This was published yesterday with a different headline and slightly different text. Today I also changed the phrase “local and state” to “state and federal.”

Last week the Federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) reported that health care spending was 17 percent of the U.S. economy last year. By 2012, according to the report, state and federal governments will pick up more than half the tab. The recession has increased the number of people who qualify for state-funded Medicaid. As baby boomers retire, the Medicare rolls will swell.

Most people agree that health care reform is not an option. This video includes interviews with business leaders who support as well as those who oppose the current health care bills. Please watch, listen, and contact your legislators to share your opinion.

Opponents and supporters alike seem unaware of how much modern treatments have added to that projection. Opponents are fighting to protect those treatments. Supporters champion evidence-based medicine and want to make it the standard.

Medicine since the 1970s has become more dependent upon expensive tests, machines, prescription drugs, and years of extensive research to prove their effectiveness. Research and treatment methods have not always been so complicated or so profitable with such questionable results.

French Explorer Jacques Cartier made tea from the needles of an Eastern White Cedar to save his men from scurvy in the 1500s. He learned this remedy from natives along the St. Lawrence River and immediately used it to save lives. More than 200 years later, James Lind of the British Royal Navy proved the active ingredient was vitamin C, which could also be found in citrus fruit.

In those days results were the only proof anyone needed to accept a particular treatment. Costs for research studies today range from $100 million to $800 million, according to Drug Discovery and Development. A return to simple methods is long overdue.

The treatments used by Cartier and Lind would be considered alternative medicine in our country today. Many of what we consider alternative treatments have been proven through studies conducted around the world and are listed in PubMed, a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health.

One sign that this research is accurate may be found in the life expectancy list reported by the CIA World Factbook 2009. Two countries that treat natural methods as mainstream therapies rank higher than the United States. Japan, which ranks third, has used its own variation of Traditional Chinese Medicine for many centuries. Australia, number seven, allows open practice in several natural disciplines. The United States, however, ranks 50th, yet many professionals here still claim that natural treatments don’t work.

One reason for their denial is that U.S. researchers have been unable to duplicate many positive studies conducted in other countries. Experts in alternative medicine say that poor study design is the reason. Some researchers ask the wrong questions because they don’t understand how the disciplines work. Some start with the wrong quality or form of the materials they test.

In spite of the discrepancies, an additional observation suggests that these disciplines work better than western medicine when used properly. The United States spends more than twice as much per capita on health care as Australia and more than two-and-one-half times as much as Japan.

It’s past time for the U.S. to get over it’s superiority complex and embrace treatments that work. The “Citizens in Charge” plan I mentioned in an earlier post is a good road map to guide these changes.

The plan would cover catastrophic care for all and give everyone a debit card with a pre-determined amount that could only be spent on health-related costs. These cards could be used for anything related to health, including alternative medicine services and nutritious food. The savings from this plan would allow us to provide health care for every citizen in this country.

After I thought about this new discovery for awhile, the excitement of a new opportunity replaced the initial disappointment of being scooped. My new goal is to help gifted researchers communicate their findings to the public.

Please follow me on this journey. Feel free to comment, share your ideas, or let me know if you don’t understand what’s going on. You can also stop by just to say hello.

The medical industrial complex, which fears health care reform efforts, is using my book and a seminar I gave last year to fight the natural care industry. I refuse to be used that way.

My next book will be available in early 2010. Stay informed by subscribing to blog updates by email or RSS feed.

Every plan presented in Congress so far has led to charges that a public option would increase the federal deficit, cause rationing of services, or require tax increases. “Citizens in Charge,” by Mike Adams of NaturalNews.com, would combine universal coverage with total health care freedom to slash costs for everyone.

“Citizens in Charge” would cover catastrophic, routine, and preventive care. The federal government would pay all “catastrophic” expenses, such as accidents and acute medical emergencies. Each man and woman would also receive a government-funded debit card and at least $350 each month. Parents and legal guardians would receive additional cards for each child under their care.

All health-related vendors would be required to accept the cards. Healthy food, all conventional and natural care services and products, and gym memberships would be covered.

This plan would correct several imbalances in the present health care system. It would shift the focus from “disease care” to “health care.” All consumers would be able to afford the care they need from the providers they choose. They would have equal access to healthy food and services that decrease the rate of expensive, preventable diseases. They would also be more conscious of the cost and value of services they choose.

Click here to read details of the plan.

—-
Jacqueline Laurette Jones is author of Unmasking a Diagnosis: How to get Help for a Confusing Chronic Illness Without Filing for Bankruptcy.

With 75 percent of internet users using the internet for health information (Pew Internet Project, 8/08) and many of them seeking support, thousands of bloggers now post daily journals about the emotional challenges they face with daily chronic pain.

National Invisible Chronic Illness Awareness Week, September 14-20, 2009, invites bloggers to have a significant role in their awareness campaign. For example, part of their outreach has been featuring guest bloggers on their own web site invisibleillnessweek.com , as well as inviting bloggers around the globe to commit to blogging about invisible illness issues. To help spread the word they have also created a meme, “30 Things About My Invisible Illness You May Not Know” that people have posted on Facebook, blogs and other social networks.

Lisa Copen, who founded National Invisible Chronic Illness Awareness Week in 2002 says, “Though our illnesses and symptoms may vary, we still have a great deal in common. We can learn from one another about coping and finding the balance of taking care of ourselves yet living life to the fullest.” Copen says patient blogs aren’t depressing like healthy people may assume. “Illness bloggers don’t typically dwell on the logistics of symptoms, lab tests, or hospital stays. Instead, they write on everyday topics and how their illness impacts their families, finances, careers. They may discuss patient advocacy issues, but they also write about vacationing with an illness or dating when you have a chronic illness.”

Invisible Illness Week was recently the host of Grand Rounds, the largest medical blog carnival on the internet.

Over 300 people have officially committed to blogging for Invisible Illness Week so far and many are sharing on their Facebook notes page or other social network. Copen encourages those who do not have a blog to shares something about their illness with Facebook friends, a few Twitter posts, or even in the comments section of the invisibleillnessweek.com web site.
If you would like to join this unique opportunity to blog for awareness about invisible illnesses, see www.invisibleillnessweek.com for details. Invisible

Illness Week’s highlight is a 5-day virtual conference with 20 speakers that can be heard online for free on a topics such as marriage with illness, applying for disability, setting boundaries, and when your child is ill.

Copen is also the founder of Rest Ministries which sponsors the event and IllnessTwitters.ning.com for anyone who “tweets” on health or medical conditions.

Anger drove my life for almost 20 years. The cause: trying to find help for a chronic illness, a disease that develops slowly and lasts a long time. Our medical system is unmatched in its treatment of acute illness, which starts suddenly and ends quickly. Until about 10 years ago, medical professionals didn’t recognize the difference.

Many providers still don’t understand chronic illness. They call patients hyperchondriacs or cyberchondriacs, terms for people excessively worried about their health.

This lack of respect from the medical profession sends medical costs through the roof. I often dream of what I could do with the money I’ve spent on doctors who wasted my time.

Through my struggles I’ve learned that “all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.” (Romans 8:28) Love for my mother and for friends, who also suffer from chronic illnesses, drove me to seek solutions. Though the solutions haven’t eliminated all our problems, they’ve improved the quality of our lives in ways I never imagined.

Now I’m determined to improve the lives of others by conducting research on natural treatments for chronic illness. Thirty years ago a college biochemistry class convinced me that the health care system would move in this direction.

Though money is a temporary obstacle to achieving my goals, I’m not worried. God has helped me overcome much greater challenges. The Bible says, “All things are possible to him who believes.” (Mark 9:23)

But belief must be backed by action. The first step on my journey is to sell enough ebooks and articles to pursue a certificate in health counseling. Work in that field will pay the bills while I complete advanced degrees.

My past is a fading memory. The joy of serving other fills my life, and I am angry no more.

—-
Jacqueline Laurette Jones is author of Unmasking a Diagnosis: How to get Help for a Confusing Chronic Illness Without Filing for Bankruptcy.

Try to picture the American economy permanently stuck in the same place it is right now or in worse condition. That’s what could happen if extremists on either side of the health care debate have their way.

If the president’s enemies and defenders of the status quo win, the familiar cycle will repeat itself. Health care costs will continue to skyrocket and bankrupt individuals, businesses, and government agencies. When businesses move overseas, close their doors, or merge with others, and agencies cut their staffs because of the shrinking tax base, displaced workers will lose their health insurance.

These workers will join the millions of people who develop advanced chronic diseases because they can’t afford preventive or maintenance care. Care for advanced diseases is more expensive than prevention, and some diseases lead to disability. As you can see, the costs of doing nothing are too high.

If supporters of most bills that have passed related committees win, we could have the same result. In spite of the president’s best intentions, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says we would all pay higher taxes to fund these plans. Tax increases would further weaken the economy. Small businesses create most of the jobs in this country. High taxes leave them at a competitive disadvantage.

So, what’s the solution? Instead of wasting time trying fix the bill by Sen. Max Baucus, which has drawn bipartisan criticism, the Wyden-Bennet Bill or Healthy Americans Act is a good place to start. Though legislators have all but abandoned this bill, it’s the only one that has achieved bipartisan support. It’s also short enough for legislators and the public to understand.

Preliminary estimates from the CBO say the bill will pay for itself the first year and reduce federal health care costs afterward. It will also reduce costs for consumers. Isn’t that what we’re trying to do?

To achieve those goals, the bill features:

• a strong emphasis on preventive care with incentives for consumers and fair compensation for providers
• tax incentives for employers to create wellness programs
• premium discounts for participation in wellness programs
• health care exchanges that allow consumers with employer-based plans to choose from affordable individual plans that they can keep if they change or lose their jobs
• additional coverage for catastrophic illnesses that exhaust lifetime limits
• negotiations for fair prices on prescription drugs
• subsidies for insurance on a sliding scale that includes the middle class

The bill also:

• eliminates co-pays for chronic disease prevention and disease management services and related products
• forbids insurances premiums that are based on age, gender, industry, health status, and health history
• addresses long-term care needs
• reduces paperwork for providers
• allows patients in hospice to receive curative care instead of just comfort measures
• requires employers to increase the salaries of workers who move from employer-based coverage to a private plan
• honors existing labor contracts for seven years
• creates a Health Care Standard Deduction on federal income taxes that increases over time for everyone who files a return
• allows medical schools to report what works so new breakthroughs no longer get lost for decades
• emphasizes that only private funds can be used for abortions, a provision that brought conservatives on board
• addresses malpractice reform because the cost of malpractice insurance drives many good doctors out of the industry and increases the costs for all

The bill would be even stronger if it:

• allowed insurers to compete across state lines
• enforced or strengthened anti-trust laws
• prohibited insurers from discriminating against providers who offer alternative medicine treatments
• included an automatic trigger for a public plan in states where insurers don’t provide affordable coverage

Now that doesn’t seem so hard. Why hasn’t a sensible plan like this been accepted by the majority of legislators?

Conservatives and Progressives both dislike that the bill requires everyone to have coverage.  Conservatives believe this provision is unconstitutional. Progressives believe insurance companies are the root of all evil. The mandate may be unnecessary with the bill’s subsidies and emphasis on prevention.

Progressives also dislike the bill’s incentives to move people from public to private plans. In spite of the criticism hurled at private insurance companies, public programs have weakened both the health care system and the national economy. Capitalism drives efficiency and creates jobs in this country. It works on the law of supply and demand. Public programs decrease both. They also cause smaller insurers (and other businesses) to merge and go out of business because the pool of customers is too small. If we move more people into the private system and enforce anti-trust laws, smaller companies should be able to provide real competition.

Now that we’ve found a workable solution, can we stop calling each other names, pass something, and move on to dealing with other important issues. Our economy is going flat while we’re out here fighting like children.

—-
Jacqueline Laurette Jones is author of Unmasking a Diagnosis: How to get Help for a Confusing Chronic Illness Without Filing for Bankruptcy.