Quantcast
Opinion

Letter: Preventative care

Comments

Return To Article
  • E Sam Provo, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 1:35 a.m.

    You are aware that many health insurance policies do NOT cover preventative care? And that, because of Obamacare, they now all must?

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 6:09 a.m.

    I think we should go back to our old system of health care when billionaire insurance companies could cut poor, sick, and old people at any time for any reason. How dare poor people bother billionaire insurance companies for health care! Bah-humbug!

  • Midvaliean MIDVALE, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 6:38 a.m.

    As I look at people who are tipping the scales, its clear they don't know what to eat. I imagine they are dying to get out of their obese body. Providing people with a personalized nutritional plan would go a long ways in helping our society get better from its unhealthy epidemic.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Dec. 2, 2013 6:50 a.m.

    My current choice of private insurance allows me to have preventative healthcare already. Obamacare only increases my premiums, co-pays and deductibles and gives me far less choices in doctors and treatment options. I like my healthcare insurance and Obama promised me: "If I like it I can keep it, PERIOD"! I fear my president lied to me to get his will forced upon me!

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Dec. 2, 2013 8:35 a.m.

    And preventative care is covered under Obamacare… imagine that.

    The bigger and far more relevant question (or insight if the answer is already clear) is why doesn’t our healthcare system do more to prevent disease rather than treating ailments after they become pathologies?

  • GZE SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 8:58 a.m.

    Mountainman,

    What insurance did you already have that you can't keep? How much did your premium, deductible, and co-pay go up? Why can't you keep your prefered doctor? It seems all the worst-case scenarios happened to you. I don't know anyone in your situation. I'd like to hear how and why this has happened.

    Nothing in my situation has changed except my premium is going down $2 per month in January.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Dec. 2, 2013 10:44 a.m.

    GZE,

    I am fairly confident that many are finding that they are NOT getting dropped, their coverage improves and their costs are similar.

    However, they would never admit it. They want it to fail; they root for it to fail. They would rather see the other side fail than the country succeed.

    Partisanship now trumps country.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Dec. 2, 2013 10:51 a.m.

    I'm worried about Mountainman. His insurer is abusing him. My insurer is giving me the same services as always and dropping my premium a few dollars. I think Mountain guy ought to change insurers.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Dec. 2, 2013 12:05 p.m.

    Some people were paying for products that really weren't health insurance.

    For example, "Dianne Barrette, 56, appeared on CBS News for a segment about the wave of cancelations. Barrette, was upset because her $54 a month insurance plan was being canceled. She believed a new one would cost her more than $500 a month due to Obamacare. "What I have right now is what I'm happy with," she said. "I just want to know why I can't keep what I have. Why do I have to be forced into something else?"

    Barrette's $54 plan wasn't even insurance. Barrette was unsure of what her plan covered. But she said it was what Blue Cross calls a "supplemental" or discount plan, which only pays $50 toward doctor's office visits and a few other out-patient services, including mammograms. What her plan doesn’t cover: hospitalization. Not at all. If she gets hit by a car, or gets cancer, she’s basically out of luck. "It's all I could afford," she told me.

    With a bronze plan, she’d be paying $43 a month more, but in return, she would have true protection and access to health care."
    (MotherJones)

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 12:23 p.m.

    The problem is that I don't need the insurance for the preventive care, but for the emergency care. My insurance gives me 1 well check per year. It doesn't pay for anything else until I have paid $1000 towards my deductable, and then only pays 60% up to my out of pocket max. What that means is that when my children get sick, I have to pay out of pocket. What is the point of insurance that is more like a pre-paid maintenance plan? Yes some problems will be picked up early, but it does no good for a sick child at 3AM.

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    Dec. 2, 2013 12:29 p.m.

    @Midvaliean:
    "Providing people with a personalized nutritional plan would go a long ways in helping our society get better from its unhealthy epidemic."

    Under Obamacare people will not only have nutritional plans, they will be required to have and use them. And if they don't they will get on Sebelius' 'death panel' list.

    @JoeBlow:
    "Yea, an I was promised that Iraqi had WMD and that Iraqi..."

    Iraq did have WMD... Saddam Hussein used them on the Kurdish people in the north of Iraq.

    "Newsflash. Politicians, including presidents say things that are not true. It is not a new thing."

    Yeah, but they seldom punctuate their lies with 'PERIOD.'

  • Ranch Here, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 1:54 p.m.

    @Mountanman;

    My premiums have gone up in the double-digits every year for over a decade, and that was all BEFORE the ACA. Yours is probably just like mine, imagine that, the premiums went up once again.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 2:55 p.m.

    Mountanman ---

    My insurance premiums went from $70 per month to $500 per month for the last 12 years BEFORE the ACA.

    The ACA will prevent this type of price gouging by greedy For-profit insurance providers.

    Just like the power companies now need to ask for permission and provide evidence to the Government before they can hike prices, now Healthcare must do the same.

    That's called "regulating",
    and we need it when companies have been taking advantage of consumers.

  • GZE SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 4:13 p.m.

    Red Shirt,

    It sounds like you (or your employer) chose the cheapest option. I probably pay more than you, but my plan pays 80 percent after I reach an annual deductible of $250 per person or $750 for the family.

    You knew you were gambling on having to pay higher out-of-pocket expenses in the event of an emergency when you chose the cheapest monthly premium. That's the way insurance works.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 4:19 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" lets look at the promises of the ACA before it would pass. It was estimated to be a deficit reducing bill. That meant that the Government would PROFIT from it. In late 2011, it was estimated that the ACA would cost roughly $800 billion over 10 years. At the same time the CBO estimated that it would reduce the deficit by $110 billion over that same time. That means the government set it up with a 14% profit margin. Now, you say that the insurance companies are greedy, and they average 3% to 4% for their profit margins. Doesn't this mean that the government is MORE GREEDY than private companies?

    Granted now, they are projecting that the ACA will add to the deficit and debt, so tell us which is worse, the government making 14% profit margins, adding to the debt, or private companies making a 4% profit margin?

    Your idea of "regulating" insurance companies is what Europe called Fascism in the 1930's.

  • Kimber Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 4:43 p.m.

    Thanks...this is a good reminder. And also, the ACA requires all health plans to cover basic preventive checkups and required immunizations. (Not just on their websites, but all health insurance plans). So, it makes good sense to have a health plan and use it for these basics.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 7:44 p.m.

    An ounce of prevention,
    is worth
    a pound of the cure.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Dec. 2, 2013 8:26 p.m.

    "In the state-run health insurance marketplaces, the government-approved health insurance plans are divided into five tiers: platinum, gold, silver, bronze, and catastrophic. Analysts expect young adults to gravitate towards the bronze and catastrophic plans, which are the lowest-cost options.

    Both the bronze and the catastrophic plans cover basic preventative health services including cholesterol tests, immunizations and screenings for depression and alcoholism (a full list is here). Both also cover, to varying degrees, all 10 categories of “essential health services”: hospitalizations, emergency services, ambulatory (outpatient care) services, some maternity and newborn care, pediatric care, vision and dental care for children, mental health and behavioral health treatment, rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices, laboratory services, and chronic care services.

    There are some key differences between these two tiers, however.

    For example, catastrophic plans are available to only those under age 30 or who cannot find coverage for less than 8 % of their income. Catastrophic plans are not eligible for subsidies.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Dec. 2, 2013 8:31 p.m.

    So what's the repub alternative?

    We're all waiting.

    Tort reform? Yeah, that was included in the ACA.

    For the repubs who hate their insurance rates going up, GOOD! So do we! Lets all agree to get rid of insurance, shall we? Get rid of the lazy middle-man who doesn't provide any medical service.

    Lets grow up and finally go to a single payer system.

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    Dec. 2, 2013 9:42 p.m.

    Nobody is getting a cheaper health insurance policy, unless they are getting SUBSIDIZED. Where do you think that subsidy money is coming from? Most libs think it comes from magic, or it just materializes out of thin air. It is just another form of a handout, and transfer of wealth, but again does NOTHING to bring down actual costs. Those of us who don't live in fairytale land, know that very few additional people are going to go to the doctor for "preventative" healthcare, that aren't already going. Who is going to provide it to them anyway. Most clinics, and healthcare providers are already at capacity. Many people now, who don't have to pay for it, don't use it.

  • Miss Piggie Phoenix, AZ
    Dec. 2, 2013 10:22 p.m.

    @The Real Maverick: So what's the repub alternative?"

    Well for sure it wouldn't be insurance covering males giving birth.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Dec. 3, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    So you are saying that we are justified to go to war with anyone who has the "capacity to easily re-create them (WMD)."

    Wow, you sure set the bar low and take war a bit too casually.

    Yes, there are many who voted to go to war. They all admitted it was a mistake and that no WMD's were found. Even Bush admitted that Iraq had no WMD.

    I guess your need to defend your party trumps logical and reasonable analysis.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Dec. 3, 2013 12:28 p.m.

    To "The Real Maverick" we don't want a "Republican Alternative" to Obamacare. We want a Free Market solution that works. Get the government out of the way. The fact that they have taken us froma few hundred insurance mandates in the early 1980's to over 2200 now is a testament that government micromanagement of health insurance does NOT work.

    You are wrong about Tort reform being part of the ACA. See Politifact's article "The health care law includes tort reform". Even the liberal leaning politifact says that you are wrong.

    Why do you want a single payer system? The government wastes money twice as fast as private insurance companies do. Do you think that healthcare can get better if we lose more money to fraud? Look at it this way. If they are already wasteful insuring 1/3 of the population, what do you think happens when they pay for everybody?

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    Dec. 3, 2013 12:30 p.m.

    @Mountanman
    If your insurance plan complies with the ACA it can't charge a copay for preventitive services. If thinks like well child exams, adult physicals, colonoscopys or labs aren't paid at 100% of you maximum allowable than your plan is grandfathered. And if it's a grandfathered plan than than your insurance company can't make large rate increases. Either something in your story is inaccurate or you should report them to the state insurance commission or to the HHS, whatever regulatory body they fall under. Because doing what you say they are doing is illegal and not part of the ACA.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Dec. 3, 2013 1:28 p.m.

    Re:Noodlekaboodle

    Many health plans are required to cover certain preventive care services at no cost.

    BUT not necessarily for health plans created or bought before March 23, 2010, which are known as grandfathered plans.

    Rate Review helps protect you from unreasonable rate increases. Insurance companies must now publicly justify any rate increase of 10% or more before raising your premium. This does not apply to grandfathered plans.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 3, 2013 3:03 p.m.

    While I generally prefer a socialized health care system, there is no question that personal responsibility is important, particularly as to diet! But the medical profession has been giving us the WRONG advice for years - no animal fat and all the sugar you want. Of course, the result has been a public health disaster. Cavaet Emptor still applies.

  • RedShirtCalTech Pasedena, CA
    Dec. 3, 2013 4:05 p.m.

    To "marxist" you are doing better than usual today. You are half right. We have been given the wrong advice for years. Unfortunately it has come from the Government.

    Just look at when obesity began to be a problem, and it is a few years after the government began their first attempt at telling us how we should be eating.

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    Dec. 3, 2013 7:41 p.m.

    @The Real Maverick:
    "So what's the repub alternative?"

    The Repubs' alternatives were set forth in committee when the Obamacare bill was in progress... and they got completely shut out.

    @pragmatistferlife:
    "That is absolutely false. Iraq had no WMD capacity at all."

    All it takes to create chemical WMDs is a few chemicals and a lab to mix them in. They coulda done it in Saddam's garage. Besides, a US investigation following the invasion, concluded that Iraq intended to resume WMD production if/when the Iraq sanctions were lifted.

    "They barely had a functioning country after years of war with Iran..."

    Wars don't cause non-functioning countries. In fact, it generally spurs economies.

    "Our sanctions alone killed over a million people."

    Shame on us.

    "Why do you think the country crumbled like it did..it had no war capacity as a state military."

    Saddam never did have a very powerful military compared the the US military... and considering how he was routed re his invasion into Kuwait.

  • ClarkHippo Tooele, UT
    Dec. 5, 2013 10:55 a.m.

    Andrew, do you mean to tell me there are things I can do on my own which can help me stay healthy? That I don't need to sit around and wait for the government to tell me what to do? Wow, what a remarkable concept.

    So when the government encourages people to smoke by passing higher and higher cigarette taxes, explaining that the tax is going to pay for health care, I shouldn't feel guilty of I don't buy them or smoke them?

    You mean if I decide on my own to watch what I eat and drink that's okay? If I decide on my own to get screened for cancer or tested for heart disease or other health issues, that's okay too? I don't need to wait for the government to tell me?