Happy Hanukkah

Dr Tennant Legal Defense Fund

https://www.gofundme.com/dr-tennant-legal-defence-fund

Forest Tennant, MD, DrPH, is an internist who specializes in the research and treatment of intractable chronic pain. Dr. Tennant has operated a pain clinic in West Covina, California for over 40 years, and has authored over 300 scientific articles and books on pain management.

Dr. Tennant is revered in the pain community because of his willingness to treat patients from around the country who have been abandoned by other doctors or have complex conditions such as arachnoiditis that are difficult to treat.

In November 2017, DEA agents raided the home and offices of Dr. Tennant, using a search warrant that alleged he was part of a drug trafficking organization and running a pill mill. The allegations would be laughable if they weren’t so serious and reflect a fundamental lack of knowledge about Dr. Tennant’s practice. Many of his patients require high doses of opioids and other medications, and would die without them.

Dr. Tennant has not been charged with a crime, but he deserves to have the best legal representation possible to defend himself and his reputation. There is legal help in case needed and one can find this info here helpful.

Please consider a donation to Dr. Tennant’s defense fund. Lives depend on keeping this good man in practice.

All I Want For Christmas Is For People Not To Hurt

https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/12/12/all-i-want-christmas-people-not-hurt-12271

I could never have imagined that I would ever see the cruelty that is now being inflicted upon pain patients – people who have to live their lives under conditions that are so horrible that the rest of us can’t possibly fathom the level of suffering they must endure.

It was bad enough a decade ago when chronic pain patients had two choices, both bad: 1) powerful opiate drugs, which can be very unpleasant to take in larger doses and have addiction potential (1) or 2) suffer from intractable pain that can be so bad that they become housebound. Suicide is not uncommon. And all of this was going on before our government fabricated a war against an unfortunate and powerless group of people under the faulty premise that it would diminish the devastating outbreak of overdose deaths from fentanyl and heroin that now claims tens of thousands of lives every year. (2) 

If this meant withholding or forcibly cutting back doses of opiates from people suffering from rheumatoid arthritis, spondylosis or chronic neuropathic pain (to name a few) so what? They’ll get by on Advil, yoga or acupuncture (3). I firmly believe that the CDC, DEA, politicians, and NGOs which all stood to gain from this phony war, knew damn well that their “war” was based on false information, something I have written about countless times. This is even worse than ignorance. They knew and just didn’t care.

So now we live in a pharmaceutical police state where doctors are prosecuted for caring for pain patients, and state laws set arbitrary (and scientifically bogus) daily limits on opiate doses, regardless of whether the pain patient has been doing “well” on these doses, sometimes for decades. 

What I want for Christmas is to give back whatever relief pain patients had access to before our own version of Kristallnacht hit them. Leave them and their doctors alone. They didn’t cause the problem.

And just for good measure, let’s leave a lump of coal in the stockings of the CDC, DEA, and Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP). Or maybe a turd for PROP.

NOTES:

(1) As I have written many times, one review after another has concluded that addiction of pain patients to opiates is rare, estimates ranging from 0.26% to 10%, mostly on the lower end. Pain management physicians who I have interviewed unanimously agree that addiction of pain patients is rare. There is a very big difference between dependence and addiction. And good luck finding a pain management physicians. They are fleeing in droves.

(2) It did no such thing. Opiate prescriptions are down. Total deaths are up. By a lot. 

(3) Here’s how bad this has gotten. The FDA has suggested that physicians learn about acupuncture as an alternative to drugs in pain management, despite the fact that it has been thoroughly debunked. (“Do You Believe in Magic?: The Sense and Nonsense of Alternative Medicine.” Paul Offit, M.D., Harper Collins, 2013)

 

 

And they wonder why insurance premiums and cost of Medicare/Medicaid is UP…UP…UP… ?

When my mate picked up this month’s prescriptions for me the pharmacy tech told him they will not dispense any of my pain pills next month unless I talk to the pharmacist about NarCan injectors!
I just got off the phone from talking to the pharmacist – this asinine requirement comes from the lunatic Kansas Legislature over-reacting to the mis-perceived ‘opioid crisis’ – which is a black market issue rather than a prescibed medicine problem.
If I CHOOSE to refuse to purchase the over-priced and totally unneeded injectors it will be entered into my permanent government-mandated official opioid record.
I did manage to get the pharmacy to agree to enter it as “Refused as an unnecessary and excessive cost.”
I am guessing I may have just put my Medicaid-covered pain pills in jeopardy.


I had to pick mine up also. I’m in Virginia but I was told by my doctors nurse he wouldn’t prescribe to me. I want her back in her own lane. When I asked her to refill another med and my husband picked it up she had called the Narcan in so it was ready also. My pain is so under treated now. I’m terrified of not having enough med through the holidays so I use it so sparingly. Wouldn’t I have revealed myself as an addict by now. I mean forget all my swollen red joints even with treatment they remain that way. Blood work with values that indicate both Lupus and RA…. when does this environment stop ???


I’m in Chicago and have been prescribed narcan for the past 2 years. Its 100% unnecessary. My insurance covers it at no cost to me so I just take it home and stick it in a drawer.


 

Chain Pharmacies: generating PROFITS … selling “bandaids” to addicts ?

Video shows man coming back to life after overdosing at a CVS

http://www.khou.com/news/nation-now/video-shows-man-coming-back-to-life-after-overdosing-at-a-cvs/498512524

 

DETROIT — Mark Harris had stopped at a CVS store in Detroit last month to pick up some medicine when he spotted an unusual sight. A young man was fading in and out of consciousness in an aisle, before collapsing to the floor.

Familiar with the neighborhood — Eight Mile and Gratiot — Harris says he didn’t need much convincing to know what had just happened. The man had overdosed.

“I see it a lot right there in the area, you see a lot of drug addicts. You can’t describe them, but when you see them you know it, they fit a profile,” he said.

With the young man on the floor, and CVS employees and customers beginning to buzz around him trying to figure out what to do, Harris pulled out his phone to document the traumatic ordeal.

The nearly 12-minute video, filmed Oct. 11 — and uploaded to YouTube the next day — shows an almost surreal scene. It starts with the young man unconscious on the floor and ends with him standing erect, fully functioning after EMS responders give him naloxone, a drug that blocks the effects of opioids.

The video showcases Michigan’s struggles with the national opioid crisis, the life-saving power of drugs like naloxone, and, most notably, a lack of education when it comes to handling an overdose scenario. As people wait for EMS to arrive bystanders and CVS employees do everything from gawk to pour water on the man’s head to suggest CPR, even though he already breathing.

Most notably, despite the incident taking place in a pharmacy — specifically, a pharmacy that is allowed to sell naloxone over the counter — nobody made any moves to find and administer the drug, waiting instead for the paramedics to arrive.

“People didn’t know how to respond so they didn’t know how to take action, unfortunately,” said Gina Dahlem a clinical assistant professor at University of Michigan’s School of Nursing, whose research focuses on opioid overdose prevention and education using naloxone.

“That shows the need for us to educate these public places and those who are involved — pharmacists, librarians, staff where overdoses are highly likely to occur,” Dahlem continued.

In May, Gov. Rick Snyder announced that pharmacies could dispense naloxone sans prescriptions if they registered with the state Department of Health and Human Services. Previously, only law enforcement, first responders, and doctors could administer the life-saving drug.

As of Nov. 2, 2,840 pharmacies — or 34% of the state total — obtained controlled substance licenses in Michigan in order to dispense naloxone to individuals over the counter. The CVS in question was one of those pharmacies. This led some — like Harris, who filmed the video and kept suggesting someone use Narcan, the brand name version of naloxone — to question why the pharmacist did not administer the naloxone himself.

“That’s heroin, they got some stuff Narcan that they shoot it up their nose to bring them back,” Harris is heard telling the group huddled around the man before paramedics arrived.

Watch (the video might be disturbing for some viewers): Video shows man coming back to life after overdosing at a CVS

In the video, the pharmacist at one point indicates that they may not have had the drug in stock at the moment — though the conversation was hurried and it’s unclear if the pharmacist was specifically answering the question about the drug’s availability.

CVS for its part said the pharmacist should not have administered the drug, but rather waited, as he did until EMS had arrived, stating that the drug is not meant to be “dispensed for immediate usage.”

“We make every effort to stock our pharmacy inventory based on patient demand, however, naloxone is not a medication that is dispensed for immediate usage,” CVS Director of Corporate Communication Erin Shields Britt said in a statement.

“In most cases, opioid users or their family members order naloxone to keep on-hand in an emergency to reverse an accidental overdose. In an emergency situation where naloxone is needed, 911 should be called, as was the case here.”

Dahlem of the University of Michigan, however, contends that the purpose of making naloxone available over the counter is for situations exactly like this and minimizing any lag time is ideal.

“The sooner you are able to revive a person the better the outcome,” she said. “This emphasizes the need for education in the community and of laypeople.”

The video, which documents the young man right after he lost consciousness to the moment he’s wheeled out by medics, shows not only the scary reality of a drug overdose but the confusion of many bystanders over what to do.

A CVS pharmacist is seen pushing on the man’s chest, while the man’s friend is seen pacing around the store dumping water on his head.

Dahlem notes that while the shouting and shaking of the man are actually helpful in an overdose situation, the pouring of water was in fact very dangerous. An overdose is a respiratory problem before it’s a cardiac problem, according to Dahlem, and dousing someone in water — a move people often do in overdose situations because they think it will help wake a person up — can, in fact, make the problem worse.

Michigan’s relationship with the opioid epidemic has worsened over the years. In 2015, the most recent year of data available, the state saw its third consecutive year of record drug overdose deaths. That year, 1,981 people died from drug overdoses, up 13.5% from 2014. Over the last 17 years, deaths from drug overdoses quadrupled, up from 455 in 1999.

For Harris, who decided to document the incident because he had never seen anything like it before, the incident highlighted a clear health and education issue, but also a disconnect between the response to the opioid crisis and what he witnessed 30 years back during the crack epidemic in Detroit.

“In the ’80s during the crack epidemic, most of the victims of the crack epidemic were jailed and criticized and now it’s an opioid epidemic and it’s more like they need help,” said Harris, who says he is a recovering alcoholic and that he’s sensitive to the realities of addiction.

“It’s a person’s own choice to use drugs or alcohol, but once you get addicted you’re sick. A lot of times, you need help to get out of addiction, but during the crack epidemic, they weren’t trying to help people like now. During the crack epidemic, they criminalized all of the people and mostly just put people in jail for just what the guy did.”

While it is unclear what ended up happening to the young man in the video, a YouTube commenter wrote to the Free Press that the man had entered himself into rehab.

 

Digital Pills Track How Patients Use Opioids

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://newsstand.google.com/articles/CAIiEP1D-zfiGaG5bgECPfPfjYMqFQgEKg0IACoGCAowof8GMMBfMLTNAg

New pill capsules that send a message to a smartphone as they move through the GI tract have emerged as a way to track whether patients are taking their medicine as prescribed. The problem of nonadherence to medication instructions causes about 125,000 deaths a year and at least 10 percent of hospitalizations, according to one estimate.

Soon the ingestible tracking technology could also be used to make sure patients aren’t taking too many of drugs like opioids, which are highly addictive. Researchers at one Boston hospital think the high-tech pills could help physicians prescribe the right amount of opioids, helping patients avoid taking more than they need. Check these out colabioclipanama2019 .

As the opioid epidemic in the U.S. grows, Edward Boyer and Peter Chai, emergency medical physicians and medical toxicologists at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, wanted to find out how patients take opioids when they’re prescribed them for the first time.

Chai says being able to detect a pattern in how patients are taking pills can help physicians intervene if there’s a change in that pattern: if patients are taking more pills, for example, or taking them before they go to bed at night, the most dangerous time to take opioids.

They partnered with EtectRx, a company based in Newberry, Florida, that’s developing an ingestible gel capsule with a wireless sensor. The gel capsule fits over regular pills; when swallowed, it’s dissolved by digestive acids in the stomach and emits a radio signal that’s picked up by a small device worn around the neck. You get more details about pill capsules here rooftopyoga .The reader detects the message sent from the pill and forwards it to a physician’s smartphone app via Bluetooth.

 

Boyer and Chai tried out the technology on 15 patients who were admitted to the emergency room at Brigham and Women’s for bone fractures and were prescribed oxycodone, a type of opioid. The technology records how many pills each patient takes and how often they take them. If a patient takes too many of the opioids because pain is persisting, a doctor can intervene.

The first pill equipped with a sensor was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in November for Abilify, an antipsychotic drug used to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. These patients often do not take their medication regularly, which can have severe side effects.

Right now, the technology is still a bit clunky. The digital pill that pairs with Abilify requires that patients wear a patch on their torso when they take their medicine. The technology developed by EtectRx uses an electronic reader about the size of an iPod, worn around the neck. But the company is working on boosting the pill’s signal strength.

“We would hope that one day the reader would become integrated into wearables that people use every day—think the watch band of the Apple Watch, or the case of your smartphone,” Chai says. “That would really allow the reader to start to meld into the everyday life of patients.”

Challenges remain. Not all patients will want to be tracked, and if they do agree, they’ll want to know how their personal data is being used.

Boyer and Chai have interviewed emergency room patients who use heroin and asked if they would be willing to use the technology. About 83 percent said they would. Next, they are testing it in chronic pain patients who have been taking opioids on a long-term basis.

Larissa Mooney, director of the UCLA Addiction Medicine Clinic, says she can understand why the technology is exciting, but she’s not convinced yet that digital pills could be used to prevent or treat addiction.

“This will only work if people agree to and consent to being monitored. Somebody who doesn’t want to have their every dose recorded could refuse this medicine, so there are always going to be limitations,” she says.

There’s also a lot of variability in people’s needs for opioid pain medication, she says, so these pills would need to be tested in more patients with different types of pain.

Will CVS-Aetna Merger Lead to “Separate But Unequal” Healthcare?

http://thehealthcareblog.com/blog/2017/12/11/will-cvs-aetna-merger-lead-to-separate-but-unequal-healthcare/

Last week, pharmacy giant CVS agreed to purchase Aetna this week for an astounding $69 billion dollar sum. The company allegedly plans to reduce health spending by developing an integrated system touted as “a new front door for health care in America.” This merger is actually an acquisition, entailing transfer of ownership. The central aim of an acquisition is to increase market share, expand the scope of services provided, and improve financial stability. CVS hit the jackpot on all three objectives. While Wall Street investors celebrate,

many of us knowledgeable in the delivery of healthcare services are wondering who will bear the responsibility for the patients harmed by this experiment?

Aetna has compiled vast amounts of data from 22 million health plan members. CVS provides pharmacy benefits management to nearly 90 million consumers. Together, with 10,000 stores and 1,100-minute clinics already in the CVS network,

this acquisition will create a ‘Walmart for Healthcare’

Applying bulk-purchase business strategies to the sale of merchandise is one thing, while providing healthcare services by ‘trial and error’ to human beings is another matter entirely. Bypassing physicians to deliver healthcare by protocol categorically jeopardizes patient safety.

Executives at Aetna-CVS plan to utilize pharmacists and nurses in the evaluation of acute illness and management of chronic disease. If an insurer, drugstore, and pharmacy benefit manager unite as one, it will usher in an era of medical “segregation,” with segregation defined as the isolation or separation of a race, class, or group by enforced or voluntary restriction, by barriers to social intercourse, by separate educational facilities, or by other discriminatory means.

CVS-Aetna executives are hypothesizing these clinicians working independently can provide “separate but equal” healthcare services at a lower cost than physicians.

There is no scientific evidence their assertion is true or even possible. Their innovative business model will be, in a word, an experiment on citizens of this nation. In Brown v. The Board of Education in 1954, the Supreme Court already ruled unanimously “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” and are in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause (“no state… shall deny to any person…the equal protection of the laws.”)   Why is “separate but equal” acceptable for healthcare? It is not.

For example, recently, a mother brought in her 18-month-old with a fever, runny nose, and ear pain. On examination, he had an ear infection and was prescribed Amoxicillin. The next evening, he refused oral intake, and developed a rash in his mouth, and on his hands and feet. The mother took him to a retail clinic after work that evening. “Minute Clinics” are convenient because they accept walk-ins, charge by the visit, and order tests by protocol, like when ordering dessert, a la carte in a restaurant.

At the retail clinic, a rapid flu test was negative and a rapid streptococcal test was positive. Using this “information” to guide diagnosis and treatment by protocol, his “Strep Throat infection” in conjunction with a rash was assumed to be Scarlet Fever, which was theorized to be “resistant to Amoxicillin.” The clinician prescribed Omnicef inappropriately, believing something “stronger” was required for Streptococcal bacteria.

Having regular commercial insurance, the mother returned to my office for medical care when her son continued complaining of ear pain despite the “stronger” antibiotic two days later and his oral lesions continued to multiply. His exam revealed Herpangina (a variation of the hand, foot, and mouth virus) and his eardrum was now bulging with pus. I recommended restarting the amoxicillin and for her son drink cool liquids until the oral lesions resolved; the child recovered uneventfully.

Pharmacists and nurses will be thrust into independent roles for which they are ill-equipped to handle and if using this shotgun approach, costs will continue their upward climb. First, children under two rarely get streptococcal throat infections, so strep tests should not be routinely administered in this age group. Secondly, symptoms of streptococcal infection are narrow: sore throat, fever, swollen lymph nodes, and abdominal pain in the absence of a runny nose and cough. A positive test in this child indicated they were a carrier which needs no intervention. Third, scarlet fever looks nothing like herpangina, which is a virus and resolves on its own. Fourth, Omnicef, at a cost of $150 per course, is not a first, second, or even third-line treatment for Group A Streptococcal infection; the first line choice is amoxicillin, costing less than $5.

If this ill-advised merger between Aetna and CVS proceeds, millions of lives will hang in the balance. This new business model reminds me of the scene from Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, when Ebenezer Scrooge sees the Cratchit family mourning the loss of Tiny Tim. Research has shown life expectancy is proportional to the ratio of primary care physicians available per 100,000 population. How many children, like Tiny Tim, will be harmed before lawmakers and the public refuse to accept a future devoid of primary care physicians?

Thankfully, time has a way of revealing truth. CVS considers having a medical degree to be an “obstacle” to affordable medical care, which they plan to eliminate with “one-stop shopping,” having pharmacists and nurses practicing medicine by protocol. A segregated, two-tiered healthcare system will ultimately emerge as Aetna members are directed to “Minute Clinics” without access to physicians while those on other commercial insurance plans will see the physician, nurse practitioner, or physician assistant of their choice. Changing the delivery of healthcare services by circumventing physicians to save money is equivalent to gambling with patients’ lives. This vertical business model should induce fear and panic in all of us – we should run for our lives, literally and never look back.

What’s behind the spike in drug store robberies?

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article188636384.html

The brazen afternoon robbery of a Citrus Heights Rite Aid resulting in the death of an 87-year-old woman brought attention to a growing problem: the rising rate of pharmacy thefts.

In the northeast Sacramento County suburb alone, the number of pharmacy robberies is up to eight in 2017 from two in 2016.

Over the last two years, pharmacy robberies in California are up 163 percent, according to numbers complied by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.

In 2015, the agency recorded 90 incidents. The number climbed to 154 in 2016. Through Nov. 17, some 237 had been reported to the DEA.

“To see that kind of spike, it is alarming,” said Special Agent Casey Reittig, a spokeswoman for the DEA. She declined to speculate why, but suggested drug users may have become more brazen in response to rule changes tightening access to opioids.

Robbers are after opioids and cough syrup ingredients, said Sgt. Shaun Hampton, spokesman for the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department. While countywide statistics were not available Thursday, Hampton said he believes Sacramento County is experiencing an uptick.

The opioid epidemic has been well documented, with about 33,000 Americans dying in 2015 from an opioid overdose, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The powerful pain-relieving drugs carry significant addiction risks.

Meanwhile, Hampton said large bottles containing promethazine with the opioid codeine – ingredients in prescription cough syrup – can go for as much as $400 on the street. Smaller bottles sell for $50 to $100.

The powerful cough suppressants have been abused for years. Mixed with alcohol, they are used to create an intoxicating mix commonly called “purple drank,” “sizzurp” or “lean.” Consumption of purple drank has been popularized in rap music for years.

The head of the California Pharmacists Association added that a move to increase public safety – restricting cough syrup access to reduce abuse of the drug – may also have inadvertently put more pharmacists at risk.

In 2011, the state Legislature added dextromethorphan to the list of over-the-counter drugs with an 18-and-over age requirement – moving them behind the counter. Advocates for Senate Bill 514, including an array of health and public safety organizations, said teens were stealing cough syrup from drug store shelves and taking doses 8 to 20 times the recommended amount to get high. Many teens thought the drug was less harmful because it involved an over-the-counter cough syrup instead of a prescription drug.

While the legislation stopped the rampant pickpocketing of cough syrup, “now we have active robberies,” Roth said. “It kind of cuts both ways.”

Roth said those robbing pharmacies take cough syrups containing promethazine or dextromethorphan, which is often referred to as DMX.

“My sense is that they are seeking any and all,” Roth said.

Roth said the association continues to support the cough syrup law as a way to reduce the abuse of such products. The association advises members to increase security measures to deter thefts. If robbed, Roth said, pharmacists are advised not to resist.

Rite Aid customer Marilyn Stribley died as a result of the injuries she suffered when she was knocked down Nov. 27 by a suspect running from the store on the 6600 block of Auburn Boulevard. Video of the fatal incident has been widely circulated in the media.

Citrus Heights police announced Friday they had arrested Kimani Randolph, 21, of Sacramento on suspicion of robbery and violating probation. He was located and arrested without incident Thursday in Las Vegas and is scheduled to be extradited to Sacramento next week. He was on probation for being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm.

Police are still trying to identify the two other suspects, previously described as black men between ages 18 and 20. Police said the men had jumped over the pharmacy counter and demanded prescription drugs. Store employees handed over the drugs.

Rite Aid Corp. has offered a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the robbers.

Hampton said there was no evidence to suggest a robbery of a Carmichael Rite Aid five days later was connected. He said agencies are sharing information.

Ed Fletcher: 916-321-1269, @NewsFletch

Pharmacies – especially chains – have steadfastly refused to “harden” their Rx dept against robberies… they are apparently concerned that the Rx dept would be “less inviting – less friendly”.. because if anyone is paying attention … if you see the video or description of the typical pharmacy robbery.. the ROBBERS … JUMPED THE COUNTER… to get into the Rx dept… many of these chain pharmacies have “locked doors” for employees to enter/exit the Rx dept..

Putting horizontal bars abt 12″ apart across the checkout area of the Rx dept would prevent “counter jumping” and may help reduce pharmacy robberies.

OF course, the more doses of opiates that get to “the street” the more job security for law enforcement. One statistic that I never see published is how many MILLIONS of opiate doses that get to “the street” from pharmacy robberies – WONDER WHY ?

The CVS-Aetna Merger Will Be a Disaster for Small Drugstores and Patients ?

https://slate.com/business/2017/12/the-arguments-for-and-against-the-cvs-aetna-merger.html

Big corporate mergers in the health care industry tend to work out poorly for customers. When hospitals combine, they raise prices. When insurers get together, premiums can leap. But when pharmacy giant CVS announced last week that it planned to buy Aetna, the nation’s third largest insurer, in a deal worth $69 billion, some experts were cautiously optimistic. “[T]here’s reason to believe that a combined CVS-Aetna might find ways to reduce costs—and represent an instance when consumers actually come out ahead after health care consolidation,” Austin Frakt, a professor at Boston University’s School of Public Health, wrote at the New York Times.

The optimism isn’t absurd. In theory, merging might help the companies nudge patients into more low-cost and effective care. It could also weed out some of the bad incentives that appear to be driving up prescription drug costs.

But there are also reasons to be wary of the deal, which could help CVS and Aetna unfairly elbow away their competition.

To understand why CVS would be interested in acquiring an insurer, there are a few important things to know. First, many industry watchers seem to be afraid that Amazon is planning to enter the prescription drug business, which would put unbelievable pressure on retail pharmacies. CVS may be girding itself for that future by expanding into other lines of business. Second,

CVS isn’t just a chronically understaffed purveyor of energy drinks, toothpaste, and Lipitor. It’s also a health care provider.

Along with its 9,700 drugstores, CVS runs 1,100 MinuteClinic locations, where patients can walk in without an appointment to deal with their basic health needs, like having a rash examined or getting a flu shot. Buying Aetna and combining it with this network would create a convenient, symbiotic relationship. For instance, Aetna could push its enrollees to use CVS’s inexpensive clinics, staffed with nurse practitioners and physician assistants, rather than visit a primary care doctor every time they come down with a fever. Of course, patients would probably stop by the pharmacy counter to fill their prescriptions, too.

The companies also argue that bringing together an insurer with a web of retail clinics will make it cheaper to treat chronic diseases, which are a major driver of health costs. Diabetes sufferers, for instance, could stop by CVS for check-ins to monitor their health and pick up their supplies. The pharmacy could keep tabs on their blood sugar remotely and send a helpful text when levels are off. This sort of pre-emptive care could prevent major complications from the condition, which would be good for the patient, and Aetna’s bottom line.

This is the sort of value-based care model—where providers make money by keeping patients healthy and expenses down, instead of charging for as many services as possible—that most experts think the U.S. medical system needs to shift toward if we ever want to control our health spending. The U.S. government, for its part, has been trying to nudge hospitals and physicians in this direction for years. And while there are questions about whether CVS can actually pull off its vision, it’s not necessarily an absurd idea to try. “This is certainly going to be difficult to do,” Craig Garthwaite, a professor at Northwestern University Kellogg School of Management who studies the health care industry, told me. “But the first step along that road is to create the economic incentives so that you make more money if you make people healthier.”

There’s another reason wonks are guardedly optimistic about the merger, and it has to do with drug prices. Since 2007, CVS has owned CVS Caremark, the country’s second largest pharmacy benefits manager, which counts Aetna as one of its most important clients. Employers and health insurers hire PBMs, as they’re called, to handle their prescription drug plans, and much of their work involves negotiating discounts from pharmaceutical-makers. But many observers have begun to think that these middle men, who are theoretically supposed to keep drug costs down, may actually be contributing to their rise by encouraging companies like Pfizer and Novartis to hike their list prices, then offer big rebates in order to win business.

A big part of the problem is that PBMs typically take a cut of each rebate for themselves, so they benefit when list prices go up. (If that makes the industry sound like a kickback scheme, well, you be the judge.) This might be less of a problem if there were lots of companies competing by offering to accept a smaller slice of the action in return for their services, but the industry has become incredibly concentrated. According to Bloomberg, about 70 percent of all prescriptions in the U.S. are handled by just three PBMs, including CVS Caremark.

Because their dealings are bound by confidentiality agreements, it’s not clear exactly how much of the country’s spiraling drug cost problem can be traced back to the PBMs. Their role may even be a bit overhyped, since the companies make a convenient scapegoat for pharma manufacturers looking to deflect blame for high prices. When Mylan come under fire for hiking the cost EpiPens last year, for instance, it was quick to blame the “broken system” created by companies like CVS Caremark.

Whether or not these companies are the villains they’re often painted as, though, there seems to be a growing consensus that insurers are better off cutting-out the middle man and managing their own PBMs. The theory is that instead of trying to maximize their own share of each rebate while driving up drug prices in the process, an in-house benefits manager will only be incentivized to keep costs low for the insurer they’re attached to. United Healthcare owns OptumRX, the number-three PBM, which it combined with Catamaran, then the industry’s number-four player, in a $12.8 billion deal. And in October, Anthem announced it would end its contract with industry leader ExpressScripts and start its own internal PBM with CVS’s help. By purchasing Aetna, CVS is continuing a trend that could rationalize the country’s drug distribution system, at least a bit.

So, that’s the upbeat story you can tell about this merger. There are also reasons to doubt it.

For starters, it’s not obvious that sending patients to their local MinuteClinic instead of their family doctor will save all that much money for customers or Aetna itself. America’s astronomical health spending isn’t driven by an excessive number of visits to primary care visits. It’s driven by hospitals, largely, and there’s not much about this merger that suggests it would help Aetna and CVS squeeze those costs. “They don’t have doctors. They don’t have hospitals. They don’t have outpatient centers,” Martin Gaynor, a professor of economics and health policy at Carnegie Mellon, told me. “They have outpatient pharmacies and they have MinuteClinics. What do you do with that?”

As for fixing our broken drug distribution system: United Healthgroup has owned a PBM business for a while now, and there’s no indication that it’s saved customers much if any money. That may be because, despite what the incentives look like on paper, it’s more profitable for the merged companies to keep making profits off of high drug prices and risk losing a few insurance enrollees than it is to try to iron out those costs, David Balto, an antitrust lawyer and former policy director at the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Competition, told me. “Where we have seen insurers and PBMs merge, we’ve seen no efficiencies,” he said.

Finally, it’s possible that letting CVS and Aetna merge will give them new tools to unfairly undercut their competitors. The most obvious concern is that CVS will push Aetna customers to use their pharmacies instead of, say, Walgreens, or their mom-and-pop drugstore around the corner. “When CVS acquires Aetna, will it restrict where Aetna consumers get their drugs? You better believe they will,” Balto said. The National Community Pharmacists Association, which represents the owners of 22,000 pharmacies, including independent shops and regional chains, has voiced the same concern.

The merged companies could have some subtle but unfair advantages over other insurers, as well. CVS might offer Aetna a better deal on prescriptions than, say, United or Cigna, giving its corporate sibling a leg up. Some antitrust advocates, like Open Markets policy director Phillip Longman, are also concerned that Aetna could leverage the vast trove of patient data from CVS’s PBM business in ways that might be unfair to other carriers.* “In the health care business, if one player gets this trove of information, it’s a big competitive advantage,” he said.

Just like the potential benefits of the merger, a lot of these concerns are hypothetical at this point, and there are reasons to think they could be overblown. CVS might not want to alienate other insurers and customers by openly playing favorites with Aetna. Regulators could require CVS to set up a firewall to ensure Aetna doesn’t abuse Caremark’s data. As for independent pharmacies, they may be in trouble anyway if Amazon decides to finally jump into the business.

But the issues deserve careful attention. Unfortunately, we can’t necessarily count on the government to give them that. For several decades, the Justice Department has focused on policing horizontal mergers—where two companies in the same line of business, such as two insurers, combine. But CVS and Aetna would be what’s known as a vertical merger, where companies in two different stages of a supply chain join up. The DOJ has generally given those deals a free pass. It made an enormous exception recently, by suing to stop AT&T from acquiring Time Warner, but many believe that may have been political payback by the Trump administration against Time Warner–owned CNN and not precedent.

So, could the marriage of one of the country’s biggest pharmacies and biggest insurers be a happy one for consumers? Or will it just lead to a more concentrated health care industry without benefiting patients? It’s doubtful that the government is going to stop us from finding out.

Aetna: denied 15 y/o minimal invasive brain surgery to end her epilepsy

Girl has blunt message for insurance company after brain surgery request denied

http://wgntv.com/2017/12/11/girl-has-blunt-message-for-aetna-after-her-brain-surgery-request-was-denied/

Cara Pressman sobbed in the big red chair in her living room. The 15-year-old tried to absorb the devastating news relayed by her parents: that their insurance company, Aetna, denied her for a minimally invasive brain surgery that could end the seizures that have haunted her since she was 9 years old.

“When my parents told me, I went kind of blank and started crying,” she said. “I cried for like an hour.”

Her friends had been lined up to visit her in the hospital for the surgery three days away, on Monday, October 23. Between tears, she texted them that the whole thing was off.

It was supposed to be a joyous weekend. Cara’s grandparents had come to town to celebrate their 90th birthdays, a jubilant party with more than 100 family and friends crowding her home. The party did go on — just with a lot more stress.

Cara had multiple complex partial seizures that weekend. When the seizures strike, her body gets cold and shakes, and she zones out for anywhere from 20 seconds to two minutes, typically still aware of her surroundings. Her seizures can be triggered by stress, by being happy, by exerting herself — almost anything. “It’s like having a nightmare but while you’re awake,” she said.

In the six weeks since the denial, Cara has had more than two dozen seizures affecting her everyday life. Her message to Aetna is blunt: “Considering they’re denying me getting surgery and stopping this thing that’s wrong with my brain, I would probably just say, ‘Screw you.’ ”

Aetna: We’re looking out for what’s best for patients

The Pressman family and, separately, Jennifer Rittereiser, a 44-year-old mom who has struggled with seizures since she was 10, approached CNN in recent weeks after they were both denied, by Aetna, for laser ablation surgery, a minimally invasive procedure in which a thin laser is used to heat and destroy lesions in the brain where the seizures are originating. Aetna is the third-largest health insurance provider in the country, providing medical coverage to 23.1 million people.

Neurologists consider laser ablation, which is performed through a small hole in the skull, to be safer and more precise than traditional brain surgery, where the top portion of the skull is removed in order for doctors to operate. The procedure is less daunting for the patient and parents who make decisions for their children: No one likes the idea of a skull opened and a chunk of brain removed.

In denying Cara her surgery, Aetna said it considers laser ablation surgery “experimental and investigational for the treatment of epilepsy because the effectiveness of this approach has not been established.”

“Clinical studies have not proven that this procedures effective for treatment of the member’s condition,” Aetna wrote in its rejection letter.

The insurance company did approve her for the more invasive and more expensive open brain surgery, called a temporal lobectomy, even though her medical team never sought approval for the procedure.

The laser surgery is approved by the Food and Drug Administration and is widely recognized within the epilepsy community as an effective treatment alternative to open brain surgery, especially when the location of seizure activity can be pinpointed to a specific part of the brain.

Dr. Jamie Van Gompel, a neurosurgeon at the Mayo Clinic, disputes Aetna’s assessment. He is not involved in Cara’s care nor Rittereiser’s treatment, but he said Aetna’s assessment is wrong.

“I would not call it experimental at all,” said Van Gompel, who is leading a clinical trial on the surgery at Mayo as part of a larger national study. “It’s definitely not an experimental procedure. There’ve been thousands of patients treated with it. It’s FDA-approved. There’s a lot of data out there to suggest it’s effective for epilepsy.”

Van Gompel said a temporal lobectomy carries a much higher risk of serious complications, including the possibility of death. “It’s a big jump to go to a big invasive procedure,” he said.

Recovery time after open brain surgery can range from six to 12 weeks. By contrast, a patient who undergoes laser ablation can be back to work or at school in less than two weeks. The pain from laser surgery is much less, and extreme headaches are fewer than with open brain surgery, Van Gompel said.

While laser ablation has not yet undergone large randomized controlled trials, Van Gompel said existing data shows it’s effective more than 50% of the time. He hopes the current clinical trial will show a success rate of 60% to 70% or better in epilepsy patients. Temporal lobectomies, he said, have a slightly better rate, of more than 70%.

Pressed by CNN for a better explanation on its denial, Aetna stood by its rejection for Cara and Rittereiser, saying it was in the best interest of the patients. But the language was softened slightly.

“Clinical effectiveness and our members’ safety are the primary criteria we use in determining whether a treatment or service is medically necessary,” Aetna said. “There is currently a limited amount of evidence-based, clinical studies related to laser ablation surgery. As noted by the Epilepsy Foundation, only studies with a very small number of participants have been used to report the effectiveness of this procedure. We consistently evaluate any new studies or additional evidence when developing our clinical policy bulletins, and will continue to do so for this procedure.”

Contacted for reaction, the Epilepsy Foundation strongly objected to Aetna’s remarks, saying the insurance company took its information out of context. Laser ablation surgery “has emerged as a new minimally invasive surgical option that is best suited for patients with symptomatic localization-related epilepsy,” said Dr. Jacqueline French, the chief science officer with the Epilepsy Foundation.

“This technology is much less invasive than the alternative, which involves removing a sizeable piece of brain, at a substantially higher monetary and personal cost,” French said. “This path should be available, if the treating epilepsy physician has recommended it, without delay or barriers.”

Phil Gattone, the president and CEO of the Epilepsy Foundation, said insurance denials and other barriers to treatment have become a common battle for thousands of Americans with seizure disorders.

Gattone knows first-hand the pain of what Cara’s parents are going through. His own son began having seizures when he was 4 and underwent brain surgery in the early 1990s. “It was extremely challenging for our family to make a decision to remove part of our child’s skull and brain for a surgery that we hoped would end the devastation of seizures that were stopping his development,” Gattone said. “We took this leap of faith and made the decision, and it worked out the best for him.”

But he added that he and his wife wished laser ablation surgery had been available back then. Laser ablation was approved by the FDA nine years ago. “I know that my wife and I would’ve found much more comfort if we had had (laser ablation) as an option,” he said.

Gattone said people with seizures, their caregivers and their doctors should not be “spending critical time in the midst of a health-care crisis, filing paperwork, making appeals or otherwise going through the motions of administrative paperwork” trying to get approval for a life-changing operation.

“The Epilepsy Foundation can understand no reason why an insurance company would place any barrier to delay a treatment that may save an individual’s life, promote the development of the young child’s brain or bring about seizure control,” Gattone said.

Mom who crashed with kid in car gets denied

Jennifer Rittereiser lost consciousness behind the wheel of her silver SUV while driving with her 7-year-old son, Robert, in April. Her SUV rammed into a car in front of her and struck it again before veering into oncoming traffic. Her vehicle careened down an embankment, flipped over and came to rest on its side amid a tangle of brush. She narrowly missed slamming into a guardrail and several trees.

Mom and son somehow managed to walk free unharmed.

“People were amazed,” she said. “They had a helicopter on the way, actually. I am extremely fortunate just from that sense.”

Rittereiser has battled seizures since she was 10 and has been able to function with an array of medications in the three decades since. For much of her life, she could tell when the seizures might come.

These weren’t like the seizures depicted in Hollywood movies; she wouldn’t fall to the ground and writhe. She would zone out for a spell. She could understand people and could still function but couldn’t speak back — or if she did, her words were garbled.

As an executive in the health care industry, Rittereiser has fallen asleep during meetings. When she senses a seizure coming, she rushes to the bathroom to hide until they go away. One time, she says she urinated on herself at her desk without realizing it.

Rittereiser had a crash in 2014 in which she rear-ended a car after she had a seizure. No one was hurt in that crash, but she stopped driving for more than a year. Her medications were tweaked, and her seizures were largely kept in check, until the crash this April.

She was soon evaluated by an array of doctors and recommended for laser ablation surgery. After 34 years of struggling with seizures, she thought her ordeal might finally come to an end. Surgery was set for June 16.

But in late May, Aetna denied the surgery. She fought Aetna’s decision through a lengthy appeals process. Aetna refused to budge.

“It’s just not right,” Rittereiser said.

She said she recently went to Aetna’s website to look up the company’s values. She felt nauseated. “Everything in their core values is not being shown in the way I’m being treated. They’re talking about promoting wellness and health and ‘being by your side.’ ”

She paused, contemplating the company’s “by your side” catchphrase, saying it’s “the most ridiculous thing, because they are the biggest barrier to my success and my well-being going forward.

“It drives me crazy.”

Dad: ‘You get so angry’

Julie Pressman stood near an elevator at her doctor’s office when word came that Cara’s surgery had been denied. The mom fell to the floor and wept.

She called Cara’s father, Robert. He was at the airport picking up his 90-year-old parents for their birthday party. Mom and Dad rallied for their daughter and gathered strength to break the news. That’s when Cara sat in the red chair, crying inconsolably.

“Telling Cara was horrible,” her mom said. “Horrible.”

“It’s just so frustrating for us to know there’s a solution out there — a way to fix our daughter — and some bureaucratic machine is preventing this from happening,” Robert Pressman said. “You get so angry, but you don’t know who to take it out on, because there’s no particular person that’s doing it. It’s this big bureaucracy that’s preventing this from happening.”

Julie and Robert said the most beautiful day of their lives came on August 20, 2002, when Cara popped into the world and met her 2-year-old sister, Lindsey, for the first time. “That was the day we became a family,” Julie said. “Our love for those girls is amazing. How we got this lucky is beyond us.”

But that luck has been tested. When Cara was 9, she’d complained of extreme headaches for much of the day one evening, and then in the middle of the night, she began seizing uncontrollably. The family had two black Labradors that had gone to her room and barked like crazy to alert her parents. Cara had bitten her tongue, and blood was running down her face when they got to the room.

It was a terrifying scene. She was rushed off in an ambulance and underwent a battery of tests. Mom, Dad and Cara never thought they’d still be battling seizures six years later — let alone an insurance company. She’s had seizures on the soccer field, during softball games, on stage during plays, in the classroom. Almost everywhere.

How does she envision a life without seizures?

“I don’t know,” she said. “I’ve never had a life without seizures.”

“You will. You will,” her dad told her.

“I just don’t know when,” she responded.

Mom: “It will happen, kiddo.”

Her mother calls Cara a feisty, petite powerhouse with big marble eyes and long eyelashes and a funny wit to match. She’s a naturally gifted athlete, singer and dancer, but her parents feel that her seizures have kept her from reaching her full potential.

They long for the day when the seizures are gone. The parents said they have paid $24,000 for insurance with Aetna this year. They’re determined to get Cara laser ablation surgery with or without the insurance company’s help. They will appeal Aetna’s latest rejection — but they’re not optimistic.

In preparation, they’ve begun exploring raiding their retirement funds to pay the $300,000 out of pocket. “Cara is worth every penny, but man,” her mom said. ” ‘Screw Aetna,’ indeed, to quote my kid.”