Government Aims at Mentally-Disabled Elderly to Reduce Medicare Drug Costs

reply to post by schuyler


Schuyler, thank you for your informative post.

I in no way intended to say that the recipients would be excluded from coverage for their Medicare benefits. The conversation was concerning the three classes of drugs slated for non coverage by Medicare. Although the Advantage plan was cited, the changes will be for the Part D Medicare coverage.

These three classes of drugs are already limited in coverage with many of the Part D plans.

And you are correct, each of the Part D plans have varying benefits depending on the premiums paid. Which directly correlates to either the thriftiness of the purchaser, or their economic inability to afford more.

Antidepressants vary in cost considerably. www.consumerreports.org...

Retail prices for commonly prescribed antidepressants range from about $21 a month, and sometimes even less, to more than $1,000 a month. This report shows how you can save more than $100 a month or $1,200 a year, if you have to take an antidepressant regularly.

It depends on what your doctor prescribes, or what your body will tolerate as to how much your cost will be.

Immunosuppressives: www.renalandurologynews.com...

Adjusted for inflation and expressed in 2012 dollars, the annual per-patient cost rose from $9,280 in 1993 to a high of $33,040 in 2007 and then declined to $18,746 in 2011, Roger W. Evans, PhD, of the United Network for the Recruitment of Transplantation Professionals in Rochester, Minn., reported.

As you can see, the cost for these drugs far exceed the capability of the majority of Medicare recipients to pay out of pocket. In the case of transplant, this would be a lifelong annual expense.

Antipsychotics: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

The estimated 2004 daily costs were $20.74, $18.90, and $15.78 per day for quetiapine, olanzapine, and risperidone, respectively with coprescribed antipsychotics being significantly higher for quetiapine ($11.13) compared to olanzapine ($4.29, p < .01) or risperidone ($4.76, p < .01)

Again, it would depend on what your physician prescribes and how your body tolerates it, but the cost would average between $140-$620 per month for the medication.

I hope that clarifies what I meant in the OP.

BT

reply to post by Bassago


Actually, Bassago, I do not disagree with you. I also believe there is over use of some of these medications. As far as the transplants, they are already limited to the elderly, but immunosuppressives are not just used with transplants, but also rheumatoid arthritis, Lupus and other diseases.

Good point.

BT

Arrrgh! My father died of complications from end-stage Parkinson's a couple of years ago. He was fully aware of what was happening to his body, so he was on 2 different anti-depression medications. His Rx bill each month was horrendous. I'm glad he didn't stick around for all this nonsense... My siblings and I, on the other hand. Guess I will have to have a "too old to afford living" clause in our Powers of Attorney for Healthcare documents.

Lolliek Guess I will have to have a "too old to afford living" clause in our Powers of Attorney fo Healthcare documents.

As we all may have to do eventually.

It seems sometimes like they intentionally are trying to deplete our assets to zero and beyond as we approach old age and death. That would make us a truly throw away society. Nothing left when the engine wears out.

BT

www.mainstreet.com...

Government Aims at Mentally-Disabled Elderly to Reduce Medicare Drug Costs

The federal government expects to save $1.3 billion between 2015 and 2019, if the proposed rule passes

(Wait.) (What?!)
www.huffingtonpost.com...

Obama Would Have To Unveil 'Black Budget' For Spy Agencies Under New Bipartisan Bill

The actual funding lines for America’s spy agencies have been a matter of secrecy until recently, when the Washington Post obtained a $53 billion “black budget” list for fiscal year 2013 from Edward Snowden.

Maybe we could put the elderly disabled to work in various corners of the super black world! Hey! They would just have to get along with hostile ETs is all.
(Sarcasm.) (Of course.)

Government Aims at "Mentally-Disabled Elderly to Reduce Medicare Drug Costs"

Yeah, hiring Mentally disabled elderly to govern the country will probably be better than the ones running it now. They could probably save the taxpayers a lot of money if we put them in charge of things.

Now to be serious, Antidepressants can be replaced by dietary changes most of the time. Adjusting glutamate within the body and brain is what most of the meds do. There are some conditions that cannot be controlled by diet, but they amount to less than ten percent of the people on the meds.

reply to post by rickymouse


That is correct, many things, including depression can be treated with diet. However, for those extreme cases, where perhaps appetite has been diminished, and/or a more rapid response is required, Antidepressants can be the correct therapy.

Truth is, medical treatment is NOT a cookie cutter profession. Every patient should have their treatment tailored to their needs. This is not the direction our medical care is going, IMHO.

BT

Hmmmm..... Besides supposedly saving us taxpayers money, I can see where this would pose a huge advantage to one particular industry: nursing homes.

How many of these folks are able to live alone and care for themselves ONLY because they have these medicines? A severe case of rheumatoid arthritis comes to mind as an example. Take the medicines away, and it's off to the nursing home/assisted living facility with them where they can have round the clock care because they can no longer do basic things for themselves.

And if this scenario goes down as I've described above, where are the savings in that? I would think that living in a nursing home would cost medicare far more than a couple of prescription medicines each month. And from what I understand, medicare usually doesn't cover the total bill for being in a nursing home, so the person's savings go toward the cost. If they go thru all of their savings/cash money, then assets have to be sold until they have nothing left.

So I see a couple of possible conspiracies in this:

1) More customers for the nursing homes and assisted living facilities.

2) More wealth consolidation; your grandpa worked hard his entire life and amassed some savings and built a nice house, has a vehicle that's paid for, etc? Kiss it all goodbye - it has to be sold to pay for his room at the nursing home. That means there's nothing for grandpa to leave to his kids, grandkids or anyone else. Instead, that money goes into the Medical Machine, never to be seen again.

The one I can't figure out is why the Big Pharma industry isn't absolutely losing their mind over this. They stand to LOSE money, and we all know that Big Pharma will not stand for anyone cutting into their profits.

DustbowlDebutante

The one I can't figure out is why the Big Pharma industry isn't absolutely losing their mind over this. They stand to LOSE money, and we all know that Big Pharma will not stand for anyone cutting into their profits.

Perhaps the move being made now to make vitamins and herbal supplements prescription only, and therefore under the auspices of the pharmaceutical industry, as well as a move towards making vaccinations mandatory in many facets of society, will make up for the loss of the elderly with the antidepressants, immunosuppresants and antipsychotics.

After all, they will still have the rest of society using those meds and the increase in the newly found cash cow of natural vitamins and herbs.

BT

reply to post by BearTruth


That's a very valid point. I hadn't looked at it like that. So it's a....Triple Conspiracy!

And it's a good reason for anyone who takes herbal supplements to buy seeds and start a medicinal herb garden now, while you still can.

Starred your reply for pointing that out to me

Eta: I guess the reason the nursing home thing immediately came to my mind is because I've noticed that in my neck of the woods, although we have a TON of nursing homes and assisted living facilities, more and more of them are being built constantly - huge ones. I'm talking bigger buildings than our schools! I've actually wondered how in the heck a town of only 25K people could possibly contain enough elderly people to actually fill all of the beds in them.

reply to post by DustbowlDebutante


They are planning for the future they know is coming, because they have implemented it.

There are many layers to this "onion".

BT

Removing antipsychotics will cause more murders, gun crimes, and fill prisons.

This is going to save money?????????????. this will be a boon for the anti gun people.

Removing Antidepressants will cause more Suicide. Since many people commit Suicide with guns this will be a boon to the anti gun people.
Antidepressants are way over proscribed for pain and many older men get severe BPH from Antidepressants this will cost more money.
over 50% of people taking Antidepressants for depression have normal serotonin levels and are not really depressed.
This is because there is no approved lab test for serotonin levels or depression. Its the tell your doctor you have been feeling down for weeks and he automatically writes a script for the latest and most expensive Antidepressant.

Removing Immunosuppressants will cause more illegal drug crimes as many autoimmune disorders are very painfull. and we know how then DEA is going after doctors that proscribe pain meds.(i know i have sarcoidosis and neurosarcoidosis)
Many of these people will commit Suicide if they can not get pain relief.

reply to post by ANNED


With all you stated, I still think it is only the tip of the iceberg. Those who truly need these medications, and cannot obtain them will suffer, but so will everyone associated with them.

I am hoping that there is still a sane way to overcome this insane financial choice.

BT