Data highlight need for reform

By Nicole Lucht (contact), In Business reporter

Fri, Jul 3, 2009 (3 a.m.)

Still skeptical of the nation’s need to reform its fragmented health care system?

The federal government, in releasing a compilation of Nevada statistics, labeled the Silver State’s quality of care as “weak,” and its preventive care “deficient.”

Consider these Nevada figures released by the feds:

• 1.6 million people receive health insurance from their employers, but that number is declining — just 64 percent were covered in 2007.

Much of the decline comes from workers at small businesses, which make up 73 percent of businesses in this state. Just 44 percent of them offered health benefits in 2006.

• Businesses and families pay a hidden health tax of $1,300 per year on premiums to subsidize costs incurred by those without health insurance. Of the people who are uninsured (18 percent of Nevadans), 70 percent of them are in families with at least one full-time worker.

• Premiums for families average $11,276, about the annual salary of a full-time minimum wage job, and since 2000, those premiums have increased by 61 percent.

• 14 percent of middle-income families spend more than 10 percent of their income on health care, another 14 percent of people report not visiting a doctor because of its high costs.

• There is limited choice for health insurance in the state. Sierra Health Services, a subsidiary of UnitedHealthcare, controls 29 percent of the health insurance offered in the state. The top two insurance providers control 57 percent of the market share.

• Those with preexisting conditions have even more limitations. Premiums vary based on demographic factors and health status, and coverage can be denied completely in some cases.

It worries me when I hear people such as former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, once slated as President Barack Obama’s health czar, say he gives this Congress and administration a 50-50 shot at actually reforming the system.

Republicans object to a public health insurance option, saying it would financially devastate private health insurance companies.

But others, such as the public plan advocacy group Health Care for America Now, will be heading to the many Independence Day celebrations to gather signatures on petitions to present to Congress, said Theresa Navarro, the group’s state director.

She said that although Reps. Dina Titus and Shelley Berkley support the public plan, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid still hasn’t pledged his support. The group hopes to deliver the petitions to him personally, she said.

Those affiliated with private insurance companies argue that a public plan would affect those with health insurance they would like to keep. But it would be an option for the consumer, the same concept these for-profit companies say they are trying to preserve by removing the government option.

This is much bigger than if you, as an individual, are satisfied with your level of care. I typically try to avoid cliches, but not today. What is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander.

Yes, you may enjoy your health insurance plan, especially if your employer can still afford to cover its ever-increasing costs, and if you, as the employee, can still afford to pay its premium. But there are many out there not as fortunate as you or me. And when

they get sick and visit their primary care doctor — the costly emergency room — guess who pays for all that? That’s right. You and me.

In other news:

Nevada Cancer Institute physicians and scientists recently published a study showing that among 11 blood tests, the CellSearch Circulating Tumor Cell assay and the lactate dehydrogenase test provide the most prognostic information for prostate cancer patients starting a new line of therapy.

The study, “Circulating Tumor Cells in Patients With Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Baseline Values and Correlation with Prognostic Factors,” was published in last month’s issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, a journal that focuses on cutting-edge biomarkers.

The paper details the use of the assay in 100 patients with prostate cancer who are no longer responsive to hormonal therapy.

“This simple blood test helps guide therapeutic decision making, helping us to identify patients at higher risk from prostate cancer death,” said Dr. Oscar Goodman, assistant member of the Clinical Oncology Department, in a statement. “It also predicts which patients are at risk of having cancer that has spread and can be picked up by scans.” Goodman is Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman’s son.

Nine physicians and scientists with the study worked at the institute during the research stage: Goodman, Louis Fink, James Symanowski, Bryan Wong, Beth Grobaski, David Pomerantz, Yupo Ma, David Ward and Nicholas Vogelzang.

Nicole Lucht covers health care, workplace, energy and banking issues for In Business Las Vegas and its sister publication, the Las Vegas Sun. She can be reached at 259-8832 or at nicole.lucht@lasvegassun.com.