The "no"s nose
I spent all day driving in the D.C. area, listening to WAMU, so I've heard a lot about the flu vaccine kerfuffle. (If I'd been driving in Richmond, listening to public radio, I would have heard a lot about Brahms.) Last week our pediatrician told Ewa and I we should get the shot because we have an infant son, but I could swear our regular doctor's secretary laughed when I called to ask about it. They're not getting the vaccine, she said.
I get vaccinated every year, because not getting sick is sort of a matter of pride with me. I'm terrified of not being able to work. Ewa worked on a story for Redbook a few years ago that said each inoculation can last up to 18 months, so we're probably okay. I heard the tail end of a discussion about taking a nasal spray instead--are those not in short supply? If so, wouldn't flu mist manufacturers be crowing about it? Please advise. Also: How do I get one?
Finally, I heard the first half of an interesting discussion on the Diane Rehm Show rebroadcast tonight. Fuzzed out around Fredericksburg, but she had two guys on whose series on corporate welfare in Time I really enjoyed, Donald Barlett and James Steele.
They've been investigating the health care system in the U.S. and have written a book about it. As I said, I didn't hear the whole discussion, but one interesting point they brought up was a criticism of market-based health care. (There was in fact a pretty good article in the Washington Post yesterday on why exactly so few companies are making the flu vaccine.) Barlett pointed out that there is no shortage of erectile-dysfunction drugs on the market right now, and that no one's dying from that particular condition.
I also heard Kerry on the radio offering an actual plan to make sure this flu vaccine shortage doesn't happen again. I have to say it doesn't sound too far out. Finally, Andrew Sullivan has an interesting post on the flu vaccine shortage noting that the Health and Human Services Administration spokesman, Bill Pierce, blames Congress for not funding an effort to improve the vaccination process.
"Hmmm. And which party controls Congress?" says Sullivan.
I get vaccinated every year, because not getting sick is sort of a matter of pride with me. I'm terrified of not being able to work. Ewa worked on a story for Redbook a few years ago that said each inoculation can last up to 18 months, so we're probably okay. I heard the tail end of a discussion about taking a nasal spray instead--are those not in short supply? If so, wouldn't flu mist manufacturers be crowing about it? Please advise. Also: How do I get one?
Finally, I heard the first half of an interesting discussion on the Diane Rehm Show rebroadcast tonight. Fuzzed out around Fredericksburg, but she had two guys on whose series on corporate welfare in Time I really enjoyed, Donald Barlett and James Steele.
They've been investigating the health care system in the U.S. and have written a book about it. As I said, I didn't hear the whole discussion, but one interesting point they brought up was a criticism of market-based health care. (There was in fact a pretty good article in the Washington Post yesterday on why exactly so few companies are making the flu vaccine.) Barlett pointed out that there is no shortage of erectile-dysfunction drugs on the market right now, and that no one's dying from that particular condition.
I also heard Kerry on the radio offering an actual plan to make sure this flu vaccine shortage doesn't happen again. I have to say it doesn't sound too far out. Finally, Andrew Sullivan has an interesting post on the flu vaccine shortage noting that the Health and Human Services Administration spokesman, Bill Pierce, blames Congress for not funding an effort to improve the vaccination process.
"Hmmm. And which party controls Congress?" says Sullivan.
posted by Andrew Beaujon at 01:30
1 Comments:
http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041021/OPINION02/410210304/1018/OPINION
Thursday, October 21, 2004
U.S. needs universal health care
Daryl Northrop
Guest Opinion
Nov. 2 election candidates
The Press-Citizen has invited candidates in contested area races to write a guest opinion discussing a single issue affecting the jurisdiction they hope to represent. These columns will appear during the next several days and will be available online through the campaign season.
Health care for all is a fundamental human right. To that end, my campaign for U.S. Senate and the Green Party fully support universal, single payer health care for all Americans.
In 2004, comprehensive health care remains a dream for vast portions of American society. More than 30 million of our fellow citizens have no access to health insurance, while millions more who have health insurance are burdened with ever increasing premiums, co-pays, cruelly restrictive formularies for prescription drugs and HMOs intruding on doctor/patient medical decisions in the interests of profit.
The for-profit health care system in the United States is a failure. We, as a nation, must move away from our current situation of restricted care and skyrocketing prices toward a system of universal, comprehensive, effective and affordable health care.
Goals and benefits
We should follow four goals and principles of action in creating such a system:
• Access to comprehensive health care is a human right. It is the responsibility of society, through its government, to ensure this right. Coverage should not be tied to employment. Private insurance firms' past record disqualifies them from a central role in managing health care.
• The right to choose and change one's physician is fundamental to patient autonomy. Patients should be free to seek care from any licensed health care professional.
• Pursuit of corporate profit and personal fortune have no place in caregiving and they create enormous waste. The United States al-ready spends enough to provide comprehensive health care to all Americans with no increase in total costs. However, the vast health care resources now squandered on bureaucracy (mostly due to efforts to divert costs to other payers or onto patients themselves), profits, marketing and useless or even harmful medical interventions must be shifted to needed care.
• In a democracy, the public should set overall health policies. Personal medical decisions must be made by patients with their caregivers, not by corporate or government bureaucrats.
Following those goals and principles, universal health care would offer:
• Improved health for all Americans -- Care would no longer be linked to employer sponsored plans or the ability to afford high insurance premiums. Universal access to preventative health care, wellness information, and regular checkups for all citizens will greatly reduce illness aggravated by lack of care.
• Direct economic benefit for business, small and large -- In Canada, the divisions of GM and Ford Motors based there wholeheartedly endorse their single-payer universal healthcare system. Why? New workers report to the job healthy, and workers who need health care on the job do not put a burden on the profit margin by incurring health costs to be paid directly by the company.
• Direct economic benefit for all Americans -- Access to high quality health care, regardless of ability to pay will directly benefit by having better health, fewer sick days away from work, and greater personal economic stability without the threat of catastrophic health care costs.
• Real control over soaring medical costs -- With the elimination of profit and mulitiple health care companies squandering health care funds, the overall cost of health care will decrease on a per capita basis. With all citizens in the same pool of participants, maximum discounting can be achieved from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries.
Plan of action
The progression toward universal health care will, by necessity, be an incremental process. Political representatives will have to be elected who are not beholden to HMOs, drug companies and medical device manufacturers.
To accomplish this, neither my campaign nor the Green Party accept any special interest contributions. None at all. That is something the Democratic and Republican parties cannot claim.
As a member of the U.S. Senate, I will work tirelessly to eliminate corporate and special interest funding of our democratic process.
Recent World Health Organization statistics clearly show the differences between our system and the national health care system that Canada enjoys. Canada spends 40 percent less per citizen that Americans on health care each year.
In return, they have a system where they choose their own doctor, have lower infant mortality rates, longer life-spans, cheaper prescription drugs and continuous coverage regardless of employment status.
The time has come for Iowans to have real representation in the U.S. Senate, representation that fights for a health care system that benefits all of us, not just those who are wealthy enough to access it.
Reach Daryl Northrop, Green Party candidate for U.S. Senate, at Daryl@NorthropForSenate.org.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home