Health Care: Red vs. Blue

March 6th, 2007

A tale of two citizens

My grandmother was just diagnosed with a rare illness requiring medicine that costs $700 a month. Since this medicine is not covered by insurance – and since she and my grandfather already spend much of their income on medicine and health care – she was forced to go begging to the drug’s manufacturer for access to the medicine. It looks, so far, like the drug manufacturer is going to help her out. That’s not yet confirmed, though.

A few days ago, I read a news story about a twelve year old boy who died from – of all things – complications from an untreated toothache. The kid died because his family did not have access to proper dental care.

Twenty-first century America

When I was little, I remember hearing many things about what the twenty-first century would be like. Americans would drive to work in flying cars. We’d deal with cancer, the common cold, and hair loss with simple pills. Life would be great!

Well, this is America. This is the twenty-first century. I never really expected the flying cars to materialize. But I never, ever expected that in the America of the twenty-first century, our elderly would go begging to corporations for medicine and children would die from lack of basic medical care. I never dreamed of a twenty-first century America where 15.7 percent of Americans are uninsured and have limited or no access to basic care.

How did we come to this? We certainly seem to spend enough money on health care – more per capita than just about anyone else in the world. That includes, by the way, countries that provide medical care for all their citizens.

Fixing the health care system should be a priority in this country. The two stories above should not happen in America. I can’t be the only one who finds the state of health care in this country to be a moral outrage. This is America, and we’re supposed to be better than that!

The Red vs. the Blue

Health care in this country is an important issue to me, and I hope that it’ll be an important issue the next time presidential elections come around. With that in mind, I decided to check out the campaign web sites of several presidential hopefuls to see where they stand.

Here are the Republican hopefuls:

Rudy Giuliani

Giuliani’s campaign website doesn’t say much about health care. It doesn’t say much about any other issues, either. If you want to know his position, you will probably have to go elsewhere.

Giuliani does mention (look at the very bottom of the page) that he was involved in a program called HealthStat, aimed at "identifying unenrolled children eligible for health insurance".

Mitt Romney

Romney has a page dedicated to health care. He tell us

The health of our nation can be improved by extending health insurance to all Americans, not through a government program or new taxes, but through market reforms.

I’m having real trouble translating this as anything other than "Shut up and take what scraps the market throws you". Just what sort of market reforms are we talking about here? Would it be too cynical of me to assume he means a tax cut of some kind, like Bush proposed in his recent State of the Union address?

It’s a conservative idea, insisting that individuals have responsibility for their own health care. I think it appeals to people on both sides of the aisle: insurance for everyone without a tax increase.

Maybe this is a silly question, but who is going to pay for insurance for everyone? Or is Romney redefining "everyone" as "everyone who can afford health insurance"?

(If Romney was advocating some sort of single-payer system, his last sentence might make some sense. We pay a lot to middlemen – insurance companies – now. If we got that money back, we might end up with more money in our pockets even if our taxes were nominally higher. But I don’t think that’s where Romney is heading. After all, Romney’s made it clear that he’s not interested in any kind of government involvement.)

John McCain

McCain doesn’t have a page on his site dedicated to health care. He does have a page on Human Dignity & the Sanctity of Life – which would seem related. Alas, it’s only McCain’s position on abortion, gay marriage, stem cells, and the evils of the internet. I did find one interesting quote:

The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society by strengthening faith-based, community, and neighborhood organizations that provide critical services to pregnant mothers in need. This work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion.

This isn’t very encouraging, unless these armies of compassion are in the business of providing health care for these children once they’re out of the womb. They didn’t do squat for that kid who died from a toothache.

On to the Democrats:

Hillary Clinton

Clinton’s got a press release up that tells us

Passage of a universal health coverage plan will be one of my top priorities as President. It is time for bold yet practical solutions and I will use today’s encouraging news to continue my efforts to build support for universal health care.

Clinton’s heart looks like it’s in the right place. She recognizes that the system is broken, and that universal care is something we need. But she’s not filling in any details at this point.

(I can’t say I blame her for lack of detail right now.)

Barack Obama

Like Clinton, Obama has called for universal health care. He also has a page on health care on his site.

The United States is one of the wealthiest nations in the world, yet more than 46 million Americans have no health insurance. Too many hard-working Americans cannot afford their medical bills, and health-related issues are the number one cause for personal bankruptcy. Promoting affordable, accessible, and high-quality health care is a priority for Senator Obama, who is a member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

Also like Clinton, his page doesn’t go into any specifics on how he plans to provide universal care. The rest of the page dwells on side issues (lead paint, information technology, hospital report cards, etc.). I’d love to see some details on what he plans to do.

John Edwards

Like the other Democrats, Edwards favors of universal health care. Unlike the other Democrats, he’s given us a few of the details on his plan.

Edwards proposes to first require employers to either provide health insurance or partially pay for it, create “Health Markets” to help insured folks have more bargaining power, and to eventually require everyone to buy health insurance. The poor would be covered under an expanded Medicare.

I’m not sure whether the Edwards plan would work, but he’s at least given us something to talk about. For instance, doesn’t the need for people to purchase different insurance plans add unnecessary layers (and costs) to the process of getting health care? I see our system of many providers of health insurance – each with their own policies and paperwork – as part of the problem, not part of the solution. Also, it’s in a for-profit insurer’s interests to take as much money and pay for as little care as possible. (My current insurer excels at this.)

I also don’t care for the association of health care with employment. Why should a pottery shop, for instance, have to worry about dealing with health care? What happens to my care if I want to, say, change careers and start a small business? Wouldn’t our businesses be more competitive if they didn’t have to worry about providing health care themselves?

Perhaps, though, the Edwards system is meant as a transition from the gigantic mess we have now to a system that at minimum guarantees access to care for all Americans. That’d definitely be a step in the right direction.

Summing up

It looks like the major Republicans are (at best) indifferent to universal health care. This might be my cynical side speaking again, but I think the Republicans are more interested in cutting taxes than anything else. Health care just isn’t on their radar – unless it’s used as a lever for more tax cuts.

The major Democrats acknowledge that there’s a real issue with health care, but aren’t as yet providing much information on how they intend to solve it (John Edwards excepted). But it’s early. Perhaps as the campaign goes on, we’ll get more details on the Democratic plans. And maybe the Republicans will propose something more meaty than tax cuts.

If any of you readers have some more information on any of these candidates’ positions on health care and their plans to fix it, leave me some links. I’d be interested in reading them! (The same goes for positions from candidates that aren’t as well-known as the ones I’ve mentioned. I’d be interested in reading what they think, too!)

Friday cat: Head rush!

March 2nd, 2007

[Head rush!]
Ash: When I do this, the blood goes right to my head! Awesome!

Friday Cate: Bald and Balder

March 2nd, 2007

Bald and balder.

[Bald and balder]

… but which is which?

The benefits of religion

March 1st, 2007

I’ve recently been reading The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. One criticism of Dawkins is that he doesn’t recognize enough of the good that religion does for society.

For example, here is an example of the good religion does that, as far as I know, is completely omitted from The God Delusion:

“Cleaning the toilet to attract luck” published this month is the latest in a series of books advising readers on how to attract good fortune using a brush and an array of cleaning fluids.

[…]

The books are inspired by Buddhist teachings and feng shui, a traditional Chinese belief that people’s fortunes are determined by their surroundings.

How can Richard Dawkins simply ignore the vast benefit to society that clean toilets provide? Isn’t a holy war now and then a small price to pay for a sparkling, sanitary crapper?

Dawkins fans might retort that this particular article was published well after The God Delusion went to press. Well, that’s no excuse.

The idea that a clean toilet can bring good fortune, or even make you more beautiful, has existed in Japan for many years, according to Yuka Soma of Makino Publishing in Tokyo, editor of one of the toilet books.

Such clear, unmistakable benefit from religion. It amazes me that Dawkins is unable to see it!***

***For the humor impaired, take a close look at the category where this post is filed. Got it? Good.


Thanks to quork, a commenter over at Pharyngula for the link.

All wet

February 26th, 2007

I have often joked that, in addition to fume hoods, chemistry laboratories come equipped with giant invisible brain vacuums mounted above the door. These giant vacuums suck the common sense right out of students’ heads as they walk into the laboratory.

How else can we account for the fact that many students lose all common sense while they’re in the lab?

Here’s an example. We’re performing a specific heat lab in my introductory chemistry lab. Students heat up a metal sample by placing it into a test tube suspended in boiling water. Since the water is boiling, the metal evnetually reaches the same temperature as the boiling water: 100oC. The metal is then put into a cup which contains a known amount of room temperature water. The students then measure how much heat goes from the metal sample to the room temperature water.

The lab manual asks students a queston: Why is the metal sample placed into a test tube and then lowered into the boiling water rather than being placed directly in the boiling water?

Putting the metal sample directly into the water – obviously – gets it wet. Transferring hot water along with the metal sample to the cup will make the temperature inside the cup go up more than expected, and the energy calculated will be too large.

One student had some trouble with the answer, and asked for a hint. But the problematic part of the answer might not be what you think …

Me: So, how is the metal sample going to be affected if you put it directly into the boiling water instead of the dry test tube?

Student: I don’t know.

Me: Okay. Hmm … Let’s say you’re riding in a boat and you fall overboard. What do you get?

Student: You get … tired? From swimming?

Me: How about this? You jump into the pool. How are you different after you jump into the pool from the way you were before you jump in?

Student: You’re … wet?

Me: Good. So now all you need to think about now is how that metal sample being wet with hot water before you put it into the cup would affect your results.

Stupidopedia

February 21st, 2007

There’s a new web encyclopedia in town: Conservapedia, which seems to be trying to position itself as a “Fox News” version of Wikipedia. In other words, it caters to people who call themselves conservatives.

I think they’ve got the branding all wrong. If the site’s serious – and not just meant as a silly jab at conservatives – they ought to call it “Stupidopedia: Two-bit articles for two-bit minds”. Am I being harsh?

Here are some samples. I’m a chemist, so I’ll look up some simple chemistry-related topics.

Here is the entire, unedited Conservapedia entry for water.

Water is and oderless, tasteless, colorless substance. Its chemical formula is H2O. (That is two hydrogens and one oxygen. I apologize for the lack of subscipts.)

Here’s the atom

An atom is the smallest unit chemical matter in creation. The word atom comes from the Greek term for indivisible, átomos. There have been many ideas about how atoms may look. The current one is called the Quantum Mechanical Model, and is very complex.

Who writes this crap? Fifth graders? Compare with the Wikipedia entries for water and atom, which are just a bit more useful and well-edited.

I think the best chemistry Conservapedia article I’ve seen so far, though, is one that was discovered by The Disgruntled Chemist: The law of mass conversation. Do conservatives not know how to spell the word “conservation”? 🙂


If the site wasn’t satire before, it’s satire now. Some folks have been spicing the entries up a bit. Now, the “The Law of Mass Conversation” entry says

Matter cannot be created (except by the Almighty during the Genesis creation event) or destroyed (except by the Almighty at the End of Days), it can only change form.

Curse you, evolution!

February 19th, 2007

This is the second time in about a month than I’ve been infected by one of these annoying noroviruses.

The symptoms of norovirus illness usually include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and some stomach cramping. Sometimes people additionally have a low-grade fever, chills, headache, muscle aches, and a general sense of tiredness. The illness often begins suddenly, and the infected person may feel very sick.

No kidding … I get up to get ready for my morning classes, and … blam! Instant illness.

Anyone can become infected with these viruses. There are many different strains of norovirus, which makes it difficult for a person’s body to develop long-lasting immunity.

Curse you, evolution, for making so many different strains of this bug!

Science knowledge in America

February 18th, 2007

Good news, everyone!

A new study shows that Americans of 2005 (28%) are much more likely to understand science articles in the news than Americans of 1988 (10%). The study’s author says that the major reason is that more colleges have basic science courses as an entry requirement.

I’ll buy that line of argument. Put more people through basic science courses early, and at least some of it will stick. More people with some scientific knowledge is certainly a good thing. But there’s one little problem – there’s also the issue

that people are giving increasing credence to pseudoscience such as the visits of space aliens, lucky numbers and horoscopes.

Why?

One problem, [Carol Susan Losh of FSU] said, is that pseudoscience can speak to the meaning of life in ways that science does not.

What, does no one read Carl Sagan anymore?

I’m not sure I buy that belief in pseudoscience is up because of some sort of search for the meaning of life. Wasn’t that need just as real in the past as it is today? I might be inclined to buy into the idea that, since pseudoscience is all over the web, people are more exposed to nonsense than they ever were previously.

As silly as I think astrologers and people who claim to talk to the dead are, I don’t worry about them that much. Why? Mainly because most practitioners of pseudosciences like astrology aren’t seeding school boards with candidates to try to sneak astrology into the science classroom.

But there’s one pseudoscience out there whose practitioners can’t keep their mitts off the science curriculum. Creationism.

Back to the article …

[…] there also has been a drop in the number of people who believe evolution correctly explains the development of life on Earth and an increase in those who believe mankind was created about 10,000 years ago.

(emphasis mine)

To believe that the world / mankind was “created” six to ten thousand years ago, you have to throw away the foundations of almost all the sciences. Fundamental facts and theories in chemistry, physics, geology, biology, etc. are simply incompatible with the young Earth viewpoint.

And the numbers of these people are growing? That’s a frightening thought!

Peach nuts

February 18th, 2007

In South Carolina, we might send nutty people to the psychiatric wards for treatment. But the ones who are incurably insane? The ones who have no hope of ever living in reality again? We send them to the State House.

We are not alone in this practice.

Let me introduce you to Georgia representative Ben Bridges.

The Anti-Defamation League is calling on state Rep. Ben Bridges [Republican, of course] to apologize for a memo distributed under his name that says the teaching of evolution should be banned in public schools because it is a religious deception stemming from an ancient Jewish sect.

The memo, sent to lawmakers across the country over Bridges’ signature, tells readers to go to fixedearth.com, which is probably the third most insane site on the whole Internet. Here’s a sample (original here) of the content of the site Ben Bridges apparently wanted lawmakers to see. I’ve removed the formatting to save your sanity.

From those years on through Newton’s mathematical inventions and overloaded gravity theory…through lawyer Lyell’s factless Uniformitarian Geology…to Darwin’s mythology (which gave wings to Marx’s and Freud’s and Dewey’s deviltry)…to Einstein’s Cabalistic Relativism and Zionism…to LeMaitre’s and Gamow’s and Penzias’ Big Bangism…to Extraterrestrialist extradinaire Sagan’s programming of NASA’s computers…to Goldin’s controlling philosophy for the Space Program which he officially named the “Origins Program” and defined as “a search for man’s cosmic roots”…

…From all of this and a hundred more examples from Copernicus to Wickramasinghe and back, the “restructuring of mathematics” into an “art form”… the recent fraudulent use of computer-programmed communications technology… the development of near-instantaneous tele-communications worldwide…have all worked together to progressively shrink the world into today’s virtual Global Plantation. In this environment, news, academia, and other media-managed outlets continually bow the knee to the Evolution and Big Bang Idols while simultaneously dumbing-down whole populations with moronic entertainment drivel laced with amoral and sexual perversion themes and punctuated with violence and horror….

On the other hand, near total censorship of information and entertainment upholding Christian values and Biblical teachings is in effect in the schools and everywhere else where belief systems are molded and were once reinforced in once Christian nations. This combination of forces that has nearly destroyed the Biblical foundation of the best parts of Western civilization is rooted and grounded in the mythical evolutionary Origins fundamentals imposed upon the world by “science falsely so called” (e.g., “Hitler, Stalin…”). This false science Idol has birthed and now nurtures the Kabbalist mythology a 15 billion year evolution of the universe, the earth, and all life forms including mankind. This Idol has almost succeeded in making its “creation scenario” the foundation of all “knowledge” which determines modern man’s behavior in all areas of life.

On second thought, it’s probably not enough to remove just the formatting to save your sanity. I apologize; the text alone is enough to induce migraines. 🙂

Bridges, after he was caught distributing this hateful nonsense, denied having anything to do with the memo. Of course, it came from his office – over his signature.


The two sites on the Internet that are more insane than fixedearth.com?

Enjoy!

Friday cat: Soft and crafty

February 16th, 2007

Everyone knows that cats love anything made of cloth.

[Tom and fabric]
Tom: Soft and crafty

… but did you know that cats like to make their own quilts?