Categories
Cardiovascular
Diagnostics
Endocrinology
Health Insurance
Medical Devices
Mental Health
Nutrition
Oncology
Public Health
Sexual Health
Popular Articles
Teeth Whitening Products

Timing Is Everything: Growth Factor Keeps Brain Development On Track
Just like a conductor cueing musicians in an orchestra, Fgf10, a member of the fibroblast growth factor (Ffg) family of morphogens, lets brain stem cells know that the moment to get to work has arrived, ensuring that they hit their first developmental milestone on time, report scientists at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in the July 16, 2009, edition of the journal Neuron.
generic viagra online
Announcing National MS And Parkinson's Disease Registries Act
Senator Byron Dorgan (ND) on Tuesday introduced legislation that would for the first time establish a national coordinated system to collect and analyze data on multiple sclerosis and Parkinson"s disease. Accurate incidence and prevalence information on these two diseases currently does not exist. Click here to ask your Senator to support this legislation.
News of the day
Some Routine Cancer Screenings Not Proven To Reduce Deaths, Experts Say
Routine screenings for cancers -- including breast cancer in younger women -- have not proven to reduce the chance of death for people without specific symptoms or risk factors, and experts suggest that some tests could lead to harm, the New York Times reports.According to Ned Calonge, chair of the United States Preventive Services Task Force, screening is only useful if it prevents enough deaths to outweigh harm from treatments that are not medically necessary. He said that although screening in some cases will detect life-threatening cancers that respond to intervention, it also can result in false positives that cause needless worry and unnecessary procedures. Screening also might fail to diagnose an existing cancer, causing patients to ignore symptoms; find slow-growing or stable cancers that are not life-threatening and normally do not need treatment; or find aggressive, life-threatening cancers that do not respond to treatment, Calonge said. Only a handful of screening tests have been proven to significantly reduce death among certain age groups: pap tests to screen for cervical cancer beginning no later than age 21; mammograms to screen for breast cancer starting at age 40; and colon cancer screening beginning at age 50. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there is no medical proof that routine screening for many other cancers -- including ovarian cancer -- reduces deaths.The Times reports that the Breast Cancer Education and Awareness Requires Learning Young Act of 2009 (HR 1740) -- also known as the Early Act -- has become a central issue in the debate because it would create a breast cancer detection campaign for women younger than age 45. Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla.) introduced the bill in March, and it now has more than 350 co-sponsors. The bill would provide $45 million over five years for teaching young women and their physicians to check for abnormalities; promote healthy lifestyle choices; and provide grants to groups supporting women with breast cancer. The bill focuses on certain ethnic or racial groups at higher risk of developing aggressive tumors. CDC would oversee an expert panel to create the campaign based on the latest medical research, Wasserman-Schultz said.Critics of the bill say that the legislation promotes techniques, such as self-exams, that have not proven to detect cancer at earlier stages or reduce deaths. They also argue that self-exams could lead to many insignificant nodules being biopsied, which can cause scarring and make it harder to detect breast cancer when women are older. According to Susan Love -- a breast cancer surgeon who has encouraged Wasserman-Schultz to abandon the bill -- the public health campaign could cause younger women to overestimate their chances of dying of breast cancer (Singer, New York Times, 7/17).
Health Insurance

Medicare Offers Lessons For Possible 'Public Plan'

As President Barack Obama and some Democratic lawmakers push for a government-run public plan, Medicare is being scrutinized. The New York Times examines Medicare, which provides coverage to more than 45 million elderly and disabled and says: "How closely a new public plan would resemble Medicare is unclear. Still, Medicare"s record offers insights into the benefits and pitfalls of public health care. While it has driven down costs though its sheer market dominance, Medicare has also been extremely slow in using its power to encourage or compel more effective health care. And, of course, providing health care for older Americans has been expensive. Medicare is expected to represent an estimated 13 percent of next year"s federal budget. Medicare has evolved into the bedrock of health insurance for America"s elderly population since it was created in 1965. Anyone over 65 qualifies for coverage, regardless of income or health status. The program focuses on paying medical claims rather than denying them, as private insurers often do, and those covered have found it relatively easy to understand what benefits are provided and to find a doctor who will treat them. The elderly also have the option under Medicare of enrolling in health plans offered by private insurers." The Times reports: "Medicare"s market leverage enables it to purchase medical care much more cheaply than private insurers do, and the government uses this clout to drive down prices as a way of controlling costs. Because Medicare represents such a large share of the overall insurance market, hospitals and doctors typically treat Medicare patients even when they might refuse to accept a patient from a private insurer paying the same rate. Medicare"s monopoly over the insurance market for the elderly also allows it to compel important changes in the way medical care is paid for. ... But it is that very market power that critics worry about as the debate over a new public plan for the uninsured begins... And that, critics say, could mean private insurers will be squeezed out of that market and consumers will lose the opportunity to choose among different insurance plans. On the other hand, if Congress creates a smaller program that lacks Medicare"s market power, it would raise another question: why do it at all? The government could simply set the rules for competition among private plans and, if necessary, offer subsidies to consumers to help them purchase coverage. But a public plan could still have a cost advantage" (Abelson, 7/4). This information was reprinted from kaiserhealthnews.org with kind permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives and sign up for email delivery at kaiserhealthnews.org. © Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.


Add your comment:
Name:
Site address: http://
Your message:
Enter today\\\\'s date, 2 digits
(spam protection):

© Copyright 2009