tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705432279177203509.post169213768202992443..comments2024-03-19T04:04:16.798-07:00Comments on Budd's Blog: United Health Care and Telehealth (2)Buddhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03893224951099943306noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705432279177203509.post-57561441035431906842019-10-26T12:35:15.852-07:002019-10-26T12:35:15.852-07:00USA Google.com I admire this article for the well-...USA Google.com I admire this article for the well-researched content and excellent wording. I got so involved in this material that I couldn’t stop reading. I am impressed with your work and skill. Thank you so much. <a href="http://supplementmed.com/cilexin" rel="nofollow">Cilexin</a><br />THE SMALL BUSINESS NETOWRKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10367211668261090762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8705432279177203509.post-31552052737516582862010-01-03T12:35:58.276-08:002010-01-03T12:35:58.276-08:00Budd--I largely agree with you about technology fi...Budd--I largely agree with you about technology finding its application, although I'd characterize it as 'ready, fire, aim' in that technology has some approximate rationale or reason for being at the start, which usually is not be the way it winds up being used. (As in the telephone was the voice version of the telegraph, TV was radio with pictures, etc.)<br /><br />I also agree about virtual visits being most applicable in rural or less populated (northern MN and western PA come to mind) areas--yet it seems to be taking off in places like NYC where it's viewed as timesaving and fitting into the lifestyle.<br /><br />Why I believe insurers will be toast with non-reform;(disclaimer, from here on in, this is strictly my POV and not related to Telecare Aware, which is a news and information website with opinions expressed mainly by our readers). <br /><br />One, insurers are not constituted for change (your last paragraph.) It's not just UHC, it's Aetna (one of the worst), the Blues etc. They don't get innovation or technology; they've tried to buy it (in the form of health management companies), and driven *them* right into the ground. They are financially driven organizations that are now in phase one of organizational decline--preserve executive salaries, increase rates, slow pay providers, cut staff.<br /><br />Two, their clever politicking and lobbyists are not going to escape the current and highly unpredictable political waves, be it from the left or the 'tea party' populist side kicking everyone's tail. Insurers are nice fat targets, and deservedly so for the most part. It's hard to find anyone to say a good word about them, including physicians. <br /><br />So right now my crystal ball is saying: Congress will play ball with them to get non-reform legislation through and nice fat contributions for the 2010 elections, but then the panels, regulations and executive orders will kick in, all driving to public option/single payer. The insurers, who are losing corporate subscribers daily, will increasingly be seen as 'losers' in the game; the investment markets will reflect this. If non-reform happens, short term they will become increasingly low-pay administrators of increasingly mandated policies. By the end of the game there will be consolidation and increasing unprofitability. My model is what happened in the end stage of airline deregulation--consolidation, unprofitability of the survivors and increasing regulation.<br /><br />Throw cuts in funding and restrictions on Medicare and Medicaid. The squeeze in payments is already affecting companies like CardioNet with proven technologies. It will just work upward from there. <br /><br />On the other hand,if this is stemmed with this year's elections, the insurers may well find themselves (like Big Pharma) on the wrong side because of what they are and their gaming the system. What then happens is anyone's guess. We will see!Donna Cusanohttp://www.telecareaware.comnoreply@blogger.com