BLOG POSTS

Walter Cronkite got it wrong. America’s health care system is both healthy and caring, and it’s a system that works beautifully – but it only benefits the wealthy and powerful medical barons who run it: the drug and insurance companies, the private medical companies who own the infrastructure and staff, and the huge (often international) pharmaceutical chains who dole out the drugs and accessories at enormous profit, that benefits them all.

During my thirteen years in the United States I received various medical treatments and required certain drugs. The one prescribed the most was Lansoprazole, a proton pump inhibitor for acid reflux. My doctor supplied a three-monthly prescription for this generic of Prevacid, which was filled at our local Walgreens store.

Every three months I would collect my prescription and pay the co-pay. It varied, but averaged around $35-$40. The explanation conveniently stapled to the package by Walgreens contained one piece of information I always took note of. It read: “Your insurance has saved you $xxx.”

The amount of ‘$xxx’ was never less than $350, and on one occasion came close to $500. In total, with the co-pay, this generic drug would have cost between $385 and $585. That’s a lot of money for ninety small capsules filled with a bit of white powder. The cost of one capsule, at its cheapest, was more than $4, and at its most expensive, $6.50. Thank you, insurance company, for paying so much of the cost for me. Surely, it was worth the $450 monthly fee we paid for coverage?

Or, was it?

Two factors would cross my mind each time I collected my prescription: how could anyone without medical insurance ever afford this drug, and, would a similar amount of cocaine be anymore expensive? Probably not.

Recently, I had reason to refill my Lansoprazole prescription in France, having moved there permanently. My French doctor supplied me with a similar three monthly prescription and I took it to our local pharmacy to be filled.

I was dreading the cost. In France I had no medical insurance. We had applied for the French Carte Vitale allowing us to use their public health system, but at that time had not received it. Consequently, my wife and I had to pay full price for drugs and medical treatment.

I proffered my prescription to the pharmacist with some trepidation. He gave me the ninety capsules and asked if I was a member of the health service. I told him: No. In that case, he said, I would have to pay in full for my prescription the sum of 25 euros and eighty centimes – the equivalent of $29.

The full retail price of this drug in France was substantially less than the co-pay demanded by our insurance company for the exact same drug in the United States.

To obtain this prescription I had to visit a French doctor. When I visited a doctor in the U.S. the fee was generally $120. The insurance paid 90%. I paid the remaining $20. A specialist was usually about double – $240.

Prior to leaving my doctor after obtaining my prescription, I asked how I should settle his account. He responded that, without French health insurance, I must pay him 23 euros ($26) cash. That was the amount he received for every consultation, which incidentally lasted for thirty-five minutes, not the fifteen allowed to me by U.S. health services.

French doctors have no imposed time limit on their consultations. They take as long as is necessary. Of course, this means that often there can be a long wait to be seen (we’ve waited up to an hour in the ‘salle d’attente’, even with an appointment) but assured with the knowledge the doctor will listen carefully to your problem, take time to make an assessment of your condition, and definitely not be hammering away at his/her computer keyboard while you’re describing your symptoms.

Here, it seems, is clear evidence that U.S. drug companies, in cahoots with U.S. insurance companies, are grossly inflating the price of their products. It also seems likely that national pharmaceutical chains, like Walgreens, are in on the deal.

Private medical companies now run most of the hospitals and doctor services in America. Patients are being squeezed more and more for that extra buck and doctors are under ever-increasing pressure, required to hear a patient’s symptoms, diagnose, and prescribe treatment, all while entering this information into the medical records database, and all within an imposed time limit of fifteen minutes, or less.

The American people are being ripped off by their health services and insurance companies. Somebody is making an enormous profit. It could even be considered racketeering.

Perhaps it’s time someone blew the whistle on America’s medical mafia.

Three absurdities in one day is a lot, even for the BBC News, but there they were staring us in the face this morning, jaw-dropping examples of the crassness of the human species when elevated to any form of authority.

The world is teetering on the precipice of global warming, politicians are burying their heads deep into the sand while pretending they have the matter in hand, and China bans electric scooters and segways from the roads of two major cities. The above image clearly displays the irresponsible attitude of Chinese politicians, their hypocrisy in paying lip service to the containment of global warming while banning environmentally-friendly transportation on the grounds of “safety”. The woman in the image is forced to wear a mask because of the pollution caused by China’s vast number of cars, yet will be barred from doing her small part for the environment.^[1]

Meanwhile, Canadian officialdom is publicising its inhumanity to its fellow man by forcing a couple married for sixty-two years to live in separate care homes. Here is a perfect example of how human beings with power over people rapidly become desensitized to the needs of those they control.

Forcing two people apart who have lived together and loved one another for any length of time is cruel and inhumane. After sixty-two years it should be a criminal offence punishable by public flogging. Fraser Health Authority is the power holding sway over this couple. The key people in power are a Michael Marchbank, Arun Garg, and Vivian Giglio. Their motto is: ‘Better health. Best in health care’. If this is the best healthcare they can provide to their customers then their motto should be: ‘Screw you. We’re alright, Jack’.^[2]

The third – though possibly not the last – absurdity to surface from the pages of the BBC News website today concerns our old friend, Amazon. Apart from rumours of ruthless employee-bashing, Amazon has in the past provided a service most of us have partaken of to a greater or lesser degree. It’s also done wonders for the profits of companies like UPS, Fedex, and cardboard box manufacturers worldwide.

Amazon’s latest idea is surely one offering too far: Amazon Dash. Soon we’ll be able to purchase Dash buttons for many household products: toilet rolls, washing detergent, toothpaste…the list is expanding rapidly. Running short of condoms? Just press your Dash Durex button and a packet will be ‘dashed’ to you within twenty-four hours. (Don’t worry, lads, you won’t have to keep it in your pants for that long once Amazon gets its drones off the ground). The system’s been in use in the U.S. (where else!) since March last year and is catching on rapidly.

With major manufacturers all keen to get in on the act it’s surely one more step on the road to complete corporate domination of our lives; lives that are already rapidly becoming controlled by social media, Google advertising, and huge conglomerates like Apple, Microsoft, and the like. Never mind that we can buy a product much cheaper at the local supermarket, why go out if it can come to you?^[3]

It’s all part of taking control away from us and putting it in the hands of those who hold the power. Whether it’s getting to work or to the shops on an environmentally-friendly vehicle, living out our remaining years together with our life partner, or choosing if the condom we use is made by Durex or Trojan, those choices should be ours as a right, not imposed on us by the inhumanity of governments, health authorities, or corporations.

^{[1] “Beijing and Shanghai ban electric scooters and segways on roads” BBC, August 31st 2016}

^{[2] “Canadian couple forced to live apart after 62 years” BBC, August 26th 2016}

^{[3] “Amazon Dash – who wants to live in a push-button world?” BBC, August 31st 2016}

For years it was considered the height of indecency for a woman to display more than her ankles when at the beach. The Victorians were particularly fussy that way. Gradually, fashions and morals changed. Full swimsuits became the norm, then bikinis.

Over the last few decades the dangers of skin cancer, from exposure to the sun, have become more obvious. Doctors advise us to cover up while on the beach. Few of us take much heed, but nevertheless it’s good advice.

Today, in parts of Southern France, it’s suddenly become illegal to cover up while on the beach. This….

….is fine…

…but this isn’t.

This woman was fined by French police and told to take off her shirt.

A debate is raging throughout France on whether ‘burkinis’, the Muslim version of a swimsuit covering so much of the body its modesty would even have raised the eyebrows of prudish Victorians, was acceptable on French beaches, or if it was a religious ’emblem’ banned under French law.

As the BBC reports today:

In 2010, France became the first European country to ban the full-face veil in public

A 2004 law forbids the wearing of religious emblems in schools and colleges

The 1905 constitution aims to separate Church and state. It enshrines secularism in education but also guarantees the freedom of religion and freedom to exercise it. The original text made no reference to clothing.^[1]

The ban on burkinis, or articles of clothing of a similar nature, was enacted by local mayors after the attack in Nice on Bastille Day that left eighty-five people dead.

French court rulings have overturned the bans, but the mayors say they’ll continue to enforce them in defiance of the higher legal authority.

It’s a difficult debate, given the sanctity of French secularism as enshrined in the Constitution. French children may not wear crosses or other Christian symbols in school, but the Constitution also protects the right of religious freedom.

It would seem the French mayors who are enforcing this ban have ignited a fiery debate that could threaten the very heart of the French Constitution itself.

^{[1] “France ‘burkini’: Mayors urged to heed court’s ruling” BBC, August 27th 2016}