I admit it. I wasn't that smart. My husband gave me a hard time too. I probably deserved that but I did get him to cook dinner.
What did I do? Something bad to my knee again. So at the end of July, I fell and my knee bent sideways. I ended up at the doctor who took x-rays and ended up at the knee doctor who said nothing but sent me for PT and gave me a knee brace. I have been going to PT but stopped wearing my knee brace last week because its just too hot and uncomfortable and my knee has been feeling better.
Yesterday I was out on our side porch trying to move stuff around and pushed things sideways with my foot. DAMN. That made my knee bend sideways again. And its swollen and hurts again this morning.
So I wasn't that smart. I am going to skip the gym today and maybe wear my knee brace again (if I can find it). Damn. But I'm not going back to the doctor. And it was healing so nicely. Triple damn.
At least I can easily blame myself for this instead of being a politician and blaming the other party.
Nov 28, 2019
Nov 26, 2019
Get braced for Pinktober.
Please watch this video before you bite into your crispy KFC that arrived in a pink bucket.
Nov 25, 2019
Prescriptions and regulations and confusion
You might have guessed I take a few prescriptions these days. Actually I have a whole pile. Every weekend I sit down and fill our pill boxes for the week. My husband has one prescription and vitamins. I have a lot more.
I get my prescriptions from three places - the local pharmacy, the insurance company's mail order pharmacy, and the insurance company's specialty pharmacy. I got promoted to the specialty pharmacy this year for some reason. Its not that they really charge more, they just like to make my life more complicated.
What really annoys me about prescription medications are the stupid rules. The latest new rule is that I couldn't just call my pain management doctor for a refill on my break through pain meds (because the new cats hid the other bottle when they 'explored' the shelf in my closet), they had to make sure I had an upcoming appointment with the doctor. They even called me twice to make sure. (Then I explained how the cats hid my prescription which caused me to think that I had run out when I hadn't.)
The other rule that annoys me is that because of the 'opioid' crisis (which I recognize is a real and growing) problem, pharmacies want patients to have used up almost all their prescription before providing a refill. I know that pain medication use can lead to opioid abuse but not everyone.
I am picky about my prescription use. I use one of those lovely box a day pill box for years and have to take pills at three different times during the day (on an empty stomach, after eating, and before bed). If I was really good I would take some pills in the middle of the day as well but since I NEVER remember, that is not going to happen any time soon.
I also think about how often I take certain prescriptions which are prescribed 'as needed'. If I think I am taking them too often, I will take a minute to think how often I am taking them and why and if I need a doctor visit for a potential issue.
I feel I can manage my prescriptions myself and don't think I need any more rules to help me manage them. And about those prices? Well that's another story.
I get my prescriptions from three places - the local pharmacy, the insurance company's mail order pharmacy, and the insurance company's specialty pharmacy. I got promoted to the specialty pharmacy this year for some reason. Its not that they really charge more, they just like to make my life more complicated.
What really annoys me about prescription medications are the stupid rules. The latest new rule is that I couldn't just call my pain management doctor for a refill on my break through pain meds (because the new cats hid the other bottle when they 'explored' the shelf in my closet), they had to make sure I had an upcoming appointment with the doctor. They even called me twice to make sure. (Then I explained how the cats hid my prescription which caused me to think that I had run out when I hadn't.)
The other rule that annoys me is that because of the 'opioid' crisis (which I recognize is a real and growing) problem, pharmacies want patients to have used up almost all their prescription before providing a refill. I know that pain medication use can lead to opioid abuse but not everyone.
I am picky about my prescription use. I use one of those lovely box a day pill box for years and have to take pills at three different times during the day (on an empty stomach, after eating, and before bed). If I was really good I would take some pills in the middle of the day as well but since I NEVER remember, that is not going to happen any time soon.
I also think about how often I take certain prescriptions which are prescribed 'as needed'. If I think I am taking them too often, I will take a minute to think how often I am taking them and why and if I need a doctor visit for a potential issue.
I feel I can manage my prescriptions myself and don't think I need any more rules to help me manage them. And about those prices? Well that's another story.
Nov 21, 2019
Crowdfunding
So crowdfunding is a great concept. It helped get a friend's son injured in Thailand home in a first class seat when he was too injured to sit in a regular seat. It helped numerous independent movies get started. It can raise funds to help a family displaced by fire or other disaster.
But what about crowdfunding medical device design and start up? I would never have thought of that. I prefer my crowd funding to go to individuals and not to companies, especially overseas companies which makes me feel there is little or no recourse to get my money back or new product.
What I find a tad scary is companies are using crowd funding to fund the design and meet FDA approval requirements. So even if you think the concept is awesome, why are you prepaying for something that may never happen - and may end up with the 'As Seen on TV' label.
But now it seems companies are crowdfunding their new medical devices. Maybe it may make them get to market sooner but it doesn't speak to the company's financial stability. If you give them money to get off the ground, how are they going to continue to be solvent as the product develops? And what if they need to make multiple modifications to get approval? Will they continue to crowdfund? Go back and ask everyone for more money?
I kind of get the heebeejeebees on this one.
But what about crowdfunding medical device design and start up? I would never have thought of that. I prefer my crowd funding to go to individuals and not to companies, especially overseas companies which makes me feel there is little or no recourse to get my money back or new product.
What I find a tad scary is companies are using crowd funding to fund the design and meet FDA approval requirements. So even if you think the concept is awesome, why are you prepaying for something that may never happen - and may end up with the 'As Seen on TV' label.
But now it seems companies are crowdfunding their new medical devices. Maybe it may make them get to market sooner but it doesn't speak to the company's financial stability. If you give them money to get off the ground, how are they going to continue to be solvent as the product develops? And what if they need to make multiple modifications to get approval? Will they continue to crowdfund? Go back and ask everyone for more money?
I kind of get the heebeejeebees on this one.
Nov 19, 2019
The Wrong Approach to Pricing
Here is an example of the wrong approach to pricing medications. That really fancy expensive Hepatitis C drug, Sovaldi, is $1,000 per pill and $84,000 for the course of treatment and the price is justified because it saves on the cost of a liver transplant down the road and long term medical costs for the patient. WRONG IDEA!
It has now been revealed that the poor manufacturer, Gilead Sciences, which justified that price on the above reason, grossed $12.4 billion last year for the sales of Sovaldi alone. Sorry Gilead, I have absolutely no sympathy for you because of the revenue generated in the first year.
Yes, I understand the argument that the expensive drugs are justified because of the resulting reduced treatment costs for the patient in the long term and that the costs of and time to developing drugs is high and many possibilities are dumped after years of work. And that these drugs are developed for smaller and smaller potential patient markets for rarer ailments. But $12.4 billion? I think you got your money back and should cut the price significantly, maybe 1/10th of the current price.
So here is my proposal for new drug pricing: Look at your development costs of that drug that made it to market and the costs of the other drugs that eventually lead to the new drug but were dumped on the way and then price it so that your costs are recouped in five years, not one. And completely forget about the patient's long term cost savings in health costs. That is none of your business. Don't you remember HIPPA? Patient health issues are not your problem. You are providing a product that helps recover from it, just like an aspirin would relieve a headache.
Here's an example. Your current pricing method would allow restaurants to charge $3 for the tasty but bad for your juicy, fatty steak or prime rib and $80 for the healthy side salad because of the diner's potential long term health problems from eating the steak and ensuing cholesterol and other ailment costs.
The current pricing model leads to insurance companies deciding who should receive these new medications instead of doctors deciding what is best for their patients - which is the way medicine should be practiced.
Okay, this is all my opinion, to which I am entitled, but I really think pharma companies are doing it wrong.
It has now been revealed that the poor manufacturer, Gilead Sciences, which justified that price on the above reason, grossed $12.4 billion last year for the sales of Sovaldi alone. Sorry Gilead, I have absolutely no sympathy for you because of the revenue generated in the first year.
Yes, I understand the argument that the expensive drugs are justified because of the resulting reduced treatment costs for the patient in the long term and that the costs of and time to developing drugs is high and many possibilities are dumped after years of work. And that these drugs are developed for smaller and smaller potential patient markets for rarer ailments. But $12.4 billion? I think you got your money back and should cut the price significantly, maybe 1/10th of the current price.
So here is my proposal for new drug pricing: Look at your development costs of that drug that made it to market and the costs of the other drugs that eventually lead to the new drug but were dumped on the way and then price it so that your costs are recouped in five years, not one. And completely forget about the patient's long term cost savings in health costs. That is none of your business. Don't you remember HIPPA? Patient health issues are not your problem. You are providing a product that helps recover from it, just like an aspirin would relieve a headache.
Here's an example. Your current pricing method would allow restaurants to charge $3 for the tasty but bad for your juicy, fatty steak or prime rib and $80 for the healthy side salad because of the diner's potential long term health problems from eating the steak and ensuing cholesterol and other ailment costs.
The current pricing model leads to insurance companies deciding who should receive these new medications instead of doctors deciding what is best for their patients - which is the way medicine should be practiced.
Okay, this is all my opinion, to which I am entitled, but I really think pharma companies are doing it wrong.