Suffer from Arthritis?

You're not alone. According to a new study, there were more than 46 million American adults with arthritis (or other rheumatic condition) in 2003. By 2030, this number is expected to rise to 67million.

Why the sharp rise?

Because of the aging Boomers.

The unfortunate consequence is that, in addition to pain and discomfort, the total amount spent on medical care for these conditions in the US increased by about 1/3 from $64.8 billion in 1997 to $80.8 billion in 2003. The "good" news is that the average cost per person did not increase too much. The bad news is that while the total medical care has gone up, the "raw earnings losses due to arthritic conditions to total $108 billion in 2003 compared to $99 billion in 1997."

So what does this mean for the aging boomers who face may arthritis in the near future? Can arthritis be cured? Prevented? Delayed?

There is some help: "The Arthritis Foundation Self-Help Program is an educational program designed to help patients with arthritis learn the skills required to become an active member in treating their own condition." This program has been shown to be "effective in reducing pain and, thus, medical costs due to fewer doctor visits."

Check this program out. Talk to your doctor about it. Take proactive actions to treat your condition.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

According to a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, "94 percent of more than 3,000 physicians surveyed reported some type of relationship with the pharmaceutical industry" -- ie. this could be something as simple as receiving free pens to "receiving payments for consulting, giving lectures and even enrolling their patients in trials" ... and even all expenses paid vacations.

The article, "Could Doctors' Drug Industry Ties Affect Your Care?" states, "data remain scant on what effect, if any, these [doctor- pharmaceutical industry] relationships have on the provision of health care.'

How can anyone trust a doctor who is (or has) in the past received "all expenses paid vacations" from a pharmaceutical company to be completely unbiased when recommending prescriptions or treatments? Would you trust your doctor to be giving you the best advice when s/he is receiving freebies from pharmaceutical companies?

There is an argument that freebies will not influence anyone's (ie. a doctor's) opinion. However, we respectfully disagree. Doctors are humans and as such are subject to influences. If s/he is in a situation where s/he can recommend two drugs to a patient, s/he may be more inclined to prescribe the drug whose maker sent him/her freebies.

Should all freebies be banned? Do pens and notepads really influence a doctor's decisions? Perhaps they don't, but why is it needed? Doctors do not need more stationery.

Sample drugs? There might be some legitimacy that it's a good thing if pharma companies give out free samples so doctors can give them to their patients --- as long as the doctors let the patients know of alternative drugs (especially lower priced generics) they can take once the samples run out.

What do you think about the freebies doctors receive? Should these doctor-pharma relationships be sanctioned by the government?

When is the fear of aging too much?

We live in a society of superficiality. Cosmetic Surgery is at a high -- especially non surgical treatments. Those in their 40s and up either go for Botox injections or, if they consider the situation "serious" they'll go under the know for a little nip/tuck. Botox injections, especially, are not considered anything out of the ordinary. In fact, the first "Botox-on-the-go" store is opening later this year in New York City.

But when 20 years olds are asking for these nonsurgical treatments, has the fear of aging gone too far? What possible wrinkles could they have? Even their plastic surgeons argue with them saying they don't need it!

Here are some disturbing statistics: "According to the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, last year people age 19 to 34 accounted for nearly 20 percent of nonsurgical procedures such as Botox and chemical peels, and 28 percent of women age 18 to 24 said they would seriously consider getting cosmetic surgery now or in the future."

What ever happened to aging gracefully? Look at Susan Sarandon, Helen Mirren, Andie MacDowell, and Jane Seymour -- to name just a few.

We're sorry… but don't these young'uns have anything better to spend their money on? Perhaps contributing to a presidential campaign? Or a non-profit organization?

(**One of the CareTALK Gals is in her 20s and she agrees with the above statements wholeheartedly).

New meaning to the phrase "wearing your jewels"

How do you wear your jewels? On your ears? Around your neck? On your fingers?

How about on your skin?

That's right. An article in the New York Times, "New Hope at the Beauty Counter: Bling in a Jar," describes several skin products that are using pulverized jewels – such as diamonds, rubies, pearls, etc— inside their facial and body creams.

Why the luxurious ingredients? Whatever happened to Ponds or Oil of Olay? Well, "manufacturers claim that, when pulverized, distilled or blended with oils, precious metals and stones can tighten, clarify and reverse the signs of age." Ahh… so beauty does come at a price – a pretty high price if you use these creams. For instance, La Prairie’s Cellular Radiance Concentrate Pure Gold (which contains 24 karat gold flecks) runs about $525 for a 1oz bottle.

However, do these really work? Should you run out and buy a bottle or two?

According to Dr. Vincent DeLeo, chairman of the dermatology department at St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital and Beth Israel Medical Centers in New York, "if you can see [precious metals used in creams] after you use it, it's not doing anything but sitting on a dead layer of skin."

Would you buy a cream with diamonds, pearls, rubies, other precious metal and jewels? Tell us, we’d like to know.

Are you satisfied with your hospital?

According to a survey of 2.3M patients, there are more of you who are satisfied now compared to 5 years ago.

However, "room conditions, food quality and discharge process" are still a problem with many patients: more than 50% were not satisfied with their rooms, and more than 33% were not satisfied with their meals and discharge process.

Now, what we would like to know is what questions were asked of those surveyed and where were the hospitals located? According to the Wall Street Journal, there were more than 1,700 hospitals represented in this survey.

To find out how your hospital is rated by the government, you can check out the Hospital Compare tool on Medicare.gov.

Are you satisfied with your hospital?

Eat Chocolate (dark chocolate, that is)!!

Some of you may have known this already… but now it's official. According to the New York Times, a new study has found that "eating dark chocolate may be almost as effective at lowering blood pressure as taking the most common antihypertensive drugs."

GREAT!

Bring on the dark chocolate! However, eat in moderation ---your hips and belly might not thank you if you eat too much of it.

Lifestyle Medicine

How many of you are guilty of having (or know people who have had) liposuction, heart surgery, or other surgery, yet the lifestyle that helped cause the condition remained the same after the surgery – ie. excessive stress, eating unhealthy foods, etc.?

We've all read about improving our lifestyle, and healthy living/aging - but why is it that some doctors don't focus on trying to change the patient's lifestyle for the better? Granted, it's hard enough getting the doctor to focus and spend time with you while in the examination room, but s/he should provide specifics on how to change your lifestyle to not only treat disease--but also to prevent it.

The obstacle, like so many others, is time and money. Counseling each patient takes time and unfortunately, it's not reimbursed by Medicare or health insurance.

However, this should not matter!

"Symptomatically treating disease without assessing patients' lifestyles or offering them guidance on how to change is ‘irresponsible and bordering on neglect.' " (NYTimes, "Teaching Doctors to Teach Patients About Lifestyle")

We agree.

Oversight for nursing homes receives a failing grade

Finding a nursing home for your loved one is difficult – especially one which you can trust will care for him/her the way s/he deserves. The least you can expect is that the nursing homes are regulated – at least by the government – especially if Medicare/Medicaid is paying for a patient’s stay. However, according to the New York Times article, "Oversight of Nursing Homes Is Criticized," a new report has been released by Congressional investigators stating the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) "fails to hold homes with a long history of harming residents accountable for the poor care provided." The government can legally impose, for compliance problems, a stiff penalty of up to $10K/day taken from the Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements owed to the nursing homes. However, this authority is seldom used.

For example:
The report found "that a nursing home was still open even though it had repeatedly been cited for 'poor quality care,' poor nutrition services, medication errors and employing people who had been convicted of abusing patients."

How can this be?

Considering "about 1.5 million people live in the nation's 16,400 nursing homes on any given day, more than 3 million people receive nursing-home care at some point in the year [and] Medicaid and Medicare pay for more than two-thirds of patients," why is there such failure to hold these nursing homes accountable? Some argue that stiff penalities would cause the nursing homes to shut down. If the nursing homes are not providing the care they should be and abusing their patients, they should be shut down! Would you risk putting your loved one in a nursing home in that situation?

Neither would we.

A blow to the Democrats

Unfortunately, the Senate blocked a proposal supported by the Democrats that would have allowed Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices. Considering the Department of Vertans Affairs, HMO's and private companies such as Walmart can negotiate prices, why not Medicare who has over 43 million beneficiaries?

The reason for the block: because of " 'the power of the insurance industry and the pharmaceutical industry', which spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on lobbying and advertisements against the bill."

Fortunately, "Senate would vote again on the issue, perhaps as an amendment to a spending bill or other measure."

"The fight will go on. "

And so it should.

"Botox-on-the-go"

While running errands or getting your nails done, why not stop by the local Botox Center for a quickie?

That's right, forget the appointments, forget the long waiting times. Just like you go to a nail salon to (primarily) get your nails done, you can now go to a Botox-only storefront office -- quick, easy, cheap(er) than the dermatologist, and you come out of the store looking years younger in 30 minutes (15 if it's a follow-up visit). This is even quicker than getting a manicure!

According to the New York Times article, "The Little Botox Shop Around the Corner," two plastic and reconstructive surgeons will be opening up a store front office offering just Botox injections in midtown Manhattan, across the street from Bloomingdale's (why not get a "younger you" to complement that outfit you just bought at Bloomie's?). You have to admit this idea is great - especially since their target audience for that location are the shoppers, those who live and work in the area (ie, they can get the injections during lunch hour), and even tourists who'd get the injections on a whim. In addition, there would be general practitioners with basic training and experience using Botox who would be administering the injections.

However, the one negative that some experts are concerned about is the fact that stores like this might trivialize the seriousness of these injections – ie. not everyone may be suitable for it and the injections should be administered by "dermatologists and surgeons who have extensive training in facial anatomy and aesthetics and long experience injecting Botox."

Do you think this will become the next "nail salon" phenom where we will see one every 5 blocks (in the city)?

AARP - Major Medicare insurer ... and major lobbyist

Hmmm… very interesting. On Monday, AARP announced it would offer a suite of products for those age 50 to 64 years old such as a high deductible insurance policy, a managed care plan, and other products… in addition to being the "largest provider of private insurance to Medicare recipients" when coverage becomes available next year.

Considering that a) "revenues and royalties from the sale of goods and services have, for many years, accounted for a substantial part of AARP's income," b) AARP is (possibly the largest and most powerful) lobbyist for older Americans and c) it is "perceived as the most important voice for older people", wouldn't this be considered a conflict of interest?

We think so.

And so do others.

According to the director of the Center for Medicare Advocacy, "AARP will not be perceived as a truly independent advocate on Medicare if it's making hefty profits by selling insurance products that provide Medicare coverage." For instance, a topic that has been hotly debated between the two political parties is whether the role of private insurers be limited? AARP would instantly side with the Republicans opposing the limitation of private insurers. (And why not? They are a private insurer themselves and they are receiving a windfall.) However, is this the best choice for Medicare beneficiaries?

What do you think? Is there a conflict?

Prayers for those at Virginia Tech

Dear Readers,

Our condolences and prayers go out to the victims, their families, and the entire student body at Virginia Tech.

Please join us in taking a moment to reflect about the horrible incident and pray for all those affected.

- The CareTALK Gals.

Early action, proactivity, and preparation are key.

Take the 1918 pandemic, for example.

There is a very interesting article in the New York Times today telling the story of how different cities reacted differently to the news of the 1918 pandemic -- also known as the Spanish Flu. For example, St. Louis, due to its quick action (ie. they immediately quarantined those with flu symptoms), had half the death rate of Philadelphia – who did not take proactive actions to quarantine the virus.

Why are we focusing on this now?

Yes, the furor of a possible pandemic has died down, but the threat of a widespread pandemic from a mutated form of the bird flu still exists – and we need to be prepared. As was the case in the 1918 pandemic – timing is everything. Our government needs to be prepared for such an emergency – but each one of us should do our parts. How? By being knowledgeable about what is occurring. The official pandemic flu site is a great resource for up to the minute information. CareTALK will also have video pods and further information regarding how you can prepare yourself and your loved ones for a possible pandemic.

If you want further information regarding the 1918 Spanish flu, you can watch "Remembering the 1918 Pandemic" on the CareTALK channel on YouTube.

One step closer to government negotiation on drug prices

A bill that has been on the "to do" list of the new congress has passed approval by a Senate committee, according to the Wall Street Journal article "Senate Panel Approves Bill On Medicare Drug Prices". The government is now one step closer to having the power to negotiate drug prices on behalf of Medicare beneficiaries. Although many oppose this effort including the Bush administration, many others believe the secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) should have the right (and in fact, it should be his/her duty) to interfere in the negotiations between drug makers, insurers and pharmacies.

And why not? After all, Medicare (which is under HHS) is responsible for the health benefits of 43 million people and it is their duty to make sure these beneficiaries receive the best price.

Opponents of this effort say government interference in negotiations would have a "negligible effect" on federal spending. However, if even a couple of million can be saved, isn't that something? After all , any savings that can be gotten can then be passed down to the beneficiaries.

Of course, this alone will not be the solution to lowering health care costs. There needs to be so much more done, as Adam Bosworth, VP of Engineering at Google, stated in his March entry on the official Google blog.

Imagine a paperless health care world

The Washington Post had a terrific article "VA Takes the Lead in Paperless Care" earlier this week on the Department of Veterans Affairs health system -- one of the few and largest health system that is almost completely paperless. Every patient's record is computerized such that any VA hospital, clinic, nursing home, rehab center can see a patient's record (and the VA system is extensive -- "155 hospitals, 881 clinics, 135 nursing homes and 45 rehabilitation centers … With 5.3 million patients."

According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS),"one-quarter of American physicians use some sort of electronic record-keeping in their practices. But less than 10 percent have systems that store all necessary data, allow electronic ordering of tests and provide clinical reminders. Only 5 percent of the country's 6,000 hospitals have computerized ordering of drugs and tests, and even fewer have a fully integrated system like the VA's."

Considering it is estimated that electronic records could potentially save American medical care $162 billion/year (and not to mention countless lives due to medical error), why don't more doctors and hospitals store patient's records electronically? Yes, the upfront investment can be steep -- ranging from a few million to upwards of 60 million; but perhaps the government can step in to reimburse such costs? In addition, according to this article, the software the VA uses which was developed over years by many people (including clinicians) is "free to anyone who wants to get it through the Freedom of Information Act." In fact, many versions are already in use (and not just in the US). So then, what's the excuse?

Perhaps health care needs a company like Google to jumpstart this and bring it to the forefront?

Be trained by a Pro-athlete

By a retired pro-athlete, that is.

More and more, retired pro-athletes are becoming personal trainers during their retirement -even though many do not have a certification in personal training. After all, as one athlete said in the New York Times article, "Those Who Can, Do. Those Who Retire, Teach," "I'm certified in life. My experience speaks for itself."

Sure, it would be great to attend a class taught by Karim Jabbar, Bobby Neely, or Diamond Dallas Page – especially if you’re one of their fans. But is this enough? If they don't need to be certified, why should others?

Many of them have had years of training due to their respective sports. But because they were trained themselves and know what their bodies could endure, should they be personal trainers for others? If they believe so strongly, why not get certified? For example, Mr. Jabbar is certified by the National Academy of Sports Medicine and has taken 70 hours of continuing education.

Would it be great to be trained by a retired pro-athlete. Sure! Do they have the experience in training? Of course! However, why not become certified so there is no dispute as to whether they should be training others or not?

Walk a Day in My Shoes…

Have you ever heard of this program?

Well, let us tell you... It's a campaign by the SEIU (The Service Employees International Union), the largest health care union in this country, inviting all presidential candidates to walk in the shoes of their member -- professional caregivers--for a day. With this program, presidential candidates get to experience first hand what professional caregivers have to go through everyday and the issues that concern them, such as being able to receive a paycheck that will support a "family, affordable health care, a secure retirement and a better life for themselves and their families."

We had written previously about the fact that professional caregivers--- those who care for your loved ones day in and day out, those who must clean and bathe and accompany your loved ones--- don't even have health insurance themselves and can't afford to have a professional caregiver care for them when they need it.

If the presidential candidates are serious about changing healthcare --as they all say--then they need to experience firsthand what the challenges and issues are that the average health care worker faces.

As the "Walk a Day in My Shoes" website states:

"Because if presidential candidates understand the struggles workers face each day, they will be better able to offer the 21st century solutions this country needs."

We agree!

Watch the coverage of presidential candidate, John Edwards, Thursday morning on Good Morning America as he Walks a Day in the shoes of an SEIU member.

Ever heard of "Obsolagnium"?

An unusual word but one that may start popping up as we age. It means: "the waning sexual desire resulting from age."

Many people think advancing age is the main reason for a declining libido --- for men and women. However, according to the New York Times article, "A Lively Libido Isn't Reserved for the Young," this is not always the case. It could be a combination of things including (but not limited to) hormones, stress at work or home (who doesn't have this, right?), financial problems, depressions, medications, illness, etc. The article gives several useful tips on what to do to increase your desire for to seek and enjoy sex.

• Repeat after us: "I am attractive". If you feel attractive, you will exude that confidence and that sexuality. Now granted, this does not mean you should be dressing like your grandchildren-- but everyone has their own inner sexual god/goddess. Tap into it. Let it out.
• Get rid of the routine! No one (whether you are young OR old) likes routine for years on end. Change it up a bit. Be daring! (but make sure it's legal).
• Have your doctor check your level of testosterone -- the "real libido hormone, for both men and women". After menopause, your level of this hormone may decrease; however, there are drugs that can help with this. Ask your doctor before taking any hormones. The safety of hormone replacement after menopause is still causing much debate.

Just remember, sexual libido is not just for the young-- though it may be for the young at heart.
Will you be young at heart at age 90?

Happy Holidays

To our readers who celebrate Easter, we wish you and your families a Happy Easter.

To our readers who are celebrating Passover, we wish you and your families a Happy Passover.

Take this opportunity as you are gathered with your family and loved ones to ask about their health and how you can help, if needed.

- The CareTALK Gals

Have arthritis? Get moving!

You have heard over and over doctors saying exercise is good for you--- especially as you age. According to the New York Times, there are now new findings published in the journal Arthritis Research & Therapy, that indicate exercising little over one hour a week can make a difference over the next three years when it comes to preventing stiff joints that lead to arthritis.

In this study, a first that focused specifically on middle aged women and older, those "in their 70s who exercised 75 minutes a week reported fewer symptoms of arthritis than those who did less, while more spry women who were active at least 2 1/2 hours weekly had even less pain in the three years that followed."

So what are you waiting for? Get moving!

Beware of scam artists

After losing a loved one, the last thing you are thinking about (or want to think about) are creditors—much less phony creditors. Unfortunately, the grieving are the prime targets for scam artists. In Sunday's The Wall Street Journal, there was a great article, "In Times of Grief, Scam Artists Arrive", regarding how these funeral scam artists read obituaries to find their next victims. (Utterly despicable!)

Some tips as outlined in the article:

• Designate one person, probably not the surviving spouse, to screen claims.
• Take charge of the conversation, by asking follow-up questions.
• Get written proof of the claim.
• Confirm that the person truly represents the company or organization cited.
• Don't make payment immediately; take time to think.

We should ALL take this advice -- not just those grieving and vulnerable. No one is safe from funeral scam artists.