Don't get ill in America

[gazza]

..gonna pretend i didnt hear that.........

[Globalmyths]

Phew after reading all the posts I am glad I am not going to take holiday in America.

[Ugly Betty]

Phew after reading all the posts I am glad I am not going to take holiday in America.

Aww, Global, come to the States! Just don't get sick. And if you do, try to make sure it's serious so the emergency room will take you right in and not leave you sitting for hours on end.

[Jerry]

It should be mentioned that in the UK, after age 60, prescription medicines are free. So are eye tests. In Wales so are dental checks.

There is other asssistance for those on low incomes, including help with glasses and contact lenses

If your income is under £12,000 a year you can claim through the NHS Low Income Scheme for help with other health-related costs.

Call 0845 850 1166 advice line or get leaflet HC 11 from the Pension Service.

Also see http://www.doh.gov.uk/helpwithhealthcosts

***

To receive income support or whatever it's called now, the savings proviso is £12,000 (2002). I don't think unemployment benefit is means-tested

Delilah is probably the person to give an update on this information, but in any case if you are an older person you should get a copy of Age Concern's annual publication entitled:

YOUR RIGHTS

It's cheap and available in Smith's etc.

[gazza]

It should be mentioned that in the UK, after age 60, prescription medicines are free. So are eye tests. In Wales so are dental checks.

..should come in handy when they fall ill through poorly heated homes......and poor nutrition.......
just where is the nearest nhs dentist.........{i cant get to the usa}.....

There is other asssistance for those on low incomes, including help with glasses and contact lenses

....to claim these benefits is so mind numbing, its the biggest deterent for the old and infirm......

If your income is under £12,000 a year you can claim through the NHS Low Income Scheme for help with other health-related costs.

.....red tape at its worst...........

[Podgy Pete]

In the Lancet a few years ago an American had Cancer , I can't remember of what but he had no Health Insurance. They told him he was going to d*e. He committed a Bank Robbery and waited for the police to arrest him. He got twenty years imprisonment but as a felon was entitled to Health Care which he received and is now in remission.
Pick the bones out of that. Its a funny world .

[sherri]

It should be mentioned that in the UK, after age 60, prescription medicines are free. So are eye tests. In Wales so are dental checks.

..should come in handy when they fall ill through poorly heated homes......and poor nutrition.......
just where is the nearest nhs dentist.........{i cant get to the usa}.....

There is other asssistance for those on low incomes, including help with glasses and contact lenses

....to claim these benefits is so mind numbing, its the biggest deterent for the old and infirm......

If your income is under £12,000 a year you can claim through the NHS Low Income Scheme for help with other health-related costs.

.....red tape at its worst...........

Gazza is right in that there is a lot of red tape when it comes to govt benefits. plus, nothing is ever clear cut and there are different income limits etc for everything.
The result is people often have no idea what is available or if they are eligible. I have no doubt many people miss out on all sorts of things because of this, especially the elderly.
It is about time things were completely streamlined, but that may not suit Govt as people would know where they were at, then.

[gazza]

i was made redundant a few years ago sherri, i rightfully claimed "job-seekers" allowance......the amount of red tape almost put me off.....and,
to top it all, they mis-placed my file, the delay and hassle which followed
ended in my handing the problem over to our parliamentary ombudsman,
nine months later, i recieved the entitlement and 50 pounds compensation
for the mis-handling of the claim.........our advice centres are usually
full from opening till closing...........the biggest abusers stealing from the
public purse are more than likely those purportadly protecting it.....

[Beachbum]

Back to the topic if getting ill in America.
I had to go to Windsor yesterday and I saw a sign outside a pharmacy which jogged my memory.
"US Prescriptions filled"
Not only is the cost of hospitalization etc more expensive in the US, so is the cost of prescription medication.
They have tour companies in the US who arrange bus trips for US seniors to come to Canada to fill their prescriptions.
Around here they come from Michigan, Ohio and sometimes Tennessee.
You get your round trip to Windsor with refreshments en route
They have a Canadian doctor waiting to co- sign your prescriptions (for a fee) and a pharmacy to fill it.
Then they take you to the Casino where you have time to have a flutter.
After that it's the all you can eat buffet at the casino (which something else)
Then the ride home and unless you've blown too much money on the slots you are still well ahead financially.

[Ugly Betty]

So right, Beachbum. Sadly, in January of 2008, the US plans to require passports for all those who cross the border by land. Those old folks who go for their cheap prescriptions are going to be forced to cough up another $100 for a passport. It's already a disgrace that Uncle Sam won't let Medicare or insurers buy the cheaper Canadian d*ugs. This is just adding insult to injury.

[memor]

Can they buy them over the internet ??

[Beachbum]

Can they buy them over the internet ??

There are several Canadian companies the do that, but the US government is in the process of taking them to court because they aren't licensed to dispense medication in the States.
They are also confiscating as much as they can at the border.
Right now, the bus trip is the best bet.

[Ugly Betty]

Can they buy them over the internet ??

There are several Canadian companies the do that, but the US government is in the process of taking them to court because they aren't licensed to dispense medication in the States.
They are also confiscating as much as they can at the border.
Right now, the bus trip is the best bet.

Correct again, Beachbum. It's all about commerce and profits. Those whose lives depend on those medications are an afterthought.

[mrp]

Right. Take away profits.

How much then gets spent on health R&D?

Sweet f*ck all.

Don't be daft.

[Ugly Betty]

Right. Take away profits.

How much then gets spent on health R&D?

Sweet f*ck all.

Don't be daft.

Actually, Mrp, the government subsidizes the d*ug industry with billions for Medicare prescriptions, tax credits and R&D...somewhere around $400 billion was approved just for Medicare alone. Meanwhile, the industry currently spends more on advertising for things like Viagra, heartburn meds and restless leg syndrome fixes than they do on R&D. Finally, Americans pay much higher prices for their prescriptions than any other country for the same medications, meanwhile generic d*ug makers -- who charge 3-5 times less for the very same medicines -- are kept from providing them with propreitary extensions to the name brand makers.

[mrp]

1. Let's take away profits (but somehow people want to make d*ugs?).

2. Let's not subsidise healthcare as it subsidises big pharma.

3. Let's subsidise healthcare because it is unaffordable.

Does not compute.

The generic firms are there to make money as well. The sensible and obvious thing you wrote is that IP gets abused. It is my professional opinion that only common law IP should exist.

[Ugly Betty]

I agree with what you're saying, Mrp. I guess my point is that our system is terribly disjointed. It's push and pull between raw capitalism and the social/political demands of an aging population.

I don't expect any company to operate without a profit motive, but I object to extensive government protection and subsidization of chosen industries at taxpayer expense, while they cut benefits because programs are too costly! They gave Medicare recipients a prescription d*ug benefit, then forced them to go thru private companies for the coverage, knowing it's cheaper for Medicare to provide it. Then they wrote into law a statute that prevents the government itself from negotiating with d*ug companies for cheaper prices and banning purchases from Canadian firms!

Finally, some of the major pharmaceuticals have benfitted from extensions on certain d*ugs...well beyond the 20 years they already enjoyed, preventing generic makers from producing cheaper alternatives. That isn't a free or a fair market.

[mrp]

That's not "capitalism", it is crony capitalism or corporatism.

Free enterprise is a much nicer term.

What a sheethouse idea, it amounts to an indirect subsidy.

Subsidies are bad!

[Ugly Betty]

That's not "capitalism", it is crony capitalism or corporatism.

Free enterprise is a much nicer term.

What a sheethouse idea, it amounts to an indirect subsidy.

Subsidies are bad!

Yep, Mrp. Like they did with big oil...they're making record profits so our clever government gave them additional tax subsidies of about $7 billion. Or subsidies for huge corporate farms.

They TALK about a free market, but there's nothing free about it.

[mrp]

Public healthcare is really costly - it just isn't worth it.

http://divisionoflabour.com/archives/003463.php

With much attention focused on universal medical insurance, the abstract of a new NBER Working Paper reminds us that government insurance often crowds out private insurance:

The continued interest in public insurance expansions as a means of covering the uninsured highlights the importance of estimates of "crowd-out", or the extent to which such expansions reduce private insurance coverage. Ten years ago, Cutler and Gruber (1996) suggested that such crowd-out might be quite large, but much subsequent research has questioned this conclusion. We revisit this issue by using improved data and incorporating the research approaches that have led to varying estimates. We focus in particular on the public insurance expansions of the 1996-2002 period. Our results clearly show that crowd-out is significant; the central tendency in our results is a crowd-out rate of about 60%. This finding emerges most strongly when we consider family-level measures of public insurance eligibility. We also find that recent anti-crowd-out provisions in public expansions may have had the opposite effect, lowering take-up by the uninsured faster than they lower crowd-out of private insurance.

A 60% crowd out rate is quite large--for every 5 people taking up government medical insurance, 3 drop private insurance. This is an awfully expensive price for covering 2 additional people.