 |
 |
Bill said, "PD costs society more than $68 million a day--much of it tax dollars ,(although how much has not been documented to the best of my knowledfge) The thing I can't understand is with the fiscal good sense it makes to cure this thing, why did we have to beat our brains out to get Congress to act? Why didn't they just pass the darn Mo Act right away?" Well, I hate to say it, but I think that's part of human nature, i.e., to put things off until you can no longer ignore them and they're finally right up in your face. It would seem to me also that the fiscally prudent route would be to spend that same money on prevention and research for a cure, rather than supporting people indefinitely on disability, but logic and reason, sadly enough, often have little to do with people's decisions. Likewise, it would seem to me, that pd research money, in the long run, would also be most effectiive if concentrated in the areas of prevention and focussing on the causes (e.g., liver deficiencies and toxins), rather than on treating symptoms primarily. One good thing lately is Clinton's attempt to change the medicare/medicaid system, so that people can afford to go back to work, rather than living off disability or even welfare, without risking losing their medical benefits. That kid I used to tutor a few years ago in this houseing project, and his family, were a prime example of this. His mother, tho' only in her early 40's, had already had 2 strokes and thus took twenty-some pills a day. She couldn't afford to go off welfare, cuz if she did, she'd lose her medical, and that'd probably spell her death sentence. Due to her relative lack of education and/or job skills, she could only take low-paying jobs without benefits. So, she was basically trapped forever on welfare, altho' that wasn't really what she wanted. I know she wanted to work. I'm sure living in the environment she did, was no help to her health either. If it's to someone's detriment to work rather than to not, why would they? I don't think even the most politically conservative types would do differently, were they ever faced with the same situation. I think most people, given the choice, would rather be self-sufficient, rather than dependent on someone else, but sometimes, in certain situations, people need to some help, not to mention incentive, to make the transition. Some of this all translate for me into my desire to cure myself of means other than surgeries and drugs eventually. I don't want to be dependent on anything of that sort for my survival, especially if I'm forced to one day live off of a fixed income. That's for the birds, and it isn't right. Ya know, I was thinking also recently, about our insurance system. They could also probably reduce their costs long-term, especially for chronic illnesses like pd, but expanding their coverage to include some other, now unconventional items. One would be a cook (preferably one well-versed in whole and organic foods) to cook for the pd patient. It's a vicious cycle, I know at least for myself. After a day's work, the last thing I feel like doing is cooking, especially with my pd, but I really need to eat alot, and to eat well. My ability to function depends alot on my overall health, my energy level, etc. In the long run, that could only retard the progression of my disease, and also serve to keep my healthy otherwise, so to deal with all the little side things that come up. I think having cleaning people take care of our homes should also be covered. We should also be covered if we wanted to either build homes that are free of toxic materials, or if we would want to do some sort of cleanup of our existing homes. Like installing ultrasonic pest repellers rather than using pesticides, Using paints that are non-toxic. Getting rid of all of the standard household chemicals and replacing them with alternative and less-toxic ones. Covering such supplies as herbs and vitamins, and also therpaies and classes like tai chi, meditation, etc. Physical therapists are now covered, but what about exercise equipment for our homes? The list could grow quite a bit, but if ya think about it, some of these things could not only make our lives easier, but I think ultimately, improve our health, reduce our stress, and in the end, cost much less money. The longer we can maintain our independence and work, etc., the better off we all are. I know for me, the deciding factor in my choosing to finally go on disability and give up working, won't necessarily be that I can't work, but that I can't work and keep up with all these other things in my life (cooking, cleaning, exercise, etc.) and fit them all into one day. Even your average, "healthy" American has trouble doing it too, if the studies on the prevalence of sleep depravation are any indication. Anyway, thought I'd throw that one out there for some discussion as well. Wendy Tebay