MM_XSLTransform error.
http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/category/hsa/feed/ is not a valid XML document.
DOMDocument::loadXML() [domdocument.loadxml]: Premature end of data in tag comments line 126 in Entity, line: 126
DOMDocument::loadXML() [domdocument.loadxml]: Premature end of data in tag item line 105 in Entity, line: 126
DOMDocument::loadXML() [domdocument.loadxml]: Premature end of data in tag channel line 11 in Entity, line: 126
DOMDocument::loadXML() [domdocument.loadxml]: Premature end of data in tag rss line 2 in Entity, line: 126 in file http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/category/hsa/feed/.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
>
<channel>
<title>Colorado Health Insurance Insider » HSA</title>
<atom:link href="http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/category/hsa/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
<link>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1</link>
<description>Research and discussion of the Colorado health insurance industry and the healthcare crisis in America.</description>
<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:54:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
<language>en</language>
<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<item>
<title>Imaging And Primary Care Doctors</title>
<link>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/28/imaging-and-primary-care-doctors/</link>
<comments>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/28/imaging-and-primary-care-doctors/#comments</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:20:39 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Louise</dc:creator>
<category><![CDATA[HSA]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[Health Care Goodies]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[Humana]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[Providers]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[billing]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[deductible]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[doctors]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[health insurance]]></category>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/?p=1396</guid>
<description><![CDATA[[...] When Jay hurt his knee a couple years ago, an MRI was done prior to surgery. We have an HSA qualified health insurance policy, and at the time our deductible was $3000. So we paid for the MRI ourselves, and it amounted to more than a third of the deductible. And that was after Humana reduced the bill to the network negotiated amount. MRIs have helped to make medicine a much more exact science, but they are not cheap.
It seems that any system that pays physicians - directly or indirectly - to order additional testing will end up with excessive testing, adding to the overall cost of health care. Even doctors with the best of intentions are likely to be swayed by the knowledge that they can boost their paychecks by adding a few MRIs here and there.
I believe that the number of tests a doctors orders should not impact his or her income. And it seems that adding more medical imaging facilities in primary care offices will only increase our already burgeoning health care costs [...]]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just read an article written by Stacey at ACP Internist, talking about how <a href="http://blogs.acponline.org/acpinternist/2009/10/annual-point-when-biz-of-medicine-gets.html">primary care docs are being encouraged to boost their incomes with medical imaging</a>. She notes that some aspects of health care reform proposals – like the medical home model, make it even more attractive for primary care physicians to offer imaging services. And defensive medicine, with “just in case” testing, adds further incentive to include costly testing and imaging for more patients.</p>
<p>When Jay hurt his knee a couple years ago, an MRI was done prior to surgery. We have an HSA qualified health insurance policy, and at the time our deductible was $3000. So we paid for the MRI ourselves, and it <a href="http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2008/01/30/hsas-only-help-if-you-fund-them/">amounted to more than a third of the deductible</a>. And that was after Humana reduced the bill to the network negotiated amount. MRIs have helped to make medicine a much more exact science, but they are not cheap.</p>
<p>It seems that any system that pays physicians – directly or indirectly – to order additional testing will end up with excessive testing, adding to the overall cost of health care. Even doctors with the best of intentions are likely to be swayed by the knowledge that they can boost their paychecks by adding a few MRIs here and there.</p>
<p>I believe that the number of tests a doctors orders should not impact his or her income. And it seems that adding more medical imaging facilities in primary care offices will only increase our already burgeoning health care costs.</p>
<p>I found Stacey’s articles in <a href="http://www.codeblog.com/archives/carnivals/grand-rounds-volume-6-number-6.html">Grand Rounds</a>, hosted in trick-or-treat style over at Code Blog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/28/imaging-and-primary-care-doctors/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>Increased Cost Sharing Reveals The True Cost Of Health Care</title>
<link>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/19/increased-cost-sharing-reveals-the-true-cost-of-health-care/</link>
<comments>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/19/increased-cost-sharing-reveals-the-true-cost-of-health-care/#comments</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:38:35 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Louise</dc:creator>
<category><![CDATA[HSA]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[Health Insurance Reform]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[Individual/Family Health]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[co-insurance]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[colorado]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[copay]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[health insurance]]></category>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/?p=1371</guid>
<description><![CDATA[[...] There's no doubt that a co-insurance based system would make people more aware of what health care actually costs. Nobody should have to devote their life to trying to obtain coverage for a serious medical problem, but on the other end of the spectrum, perhaps nobody should be paying only $15 to see a doctor, and a deductible of a couple hundred dollars a year. [...] ]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to a recent <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/19/news/economy/healthcare_openenrollment_changes/index.htm?postversion=2009101907">CNNMoney article</a>, employees should expect “shockingly” higher health care costs in 2010. The increase is expected to be somewhere in the 10% – 20% range, and will likely come in the form of increased deductibles, higher copays, co-insurance instead of co-pays, and/or a larger share of the premiums being deducted from paychecks.</p>
<p>This will no doubt cause some consternation among workers who see reductions in benefits and increased out-of-pocket exposure, but with the state of the economy and the rising cost of health care, it’s the only avenue that really makes sense for employers. Most companies that offer health insurance benefits do so as a way to attract and retain the best workers they can find, so limiting benefits and increasing the employees’ share of the costs is likely the option of last resort.</p>
<p>But maybe it makes sense, regardless of how well the economy is doing. There’s no doubt that a co-insurance based system, where employees pay a percentage of the charges, rather than a flat copay, would make people more aware of what health care actually costs. Nobody should have to <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/02/pf/too_sick_for_health_care/index.htm">devote their life to trying to obtain coverage for a serious medical problem</a>, but on the other end of the spectrum, perhaps nobody should be paying only $15 to see a doctor, and a deductible of a couple hundred dollars a year. Health insurance plans that cover nearly all costs for their members have the effect of insulating consumers from the true cost of health care. This is especially so if the premiums for the health insurance policy are mostly paid by the employer.</p>
<p>When it comes to things like housing and vehicles and food, most people expect to pay those expenses – which are often quite significant – without assistance from anyone else. It seems to me that health care is equally as important as transportation and shelter, but because we’ve grown accustomed to the idea of someone else paying the lion’s share of the bill (ie, health insurance companies and our employers), we don’t expect our own health care expenses to be as much as we spend on other life necessities like housing and groceries.</p>
<p>For self-employed people, and those who have been buying their own health insurance because they don’t have access to a group plan, high deductibles and annual premium increases are already a fact of life. Most of our clients here in Colorado opt for deductibles in the $1500 – $3000 range, and often choose HSA qualified plans as a way to lower their premiums – with the understanding that they will be taking on an increased portion of the claims if they get sick. But most working Americans get their health insurance through their employers, and have thus been largely shielded from the actual costs of health care and health insurance. Perhaps that is changing now. And perhaps the changes will increase pressure on the health care industry to do something about spiraling costs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/19/increased-cost-sharing-reveals-the-true-cost-of-health-care/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>John Mackey And Health Care Reform</title>
<link>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/09/john-mackey-and-health-care-reform/</link>
<comments>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/09/john-mackey-and-health-care-reform/#comments</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 21:00:50 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Louise</dc:creator>
<category><![CDATA[HSA]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[Health Care Goodies]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[Health Insurance Reform]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[Individual/Family Health]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[coverage mandates]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[health insurance]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[uninsured]]></category>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/?p=1359</guid>
<description><![CDATA[[...] But with any commodity in the marketplace, there will always be people who can't afford it. The life or death nature of access to health care makes it too important to place it on the same shelf as cars and jeans and high-end organic potato chips. It people can't afford (and thus don't purchase) those things, they will still be ok. The same can't really be said for health care. ]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Back in August, when I first read <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html">Whole Foods CEO John Mackey’s WSJ article about health care reform</a>, I did think that it was a little odd for him to be voicing so publicly an opinion that was certain to run counter to the opinions of a large percentage of his store’s clientele. His opinions aren’t radical or unusual – indeed they are shared by a good chunk of the American public. But not necessarily the chunk that shops in his stores. People who shop at Whole Foods don’t <em>have</em> to shop there. They aren’t shopping there because there are no other grocery stores in the area. Or because they have no car and Whole Foods is the closest store within walking distance. And given the left-of-center average demographic of Whole Foods shoppers, I found his public opposition to health care reform to be a bit strange.</p>
<p>I agree with several of the points Mackey made. I agree that HSAs should be available to anyone who wants one. But just having an HSA in place doesn’t mean that a person will have money to fund it; for a lot of people, HSAs won’t make health care any more accessible than it is(n’t) now.</p>
<p>I strongly agree that employer-provided health insurance and individual health insurance should be treated equally as far as taxes are concerned.</p>
<p>I agree that we need tort reform.</p>
<p>I agree that health care costs need to be <a href="http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2007/06/28/transparency-pt3/">much more transparent</a>.</p>
<p>Mackey writes that we should modify the tax code so that people can make voluntary, tax-deductible contributions to help provide care for people who are uninsured. The rainbows and puppies nature of this idea is nice in theory, but I don’t think we want to rely on voluntary donations to pay for the care of 47 million currently uninsured Americans.</p>
<p>His other suggestions – to allow the purchase of health insurance across state lines and to eliminate government mandates from health insurance coverage – are fraught with complications and not nearly as simple as he makes them sound. The number one priority in health care reform needs to be the American people. Yes, there is a lot of special interest involvement in health care, but removing consumer protections that have been won by state insurance commissioners isn’t going to ensure that people have access to quality care. And removing mandates from coverage would result in lower premiums, but it would also mean less coverage, which isn’t necessarily a good trade-off.</p>
<p>As expected, Mackey’s article triggered a firestorm of anger from his base of liberal customers. <a href="http://diseasemanagementcareblog.blogspot.com/2009/10/who-will-flash-mob-public-option-option.html">Jaan Sidorov of Disease Management Care Blog wrote an article</a> about a group that staged a pretty creative demonstration in a Whole Foods store in Oakland. Mackey believes that health care (along with food and shelter) is not a basic right. The protesters – and I think quite a few of Mackey’s customers – feel differently. Mackey is obviously doing well financially, and probably doesn’t have to worry about how he’s going to pay for his own health care. I think it’s a lot easier to say that health care isn’t a right when your own health care is well-secured. Mackey’s belief that health care is best left to the free market makes sense, given his participation – and success – in market economics over the years. But with any commodity in the marketplace, there will always be people who can’t afford it. Especially when the commodity is as expensive as health care has become. The life or death nature of access to health care makes it too important to place it on the same shelf as cars and jeans and high-end organic potato chips. It people can’t afford (and thus don’t purchase) those things, they will still be ok. The same can’t really be said for health care.</p>
<p>I found Jaan’s article in the <a href="http://www.healthbusinessblog.com/?p=2698">Cavalcade of Risk</a>, hosted this week by David Williams at Health Business Blog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/09/john-mackey-and-health-care-reform/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
</item>
<item>
<title>Playing With Fire</title>
<link>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/05/playing-with-fire/</link>
<comments>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/05/playing-with-fire/#comments</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:54:08 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Louise</dc:creator>
<category><![CDATA[HSA]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[Individual/Family Health]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[colorado]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[health insurance]]></category>
<category><![CDATA[uninsured]]></category>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/?p=1355</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I just read this article from NPR and Kaiser Health News about Lyn Robinson, a 52 year old woman who has chosen to be uninsured. Lyn is very healthy. She leads an active life and takes good care of herself. She pays out of pocket for alternative health care like acupuncture and chiropractic care - things that often aren't covered by health insurance policies anyway. [...]]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just read <a href="http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2009/October/04/NPR-voluntarily-uninsured.aspx">this article</a> from NPR and Kaiser Health News about Lyn Robinson, a 52 year old self-employed woman who has chosen to be uninsured for at least the last decade. Lyn is very healthy. She leads an active life and takes good care of herself. She pays out of pocket for alternative health care like acupuncture and chiropractic care – things that often aren’t covered by health insurance policies anyway.</p>
<p>Years ago, she broke her wrist and ended up paying $14,000 out of pocket to get herself put back together. It was expensive, but she figures she’s still come out ahead because she hasn’t been paying thousands of dollars each year in health insurance premiums.</p>
<p>As I read through the article, all I could think was “what if…?” I can empathize with Lyn. I go to great lengths to keep myself and my family healthy.  I understand Lyn’s frustration with knowing that she’s healthier than the average 52 year old, and would thus be subsidizing their care if she buys into a health insurance policy. But if she breaks her back on a ski slope, they will be subsidizing her care too.  The $14,000 bill for her wrist surgeries was no doubt a tough pill to swallow – but what if it had been a $140,000 bill? or a $1,400,000 bill?</p>
<p>At the end of the article, it was mentioned that the process of doing the NPR story made Lyn second-guess her decision to go uninsured, and she’s now shopping around for a high deductible policy… just in case. She had mentioned earlier in the article that she estimates it would cost $500/month for health insurance. She doesn’t live in Colorado, but premiums here are in the same basic ballpark as premiums in other states that use medical underwriting on individual health insurance policies. I checked rates for a healthy, non-smoking, 52 year-old female, and came up with a range of options priced between $200/month and $260/month for a good quality, $5000 deductible, HSA qualified plan (people like Lyn, who rarely need their health insurance and are in good health, are good candidates for high deductible plans).  So hopefully Lyn will get a pleasant surprise when she gets her quotes, and the premiums won’t be as high as she was expecting.</p>
<p>I notice that when I read articles about people who are choosing to go uninsured, they tend to have an example of a medical problem that they have been able to cover by paying the doctor or hospital directly – in Lyn’s case it was the broken wrist.  But what I’ve noticed is that the bills mentioned are usually in the $5000 – $20,000 range. I can’t remember ever reading an article about someone who chose to go uninsured, ended up with a six-figure medical bill, and then paid it off on their own.  I have to imagine most of those cases end in bankruptcy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/10/05/playing-with-fire/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
<slash:comments>