Prevention is cheaper than cure

[Arianrhod]

A final thought for you, Westwall: This thread started out to be about prevention vs cure. You and I both agree that familial CAD is not, with today’s science, preventable. So we’ve had our little sidebar, and I’ve enjoyed it. However, I asked you several posts ago whether you could provide any data to prove that the majority of CAD cases are familial and have nothing to do with lifestyle. I’d still like you to do that, but we both know you won’t. So thank you for your time. Now you may have the last word.

 

[westwall]

QUOTE="Arianrhod, post: 12239293, member: 55302"]A final thought for you, Westwall: This thread started out to be about prevention vs cure. You and I both agree that familial CAD is not, with today’s science, preventable. So we’ve had our little sidebar, and I’ve enjoyed it. However, I asked you several posts ago whether you could provide any data to prove that the majority of CAD cases are familial and have nothing to do with lifestyle. I’d still like you to do that, but we both know you won’t. So thank you for your time. Now you may have the last word.[ QUOTE]









Here is what my cardiologist told me (Dr. Chapman) "food is 15 to 20% of the problem. The majority of it is genetic. The bad cholesterol comes in two types, big puffy popcorn type, and small BB's. The BB's are the lethal kind. You can have a cholesterol reading of 500 and if it is the puffy kind you will never develop CAD. Period.

I have the worst possible kind of genes for CAD so I eat as little transfats as possible. I have always been sparing of salt anyway so that is not really a problem, though you would be amazed at how difficult it is to get a decent low salt meal at a restaurant, I drink sparingly, was extremely active throughout my life and I have never smoked. In other words if anyone should not have developed CAD it is me.

The MAJORITY of CAD sufferers are not obese. After my surgery I was signed up for cardiac rehab and not a single person in the class was obese. Not one. The majority had smoked though, so that is clearly a contributor.

Based on my now few years of experience I have come to the conclusion that obese people with CAD die from it the first time out. They don't get a second chance. Thin people can survive it but once again it depends on circumstance. My uncle died at 38, he was as thin as a rail but was a heavy smoker which no doubt contributed to his early demise. My dad made it to 60 but his proximal cause was emphysema, he no doubt had CAD as well but never lived long enough to suffer from it as well.

I nearly had the heart attack but didn't thanks to my athleticism which helped to develop secondary capillary flow which kept my heart going when my arteries were 90% closed.

Smoking far more than food is a contributor to CAD. That and genetics of course.

 

[Stephanie]

And I would bet the op would be first in line in their brown shirts going around and forcing people to go and have their little check ups. because you know, you can't rely on the citizens to make their OWN CHOICES to go see a doctor when they freaking feel it or they might not feel like going at all. that's why THEY forced this Insurance scam on you and can now FINE you if you don't sign up for it..

what freaking country are we living in when the FEDERAL Government can FORCE you to PURCHASE something or be fined. SERIOUSLY. ?

 

[Arianrhod]

And I would bet the op would be first in line in their brown shirts going around and forcing people to go and have their little check ups.

And you'd be as wrong about that as you are about everything else.

Another third-grade girl talking behind my back.

Grow up.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And I would bet the op would be first in line in their brown shirts going around and forcing people to go and have their little check ups. because you know, you can't rely on the citizens to make their OWN CHOICES to go see a doctor when they freaking feel it or they might not feel like going at all. that's why THEY forced this Insurance scam on you and can now FINE you if you don't sign up for it..

what freaking country are we living in when the FEDERAL Government can FORCE you to PURCHASE something or be fined. SERIOUSLY. ?

At the extreme...yes.

But, the title of the OP is correct and it is not news.

The Comment in the OP makes no sense. But then, you can't link to the article without a password.

And heaven forbid, the salient (or so some would think it salient) point be quoted so we'd have a clue about what the OP is whining about.

Want to prevent a lot of lung cancer....outlaw ciggarettes.

Want to potentially prevent 18,000 deaths a year (and who knows how many injuries) outlaw alcohol.

Doubt that would happen.

Want to prevent a bunch of other injuries....outlaw.....

Rock climbing.....
Cars.....
Mountain Biking.....
High School Football......
Etc.
Etc.

Doubt that will happen......

But it would prevent injuries.

Now.....

Have seat belts saved lives. I am sure they have.......

Can you make people wear seatbelt ? You can pass laws.....

You could also put cameras in cars.....

I guess you could put computers in cars that would rat you out if you speed.

Some call it big brother if you force it.

Now, what if your insurance company gives you a discount if you AGREE to put that computer in your car.

They already give you a break if you don't smoke.

Choice vs. Force......

Not saying that is what the OP is proposing (can't tell....OP just pissed out a little blurb and started the thread).

 

[Arianrhod]

You can enroll on the site for free, and I promise the Black Helicopters won't come for you. But since Sun Devil needs to be spoon-fed, the entire article is quoted:

Introduction

Preventive services are available for nine of the ten leading causes of death in the United States.[1] The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has reduced cost as a barrier to care by expanding access to insurance and requiring many health plans to cover certain recommended preventive services without copayments or deductibles.[1] To establish a baseline for the receipt of these services for monitoring the effects of the law after 2012, CDC analyzed responses from persons aged ≥18 years in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) for the years 2011 and 2012 combined. NHIS is an in-person interview administered annually to a nationally representative sample of the noninstitutionalized, U.S. civilian population. This report summarizes the findings for nine preventive services covered by the ACA. Having health insurance or a higher income was associated with higher rates of receiving these services, affirming findings of previous studies.[2] Securing health insurance coverage might be an important way to increase receipt of clinical preventive services, but insurance coverage is not sufficient to ensure that everyone is offered or uses clinical services proven to prevent disease. Greater awareness of ACA provisions among the public, public health professionals, partners, and health care providers might help increase the receipt of recommended services.[3]

The responses to questions about the receipt of nine clinical preventive services recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) or the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) were analyzed to identify receipt rates for the clinical services ( Table 1 ). The nine preventive services are among dozens of services for adults covered with no copayments or deductibles under certain health plans according to the ACA*†: 1)blood pressure screening, 2) cholesterol screening, 3) colon cancer screening, 4) diet counseling, 5) fasting blood glucose test (diabetes screening), 6) hepatitis A vaccination, 7) hepatitis B vaccination, 8) mammogram (breast cancer screening), and 9) Papanicolaou (Pap) test (cervical cancer screening). While clinical guidelines change over time (i.e., adjusting the recommended periodicity or risk factors for which the service is indicated), it is important to consistently monitor receipt rates for the underlying clinical services for accurate year-to-year comparisons. Asked annually since 2011, the NHIS survey questions used for this analysis are designed to consistently measure receipt of the services each survey year and to improve accuracy of responses by limiting recall of service receipt to 12 months where possible; for hepatitis A and B vaccinations, respondents were asked if they had ever received this service ( Table 1 ). Only 15 preventive services (these nine services and six others previously reported on in 2014[4]) are included in both the ACA's coverage requirements and the annual NHIS.

To increase sample sizes and improve the reliability of estimates for this analysis, NHIS data from the sample adult core questionnaires in 2011 and 2012 were combined. From within each family in each household identified, one adult (aged ≥18 years) was randomly selected to complete the questionnaire.§ NHIS 2011 and 2012 adult core samples included 33,014 and 34,525 respondents, respectively, and the overall response rates were 66.3% and 61.2%.

Participants were asked whether they had health insurance at the time of the interview. They were considered uninsured if they reported currently not having private health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, Children's Health Insurance Program, a state-sponsored or other government-sponsored health plan, or a military plan, or if they had only a private plan that paid for one type of service (e.g., injury or dental care) or had only Indian Health Service coverage.¶ Multiple imputations were performed on family income to account for missing responses to income questions.** NHIS data were adjusted for nonresponse and weighted to provide national estimates of insurance status and receipt of preventive care; 95% confidence intervals were calculated that took into account the survey's multistage probability sample design. Generalized linear modeling and t-tests were used to calculate prevalence ratios and determine statistical significances of differences in receipt of preventive services between persons in three categories: 1) insured versus uninsured, 2) current family incomes >200% of the federal poverty level (FPL)†† versus current family incomes ≤200% of the FPL, and 3) any private health insurance versus only public coverage. Analysis for each service was restricted to persons of the age and sex for who receipt of that service is recommended ( Table 1 ).

For the nine services examined, prevalence of receipt of service in the queried timeframe was as follows: hepatitis A vaccination, 12.7%; colon cancer screening, 23.6%; diet counseling, 26.9%; hepatitis B vaccination, 38.8%; diabetes screening, 45.3%; cervical cancer screening, 59.4%; breast cancer screening, 61.6%; cholesterol screening, 70.0%; and blood pressure screening, 82.9% ( Table 2 ). A statistically significant higher percentage of adults with health insurance received each of nine clinical preventive services compared with those who were uninsured ( Table 2 ). Among the nine services, the service receipt prevalence ratio for those with insurance compared with those without insurance ranged from 1.39 for hepatitis B vaccination to 3.13 for colon cancer screening ( Table 2 ).

Persons with family incomes >200% of the FPL received clinical preventive services at a statistically significant higher prevalence compared with those with incomes below that threshold for eight of nine services (all but hepatitis A vaccination) ( Table 3 ). Among those eight services, the service receipt prevalence ratio for those with family incomes >200% of the FPL compared with those with incomes ≤200% of the FPL ranged from 1.06 for hepatitis B vaccination to 1.43 for breast cancer screening ( Table 3 ).

Persons with private health insurance received preventive services at a statistically significant higher prevalence for two of nine services, and at a lower prevalence for four of nine services, compared with those with only public insurance ( Table 4 ).

Discussion

During 2011–2012, those with insurance or with higher incomes were more likely than those without coverage or with lower incomes, respectively, to have received nine preventive services during the identified time period. This supports previously published studies, including one that found prevalence ratios in the range of 1–3 for those with insurance receiving preventive services in the prior year compared with those without coverage.[2,4]

This report could serve as a baseline for tracking the effects of some of the ACA's preventive care provisions that might occur after 2012. Since the ACA began to require certain plans to cover clinical preventive services as early as September 2010, the data from the 2011–2012 study period might include some of the early impact of the law. Any early impact included might be limited for several reasons: 1) a high number of persons remained uninsured during 2011–2012; 2) there was little awareness of the preventive care provisions of the new law; and 3) many plans were not yet subject to the preventive services provisions because of grandfathering and other factors.[1,5–7] Monitoring the trend of service receipt rates over time could provide insight into how the service receipt gaps relating to income and insurance status might change as more persons gain coverage that includes the ACA's preventive service coverage requirements.

The findings in this report are subject to at least six limitations. First, receipt of preventive services was self-reported and might be subject to recall bias, particularly for lifetime receipt of services like vaccinations that are routinely administered to young children rather than adults. Second, inferences from these results are limited by differences in time between when the questions were asked and when the services were received. For example, NHIS identifies whether the respondent is insured at the time of interview; however, depending on the service, NHIS asks whether the respondent received preventive care in the last 12 months, or ever during their lifetime. Currently uninsured respondents might have received preventive care during a time when they had insurance, or vice versa. Third, some of the services might have been received as diagnostic measures instead of for prevention. Fourth, the results of this analysis identify the rates of service receipt during the 12 months before interview, or ever in life, but cannot be seen as measures of adherence to guidelines because of differences between the annual survey questions and the official recommendation for these nine services. Fifth, this cross-sectional analysis does not demonstrate causation and does not include other possible confounders that might be associated with service receipt rates. For example, those with higher incomes might also be more likely to have health insurance, and vice versa. Finally, NHIS is limited to noninstitutionalized civilians, excluding certain populations (e.g., the institutionalized and the military) that might be especially likely to receive recommended preventive services.

All new private health plans, alternative benefit plans for the newly Medicaid eligible, and Medicare now provide coverage with no copayments or deductibles for many recommended clinical preventive services as part of the ACA.[1] These provisions might have the greatest impact for higher-cost services like certain colorectal cancer screening methods. Of the nine services examined, colon cancer screening had the highest service receipt prevalence ratio, 3.13, for those with insurance compared with those without insurance. While insurance coverage is not the only barrier to receiving services, efforts to increase enrollment and coverage retention could help increase receipt of preventive services and reduce avoidable complications from illness, long-term health care costs, and premature deaths.[8]

Amazing how not one of you bothered to say "I can't get into the site. What does it say?"

Because God forbid any of you actually learn something.

If Sun Devil can manage to be polite for a few seconds, I'll post the tables as well.

Now, watch him say "TLDR" instead. What else can you expect from someone who can't tell the difference between explaining and "whining"?

 

[Arianrhod]

And the "Put it on IGNORE!!!!!" crowd slinks way.

"Facts, dude. What're we supposed to do about facts?"

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And the "Put it on IGNORE!!!!!" crowd slinks way.

"Facts, dude. What're we supposed to do about facts?"

When someone presents them, they'll have to deal with it.

For now, all they have is your babybarf postings to look at.

 

[Arianrhod]

And the "Put it on IGNORE!!!!!" crowd slinks way.

"Facts, dude. What're we supposed to do about facts?"

When someone presents them, they'll have to deal with it.

For now, all they have is your babybarf postings to look at.

There are links in the posts. You're just afraid to read them.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And the "Put it on IGNORE!!!!!" crowd slinks way.

"Facts, dude. What're we supposed to do about facts?"

When someone presents them, they'll have to deal with it.

For now, all they have is your babybarf postings to look at.

There are links in the posts. You're just afraid to read them.

It's already been pointed out that you have register to read the link.

Some of us don't see where we should do your work for you.

If you can't copy the relevant information (which you should be doing anyway...why should we try to pull your argument out a link), then you don't have any facts.

Sorry.....can't help that.

 

[Arianrhod]

If you can't copy the relevant information.

I did. Go back and reread. Or is that too much work for you?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

If you can't copy the relevant information.

I did. Go back and reread. Or is that too much work for you?

I looked....I can't find it.

I am sure you can show me.

 

[Arianrhod]

If you can't copy the relevant information.

I did. Go back and reread. Or is that too much work for you?

I looked....I can't find it.

I am sure you can show me.

Not the sharpest pencil in the drawer, are you?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

If you can't copy the relevant information.

I did. Go back and reread. Or is that too much work for you?

I looked....I can't find it.

I am sure you can show me.

Not the sharpest pencil in the drawer, are you?

You might try to hide your deflection and basic falsehoods.....just a little.

 

[emilynghiem]

A final thought for you, Westwall: This thread started out to be about prevention vs cure. You and I both agree that familial CAD is not, with today’s science, preventable. So we’ve had our little sidebar, and I’ve enjoyed it. However, I asked you several posts ago whether you could provide any data to prove that the majority of CAD cases are familial and have nothing to do with lifestyle. I’d still like you to do that, but we both know you won’t. So thank you for your time. Now you may have the last word.

Dear Arianrhod
I find that regardless how much of the cause is nature/nurture, genetic or environment, etc.
the process of CURE and HEALING is enhanced if people are more forgiving and open
and the process is obstructed if people block their minds with negative emotions from
fear and unforgiveness.

There is more and more research into forgiveness and the impact on health and recovery.

One friend said there is at least one study that estimated 80-85% of ills can be attributed or correlated
with unforgiveness.

The stress alone decreases the mind and body's ability to heal themselves.

And if you look up the resources I posted for Spiritual Healing,
the therapy used by those doctors based on forgiveness of personal and generational issues
to REMOVE these emotional blocks has, in fact, CURED cases of
schizophrenia, rheumatoid arthritis, cancer and other diseases.

Whether these conditions were genetic or they were environmental,
the process of helping the mind and body to OVERCOME the ill conditions
is based on identifying the obstructions to healing
and removing these blockages by spiritual forgiveness.

This process works on ADDICTIONS also.
if the cause is unconscious and comes from something inherited from past generations,
then the prayer for forgiveness and healing is focused there.
If the cause is conscious, based on choices and environment in this lifetime,
then they prayer and therapy is focused there on those choices made by the individual.

The process may differ in focus, but the end goal is the same:
to remove the causes and blockages, so that the natural healing process is facilitated instead of cut off.

 

[Arianrhod]

A final thought for you, Westwall: This thread started out to be about prevention vs cure. You and I both agree that familial CAD is not, with today’s science, preventable. So we’ve had our little sidebar, and I’ve enjoyed it. However, I asked you several posts ago whether you could provide any data to prove that the majority of CAD cases are familial and have nothing to do with lifestyle. I’d still like you to do that, but we both know you won’t. So thank you for your time. Now you may have the last word.

Dear Arianrhod
I find that regardless how much of the cause is nature/nurture, genetic or environment, etc.
the process of CURE and HEALING is enhanced if people are more forgiving and open
and the process is obstructed if people block their minds with negative emotions from
fear and unforgiveness.

There is more and more research into forgiveness and the impact on health and recovery.

One friend said there is at least one study that estimated 80-85% of ills can be attributed or correlated
with unforgiveness.

The stress alone decreases the mind and body's ability to heal themselves.

And if you look up the resources I posted for Spiritual Healing,
the therapy used by those doctors based on forgiveness of personal and generational issues
to REMOVE these emotional blocks has, in fact, CURED cases of
schizophrenia, rheumatoid arthritis, cancer and other diseases.

Whether these conditions were genetic or they were environmental,
the process of helping the mind and body to OVERCOME the ill conditions
is based on identifying the obstructions to healing
and removing these blockages by spiritual forgiveness.

This process works on ADDICTIONS also.
if the cause is unconscious and comes from something inherited from past generations,
then the prayer for forgiveness and healing is focused there.
If the cause is conscious, based on choices and environment in this lifetime,
then they prayer and therapy is focused there on those choices made by the individual.

The process may differ in focus, but the end goal is the same:
to remove the causes and blockages, so that the natural healing process is facilitated instead of cut off.

Some lovely thoughts, but not very helpful in terms of, let's say, children with the genetic potential for chronic illnesses. You can't exactly expect a four-year-old with type 1 diabetes who has to do 10 finger sticks a day to control their diabetes with "forgiveness."

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Can we get a link to where Fox News said prevention was NOT cheaper than a cure ?

 

[Arianrhod]

Cost of treating pneumonia in the U.S.: Anywhere from $14,000 to $38,000.

Cost of pneumonia vaccine: $25, often covered by insurance.