A Guide to Predicting Your Medical Future

Nins @- Where are you getting your information from? I'd like to read further

Did you know that if McCain is elected you will have to pay income tax on the value of the medical insurance that your employer gives you? Worse still, he is offering a tax break for people who pay their own insurance, BUT only $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families.

Let's say you have a family of four. Your insurance policy costs would be at least $1,500-2,500 per month under a self-pay plan, which cost more than employer group plans. So, you pay $18,000 -$30,000 per year for insurance, and you get to deduct only $5,000 of that. If you paid $25,000 for you insurance, you would be out of pocket $20,000 per year. This is FAR WORSE than the current system, where if you are self employed you can deduct 100% of you medical insurance costs.

So, if you're not self employed, you would stick with your Employer's plan. Employer plans for a family of four have a value of $900-$1,500 per month totaling 10,800-$18,000 per year. Surprise! On April 15th, you owe tax on all of that as INCOME to you. Say your bracket is 25%, and the value of your Employer medical plan is $14,000. You will OWE THE IRS an additional $3,500, and that's ON TOP of whatever monthly premium you already pay to your employer for your insurance.

Many analysts say that McCain's new rules would encourage employers to stop offering health benefits. If that happened, then far fewer Americans would be insured than are insured today, because what family of four can afford $18,000-$30,000 out of pocket per year for self-pay health insurance?

Furthermore, McCain's plan does not require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions of people who self-pay their insurance. People under employer group plans have all of their pre-existing conditions covered. This is a hugely unfair aspect of the current system. Insurance companies can afford to cover the pre-existing conditions of the much larger pool of people with group insurance, but they refuse to pay the pre-existing conditions on the smaller pool of self-pay customers. They have been allowed to price gouge the self-pay customers, which is a form of market manipulation that should be illegal.

So let's say one of your kids had diabetes and you have high blood pressure, then your employer stops offering insurance. You now have to buy your own, but you and your child are INELIGIBLE due to pre-existing conditions. Oh, yeah, they will let you buy the insurance, but you can't use it for any pre-existing condition until you have paid on time every month for two years. And you know what happens at one year and 11 months? You get a letter saying your policy has been cancelled. I have many patients this has happened to.

McCain's plan SUCKS.

It does nothing to help middle class working Americans afford or obtain medical insurance. In fact, it makes the current system WORSE.

Oh, and let's put eating disorders vs obesity into perspective. Roughly 7 million people have eating disorders in the US. In contrast, 25% of AMericans are obese. That's 75 MILLION people. Which do YOU think is the bigger heath risk.?

The article also left out skin cancer screenings. People 20-40 should have a clinical skin exam at least every 3 years, people 40+ should have one annually, and all people over the age of 20 should be doing montly self-exams. Kind of a big oversight IMO.

Coronary heart/artery disease is not ONLY a genetic disease. It is a well-known fact that many things can contribute to the health of your blood vessels and heart. Coronary artery disease comes about when plaque forms and builds on the arteries. Although people with genetic predisposition can often build the plaque more quickly, genes are not the only factor. Diet, exercise, and a whole host of other factors also play a role. I'm not sure why hamidbak is so sure that CAD and gum disease are not related, but researchers (yes many researchers, and yes they did medical research studies) have found that people with periodontal disease are almost two times as likely to suffer from coronary artery disease as those without periodontal disease. Whether it is a direct cause-and-effect is not certain, but I think that results like that would make me want to brush my teeth and get my cavities taken care of. How about you?

"Just A": Since you do not know whether I am a doctor or not, and what my medical/research background is, perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss what I said. At NO point in my message did I say that girls should skip exams. I was simply relating the general consensus among GYNs in regards to when you need to get a pap. I believe I suggest that MOST women should get yearly exams and paps. Secondly, I find it interesting that you said your "precancerous cells" have been developing for nearly 10 years. Most cancer cells take time to develop, and often cancer is not discovered on paps, but instead when a woman notices a change (bloating, postmenopausal or abnormal bleeding, etc.) and further tests are done. So again, I reiterate: 18 is the usual age that is suggested for women to begin annual exams with paps. Most women will benefit from yearly paps. However, there are some women who are at such a low risk for GYN cancers and ailments, that skipping the pap (WHILE STILL HAVING THE ANNUAL EXAM) is not considered dangerous or even abnormal.

As a reader, I was shocked to hear that my precancerous cells that were found from my last pap have probably been developing for darn near 10 years. Ivhie, I think you should keep your advice to yourself when it comes to not having yearly paps. I do have yearly paps, and even I still got caught up. Just imagine if two years from now, a friend of yours is starting chemotherapy for cervical cancer because she listened to you and skipped one of her exams. If any of you are not physicians, whether it be medical/dental or whatever the like DO NOT tell your fellow bloggers to skip exams.

I'll post this separate from my original reply just for peace of mind. I noted some confusion regarding the age to start getting pelvic exams and how often. The article was not very good at explaining it, so here's my attempt. 18 is the usual age to suggest that a girl begins GYN exams if she is sexually active. If she is not sexually active, GYN exams can begin either when she reaches 21 or when she becomes sexually active, whichever comes first. As for the differences in how many years should be between GYN exams, this is also depedent on the person. Most GYNs will tell you that routine annual exams are important. Most women should go by that. However, in a case where a woman has never been sexually active, or has had several yearly exams (including paps) that come back normal and she is monogamous, it wouldn't be as important to have a yearly pap. You should probably always try to get some exam or physical annually, but yearly paps aren't always necessary. Does that clear it up some?

get a life? hummmm sounds negative to me.