This is a very interesting observation Mary.  Through the years we have all
demanded more form our health care system and the "market" has responded by
providing these very sophisticated test you spoke of.  They are truly
wonders and have enhanced the lives of many.  I think the point you are
making is that if we chose we could spend all of our income on health and
there would be a point at which you would start to see a diminishing return.
It is understandable that those caught on the wrong side of that diminishing
return will be impacted.  There is a balance point that we must all
contribute to and the hope is that balance point moves the point of
diminishing return ever higher.  Meaning that with each dollar spent we
provide benefits for more not less individuals.

Complex issue indeed.  In my humble opinion we should try to take on more
responsibility ourselves in understanding the possible return on tests
ordered for us.  It may seem radical to ask the doctor "Do I really need
this test and what direction will you take my treatment as a result of that
test?"  In this litigious society doctors frequently order tests just to
cover themselves because the test is there.  Failure to order the test could
result in a lawsuit.   This is no reason for running a test.  I say that on
one side and then on the other I am strongly against the HMO's that try to
do just that.  As you can see I would fall into the category that would
consume every test.  That still does not make it right.  It does help point
out that when we demand more we all pay more.

This odd anomaly you pointed out will result in the older population
receiving a disproportionately high cut of the limited pie that is out
national health care budget.  I consider our national health care budget to
be not only that contributed by Federal and State Government but more
importantly the insurance companies.  As our aging population grows and our
lives are extended by these scientific discoveries the older population will
statistically consume more of the health pie.  The secret will be as, we
move forward, to keep the current health care solvent and at the same time
try to achieve balance that will allow everyone to benefit to some degree
from advances.

I would like to live forever but all the money in the world and all the
advances in science will not make that possible.  That is one extreme.  The
other extreme is to ignore all medical treatment whatsoever.  Then I would
suspect the average lifespan would end up somewhere between the cave men and
the poorest country in the world today.  In between is a balance point.  The
more we educate ourselves and participate in our own treatment and accept
responsibility for at least a limited control over that treatment, the
greater and more comfortable our lives will be.

If we all try to understand the limitations of life, science and human
nature perhaps we can work together to move that balance point up without
sacrificing our children's futures.

Regards

Frank


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mary Ann Ryan" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 9:01 AM
Subject: Affordable health care


> >
> > >  I went to hear  Senator Kerry at  the Portland
> > Boys' and Girls' club.  He emphasized the
> > need for increased long-term home health care being
> > funded to prevent unnecessary institutionalizations
>
> I hope that this can be a non-partisan discussion because it is imperative
> that we look realistically at this issue.
>
> I'm very, very concerned about health care spending.  As a nurse I have
seen
> a radical increase in sophisticated procedures and tests..  Many on this
> list have had MRI's, CAT scans, and, in a few instances, PET scans.  Some
> have gone through DBS surgery, angiography, and bypass surgery.  All of
> these tests and procedures are extremely expensive.  Add to this list even
> newer blood analysis, medications, intensive care costs and rehab costs
and
> it is no wonder that Medicare is in trouble.
>
> Medicare will be supplementing medication costs this year.  From where I'm
> sitting, I'm very concerned that we may find Medicare dollars shrinking at
a
> pace no one has anticipated.  Already, there is discussion about
decreasing
> Medicare home health care subsidies. In light of all of this, my question
> is.......how much should we expect the government to spend on health
care??
> Please let's not talk about how health care spending could be increased if
> we just stopped our presence in the middle ease - all of us know that is
not
> going to happen, right or wrong.
>
> While the elderly population needs more medical care, it is also true that
> young families are being severely impacted by extremely high insurance
> costs.  What is to happen to them??  How can dollars be allocated in such
a
> way that everyone gets a piece of the pie?  And, more importantly, do we
(as
> a population dealing with a chronic disease) have have a right to expect
> that even more dollars be spend on the care of our loved ones in the face
of
> decreasing dollars for health care?
> ------------
> Mary Ann Ryan (CG Jamie 64/24)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to:
mailto:[log in to unmask]
> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn