Health Care Insurance in Maine (Brunswick, Washington: buyer, subsidized, deductible)

[angelo129]

Originally Posted by reloop

Quote:

• The Maine Economic Growth Council recently cited Maine for the health coverage it provides its citizens (90 percent in 2006).
• The percentage of people receiving Medicaid in Maine is directly linked to Maine’s lower than average rate of people who are uninsured. Unquote

link with above quotes: :

I'm not sure what the poster is attempting to prove here, but the carefully selected "statistics" are very misleading. Here is the rest of the picture from the Maine Economic Growth Council:

"The Measures of Growth in Focus 2009, an annual barometer of Maine's economy, was released last week by the members of the Maine Economic Growth Council and the Maine Development Foundation. They assigned six red warning flags to the 24 categories for which they gather data on Maine's economy.

- Per capita income remains low and aggravates the state's tax burden

- High speed internet subscribers are not keeping pace with region or nation

- Manufacturing productivity also is not keeping pace with the nation

- Cost of health care is 33% higher than the national average

- Cost of energy is 32% higher than the national average

- State and local tax burden is not closing the gap toward the New England average"

I'd also like to point out this quote from the same report:

"The report uses the most recently available data, however, it may be data for years as far back as 2004 and not much that is more recent than 2007."

Do any of us believe that things have not gotten significantly worse across the board since 2007? Why would someone post a carefully chosen and misleading quote and fail to mention that the figures don't include anything more recent than 2007?

I think that we all know, especially those who work in medical fields, that statistics can be misleading, deliberately or otherwise. What does it mean to say that people are "covered"? Relatives of mine have been "covered" in both Maine and in other states in which they've lived, but that coverage has ranged from having medical bills completely covered to (as in Maine) having enormous deductibles, onerous co-pays for everything, and extremely limited "coverage".

The issue is a complex one, but let's not pull out a single item that supports our own point of view and present it as the whole truth. As you all know, the cost of any single item doesn't determine the level of one's prosperity. Nor does it say anything about the cost of groceries in Maine (or elsewhere) to pull a single cheap item out of the cart and proclaim that groceries are cheap here. I've not yet met a single person who actually works in healthcare (and I know many, my husband being one of them) who thinks that Mainers are in any way adequately insured.

[canard]

Originally Posted by wendell23

What about cancer in Maine?

I heard that it is the highest in the country.

[cebdark]

Originally Posted by angelo129

I'm not sure what the poster is attempting to prove here, but the carefully selected "statistics" are very misleading.

I'd also like to point out this quote from the same report:

"The report uses the most recently available data, however, it may be data for years as far back as 2004 and not much that is more recent than 2007."

Do any of us believe that things have not gotten significantly worse across the board since 2007? Why would someone post a carefully chosen and misleading quote and fail to mention that the figures don't include anything more recent than 2007?

I think that we all know, especially those who work in medical fields, that statistics can be misleading, deliberately or otherwise. What does it mean to say that people are "covered"? Relatives of mine have been "covered" in both Maine and in other states in which they've lived, but that coverage has ranged from having medical bills completely covered to (as in Maine) having enormous deductibles, onerous co-pays for everything, and extremely limited "coverage".

The issue is a complex one, but let's not pull out a single item that supports our own point of view and present it as the whole truth. As you all know, the cost of any single item doesn't determine the level of one's prosperity. Nor does it say anything about the cost of groceries in Maine (or elsewhere) to pull a single cheap item out of the cart and proclaim that groceries are cheap here. I've not yet met a single person who actually works in healthcare (and I know many, my husband being one of them) who thinks that Mainers are in any way adequately insured.

I'm not trying to "prove" anything. Someone on another post asked the off-topic question of if Maine didn't have good health insurance coverage, why are 91% covered? That's what I found stating that Mainers were 90% covered. I never intended to use it to "support our own point of view and present it as the whole truth." My apologies if anyone took it to be that. Frankly, I am well-aware that any statistic can be manipulated - regardless of the topic.

I also work in healthcare. Part of my position includes verifying insurance coverage. All I know is that the majority of the time, I'm verifying Mainecare coverage. I'm not being facetious in that statement. There are times when I've come close to believing that Mainecare is the "universal coverage" of the state.

I also agree that Maine lacks adequate coverage. It is no doubt a complicated and expensive issue.

[Submariner]

As per the CDC website: "For every 100,000 men and women in Maine, on average, approximately 518 were diagnosed with cancer and approximately 205 died from it." The national averages are: 458 and 184.

Massachusetts: 507 and 185

Delaware: 518 and 198

Louisiana: 493 and 215

Hmm. After spending a half hour scrolling through all 50 states data on the CDC website, it does appear that Maine is number #1.

Approx 1 person out of 200 gets detected as having a cancer each year in Maine, and about 1 out of every 500 in Maine will die from cancer each year.

No other state beats us in terms of detecting new cancers each year, and only Louisiana beats us in terms of cancer deaths each year.

Woo Hoo Maine is number 'one'

I think it is due to Cutler.

[msina]

As per the CDC website: "For every 100,000 men and women in Maine, on average, approximately 518 were diagnosed with cancer and approximately 205 died from it." The national averages are: 458 and 184.

Massachusetts: 507 and 185

Delaware: 518 and 198

Louisiana: 493 and 215

Hmm. After spending a half hour scrolling through all 50 states data on the CDC website, it does appear that Maine is number #1.

Approx 1 person out of 200 gets detected as having a cancer each year in Maine, and about 1 out of every 500 in Maine will die from cancer each year.

No other state beats us in terms of detecting new cancers each year, and only Louisiana beats us in terms of cancer deaths each year.

I think it also has something to do with the population of Maine having a lot of older people. As we get older more things have a chance to "show up" on tests.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by msina

I think it also has something to do with the population of Maine having a lot of older people. As we get older more things have a chance to "show up" on tests.

That thought occurred to me, so I looked at Florida. Expecting to see a higher rate of folks dying from cancers.

Now I did not search to find Demographic cancers to see if older folks do get more cancers or not. I wonder if cancers kind of hit everyone equally, regardless of age?

I do not know.

Right now I have an elder brother who is slowly losing a battle with leukemia, 13 years my elder.

And a cousin-in-law who is also losing to leukemia and he just turned 18.

So it would seem, for that today among my kin, both the older and the young folks are getting it.

[BacktoNE]

Also a lot of very poor people with unhealthy lifestyles. Many cancers are caused or exacerbated by poor diet, smoking, drinking, etc.

[Casper1212]

True. And I've read that genetics have a lot to do with it, too. The new trend toward using sea salt is because of studies that point to agents in processed salt being a food of sorts for cancer. Sea salt does not contain that agent. Cancer also seems to cycle in certain areas. I've noticed increases in some areas over a period, then it slows. But occurances will increase in other parts of the country.

[cebdark]

Originally Posted by Casper1212

True. And I've read that genetics have a lot to do with it, too. The new trend toward using sea salt is because of studies that point to agents in processed salt being a food of sorts for cancer. Sea salt does not contain that agent. Cancer also seems to cycle in certain areas. I've noticed increases in some areas over a period, then it slows. But occurances will increase in other parts of the country.

I think the additives, colors and preservative junk that are added to many foods may also play a factor too. I mean really - purple ketchup? Ew...I'll take mine red thank you (although I'm sure that red dye is added). I believe I also read somewhere that Maine has high levels of Radon gas as well, but I'm not sure of what those are relative to other areas.

[Sunday1]

The allowable levels of radon in this country are too high - and the EPA has tried to get the levels lowered. We put radon mitigation systems in both of the houses we bought in Illinois - one while it was under construction and the other before we moved in because it tested high in the inspection. I don't know how Maine fares with radon, but there are definitely specific regions of the country where high levels are more prevalent.