|
|
Health Care PRESS ROOM |
|
|
|
How We Pay for Health Care: Let's pare down the paperwork
Submitted by John R. Graham on 11.29.2005
Doctors at UCSF's Institute of Health Policy Studies confirmed this month that California's health-care system suffers from an acute case of clogged arteries. In a study of spending by physicians and hospitals, lead author James G. Kahn revealed that 21 percent of their costs go to billing and insurance-related expenses.
HSAs Must Not Be A Casualty Of Tax Reform
Submitted by Sally C. Pipes on 11.27.2005
The President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform unloaded 272 pages of analysis and recommendations to reform the federal tax code. Like any major effort, it offers something for everyone to love and something for everyone to hate.
To preserve supply and innovation, don’t let feds negotiate drug prices
Submitted by Benjamin Zycher on 11.22.2005
With growing political pressures to find savings in the budget, many now argue that the federal government ought to negotiate the prices to be paid for prescription drugs under the Medicare Modernization Act (MMA), claiming that the law as now written prevents such negotiation.
Direct-to-consumer drug ads advance nation's health
Submitted by Peter J. Pitts on 11.16.2005
In September 2003 I was an associate commissioner at the Food and Drug Administration and served as a panelist at a two-day public hearing on pharmaceutical direct-to-consumer advertising.
California's tax on health-care savings
Submitted by John R. Graham on 11.13.2005
Next year, about one-third of employers in the United States will offer health savings accounts, according to a survey by Buck Consultants. Health savings accounts have existed for less than two years and are a significant innovation in consumer-directed health care. With a health savings account, the patient, not an insurance company or government bureaucracy, controls money spent on ordinary health care. This change is certain to bring better value and more satisfied patients.
Head-to-Head Drug Trials at Ballot Box
Submitted by John R. Graham on 11.9.2005
On November 8, Californians will enjoy a rare opportunity to influence the price of prescription drugs in the Golden State. Both Propositions 78 and 79 aim to lower prescription prices for needy Californians. The measures offer starkly different visions of the appropriate relationships between patients, the state, and drug makers. Only one will succeed.
Battle of the drug-discount plans
Submitted by Benjamin Zycher, Ph.D. on 11.5.2005
Proposition 78 will increase drug access and reduce drug prices for those in need precisely because it will enable the drug producers to make more money, by discounting drugs for those less fortunate without being forced to offer the same discounts to the federal government. Prop. 79 explicitly would reduce drug access for the needy in an effort to subsidize the middle class, and it would engender a tidal wave of litigation.
Drug advertising does not raise prices
Submitted by Peter J. Pitts on 11.3.2005
Dave Peyton's recent column, "Advertising drugs raises drug prices," on Oct. 28, repeats a lot of rhetoric while ignoring a lot of facts.
FDA, the Internet, and Medical Devices
Submitted on 11.1.2005
In all of the excitement about the online consumer marketplace for medical device companies, FDA compliance is a question that continually arises. Understanding of exactly which regulations apply specifically to online consumer advertising by device companies has been somewhat elusive. This is justifiable, for it is an intriguing, if not murky, subject, and, on the part of FDA, very definitely a work in progress.
|
|
|
 |
