After spending [redacted] years in network news, covering every Presidential race from 1980 to 2004, my level of exhaustion and cynicism when it comes to politics is … epic. I vote in every election, because dammit-that’s-my-right-as-a-citizen, but often it’s a case of holding my nose and doing the best I can with the (rotten) choices I’m offered. When I was invited to Capitol Hill last Tuesday, Dec. 13, to be in the room when a new Make Congress Work initiative was announced, I accepted with some of that exhaustion and cynicism. But like the old news warhorse I am, I saddled up and rode up I-95 to see what I could see. What I saw made me feel like someone who’s been wandering in the wilderness for … ever, who stumbles upon a tidy little town that welcomes the weary wanderer with open arms. And gives her a job: help spread the news about the tidy little town. Help it grow into a big ol’ city. So think of this as metaphorical political tourism. You can come along on the trip and enjoy the scenery with me. Oh, come on, work with me, people. I’m a writer, and sometimes a comedian. I’ll bring this all home, I promise. Here’s what happened: over 400 people showed up in the Caucus Room at the Cannon House Office Building to talk with, and listen to, a literal parade of bipartisan leaders from all points of the political compass. The point? To break the chains of gridlock that have the folks we elected to represent us in a constant state of get-nothing-done. That point was tidily contained in a 12-point plan to literally make Congress work. For its pay, for its privileges, and most importantly for the CITIZENS THAT ELECTED THEM TO OFFICE. OK,…
The concept of mobile health and mobile medicine is enticing. “There’s an app for that” when applied to managing a chronic condition like diabetes, or navigating cancer treatment, sounds like real 21st century healthcare, doesn’t it? Tomorrow (Dec. 1, 2011) I’m on a panel that’s part of mHealthCon at Rutgers University, a conference where a plethora of mobile app developers and thought leaders will be talking both the idea and the practical app of mobile in healthcare. Our panel is self-described as the American Idol judges – I’m Simon, including the scowl potential – and we’re expected to give meaningful and frank feedback to the app developers that are in the session preceding us. Leading the conversation will be my buddy Bob Brooks of WEGO Health, and sitting with me in judgement will be Amy Gurowitz (who’s gonna channel either J-Lo or Ellen, she hasn’t decided yet) of MS-OL and MS SoftServe, as well as the founder of Divabetic, Max Szadek (he’s Paula). The challenges that mobile health development face were summed up brilliantly by Dr. Kenny Linn in a post on the US News health blog: Apps have … advantages over traditional medical texts. The information is always current, whereas many textbooks are already dated by the time they hit shelves. If I have a question, I can look up the answer on my smartphone without leaving my patient’s side. But smartphone apps also have downsides—despite their enormous potential to improve the quality and convenience of healthcare. While textbooks undergo rigorous review by experts, apps vary in quality and don’t have to be vetted for accuracy or safety. That point was driven home to me recently when a colleague shared a nifty app she’d downloaded that acted as a mobile electrocardiogram (ECG) monitor: Just place your finger tip on the smartphone’s camera, and your heart rate and electrical rhythm appear on screen. Visions of chucking…
Heaving scrums from coast to coast are occupying public squares to protest what seems to be the greatest concentration of personal wealth since the Gilded Age at the end of the 19th century. Their ire is directed at Wall Street, which does bear some of the blame for the epic meltdown of the US – and global – economy over the last four years. The biggest share of the blame, however, really belongs on another street entirely: K Street. The street of lobbying dreams, chock full of high-dollar law and PR firms that work Capitol Hill relentlessly on behalf of everything from AARP to zoologists. Individual taxpayers have no access to K Steet influence, unless they’re members of an interest group – like the aforementioned AARP – that has enough chedda to hire a lobbying firm. Congress, both the House and the Senate, depend on special interest money to mount successful election campaigns. The electorate – the taxpayers, we individual voters who head to the polls to hold our noses and do the best we can with the choices offered – are offered those choices for national office based on who can raise the most money, and spend it to get our attention. And now that corporations are people – thank you, Citizens United – they are under no restraint whatsoever when it comes to political donations. Have you completed the calculation yet? Here’s what it boils down to: Corporate $ + K Street (Congress) = We’re Screwed That may seem simplistic, but it captures the essence. Do not mistake me – I am a capitalist. I believe that every citizen – including corporate ones – has the right to appeal on behalf of his or her interests to elected officials. Where we find ourselves today, though, is at a…
Let’s not be turkeys this Thanksgiving. Let’s not start fights with the relatives while we’re together for the weekend. Don’t let it matter that someone voted for Obama, or is backing Newt. Let it ride that somebody’s a Dallas Cowboys fan (that’s work for me) or passionate about defending Penn State (it’s a great school, with a great history). Accept the fact that Aunt [whoever] will always bring the thing you absolutely hate to eat. Put a teaspoonful on your plate, and suck it up. Or hide it under some mashed potatoes. Surrender to the idea that, at Thanksgiving, we are brought together to be thankful. Here’s my list: My family, who I love to death (even if sometimes one or the other of you will get on my last nerve) My friends, who are from all points of the globe and give me hope that I’ll visit each and every one of you (promise? threat? you decide.) My customers, who have kept me afloat in some really interesting-in-the-Chinese-curse-way times (divorce + cancer = challenging fiscal cocktail. Trust me on that one.) My healthcare team, who kept (and keep) me firmly planted on the planet (they all help me find the funny) A short list, but it’s got some serious meat on its gratitude-fueled bones. What are you grateful for this year? Be grateful for too much turkey, if you’ve got that. Be grateful for annoying family, because it means you’re not alone. Be grateful for living in a free country, if you do – if you don’t, you can earn the undying gratitude of your community by driving an Arab Spring within your borders. Be grateful that you’re alive. I have studied history, and the human race is at a point where we can learn to link together in…
“It’s in my DNA.” You hear people say that all the time about something they love to do, a passion, an attitude. There are things that actually are in your DNA that could save you money, and even save your life. Those things are the P-450 enzymes CYP-2C19, CYP-2C6, CYP-2D9 – pay attention, there’ll be a test later – which can predict your response to a wide array of drugs. Statins, blood thinners, anti-anxiety meds, anti-fungals, anti-depressants, antihistamines, beta blockers, and more – in all, about 50% of the pharmaceutical menu. So why isn’t this being offered at every doctor’s office and pharmacy throughout the land? I’ve asked this question in arenas as diverse as women’s health events and healthcare industry conferences, and have gotten a combination of responses: Really? Physicians don’t know enough about it. Patients don’t know about it. Does insurance cover it? The answers to those, in order: Yes. Here’s a link. Here’s another link. Yes. On the insurance question: even if you don’t have insurance, the test itself only costs about $400. And you only have to have it done once. Unless you wind up in a Fukushima-level radiation accident or have massive radiation treatment for cancer. A question: why isn’t pharma, which is so good at saying “ask your doctor about [insert name-brand drug here],” trumpeting DNA drug-response testing? That approach wouldn’t impact their bottom line negatively, even if it works out that some patients need less of the standard dosage of a drug. Because there will be plenty of cases where the standard dose of that same drug won’t be enough for someone else. Another question: why aren’t health insurers pushing this? They can save money with wider use of DNA drug-response testing, because over- and under-medicating leads to poor outcomes. If you get more of a blood thinning drug than you…
~ Casey Quinlan © 2010 [originally posted on the now-defunct Disruptive Women in Health Care blog, posted here for posterity.] I will admit to a bias on the subject of health insurance, and healthcare reform: I’m one of the millions of America’s uninsured. I’m female, over 50 (I told you, now I’ll have to kill you), and I was diagnosed with cancer in December of 2007. The first of those facts – being female – is the biggest dinger of the three when it comes to health insurance premiums. The reasoning there: women use more health services, starting in their teens and 20s and continuing through menopause. The second – my age – could signal a better rate, since women typically tail off in their use of healthcare in their mid-50s. However, the third fact – cancer within the last 10 years – gets me insurance coverage quotes of $2,000 per month, with a deductible between at $3,000 to $6,000 a year. For the math-challenged, that’s between $27,000 and $30,000 out of my pocket per year before insurance covers Dollar One. Since that amounts to much of my annual pre-tax income in each of the two years since Cancer Year – 2008 was the last year I had health insurance coverage – I’ve remained on the uninsured list. And developed some fierce opinions about the future of healthcare and health insurance in the US. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a/k/a “health care reform,” passed earlier this year includes some help for my situation…in 2014. Meanwhile, I’m managing to get the oral chemo meds I’ll be taking until 2013 (which cost $500 a month) with the help of a community clinic. And I’m keeping my fingers crossed that I stay as healthy as I was before the cancer diagnosis,…
We’re deep into the silly season – also known as the race for the White House – and the number of candidates has reduced itself from the two rugby teams of January to the ping-pong match vs. the old soldier of February. What kind of stories are they telling? First and foremost, they’re all saying “vote for me!”, but they’re craftily crafting their messages to speak to the world-view of people who they think are most likely to vote for them. The heated ping-pong match on the Democratic side of the fence is interesting to watch, because both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have to hit hard, yet also have to ensure that they don’t hit so hard that they alienate a piece of their base. Obama has an advantage on the stump, in person, since he’s a better, more stirring speaker than Clinton. Clinton has always seemed to be speaking from behind a wall of “good girl” – the studious policy wonk who is now trying to connect with people’s hearts. She has, however, built a bit more credibility after serving a full term in the Senate and then managing to get re-elected. Obama is positioning himself as the agent of change. That part of his story seems to be connecting most powerfully with younger voters, much of whose lives have been spent under the leadership of the Bush and Clinton families. He’s also using his story effectively to connect with the parts of the Democratic Party that identify themselves as “We’re Not Republicans”. That tag will mobilize a small portion of Democrats, but not enough to win a presidential election. (John Kerry told that story in ’04 – that sure worked out well for him, didn’t it?) The real power of Obama’s story is in his position as…