Home Government Insurance University of Pennsylvania Research Correlates Medical Expansion with Less Cardiovascular Deaths

University of Pennsylvania Research Correlates Medical Expansion with Less Cardiovascular Deaths

75
0

CNN reported that a University of Pennsylvania researcher helped lead a report evidencing that the Obama-led Medicaid expansion led to less cardiovascular-based deaths from 2010 to 2016.   Apparently, those states that implemented the Medicaid expansion experienced considerably fewer deaths.  When the researchers compared expansion states to non-expansion states, they found that expansion states had 4 fewer deaths per 100,000 than the non-expansion states.  They presented their findings at the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions. Lead researcher Sameed Khatana noted “The overall results of this study are that after expansion of Medicaid in 2014, the areas in the country that did expand had a significantly lower mortality rate compared to if they had followed the same trajectory as the areas in the country that didn’t expand.”

TrialSite News principals spend a lot of time in the Medicaid-based community care coordination software sector.  With considerable experience observing Medicaid-based programs in action, we overall suspect that the loss of coverage for the poor, minorities and vulnerable populations is not a good trend under the current administration.

We suggest that Americans get very cognizant of their healthcare situation.  We face a burgeoning obesity, cardiovascular, NASH and type 2 diabetes crisis of unprecedented proportions.  Already we have about 72 million on Medicaid and up to 60 million on Medicare. If we also count VA, DOD and other federal programs over 150 million Americans county on government for health insurance.  You know what this sounds like?  National healthcare.  Why not call it for what it is. Because we are already there—we have more people on government health insurance than most countries have population. But why not reform the existing systems?  Medicaid is a fragmented, piecemeal, federalist maze of different policies, waivers and experiments while Medicare seems to work decently well.  The argument of somehow making this go away is ridiculous. Perhaps there could be a grand experiment in the future—a great bargain between those that are antigovernment and those that are pro government. We could undertake radical reform of public health access and turn it into an agile, efficient reformed program while allowing for private access options.  This editor’s suggestion for a trade off?  We offer a streamlined national insurance but in parallel cut long term capital gains to 5% for 8 years and see if there any takers.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.