NYT: BigInsurance very worried about the "disease" model they created (LOL!!)
Mort Zuckerman
lPick...@cdc.gov, Durlan...@yale.edu, Aa...@columbia.edu,
gary_w...@nymc.edu, scientifi...@ostp.gov,
pkru...@princeton.edu, Stanle...@fiu.edu,
emcsw...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@po.state.ct.us, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, brans...@comcast.net,
vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us, freet...@charter.net,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, govern...@po.state.ct.us,
attorney...@po.state.ct.us, randall...@usdoj.gov,
Robert....@yale.edu, edi...@greenwich-post.com,
harol...@yale.edu, sedm...@nswbc.org, rrmcg...@aol.com,
fr...@nytimes.com, dpr...@stmartin.edu, saint....@sbcglobal.net
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, criminal...@usdoj.gov,
karla.d...@usdoj.gov, christophe...@usdoj.gov,
richar...@yale.edu, harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu,
inq...@aldf.com, ly...@idsociety.org, meganm...@theatlantic.com
Subject: NYT: BigInsurance very worried about the "disease" model they
created (LOL!!)
Date: May 10, 2010 3:11 AM
ARTICLE BELOW
============================
Nope. What BigInsurance is really
worried about is the disease model
they created, which is this:
Whoever has a real illness that is
expensive, like Lyme-(say mold, since
that covers moldy-house immune damage)
-induced Chronic Fatigue, Fibromyalgia,
etc, will be diagnosed as "psychiatric."
{There *are* markers of illness in these,
but psychiatrists wouldn't know a marker
of illness from a crayola, despite their
own guidelines mandating medical rule-
outs before DSM-Dx-ing *anything*.]
In the past, BigInsurance did not pay for
"psychiatric" and so everyone who acquired
these fungal antigen-induced immune dysfunction
(Yuppie AIDS), "syndromes" was dropped
from Long Term Disability... and BigInsurance
paid for nothing. Uncle Sam paid it all.
(This is why Blumenthal sued IDSA over
the whore job they were doing for BigInsurance
http://www.actionlyme.org/080430_RICO_CABAL_CAVES.htm
The arrangement between the Patenteers and Kaiser
Permanente, et al didn't make sense unless you
understood their shared lies:
http://www.actionlyme.org/CRYME_DISEASE.htm :
"No one has a disease. Until the vaccine is
ready. Then this non-disease is TERRIBLE!!
Better get the vaccine!!"
Now that there is mental health parity,
KNOWING that once someone becomes brain
damaged from the malpractice treatment
http://www.actionlyme.org/PHILLIPS_JE_PERVERT.htm
(psychotropics) of a real illness (Mold-AIDS
or LYMErix Disease
http://www.actionlyme.org/PAM3CYS_IMMUNE_SUPPRESSION.htm )
they become practically useless, much
like the DCF kidnapped and brain damaged
children:
http://www.actionlyme.org/DCF_GRADUATARDS_SPEAK.htm
"The drugs made mu dumber."
http://www.actionlyme.org/BRAINDAMAGE.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/BUNNEY_YALE_BRAIN_DAMAGE.htm
BigInsurance will *now* get stuck with
an indefinite bill for the malpractice
(real, actual PHYSIOLOGICAL *damages* can
be shown
http://www.actionlyme.org/PHILLIPS_JE_PERVERT.htm )
treatment of the 'Algias and the FibroFeminos
and the hysterials, the Munchers, and the Fatiggers
and the Faggotty Soldiers:
http://www.actionlyme.org/ROCKET_SCIENCE.htm
who, according to Simon Wessely, might as
well be Drama-Queens-Playing-Themselves-
on-Soap-Operas:
http://www.actionlyme.org/PSYCHIATRIC_BS_UPDATE_13_AUG_06.htm
- - -
WESSELY: "One way of doing that is through neuro-imaging, but we
didn’t get the money to do that, so instead we have used sophisticated
neuro-psychological testing," -- NOT SCIENTIFICALLY VALID.
"Those tablets, the NAPS tablets, it’s just not possible to study.
Pesticides, we don’t find evidence. [The antidotes to nerve agents
given to veterans are a problem- KMD] Chemical weapons, well, we
don’t think that for the British armed forces that was a big issue.
But we do think there is a relationship between a particular pattern
of protection and what happened later."-- NOT SCIENTIFICALLY VALID.
---------
I can determine that this is the status
and is what BigInsurance is worried about
from my site statistics.
Big Insurance is very worried about
this, the disease model they created:
http://www.actionlyme.org/CRYME_DSEIASE.htm
taking advantage of the fact that
psychiatrists are idiots, sluts and useful
fools...
Let's see how fast BigInsurance changes
their minds and insists on medical
rule outs before the assigment of
this permanent disability:
DSM diagnoses and their brain damaging
"treatments"
http://www.actionlyme.org/BRAINDAMAGE.htm
FUNNY!!!
Consider how wrong they *all* are about
EVERYTHING: Psychiatrists, IDSA, ILADS.org,
the NIH, duh DCF and their partners, DMHAS,
all of Yale, the CDC....
They're *wrong* about what a disease is.
They're *wrong* to have either kept their
mouths shut (ILADS.org) or lied (IDSA).
And this mental health parity law is
NOT going to provide more income to
the imaginary "MDs" psychiatry, as
they had hoped. Insurance companies
will be *running* from them rather than
ramming their victims through this
true meat-grinder.
Note that PolyGenomics wanted to look
http://www.actionlyme.org/LYM_CORRUPTICUT.htm
for genetic markers of mental disorders
when the only mental disorder there is,
is evil, itself, something acquired in
psych-school training, in the exact same
way people become possessed:
http://www.actionlyme.org/SATANS_SICKOS.htm
"It's ALL ABOUT MEEEeeeee!!!:"
http://www.actionlyme.org/DIABOLICAL_PERVERSION_PSYCHOANALYSIS.htm
"I-Me-My-AM SPECIAL, brilliant!,
magical and talented!, and therefore
a God among men. I-Me-My! take the role
of God as their judge, and permanent
executioner of the sincerest and
most insidious form of discrimination
there is, and the most diabolical form
of medicine- the brain disablers:
http://www.actionlyme.org/BRAINDAMAGE.htm "
All ^^ of the SCIENCE says this is so.
BigInsurance is all over this.
Every day and for many years...
Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org/index.htm
http://www.relapsingfever.org
===========================
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/10/health/policy/10health.html?hpw=&pagewanted=print
May 9, 2010
Fight Erupts Over Rules Issued for ‘Mental Health Parity’ Insurance
Law
By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON — A huge fight has erupted over rules issued by the Obama
administration to enforce a 2008 law that requires equal insurance
coverage for the treatment of mental and physical illnesses.
The fight offers a taste of the coming battle over rules to remake the
health care system under legislation pushed through Congress by
President Obama.
Insurance companies and employer groups are lobbying the White House
to delay and rework the rules on “mental health parity.” Insurers and
many employers supported the 2008 law, but they say the rules go far
beyond the intent of Congress and would cripple their cost-control
techniques while raising out-of-pocket costs for some patients.
Advocates for patients generally support the rules, saying they will
eliminate many forms of insurance discrimination against people with
mental illness. The rules are also supported by the American Medical
Association, the American Psychiatric Association and House Democrats,
most notably Representative Patrick J. Kennedy of Rhode Island.
The goal of the law is to abolish discriminatory insurance practices
frequently applied to coverage for the treatment of mental health
disorders and substance abuse. Under the law, insurers cannot set
higher co-payments and deductibles or stricter limits on mental health
benefits than they set for the treatment of physical illnesses like
cancer and diabetes. For decades, such disparities have been common.
Insurers and employers agree that the law prohibits them from setting
numerical limits on hospital inpatient days and outpatient visits for
mental health services if they do not impose such limits on other
types of medical care.
But insurers say the Obama administration went overboard when it tried
to regulate “nonquantitative treatment limits.” These include the
techniques used by insurers to manage care, the criteria for selection
of health care providers and the rates at which they are paid.
The Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, Aetna and other insurers
have urged the federal government to drop this aspect of the rules.
The purpose of the law was to ensure parity in benefits for patients,
not “parity in provider reimbursement,” said Justine Handelman,
executive director of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association.
But Carol A. McDaid, a lobbyist for a coalition of mental health
advocates, said, “Patients are not getting access to mental health
care because many insurers are not paying enough to cover the cost of
services.”
This may have three consequences for patients and their families,
advocates say. Patients may be unable to find mental health experts in
their health plan’s network of providers. If they go outside the
network, they typically pay more. And if they cannot afford it, they
may not receive treatment at all.
The American Psychiatric Association said that nonquantitative
treatment limits, though less visible than limits on the number of
doctor visits or hospital days, could be more insidious.
Dr. James H. Scully Jr., chief executive of the association, said some
insurers had tried to “circumvent the law” by “imposing new
requirements for prior authorization and the submission of treatment
plans for mental health services where there were no comparable
requirements on the medical-surgical side.”
Insurers strenuously object to one provision of the rules that
requires them to maintain a single deductible for all medical and
mental health services combined. This is a significant departure from
the industry’s current practice of separate deductibles.
As a result of the change, insurers say, many mental health patients
will face higher out-of-pocket costs because the combined deductible
will almost surely be higher than the current one for mental health
services alone.
But in a letter to the administration last week, leading House
Democrats said Mr. Obama was right to prohibit separate deductibles.
The law, they said, was adopted to end such inappropriate distinctions
between medical and mental health care services.
A number of companies like Aetna, Magellan Health Services and
ValueOptions specialize in managing mental health benefits.
In issuing the new rules, the Obama administration praised the work of
such companies, saying they increased the use of mental health care
while holding down costs.
But Pamela B. Greenberg, president of the Association for Behavioral
Health and Wellness, which represents these companies, said the new
rules would “hamstring” their ability to use the tools that have
proved effective in managing mental health benefits.
In a suit over the rules, Magellan and other companies said the
concept of nonquantitative limits was “boundless and ill defined” and
would reach virtually every policy and procedure used to manage mental
health benefits.
One premise of the law is that mental illnesses often have a
biological basis and can be treated as effectively as many physical
ailments. But insurers say it is impossible to use the same techniques
in managing the treatment of colon cancer and schizophrenia, or heart
failure and major depression.
"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci
Greegor
Fight Erupts Over Rules Issued for ‘Mental Health Parity’ Insurance
Law
By ROBERT PEAR Published: May 9, 2010
A version of this article appeared in print on May 10, 2010, on page
A15 of the New York edition.