Birth Control Results in Boyfriend Blues?

In the article, "Birth Control Bummer?" it is found that using oral contraceptives results in less attractiveness and the inability of selecting a good mate. According to Dr. Alvergne and Dr. Lumma, when a woman ovulates she becomes more attractive. During ovulation, there is fluctuation in a "woman's facial appearance, vocal pitch, and body odor." As evidence, they found that lap dancers make more money on nights they were ovulating. All of this occurs because the woman's body is letting her know she is fertile and needs to find a mate. When birth control prevents a woman from ovulating, the increase in attractiveness does not occur.

Additionally, the article finds birth control limits a woman's ability to select a genetically ideal mate. It is found that when mates have dissimilar physical characteristics, they have a better chance of producing healthy children. According to a study at the University of Liverpool, when women use birth control, they don't detect these cues and tend to "prefer the odor of genetically incompatible men." However, women who are fertile tend to make the correct choice. They can rely more on their natural instincts.

It is advised in the article that despite these findings, there is no proof birth control will effect women long term. There is no proof that relationships will be worse and people will produce less healthy children if women use birth control.

I thought this article was rather interesting and worthy of consideration. To me, these findings do not seem strong enough for women to start making decisions about whether or not to use birth control. More importantly, I just wanted see if there are any reactions to this article. Do you think these findings are true? Or do you think birth control has no influence on attractiveness and the ability to choose mates?

Foster Kids and Health Insurance Challenges

There is ongoing controversy regarding whether or not a universal health care plan would be the best option for the American economy. I came across an article from CNN.com entitled, "Foster kids face loss of health coverage at 18". The article presented another issue effected by a new health care reform bill, but this specific issue is unique and not a typical controversy in the health care debate. The issue revolves around foster kids; foster kids will lose their health insurance covered by the state once they turn 18.

The article focuses on Jourdane Hamilton, an 18-year-old from Rockville, Maryland, who has been in the foster care system for over two years. Jourdane plans to attend Montgomery College on a football scholarship. However, he is worried that he will not be able to play football because he will not be insured, ""Football is very physical. In every single play you have to make sure you're protecting yourself because the game is ruthless and there is a high possibility of getting hurt," said Hamilton. "If I didn't have health care coverage I don't think I would be able to put myself in high-risk situations." If Jourdane can not afford health insurance, than he will not play football, which in turn, will eliminate the possibility of him going to college since that will just be another expense he will have to pay for. If Jourdane does take the risk and play football without health insurance in order for him to continue on with his college education, he claims his academics will suffer. Jourdane believes if he plays without health insurance he, "won't be able to fully focus on his classes because he would be worried about getting hurt and paying for his basic needs."

Hamilton said that if he lost his coverage and was responsible for paying for his own plan, he would not be able to afford private insurance. "I would have to wait until Congress passes a universal health care bill," said Hamilton. "I hope this happens soon."

How should the government approach situations like Jourdane's when developing the new health care reform bill. Is it appropriate for the government to cut off foster kids' insurance at the age of 18? Should the government cover foster children beyond the age of 18 and if so, where will they find the resources to do so?

Homeless and Healthcare

One of the greatest topics in today’s society has been the health care reform. The need for health care is one that every American will face at some point in their life. However, one of the biggest groups in need of attention in the health care debate is the homeless population. In an article in The Tennessean, it states “Advocates for the homeless say these individuals face complex health problems, are generally sicker and die earlier than their housed counterparts. Advocates also say the homeless are the most frequent and expensive users of emergency room and inpatient hospital care and are much less likely than those in the general population to be insured.”

Those lobbying for health care reform are recognizing the need for an address of homelessness as a serious health care issue and failing to do so will result in a high cost of hospitalization by those facing illness. Maintenance of health is a very difficult thing for the homeless. For one, they are not a group of people that live in the most sanitary conditions, nor are the medical supplies they may have access to always the most cleanly. Nutrition is also an issue for this population. For many, finding food on a daily basis is difficult, and for those who do find meals, it may not be of the highest nutritional quality. By increasing the access the homeless population has to health care, it will increase their overall health and thus reduce the number of homeless people utilizing emergency room care, becoming inpatients in a hospital, or those dying due to a serious medical condition acquired while living on the street.

While it may seem like an expensive reform, it will be greatly worth it in the end. Making the necessary changes to provide more access to health care facilities and sanitary environments will reduce the number of diseases acquired from living on the streets, could work to provide counseling in health care maintenance, and reduce the amount of time these uninsured homeless people spend in hospitals and other clinics.

A full link to this article can be found at http://www.tennessean.com/article/20091011/NEWS01/91011009/1001/NEWS/Homeless+often+overlooked+in+health-care+reform+debate

Heath Care Reform...for the NFL

'Tis the "season" for all the talk about health care reform, and whether or not it is going to be a good idea for this country. It is also the season for the great American past time, football. In an opinion article published in the New York Times, "Health Care Reform...for the N.F.L.", Stefan Fatsis discusses how the National Football League is past due for some reform in their medical system as well.
Although the players in the National Football League receive excellent treatment, the article says that the only main goal is to just diagnose them, fix them, and return them to the field. Apparently many players like to play down their injuries. Some of the doctors in the NFL will "downplay" an injury too. The article gave a couple different examples, mainly on the Denver Broncos team, how players were injured at first and not given proper care and hurt later on in the season, or were told their injury was not as severe and were injured worse later during the season.
It turns out, the agreement for the players in the league right now is not too fair. The article goes on to explain how there needs to be some reform on the next contract for the players' union (which is being signed in 2010). Some of the changes the columnist suggests would be that there should be a league wide medical system, and not just team doctors for individual teams, doctors should tell players about injuries before they let club officials know, players should be able to view their medical records whenever they want (instead of just twice a year), and players should report any injury to the league. The columnist also feels that grievance procedures should be reformed.
This seems to be a little bit different of an article to post for this blog sight, but it is a health policy that needs to be taken into consideration when the NFL players' union goes to resign their health contracts in 2010. And if you think about it, it relates a lot to the what kind of health care issues we, the taxpayers, need to think about in reference to our nation wide health care plan option.
Do you believe that the NFL needs some health care reform of their own?

Health care Reform requires courageous politicians and a disciplined public

In this article found in Central Illinois Business magazine, the author is concerned with President Obama's health care reform and its ability to be cost effective. He points out that spending on Medicare and Medicaid are a far larger problem than financing social security and are the main source of our federal budget imbalance. Being able to manage and contain the cost of Medicare and Medicaid are very vital to long term success, but talks of changing the current system has brought about some uneasiness to the elderly. Concerns of denial of service are being fueled by rules in Britain that reportedly deny treatments such as coronary by-passes and hip replacements.

The other group of unhappy people with changes in federal health care are the nearly 85 percent of Americans who already have access to health care through a private insurance firm. A huge problem administrators are facing with implementing this new plan is being able to keep the insured happy while also covering the uninsured. To achieve this goal, the Obama administration will have to tailor a policy that both rations and controls coverage, mainly by making use of prices to control spending. One such way in which unnecessary spending could be slowed would be to have people pay more of their coverage from out of pocket expenses rather than insured coverage. This would encourage people to choose more carefully on the services they receive.

Policies such as the one mentioned above would most likely be deemed unpopular with the public at large, but enacting effective cost controlling policies needs to be a main goal for reform and it will take courageous politicians and a more disciplined public to achieve such goals.

Current Health Care Legislation Will Not Control Medical Costs, Experts Warn

In the midst of the heated debate concerning the health care reform, many problems are arising with the policies that are being proposed. Currently it seems that politicians care more about reforming how to pay for all of these health care changes, and it has become a political game in which politicians care more about expanding their popularity than doing what is right for our country. An article in the New York times called, Current Health Care Legislation Will Not control Medical Costs, Experts Warn, helps explain some issues surrounding the health care bill being proposed.
If the health care bill is passed one effect will be that insurance companies can no longer exclude patients with preexisting conditions. As a result, a lot more people who are sick are going to get insurance coverage. However, the insurance business has an adverse selection. In order to allow more sick people to have coverage, insurance companies also need to have a lot of healthy patients. These healthier patients help balance the expenses for the sick patients, but many younger, healthy people do not have health insurance because they believe it is unlikely that they will need it.
At first, congress was going make those who choose not to be covered pay a fee, but now politicians are going to make it easier for healthier people to opt out of insurance. These politicians probably know that this creates financial issues for insurance companies, but they do not care because their main concern is maintaining their popularity so they will get re-elected in the future. This in fact does create a huge problem for insurance companies because they need healthy participants to help subsidize the costs for the people who are sick with preexisting conditions. As a result, insurance companies are going to be forced to insure more people who are sick, and insurance coverage prices will raise for those who are healthy and also currently insured. This is because the insurance companies will need to compensate for the costs of the unhealthy recipients, and they will relay the costs onto the healthy recipients. As the article explains, the biggest problem facing the majority of Americans is geared toward those who already have insurance because the prices will increase.
Do you think this is fair? Are there other ways to help balance these costs, or will medical costs expand no matter what policies are implemented?

Current Health Care Legislation Will Not Control Medical Costs, Experts Warn

An article published on October 12, 2009 in the New York Times entitled “Current Health Care Legislation Will Not Control Medical Cost Exerts Warn” explains the fears the nation’s experts have about the emerging health reform bills.   David Herszenhorn explains that experts are not convinced that the new bills will do enough to decrease medical costs.  Many policy analysts, hospital offices and current and former health officials are urging adjustments that will reward quantity and quality of care to Americans.

Democrats have been aggressively pushing to pass major health care legislation this year, but with these issues arising there may be a delay.  President Barack Obama has been a strong proponent of the new health reform bill, stressing that it will provide millions of uninsured Americans with health care coverage.  Obama has been adamant on the fact that Americans and the government could save hundreds of billions of dollars by eliminating wasteful spending on things like duplicative scans for laboratory tests.  The question that Herszenhorn raises is, “Can all that money really be saved without rationing care or lowering the quality of treatment”.  Elliot G. Fisher, director of the Center for Health Policy Research at Dartmouth College, says this can defiantly happen.  He suggests to “only do the cuts in regions that are growing too fast in per-capital spending because then there’s a way to guarantee sayings”. 

For years senior citizens have been covered on a Medicare system that has provided them with benefits at a low cost, but now experts warn that these health reform bills will cause a rise in costs for the 250 million Americans who have insurance.  There needs to be more steps taken to reduce long-term spending and more benefits to the insured.  I do not think it is fair that Americans already insured are being hurt by a bill that is pushing coverage on the uninsured.  This proposal needs to be adjusted so that both groups of people are benefiting.