| Message |
Author |
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:02 am Post subject: Health insurance for Prostate cancer |
|
|
I haven't heard of any insurance policy that covers Prostate cancer. Does health insurance have any role in detecting such cancer?
_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved. |
|
Matildabrenn
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 10, 2010 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Health insurance makes a great difference. If you have coverage you may detect diseases like prostate cancer much early. An early screening will surely help you go for an early treatment too. |
|
steven
Senior member
Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 1553
215.66 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Virtually all standard health insurance plans (major medical, HMO, PPO, EPO, POS) cover both screening and treatment for prostate cancer, one of the most successfully treatable cancers in men. In fact, a very recent study just published indicates that prostate is so treatable that in the earliest stages, surgery, radiation or chemotherapy are no longer the first efforts following a positive diagnosis.
Instead, physicians are now encouraged to do more frequent PSA screening exams of the patient, and only use the more aggressive interventions if the disease begins to progress.
_________________
CA-licensed P&C Broker-Agent and Life Agent. CA Insurance Lic #0596197. Now investigating insurance company abuses, and providing litigation support and expert witness services. Send me your questions, and I'll send you my answers. |
|
MaxHerr
Moderator
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 4622
Location: Pomona CA
209.53 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | In fact, a very recent study just published indicates that prostate is so treatable that in the earliest stages, surgery, radiation or chemotherapy are no longer the first efforts following a positive diagnosis. |
That's wonderful news for many of us who don't know about it! I'm sure it'll make our insurers think of it in a new perspective. I'm sure you could share a little bit about the alternative efforts through such initial stages.
_________________
AmPmInsure Blog |
|
sil
Community Writer
Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 483
89.47 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The study recently reported simply encourages physicians to take a "wait and see" attitude, and simply perform more frequent PSA screening tests. If at any point the PSA results show a marked increase in the antibody level, then more aggressive treatment can begin. The average man lives at least 10 years beyond first diagnosis of prostate cancer, treatment or not.
The study suggests that the most aggressive treatments, surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, used too early, generally and unnecessarily leave men with side effects that will last the rest of their lives, and that the progression of the disease is not well defined from its earliest stages. Some prostate cancers may not even become worse than when first diagnosed.
The same sort of thing has happened with breast cancer in women. It used to be that a diagnosed malignancy meant radical mastectomy, often of both breasts simply as a preventive measure (can't get it if you don't have 'em). Some argue that such procedures were more misogynistic than preventive. Regardless, eventually, it has come to pass that physicians are now performing the least invasive procedures (aspirations, lumpectomies, targeted radiation) in order to save women from the lifelong "side effects" of having their breasts and other-disease-fighting lymph nodes removed.
_________________
CA-licensed P&C Broker-Agent and Life Agent. CA Insurance Lic #0596197. Now investigating insurance company abuses, and providing litigation support and expert witness services. Send me your questions, and I'll send you my answers. |
|
MaxHerr
Moderator
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 4622
Location: Pomona CA
209.53 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is indeed the great news that prostrate cancer is getting closer to becoming curable.
But what about patientss suffering from postrate cancer opting for health insurance, will they be insured? |
|
goodyphilips
Preferred member
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 190
18.98 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The term is "prostate", not prostrate. It is not closer to becoming curable, it is curable, and now the FDA has approved a vaccine that apparently can prevent it from occurring.
However, like any other cancer, if it AFFECTS YOU TODAY, you will be declined for insurance. If you have insurance before you get the disease (any disease), it is most likely going to be covered.
Obamacare seeks to overturn the fundamentals of insurance by forcing insurance companies to accept persons with preexisting (AKA existing) conditions, or exit the marketplace. Most insurers will probably take the easy exit and all of their policyholders will no longer have coverage.
Some insurers will accept them, rate them highly substandard, and charge exorbitant premiums. The government will react and order premiums lowered. Then even those insurers will respond by exiting the marketplace, and the plan that could not make its way out of Congress and into the law, a single-payer system, will have to be implemented. To the delight of Ted Kennedy, dancing a jig in his tomb.
_________________
CA-licensed P&C Broker-Agent and Life Agent. CA Insurance Lic #0596197. Now investigating insurance company abuses, and providing litigation support and expert witness services. Send me your questions, and I'll send you my answers. |
|
MaxHerr
Moderator
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 4622
Location: Pomona CA
209.53 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Most insurers will probably take the easy exit and all of their policyholders will no longer have coverage. |
I'm sure the policyholders will not find it easy to have another policy right away and they might need to reconsider a lot of things. Will these insurers ensure that their existing policy holders have some kinda coverage in place before they exit? If the insurers are forced to lower rates, I'm sure the insurance market will suffer heavily.
_________________
AmPmInsure Blog |
|
sil
Community Writer
Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 483
89.47 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Will these insurers ensure that their existing policy holders have some kinda coverage in place before they exit? |
It is not a requirement under current law, and I doubt any mention of it exists anywhere in the thousands of pages of the whole bills Congress voted to pass without fully reading (and many times misrepresenting the parts they did choose to read).
_________________
CA-licensed P&C Broker-Agent and Life Agent. CA Insurance Lic #0596197. Now investigating insurance company abuses, and providing litigation support and expert witness services. Send me your questions, and I'll send you my answers. |
|
MaxHerr
Moderator
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 4622
Location: Pomona CA
209.53 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well its tough situation and ultimately policy holders will end up losing if insurance companies discontinue those policies.
I think government should launch these policies where they would allow people to be covered with preexisting disease, instead of expecting private insurance companies to comply with them.
_________________
Health Insurance Quote |
|
goodyphilips
Preferred member
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 190
18.98 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I think government should launch these policies where they would allow people to be covered with preexisting disease, instead of expecting private insurance companies to comply with them. |
A basic misunderstanding of the Obamacare plan. The government has created an onerous set of regulation by which commercial insurance companies will be forced to "play" or to exit the market. Some will likely play initially, charging higher premiums as they actuarily must, and then the government will respond to the complaints of those persons with preexisting conditions (not just "diseases") and order insurance companies to charge them standard rates, which is unrealistic, and that's when the players will exit the market, leaving it up to the government to cover these persons along with everyone else, there won't be enough money or resources to do that, taxes will have to be raised to cover the huge debt that will be incurred, and the economy will ultimately collapse under the weight of all this.
Or the government will just start printing oodles of more money which will lead to hyperinflation, which will result in the same end result.
The plan is unworkable in reality. Congress has relied on inaccurate predictions, projections, and chosen to ignore the will of the majority of Americans who said, repeatedly, "Don't mess with the system."
And the solution would have been to deal with the 40,000,000-50,000,000 who have no health coverage. Far more workable, and the only "reform" that was truly needed. A few billion dollars per year, not a trillion dollar deficit over ten years.
_________________
CA-licensed P&C Broker-Agent and Life Agent. CA Insurance Lic #0596197. Now investigating insurance company abuses, and providing litigation support and expert witness services. Send me your questions, and I'll send you my answers. |
|
MaxHerr
Moderator
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 4622
Location: Pomona CA
209.53 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes you are right, it would be impractical for the private insurance companies and government taking it all on itself would lead to the collapse of the economy.
_________________
Health Insurance Quote |
|
goodyphilips
Preferred member
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 190
18.98 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | it would be impractical for the private insurance companies and government taking it all on itself |
That's a bit of a misparaphrase of my post. The government and the commercial insurers, working together, could make it work without ruining the economy further. But that's not "the plan".
Government's intent behind the new legislation is to drive the commercial insurance companies (a) into submission (AKA: profitless (not non-profit) entities) or (b) entirely out of the market (AKA: the self-fulfilling prophecy of a single-payer system). Because insurance companies are evil, profit-making corporations (does not work in a socialist state).
Either of these "solutions" is the epitome of socialism, which the Soviet Union proved (after about 60 years or so) is doomed to failure. The Soviet collapse was due in large part to the failure of the central government to admit that it was piling up untenable deficits. Here, Congress uses its own version of "funny math" to assert that "deficit spending = saving money" (Obamacare's $1+ trillion pricetag is touted to "save" a couple of hundred $billion. If anyone believes that, they probably have no idea how to do the addition and subtraction required to balance a checkbook).
Or they sell new bonds to pay the interest and principal on old ones (and that's just current "general fund" financing. That's also the plan to keep Social Security and Medicare afloat. But the world doesn't have enough money to buy the additional $87,000,000,000,000 in bonds that would need to be sold by 2040 to keep the system afloat forever into the future (the Trustees' "infinite horizon" time frame statements).
The raging deficits Obamacare will mandate are unsustainable. The commercial insurance industry cannot be cut out of the system of healthcare in America. But it also cannot be forced to assume risk it has no ability to decline or (ultimately) rate substandard.
A number of states have privately established high-risk pools to deal with the problem of their own residents who do not have and cannot afford health insurance in the commercial marketplace. And then the state works with the insurers to provide the benefits (very much like Assigned Risk Auto Insurance). That's all that Congress needed to do on a national level, which would allow the states to close down their high risk pools.
And they still could have turned it over to, or partnered with, the commercial insurance industry in the same way that they have created and operate Servicemembers Group Life Insurance, or have allowed HMOs and PPOs to contract to provide services to Medicare beneficiaries under the Medicare Advantage program.
THOSE programs literally do save the government money, even though the government is paying part of the cost for them. Why? Because the commercial insurance companies and HMOs and PPOs that participate know how to collect premiums, pay claims, commissions, and expenses, and still earn a profit. The federal government has yet to demonstrate that it can run any revenue-producing program profitably.
Accounting maxim #1: Figures never lie, but liars always figure.
The truth is that Obama and the voting majority in Congress lied to the American people about the inner workings and the costs of their system of national healthcare, disguised as "healthcare reform." Until the American people actually feel the negative effects, they will not comprehend how ill-conceived the whole plan was, and then it will almost be too late. The words "strengthen the system" will become the next political double-speak, as it has for Social Security and Medicare, instead of discussing the possibility of closing the system and turning it back over to the insurance industry to manage.
But at that point, why would they (the insurers) want to?
_________________
CA-licensed P&C Broker-Agent and Life Agent. CA Insurance Lic #0596197. Now investigating insurance company abuses, and providing litigation support and expert witness services. Send me your questions, and I'll send you my answers. |
|
MaxHerr
Moderator
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 4622
Location: Pomona CA
209.53 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2011 5:54 pm Post subject: national health care |
|
|
This country needs and deserves a govt.run single payer health care system that covers EVERY citizen.Other countries have it,it's successful,and it needs to happen here....Now!
_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved. |
|
vhair
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | This country needs and deserves a govt.run single payer health care system that covers EVERY citizen.Other countries have it,it's successful,and it needs to happen here....Now! |
Sir or Madam . . .
You obviously are not an economist, nor do you realize the economic impact of what you describe. Take a look at the bottom of the website in the following link to see the DAMAGE that our existing "single-payer" health care system for senior citizens is causing -- specifically, I'm referring to the COMBINED UNFUNDED LIABILITY of Social Security, Medicare, and the Prescription Drug Plan. We have created one system we cannot afford, and you want a second. Obamacare will only make things worse.
The SS/MC unfunded liability in the Trustees' 2006 report (for 2005, the year prior to the inception of the PDP) was about $87,000,000,000,000. According to the debt clock at 12:30pm PST on 2/11/11, including the $19,627,000,000,000+ PDP shortfall, now exceeds $112,500,000,000,000, and is increasing by $1,000,000 every 9 second or so. Which means that without the PDP, SS/MC would still account for more than $91,000,000,000,000 in unfunded liability, an increase of more than $4 TRILLION dollars in just 5 years.
It would be societal-suicide to use the same single-payer system to provide health care to all US citizens. And there is no other model for Congress to rely upon -- certainly none from any other country in the world. We're already on the road to BANKRUPTCY . . . and you want more. Utterly irresponsible and economically impossible.
Visit this site for a dose of reality! You'll notice that the unfunded liability per citizen is almost FIVE TIMES as much as the total US assets per citizen. And we citizens don't each have $233,900 in assets (as of 12:30pm on 2/11/11).
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
_________________
CA-licensed P&C Broker-Agent and Life Agent. CA Insurance Lic #0596197. Now investigating insurance company abuses, and providing litigation support and expert witness services. Send me your questions, and I'll send you my answers. |
|
MaxHerr
Moderator
Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Posts: 4622
Location: Pomona CA
209.53 Dollars($)
|
|
