JustCare

Tag: Cancer

  • New guidelines on alcohol consumption is likely to expose its many risks

    New guidelines on alcohol consumption is likely to expose its many risks

    I’ve written about the risks of consuming alcohol several times now. Despite the fact that we have been told for decades that a little bit of alcohol can lower the risk of heart disease, there is mounting evidence that you’re better off staying away from alcohol altogether. Isabelle Cueto reports for StatNews on past government alcohol consumption guidelines tainted by the influence of the alcohol industry and new independent guidelines to be released next year.

    Bottom line, the people preparing the research findings on alcohol consumption in the 1990’s were allowed to design the studies, collect the evidence and disseminate the results, allowing for alcohol-industry bias. Now, the guidelines are being updated. And, notwithstanding claims of fewer heart attacks among French people than Americans because they drank wine every day—broadcast on 60 Minutes in the 1990’s—it appears that the research was flawed; the alcohol industry was involved.

    The earlier research did not take account of the people who did not drink because of an illness and other considerations. There was no reason to connect alcohol consumption with better health.

    Cueto explains the tight link between politics and money, which affected the guidelines on alcohol consumption. Congress had created an independent advisory committee in the 1990’s as a result of questions about the alcohol guidelines in the 1980’s. But, it appears that the committee was far from independent. Members had ties to different food industries.

    As recently as 2020, a scientific panel tried to recommend limiting sugar and alcohol intake and federal officials wouldn’t allow it. The US Department of Health and Human Services and the US Department of Agriculture share responsibility for overseeing the recommendations on an alternating basis.

    This time, a new set of committees are overseeing the process, doing independent reviews. Their results will be released in 2025. The belief among independent experts is that the committee members looking at the evidence will recognize the risk of certain cancers and other chronic diseases from any amount of alcohol consumption and likely recommend against consuming any alcohol.

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Life expectancy in US remains lower than all other wealthy nations

    Life expectancy in US remains lower than all other wealthy nations

    Brett Wilkins reports for Common Dreams on new data from the federal government on life expectancy in the US. We continue to live shorter lives than people in every other developed nation. Advocates for a government-run national health care system argue that it’s time that the our government moves away from for-profit health care and guarantees health care for all Americans under one single system.

    Life expectancy in the US is up 1.1 years according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). It was 77.5 in 2022, the most recent year for which we have data. It’s still significantly lower than dozens of other countries.

    Cancer, heart disease, injuries and Covid-19 were most common causes of death in 2022. We lost 1.2 million lives to Covid-19. With guaranteed universal health care, we might have cut that number down by 338,000 to fewer than 900,000 lives, according to one study.

    In 2020 and 2021, US life expectancy fell, in large part as a result of Covid-19. But, in 2019, life expectancy was 1.3 years higher than it was in 2022, 78.8 years. It should go without saying that the US spends significantly more per person on health care than other wealthy countries. Every other wealthy nation has guaranteed health care for all its citizens.

    For-profit health care is not good for patient health. Eagan Kemp of Public Citizen  advocates: “We must keep making the point that profit-driven healthcare is not only worse for patients—it’s a national embarrassment. Our leaders must act to kick insurance companies to the curb and enact Medicare for All now.”

    Not only does guaranteed health care for all deliver longer life expectancies and better patient outcomes overall, it costs a lot less than our profit-driven health care system. The Congressional Budget Office determined that guaranteed health care for all would cost as much as $650 billion less than we currently spend, back in 2020. It also found that without healthcare coverage, 68,000 people in the US die every year. Our health care system also drives millions of families into medical bankruptcy and financial distress.

    In the words of the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal: “There is a solution to this health crisis—a popular one that guarantees healthcare to every person as a human right and finally puts people over profits and care over corporations. That solution is Medicare for All—everyone in, nobody out.”

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Some foods could help reduce your risk of cancer

    Some foods could help reduce your risk of cancer

    Odds are high–more than one in three–that you will develop some type of cancer in your lifetime. You’ve likely been told to avoid certain foods, such as processed meats, processed snacks and sugary drinks. Nikki Campo reports for the New York Times on what you should eat to ward off cancer.

    Of all the foods recommended, garlic is one that you might not realize offers tremendous benefits. To reap these benefits, particularly with regard to stomach and colorectal cancer, you need only eat five cloves of garlic each weak. Raw garlic, in salad dressings and guacamole, for example, is particularly good for you.

    Broccoli and other cruciferous vegetables, such as brussels sprouts, cauliflower and cabbage are all filled with plant compounds that help clear out toxins in your body. They protect against ongoing harm to your cells. Some say that they help defend against prostate, colorectal, bladder and breast cancer. Eat a lot of them each week, at least four or five servings.

    Eating a lot of tomatoes is linked to a reduced likelihood of prostate cancer. Tomatoes have a powerful antioxidant. Cooked tomatoes with olive oil appears to be even better for you than raw ones because the cooking helps our bodies absorb the lycopene, which is the compound that fends off cancer.

    Beans and legumes help give you protein and fiber. Fiber is linked to keeping colorectal cancer at bay. The cells in our colon stay healthy from the fiber that is broken down by the bacteria in our gut. You’ll need to eat 16 ounces of beans, chickpeas and lentils each day to reap benefits.

    Walnuts and other nuts deliver protein and fiber. They are linked to reduced risk of cancers of the digestive system. When you eat a lot of walnuts, your colon wall lining is healthier. You need only eat a handful of nuts each day to reap benefits.

    Berries are filled with antioxidants, such as Vitamin C and flavonoids. They protect your cells from damage and stress, which can make you more susceptible to cancer. If all you eat is four ounces of berries each day, you should reap benefits.

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Will Medicare cover a new cancer screening test?

    Will Medicare cover a new cancer screening test?

    Word’s out. Medicare has a lot of money to spend on medical services, and every corporation with something to sell wants in. Jonathan Wosen reports for Stat News on the latest lobbying efforts by Grail to have Medicare pay for its blood-based cancer screening test. Grail sees the dollar signs from getting Medicare coverage of the test, while Medicare’s approval could drive up Medicare spending for a test that might offer only limited benefits.

    Grail’s cancer screening test allegedly can identify 50 different cancers in people with no symptoms. The test detects bits of DNA. But, how would that help people? How often would people need the test for it to be useful and what would happen after cancer DNA were detected?

    If approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Medicare might cover the Galleri test, which costs $949. The FDA has not yet approved it.  In the last quarter, with the hope of imminent FDA approval, Grail spent $1.07 million pushing members of Congress to support Medicare coverage of this test.

    Medicare is not required to cover all preventive care services, as these services are not considered “medically reasonable and necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of illness or injury or to improve the functioning of a malformed body member.” However, the government has chosen to have Medicare cover a growing list of preventive care services, because preventive services could help bring down people’s  health care costs down the road and save lives.  If Medicare covered the Galleri test, it would be as a preventive care service.

    No one yet knows whether multi-cancer screening tests offer benefits to people without cancer symptoms. Sometimes, cancer lives in your body for decades doing no harm. And, sometimes cancer cells grow so quickly that they are not possible to treat effectively. Time will tell the benefits of the Galleri test and its costs.

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Medicare patients with liver cancer face $10,000 in out-of-pocket costs

    Medicare patients with liver cancer face $10,000 in out-of-pocket costs

    Even with Medicare, out-of-pocket costs for people with liver cancer can be unaffordable. A recent study found that Medicare patients must spend $10,000 out of pocket for medical and hospital care in the first year of treatment. When will Congress focus on bringing down out-of-pocket health care costs?

    About half of people with liver cancer are diagnosed after they go on Medicare. Still, the costs of liver cancer are substantial. Enormous debt and sometimes bankruptcy are likely consequences of liver cancer for people with Medicare. A study author explains that “Financial toxicity of cancer therapy can negatively impact patients, resulting in medical debt and even bankruptcy for some patients.”

    What does Medicare cover? If you have liver cancer, Medicare pays for medical services, hospital care, prescription drugs, hospice care and sometimes also physical therapy, home health care and skilled nursing facility care. But, it does not cover the full cost of your care.

    New treatment options, including new surgeries, radiation-based therapies, thermal ablation, which uses heat to kill the cancer, and immunotherapies, can be very effective. But, they all come with significant costs. And, costs have been increasing significantly since 2015, the most recent year studied.

    The study compared costs for patients with cirrhosis with costs for patients with liver cancer. Costs for cirrhosis patients were much lower than the costs for patients with liver cancer. Patients with liver cancer need additional financial help.

    This study did not look at prescription drug costs for liver cancer patients with Medicare. These drug costs only add to people’s financial burden.

    More people are dying with liver cancer because it often is not detected until late stage. By 2040, liver cancer is predicted to be the third-leading cause of death from cancer.

    In the US, cancer treatment is stunningly expensive. It is expected to rise to $250 billion in 2030.

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Case study: Medicare Advantage delays, denials and consequences

    Case study: Medicare Advantage delays, denials and consequences

    Rick Timmins, a retiree in Washington State, reports the delays and denials he has faced trying to get care while enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan in Washington State. The costs of these delays and denials have been substantial and the consequences severe. What’s worse is that he is locked in to Medicare Advantage, no longer able to switch to Traditional Medicare.

    Many people join Medicare Advantage when they turn 65 in order to save money on the supplemental coverage that is needed to protect themselves financially in Traditional Medicare. They also often save money on prescription drug coverage, which usually is included with Medicare Advantage. What people often don’t realize is that once they’ve been in a Medicare Advantage plan for more than a year, they have no right to buy Medicare supplemental coverage if they want to switch to Traditional Medicare, except in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine and New York.

    Rick Timmins had a rapidly growing painful lump in his ear. But, his Medicare Advantage plan made him wait five months before it authorized him to see a dermatologist. And, when the dermatologist referred him to a surgeon, the Medicare Advantage plan made him wait an additional two months.

    Timmins made countless calls to his Medicare Advantage plan to try to speed up the approval process. But, he could not get a straight answer as to why the prior authorization was taking so long. Customer service could not even find his prior authorization request.

    As it turned out, his Medicare Advantage plan had subcontracted the prior authorization to Optum, another company, without telling him. When he finally learned that this is what had happened, his Medicare Advantage plan could not provide him with Optum’s contact information.

    The Medicare Advantage plan’s website provided inaccurate information about his claims and out-of-pocket costs. He paid $6,570 out of pocket although his out-of-pocket costs were supposed to be capped at $6,500. And, the MA plan’s customer service staff could not explain the frequent claims denials for services he received at the cancer center or his financial liability.

    As a result of all these delays, Timmins’ lump, which turned out to be cancerous, grew larger and became a more aggressive tumor. He needed extensive surgery and immunotherapy over the course of a year to treat the cancer. All this additional treatment cost him more physically, financially and emotionally. He had a longer and painful recovery from a partial amputation of his ear and exploratory surgery in his neck.

    Timmins would like to switch to Traditional Medicare, but he can’t. Insurers offering supplemental coverage to fill gaps in Traditional Medicare will not sell him a policy. And, he does not have a right to it. He is locked in to Medicare Advantage for the rest of his life.

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Cancer patients face particularly severe medical debt

    Cancer patients face particularly severe medical debt

    Noam Levey reports for Kaiser Health News on the particularly severe medical debt people with cancer often bear. Levey profiles a breast cancer patient who faces $30,000 of debt, along with constant threats from collection agencies. She, like many people with cancer, must make tradeoffs that no one should have to make to pay off the debt.

    Cancer kills hundreds of thousands of Americans each year. People with and without insurance, young and old. New treatments are saving more lives but at an extremely high price. More than six in ten people with cancer have had to reduce their spending on necessities like food and clothing because of the high cost of their treatment. One in four of them have been pushed into bankruptcy, been evicted from their homes or had their homes foreclosed on them.

    According to the National Cancer Institute, treating someone with cancer can cost more than $1 million in the first year. On average, it costs $42,000 in the first year. People with Medicare are not spared high out-of-pocket costs. Those with blood cancer typically pay $17,000 of their own money for treatment in year one.

    About 100 million Americans have medical debt. Having cancer has been found to increase your likelihood of medical debt by 71 percent. It also makes it more than twice as likely that you will declare bankruptcy than people without cancer. And, the data show that those with cancer in bankruptcy were more likely to die than those not in bankruptcy.

    People with cancer are more likely than other people with medical debt to owe a lot of money and are also more likely to believe they will never be able to afford to pay off the debt. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that about 20 percent of people with cancer who face medical debt owe more than $10,000.

    High out-of-pocket costs leave patients making unconscionable choices. Many end up forgoing life-saving treatment so as not to incur more costs. Research shows that 18 percent of people on chemotherapy stop treatment. Of those, nearly half stop treatment when their costs rise above $2,000.

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Should you be taking aspirin every day?

    Should you be taking aspirin every day?

    When it comes to health care, everyone needs options tailored to their particular needs. That’s the beauty of traditional Medicare–it is one size fits all, working for everyone, so long as they have supplemental coverage. It’s also why the US Preventive Services Task Force’s recommendation against the use of daily aspirin for most people does not apply to everyone. Should you be taking aspirin every day?

    As reported in Just Care last week, the USPSTF recently recommended against the use of daily low-dose aspirin for most people because it determined that the risk of internal bleeding was greater than the benefits. However, that recommendation is the rule, for which there are likely exceptions. Andrew Chan, the director of cancer epidemiology at the Mass. General Cancer Center and a professor at Harvard Medical School, believes that powerful evidence indicates that low-dose aspirin can be effective in preventing colorectal cancer.

    Chan argues that the USPSTF is wrong to suggest that the evidence of the benefits of low-dose daily aspirin use is inconclusive when it comes to colorectal cancer. Chan’s research team found that people can benefit from taking aspirin if they start before they turn 70 and ward off colorectal cancer. If they start at 70, the data indicates that it might be too late to ward off cancer.

    Chan appreciates that there are serious risks of internal bleeding for some people who take low-dose aspirin daily. The key is to identify those people and make sure that they are not prescribed daily aspirin use. At the same time, Chan believes that low-dose aspirin can have beneficial anticancer effects for some people. It’s important to understand who can benefit.

    Science is evolving so it will likely be possible to understand a lot more about the population who benefits from taking daily aspirin and the population whose health is endangered from daily aspirin intake. Chan would like to see studies that identify biomarkers or another molecular factor that is able to calibrate risks and benefits of aspirin for particular individuals. He says that preventive medicine should be looking into this.

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Beware of hospitals that charge for parking

    Beware of hospitals that charge for parking

    Rebecca Ritzel reports for Kaiser Health News on hospitals that charge steep prices for parking. Consequently, patients with costly conditions who are repeat hospital visitors don’t only have high out-of-pocket costs for their care; hospitals charge them crazy high parking prices. What’s a patient to do?

    Ritzel describes how one hospital charges $28 a day and $27 an hour if you lose your parking ticket. Even cancer patients and patients with other costly conditions must pay these fees. The fees can add up to literally thousands of dollars.

    Of course, patients can sometimes opt to take public transportation to the hospital or ask a friend to drive them. But, that is not always a viable option. Some patients are too sick. And, insurers do not pay parking fees.

    Parking fees can keep patients from getting medical treatments and participating in clinical trials. It’s just too costly. Forty percent of Americans don’t have $400 for a medical emergency. Parking fees are simply the last straw for some people needing medical care.

    Some hospitals waive parking fees to cancer patients requiring certain treatments. One study found that out of 63 hospitals, 20 did not charge parking fees to patients with cancer. But, of those, some did not charge for radiation treatment but did charge for chemotherapy treatment.

    More than two-thirds surveyed charged varying fees. And, they remain an obstacle to care. Hospitals and others are finally looking into this issue. And, some will provide assistance, if asked.

    For now, you can try to get grants for transportation to the hospital. But, that is not an option for most people. Instead, people go without critical care. One study shows that people with cancer can pay $1,680 in parking fees while they are being treated. This needs to end!

    Here’s more from Just Care:

  • Coronavirus: Antibody test won’t always show whether the vaccine offers protection

    Coronavirus: Antibody test won’t always show whether the vaccine offers protection

    The COVID-19 vaccine is helping tens of millions of people, but it does not always offer protection to people with cancer. Stat News reports that people with cancer do not always generate sufficient antibodies to protect them from contracting COVID that other people generate from the vaccine. An antibody test won’t always reveal whether the vaccine offers protection.

    People with cancer have immune systems that are not able to produce as many antibodies after receiving a vaccine that a vaccine delivers to people with uncompromised immune systems. The situation is much the same for people who have had organ transplants and people with some autoimmune diseases.

    So, people who are immunocompromised and get antibody tests might not know whether they are protected from COVID. It is still unclear what level of antibodies is needed for protection of people who are immunocompromised. Cellular immunity might help protect them. So might booster shots and monoclonal antibody infusions.

    For now, people who are immunocompromised should always wear a mask, even if they have been vaccinated. They should maintain a six foot social distance, as should the people who are in their company. Antibody tests should not be relied upon to determine whether they are protected from contracting COVID. More data should be available in the next several months.

    Studies are underway to determine how best to protect people whose systems are immunocompromised and how to gauge whether a vaccine is effective.

    Here’s more from Just Care: