if your cultural beliefs are messing the with common environment we and all of our descendants are going to have to share, if your cultural beliefs are all about trying to corner and monopolize money, knowledge, political or military power over the rest of us – then bugger off.   How can I make it plainer?

, , , , , , , , , , and are all examples of what I’m talking about.

What’s this rant about?

So what, you wonder, is this little rant about?   Well, it’s about a couple of things that have come together in the last few days.

Just the other day, The U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, pointed out that the government of Pakistan is buckling before pressure from the Taliban.   The most recent and telling example of this was when the Pakistan government ‘allowed‘ the Taliban, who control the Swat Valley and, indeed, much of the northwest of Pakistan, to practice Sharia Law there.   And they, of course, did this hoping that it might result in peace with the Taliban.islamabad-pakistan

Then, just days later, we hear that the Taliban are now taking over areas adjoining the Swat Valley and forcing the people there to adopt the Taliban’s rules and killing or driving off anyone who opposes them.

Mortal Threat

The Pakistani government, in deep denial, is losing ground against the Islamic insurgents and it badly needs to decide which side it is on and get focused.   Clinton said, speaking to U.S. lawmakers, that Pakistan’s government has abdicated to the Taliban in agreeing to impose Islamic law in the Swat valley and the country now poses a “mortal threat” to the world.

I don’t think she’s exaggerating the ‘Mortal Threat’ business.   Pakistan has nuclear weapons (are you paying attention here?) and Pakistan is a weak state literally crumbling before strengthening Taliban insurgent forces.   If that’s not the definition of ‘Mortal Danger’ for the rest of us, I don’t know what is.

Then, finally, a friend of mine sent me the a link to the following video.   I encourage you to stop now, click on the video and then return here to continue reading after you are done.

Click here for the video: 

Got that?  A suitcase full of four pounds of Anthrax?   This guy has very little idea of how to try to get along with other cultures.   And, as someone who considers himself pretty liberal and tolerant, I find myself seriously wondering what we should do about people and movements like this.

Yeah, right!

Yeah, right!

I have a little movie of my own that plays over and over in my head when I think about this stuff.   It involves a time in our not too distant past when other tyrants were on the loose and wanted to take over the world.  Back then, a lot of time was spent trying to appease the beast, trying to see their good side, assuming that if we were nice, they’d be nice to.   And in my little movie, I see Neville Chamberlain getting off the plane from Germany over and over again and proclaiming, “Peace in our Time.

There’s a nice biography/documentary around about the life of Winston Churchill and it makes your skin crawl to see how very long and hard the British tried to ignore the Nazi monster and how, in the end, it almost cost them their freedom.   And without a doubt, it did cost them the loss of a lot of British lives that were lost unnecessarily because of how trusting and unprepared they were when the German Nazis finally took of their ‘Nice Mask’ and showed the world who they really were.

And here in the U.S., we refused to get involved until the Japanese literally brought the party to our shores and, like the British before us, we then suddenly had to get over our idealism and isolationism and start a massive and desperate game of catchup.

Islam is OK

So, what am I saying here?

islamFirst, let’s be clear.   I am not anti Islam.   Of the many millions of Islamic people in the world, it is only small fundamentalist core which wants to push their agendas by any means possible, who believe that terrorism is a valid tool in their struggle to make the world over in the image they want and who believe their every action, no matter how reprehensible, is blessed by their God.  But, I believe that the vast majority of Muslims in this world would simply like to live and get along just like we would.   So understand, please, that it is only these intolerant crazies that I am on about here.

Weapons of mass destruction have changed the face of warfare forever.   The leverage that can be exerted by the use of a biological or nuclear weapon can be totally out of proportion to the size of the group wielding it.   We’re not in the world anymore where we need large armies to fight our conflicts.    We’ve all been very lucky since the end of the  Second World War.   Because, in spite of our many conflicts, we’ve managed to keep the nuclear and biological genies in their bottles so far.

symbol-biohazard1symbol-nuclear1

But ask yourself, if the Taliban take over Pakistan and gain control of the weapons there, do you think it is going to turn out well for us?

Yes, I’m a liberal – but I have limits and I think for our own survival, we all should have limits.

If we think we can cure the cancer of radical Islamic fundamentalism, then by all means, we should try.   But, if we don’t think we can cure it, then we are only wasting valuable time while it spreads and becomes more and more intractable.

What should we do?

That’s a tough question. But, while we think about it and consider various half measures, those who want to destroy us and make the world over into a prison of intolerant fundamentalism, wherein women are property and human rights are irrelevant and where we all have to worship as they tell us or die, are moving inexorably forward towards the possession of nuclear and biological weapons.

This is not a place we can allow history to go.

Their culture is toxic to our future and to the future of a world based on multiculturalism,  tolerance, sustainability, science, democracy, religious freedom and human rights for everyone.   They want to take us back to the 7th century – and I, for one, don’t want to go.

In truth, I don’t know what we should do nor when we should do it.   But I see what some have called a ‘clash of civilizations‘ coming.

Some folks think that there must be something more we can do to defuse their animosity.   But, when I look at the deep roots of why they do what they do, I despair that there’s more we can do – save move forward to the final chapter in this story of human history.  The chapter in which we realize that there can be no reconciliation with a blind faith determined to convert the world to its vision or die trying.   A chapter in which we see, finally, that they will keep coming at us relentlessly until they have either won or until their vision of Islam is extinguished from the world.

We are too nice for our own good.   We will wait and wait, hoping for a way out of this quandary, and all the while we’ll be risking that they will acquire deadly weapons of mass destruction.   We may, in our tolerance and goodness, wait too long and suddenly find ourselves in a very desperate world.

But if they cannot be turned from their course, in the end, we will, we must, use whatever force it takes to eliminate their threat to our survival.   In the end, we’ll  recognize that if human civilization has a cancer and we want to advance rather than regress, then the cancer must be cut off for the greater good of the whole.

These are tough thoughts for a liberal to espouse.   But, if you’ve got  better ideas, I’d love to hear them.

———————————————

– Some additional related stories:  and and

Executed for daring to elope

Wednesday, April 15th, 2009

– Stone age values have no place in this modern world.  Women are the equals of men and men and women have the right to choose their beliefs.  I’m pretty liberal but if you want to push me beyond those two statements you are going to find it tough going.

= = = = = = = = = = =

Their crime was falling in love. Their punishment: death by firing squad. Bound and blindfolded, a young couple were shot at close range in southern Afghanistan – for daring to elope.

Abdul Aziz was 21 years old. The girl he ran off with was just 19. Her name, Gul Pecha, means flower.

Officials said the pair were tried by a Taleban court, found guilty of “immoral acts” and sentenced to death. The Taleban denied involvement.

Administrators say the couple’s parents were complicit in their fate. But that has not been confirmed.

Gul and Abdul were both from Lukhi village, in Nimroz province. Their home district borders Helmand, where a large number of Western troops are based.

They were gunned down, together, on Tuesday. Witnesses said they were shot in front of a local mob by men with AK47 assault rifles.

“They had fled their homes to the neighbouring village, because their parents refused to let them marry,” said Nimroz’s Governor, Ghullam Dastagir Azad. “Their parents tracked them down and handed them over to the Taleban.”

More…

Our Sick Farms, Our Infected Food

Sunday, April 5th, 2009

Yum - antibiotics in excess– One aspect of the world’s increasingly dire problems that one sees over and over again, is how special interest groups push their agendas to the top of the stack to the detriment of the whole.

– It is a short sightedness that happens over and over and over again.   And again, ‘No single raindrop thinks that it is responsible for the flood’.

– Here’s a story about American farms and how a decision that was for all of our benefits was pushed quietly aside by the Farm Lobby.

– Their profits will hold up a bit better over the next few years because of their actions, but all of us will suffer badly in the long run.

– When we do this sort of thing to ourselves over and over again, how can anyone have any real hope that we’re suddenly going to wake up and save ourselves collectively from the impending global environmental and climatic crises?

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Congress and the FDA must upend the nation’s agricultural policies to keep its food supply safe

Agriculture has fueled the eruption of human civilization. Efficiently raised, affordable crops and livestock feed our growing population, and hunger has largely been banished from the developed world as a result. Yet there are reasons to believe that we are beginning to lose control of our great agricultural machine. The security of our food supply is at risk in ways more noxious than anyone had feared.

The trouble starts with crops. Orange groves in Florida and California are falling to fast-moving blights with no known cure. Cavendish-variety bananas the global standard, each genetically identical to the next will almost certainly be wiped out by emerging infectious disease, just as the Cavendish’s predecessor was six decades ago. And as entomologists Diana Cox-Foster and Dennis vanEngelsdorp describe in “Saving the Honey bee,” on page 40, a mysterious affliction has ravaged honeybee colonies around the U.S., jeopardizing an agricultural system that is utterly dependent on farmed, traveling hives to pollinate vast swaths of monoculture. The ailment may be in part the result of the stresses imposed on hives by this uniquely modern system.

Plants and animals are not the only ones getting sick, however. New evidence indicates that our agricultural practices are leading directly to the spread of human disease.

Much has been made in recent years of MRSA, the antibiotic-resistant strain of Staphylococcus bacteria, and for good reason. In 2005, the most recent year for which figures are available, about 95,000 MRSA infections caused the deaths of nearly 19,000 Americans. The disease first incubated in hospitals the killer bacterium is an inevitable evolutionary response to the widespread use of antibiotics but has since found a home in locker rooms, prisons and child care facilities. Now the bacteria have spread to the farm.

Perhaps we should not be surprised. Modern factory farms keep so many animals in such a small space that the animals must be given low doses of antibiotics to shield them from the fetid conditions. The drug-resistant bacteria that emerge have now entered our food supply. The first study to investigate farm-bred MRSA in the U.S. amazingly, the Food and Drug Administration has shown little interest in testing the nation’s livestock for this disease recently found that 49 percent of pigs and 45 percent of pig workers in the survey harbored the bacteria. Unfortunately, these infections can spread. According to a report published in Emerging Infectious Diseases, MRSA from animals is now thought to be responsible for more than 20 percent of all human MRSA cases in the Netherlands.

In April 2008 a high-profile commission of scientists, farmers, doctors and veterinarians recommended that the FDA phase out the nontherapeutic use of antibiotics in farm animal production, to “preserve these drugs to treat sick animals, not healthy ones” in the words of former Kansas governor John Carlin, the commission’s chair. The FDA agreed and soon announced that it would ban the use of one widespread antibiotic except for strictly delineated medical purposes. But five days before the ban was set to take effect, the agency quietly reversed its position. Although no official reason was given, the opposition of the powerful farm lobby is widely thought to have played a role.

More…

Biofuels Boom Could Fuel Rainforest Destruction, Researcher Warns

Sunday, March 15th, 2009

Farmers across the tropics might raze forests to plant biofuel crops, according to new research by Holly Gibbs, a postdoctoral researcher at Stanford’s Woods Institute for the Environment.

“If we run our cars on biofuels produced in the tropics, chances will be good that we are effectively burning rainforests in our gas tanks,” she warned.

Policies favoring biofuel crop production may inadvertently contribute to, not slow, the process of climate change, Gibbs said. Such an environmental disaster could be “just around the corner without more thoughtful energy policies that consider potential ripple effects on tropical forests,” she added.

Gibbs’ predictions are based on her new study, in which she analyzed detailed satellite images collected between 1980 and 2000. The study is the first to do such a detailed characterization of the pathways of agricultural expansion throughout the entire tropical region. Gibbs hopes that this new knowledge will contribute to making prudent decisions about future biofuel policies and subsidies.

Gibbs presented her findings in Chicago on Feb. 14, during a symposium at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The symposium was titled “Biofuels, Tropical Deforestation, and Climate Policy: Key Challenges and Opportunities.”

More…