[Gunnie]

N.Y. Diabetes-Tracking Plan Draws Concerns

[lgvincent]

By pinpointing problem patients, then intervening ever so slightly in their care, Frieden said the city can improve thousands of lives. "I don't think we can afford not to do anything," he said.


I like these "ever so slight" interventions. They can become more and more aggressive in their actions over time.

[camjen1]

Oh great, now we are going to be looked as infected.

[Harold]

Here's what it's about;

The answer, he said, is that diabetes costs an estimated $5 billion a year to treat in New York and was the fourth leading cause of death in the city in 2003, killing 1,891.

So how do they get it paid for?

By pinpointing problem patients, then intervening ever so slightly in their care, Frieden said the city can improve thousands of lives. "I don't think we can afford not to do anything," he said.

New York's program would involve collecting the results of A1c tests, which indicate blood glucose control over a few months, unlike the daily glucose tests diabetics give themselves. The A1c test is given for both Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, the latter linked to obesity and accounting for about 90 percent of American diabetics. The program would cost between $1 million and $2 million a year, the health department said.

"intervening ever so slightly" another way to say they are really not going to help anyone. Sure in five years after everyone gets their relatives jobs doing this, the cost will go up to 1 to 2 billion. So who is going to pay for it.

The city's program wouldn't initially get consent to collect data, but would allow patients to opt out later. The database would also be tightly controlled, off limits to anyone but department staff, the patients and their doctors, health officials say.

How many times have we heard this about data bases? Why would they not be required to get consent first and give the option to opt out later? Because they want to know everyone that has it. Why and what is their goal? Well taxes of course. Are they going to tax you for having diabetes? No they would never sell that, and by taking a different route they can get so much more. How? By getting more people taxed by saying.

"We respond with surveillance when we believe something has reached epidemic proportions," Fairchild said. "And this may fit the profile. Have we become a nation of obese people who are all going to get diabetes?"

Say that anyone that exceeds the recommended weight for their height by more than ten pounds pays an Extra Health Tax. So now you have picked up 80% of the population paying an extra tax and if you rate the tax by the pound New York City will have more than enough to pay for their Security.

What affect will this have on the population? To avoid the tax people, especially the poor, will stop going to doctors. At least until they are so bad off they pass out and are hauled of to a hospital. Since so many people will be avoiding doctors to avoid the tax, doctors will not be able to pay for malpractice insurance and have to leave the City. Oh, I can see this really helping a lot of people.

The American Diabetes Association supports New York's plan. It could be a great tool for doctors who find it difficult to track patients over long periods, said the ADA's Dr. Nathaniel Clark.

That's it! I am not paying to support any organization that supports this stupidity!

[Gunnie]

What gets me is how HIPAA is not even mentioned here. I work in the corrections area, and I am not even allowed to tell my co-workers that an offender has active TB if they go to conduct a home visit, but the citizens of New York don't have the same right to keep their medical information private?

[archimeech]

Gunnie, that's because the only people with all their rights anymore are convicted felons. Personally I think I should have gone and robbed a bank years ago. That way my privacy and rights would be sure to remain mine... (this reply is grossly laden with copius amounts of sarcasm, and disgust.)

[middnite03]

I like the way that TB and HIV are mentioned in the article, and how something like this has helped.... just gotta love being grouped with those two illnesses. this is too much of a big brother thing...

[jdstein11]

You know, guys, I'm not sure I agree with you on this one, with the lone exception that I would prefer that providing data on myself be voluntary, rather than mandatory with an opt-out option. Being able to control spending by the government is something I'm all for, since I'm already paying outrageous amounts of taxes in NJ. If there are ways that we as a society can be more responsible for our own actions (GASP!) and help out our community at the same time, why not?

My understanding from the article was that some people who are more carefree with their self-care relating to diabetes may, with guidance from public health care workers, be able to learn to be more vigilant. I do believe, though, that the projected cost savings were not public funds exclusively, but also included costs to the health care industry in NY related to complications from unmonitored diabetes, so the benefits are not isolated to the government.

[archimeech]

jd,
the problem with all that is, you're a responsible and caring individual. A lot of the people that this article is speaking of, either don't have the money, education, or just don't give a rat's patootie about saving our government any money. Does the word "entitlement" ring a bell?

[jdstein11]

You got it, meech; that's my take on what one of the major issues with our society. Like the email threads that circulate every once in a while, remember when "accidents" were truly "accidents" and not opportunites to cash in? Perhaps I'm more of an idealist than I'd like, but I do believe in CI (Continuous Improvement) and that little steps make a difference if you're committed to always looking for how to take the next one.