Today’s Riddle: What Is the Wild Debate Over Health Care Really Telling Us? Farmers Market Bounty

Like many Americans, I watched with amazement, and a sense of shame, the videos earlier this week about the thousands of people drawn to free health care services in the Los Angeles area (provided by Remote Area Medical).

So great was the demand that even after thousands were treated for medical and dental problems, thousands more were turned away.

Isn't this the ultimate argument for national health care, when a medical group accustomed to providing care in Third World countries and rural areas finds insatiable demand for its services in urban U.S.?

And then I listen to all the hysteria coming up at so-called town hall meetings in opposition to President Obama's health care plan, and I want to believe it's all part of a massive insurance industry lobbying effort.

Isn't this what happened in the 1990s to the Clinton health care efforts? Yet polls say people are genuinely worried about health care and President Obama's approach.

And then it occurs to me that maybe all the noise isn’t just an insurance-industry-funded protest, but rather a real outpouring of pent-up alienation over big government meddling in our lives.

We see it (the meddling and the alienation) on this blog a lot, mostly with respect to raw milk, but we've also seen it in connection with the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), the crackdown on buying clubs, and the harassment of holistic health businesses.

Dave Milano expresses it well following my previous post: “It is always government's way to first meddle in affairs in which it has no business poking its nose, then when the inevitable disaster ensues, demand more power and money to fix the problem. This is what government has done in agriculture (in concert with commodity-pushing industrial ag businesses) and in finance and healthcare as well.”

I’ve long thought that if there’s one area government has a role (much more than private employers), it is in providing health care. It’s a benefit citizens of nearly every First World country has access to.

But if the recent protests over health care really are mostly spontaneous, then the underlying message is pretty amazing: People are saying, we'd rather do without desperately needed health services if accepting them means they come with the heavy hand of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and its Food and Drug Administration, and the nearly rubber stamp approval of the courts in the event of disputes. Give us dishonest and exploitative insurance companies over those arrogant FDA types any day of the week. At least the insurance companies' motives are clear--the want only higher profits. The government types want something more insidious—they want control over our lives and our rights.

I happen to think that our culture is hypocritical about so-called end-of-life matters, but I worry, too, about government bureaucrats drawing up rules about health care, and revising them year after year to make them fit neatly into budgets and the needs of big business. Have these Washington bureaucrats worn out their welcome, once and for all?
***
It’s the time of year to marvel at bountiful farmers markets. I was at one in Vermont on Saturday, and had more locally grown fresh veggies—Swiss chard, spinach, carrots, cucumber, parsley, beets-- for a juice concoction than I’ve had since...last August.

Comments

[the bovine]

I've been watching the American healthcare debate from north of the border for a while now. And while I don't agree with the bad things being said about Canadian healthcare, neither do I imagine that Obama has the political will or the financial resources to implement Canadian-style health care in the U.S.

Aside from my aversion to allopathic medicine generally, I think the Canadian health care system is actually pretty good, as health care systems go these days.

But when I see the global agendas being played out in America around Swine Flu compulsory vaccination programs, I foresee a greater likelihood that a national health care system in the U.S. would be just one more vehicle for the eugenic agendas described in this news story: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105872

I think what we're seeing in the public arena is that Americans who see increasing abuse of power all around them, are not eager to give governments any more power than they are already taking.

Self-promotion alert:

Read my latest post on Swine Flu Vaccine issues on The Bovine: http://thebovine.wordpress.com/2009/08/17/people-who-drink-raw-milk-probably-also-dont-vaccinate-their-children-swine-flu-and-vaccine-news-roundup/#more-9763

[Steve Bemis]

It puzzles me that there is such a huge concern about the government "controlling" healthcare. It currently controls Medicare for millions of us, and from what I hear there aren't that many complaints (a retired doctor friend, who confessed he didn't think he'd ever like Medicare - he was a pediatrician and most of his patients paid with other than Medicare funds - as a recipient of benefits has found the Medicare system to be fair, prompt and surprisingly comfortable to be part of).

So what is new? Healthcare already is a mess, emphasizing treatment of symptoms over causes, not paying for preventive care, not giving one iota of attention to nutrition. In other words, there is no "health" in "healthcare" as it stands now.

I am convinced we will continue to have a crisis in healthcare so long as we have a crisis in health. There will be no hope of saving this country from the monster which devours 1/6 of the GDP, no matter who pays for it, government or private or something in between until we get our health under control.

That much said, as an involuntary early retiree, I would like to purchase a "major medical" type of policy to protect me against huge costs - I'm willing to pay for regular doctor visits (since there aren't that many). That product is not out there, as many who read this blog probably know already. Assuming you can pass a physical (depending on the state), you MIGHT be able to get a policy that looks like major medical, but it's likely to cost $400-500 per month with a $5000 yearly deductible. In other words, pay premium of $6000 per year, for the privilege of paying the first $5000 on your own. That's $11,000 per year, for "major" protection only. If you have no claims, you're still out $6000. That truly is "major" for most budgets.

With this as the choice, I'd love to have Medicare coverage, but that's not available for me for another 3 years. Paying $94 a month seems like a good deal. If the 40,000,000 uninsured in this country could each pitch in $100 per month, that's $4 billion of additional money that's not currently available in the system.

This is obviously not a sophisticated analysis, but having a public-pay system that protects against major medical crises seems like a good deal to me. That would free up a lot of money for more productive purposes, like eating right to get and stay healthy.

[hugh betcha]

i think i'm going to design a raw milk label around the black skull and cross bones flag pirates fly. (in movies anyway)

that way no "health" warning verbage would be needed at all.

i actually like the idea a lot... i believe the unspoken message would be clear enough to anyone who has looked into the controversy surrounding this issue. i'd even guess demand for my "black flag / scull and crossbones milk" would be exceptional.

on healthcare i know this much. medi-care /caid and social security combined are currently in debt to the tune of about 50 trillion dollars. this debt is "off balance sheet" so the gov't doesn't have to explain it every time they renew the federal budget.

the money coming in to fund these programs used to be kept in accounts earmarked for said use, but our gov't (in their wisdom) have siphoned it off for use in the general fund. so it's all been spent.

our gov't is way out of control and i'm glad to see the ruckus folks are starting to rise. i wish that a few million of us would pick up pitchforks and baseball bats and march on washington.... just to send a clear message....

never before has a gov't been wound down / reigned in, or contained peacefully. how would it be possible to think our gov't can be contained without some major pain and suffering?

[Sylvia Gibson]

In my office, it is the young staff (under 35) who get the flu shot. I believe I am the only one who consumes raw milk. It was just mentioned today, this pig flu is a money maker for the drug companies. Many of us have known someone, or taken care of someone who had an adverse reaction to a vacc. The vaccs aren't worth the risk IMHO

"Healthcare already is a mess, emphasizing treatment of symptoms over causes, not paying for preventive care, not giving one iota of attention to nutrition. In other words, there is no "health" in "healthcare" as it stands now."

Steve, your words speak the truth.

[Blair McMorran]

Exactly. I don't understand what the administration intends to implement with "Universal Healthcare", but it appears to be a scaled-back version of what we've already got, which is just slightly less of the same corporate bedfellows we've been forced to host for decades. They may eat less, but they're still in your kitchen every morning, and now they'll have a bigger say about your wallet. For sickcare services I am loathe to use!!!

You can't back NAIS, GMO foods, irradiation, Big Pharma and Big Ag, undermine sustainable farming, local food supplies etc and improve America's health at the same time. They speak with forked tongues.

-Blair

[pete]

Because the government cannot be trusted with more power, period. Look at all the damage they've done suppressing alternative medicine! And we're supposed to give them more power and control over health care?

We need to be getting the government out of health care, not further into it.

[Gwen elderberry]

Well I'd agree, but I don't. I was once that divorced mom with 3 young children who worked minimum wage, and didn't have health insurance, and wasn't poor enough to get Medicaid. I didn't have $60 for an office visit when one son stuck bubble gum into the other son's ear down to his eardrum; nor when numerous allergies caused continual ear infections in one child.

When I finally got through nursing school and found my first job, and got on a health plan, at first I felt like I was stealing, or taking advantage of something when I didn't have to pay that much, and was making MORE MONEY. 12 years later, it still feels very unethical to me. It IS unethical.

While I do agree that it is scary to have the government control one more thing, I personally feel that there is nothing wrong with making health care simply AVAILABLE to the working poor. Nothing at all.

[Dave Milano]

Optimal human health is much like good milk in that both come from properly functioning natural systems. The very best we can do to achieve it is simply encourage those natural systems to work fully—at very least we ought not interfere with them. Attempting to achieve health or safety by applying secondary processes to fundamentally flawed systems is folly.

Bacterial balance, limited toxin exposure, limited stress, appropriate exposure to the elements, proper exercise and rest, and a diet of clean, nutrient-dense foods, are the fundamentals. If you think about it, these apply more than metaphorically to healthy farms (soils, crops, and animals), healthy milk, and healthy humans. Because they are so fundamental, they are of course intertwined, and work together in synergy. Neglecting any part is dangerous. Having faith in their appropriateness for us is necessary and restful.

Sure, things will go wrong, and when they do we must do our best, and intervene gently, carefully, and with open eyes. But occasional misfires do not change the basic realities. We must understand that neglecting fundamentals in favor of invented solutions to problems taken out of context will always cause undesirable, and often unpredictable, consequences.

Gwen's story is compelling, but federal control in the form of government-provided, government-mandated, or government-regulated medical care is not a solution. It is part of the problem. A very short list of negative effects resultant of government involvement in medical care includes forced utilization and forced non-utilization, raging medical care cost inflation, a frightening number of medical care-induced illnesses, a reluctance on the part of medical providers to face the realities of our society's worsening health, and (a related fact) providers' recalcitrant attitude about holding on to their lucrative detection and treatment programs rather than pursuing actual health promotion and disease prevention.“Free'” third-party reimbursed medical care is not a small part of the reason Gwen's office visit was unaffordable, and why medical care so easily substituted for health care (and in turn fed its own utilization, for a long list of unnecessarily common diseases like asthma, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, developmental delay, and so on).

(With that in mind, we ought to look at our constitution, and in there find the federal government's authority to prevent you and I, natural men and citizens of this republic, by the threat of violence--or actual violence--from even opting out of the mess.)

Interesting what Whole Foods' leadership says about this topic:

The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare - WSJ.com

By JOHN MACKEY
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out
of other people's money." —Margaret Thatcher

With a projected $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009, several trillions more in deficits projected over the next decade,...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html

[Dave Milano]

Lykke,

Thanks for the link. As a dyed-in-the-wool libertarian I strongly support true HSAs. Mackey did a good job explaining how a real HSA can work, and more importantly did a good job implementing one (at least as good a job as can be done within the writhing tentacles of government regulation).

If it is true that we have a "right" to medical care, then how can government assume control of it?

[Gwen elderberry]

How about if we just have access to it?