Pregnancy and Stretch Marks

Do you question if it is potential to see symptoms of maternity even on the 1st few calendar weeks of maternity? The reply for a lot of females is yes. Though every females experiences maternity somewhat dissimilar from everybody else, there are some general signs that many females can and do suffer, even on the first calendar weeks of maternity.

The biggest first calendar month maternity symptoms a lady may suffer are those that are like to a catamenial time period. That could be confusing, as a lady could not be certain if her signs are from her every month time period or are coming asshe's pregnant. Here are several of those signs.

Muscle spasms is one of the initiative things you might suffer while expecting. For of the maternity endocrines coursing by your physical structure and the reality that big alterations are happening within your womb, you are able to experience cramping in this sphere.

Light haemorrhage (called spotting) could also occur in the early levels of maternity. The hemorrhage happens at nidation, when the conceptus inheres in the womb. This haemorrhage could occasionally get mistaken for catamenial hemorrhaging.

Temper swings and breast irritation are 2 other early maternity symptoms that could as well happen during menstruum. Once again, the maternity internal secretions could induce a lot of shifts in the adult female body and emotions. Shift in mood is pretty general and anticipated at that stage. A lady might experience utmost emotions such as felicity, and she might also experience irritable or distressing.

The truth is that a lot of females may feel symptoms of maternity during the first calendar month of maternity, but that does not needfully mean she is expecting. For a catamenial time period can produce a lot of of the same signs, it is generally hard to inform which it's until after the maternity has been affirmed by a home maternity examination or by a health professional. You are able to watch for the symptoms, but it is difficult to know certainly until you get external ratification.

Stretch marks are pits that allow lines of pink, blood-red, or embellished signs on skin that's been extended too promptly. That stretching is frequently a consequence of prompt weight gain on maternity or muscle building. The skin’s corium layer splits and produces the following scars, acknowledged as striae. Several topical skincare goods could assist reducing the appearing of light stretch marks, or assist preventing the appearance all at once if applied decently and at the correct time. Nevertheless, large and black marks frequently need stretch mark remotion techniques that're more drastic. Lasting stretch mark remotion is just potential by operative processes, one of the following being the abdominoplasty.

Choose Natural Sleeping Pills - SleepWell

If you are on a regular basis having difficulty either falling or
remaining at rest (insomnia), attain an appointment with the
physician. Therapy is reachable — but it counts on what is inducing
your sleeplessness. In a lot of cases a fundamental health or sleep
condition could be named and addressed, a much more efficient approach
than only addressing the symptom of sleeplessness itself.
Demeanor alterations are broadly the best therapy for relentless
sleeplessness. For episodic sleepless nighttimes, nevertheless,
prescription sleeping medications might be helpful. Though sleeping
pills do not address the fundamental cause of your sleep troubles,
they might assist you getting some much demanded sleep.
Nowadays prescription sleeping medications do not carry the equal rate
of chances of addiction and o.d.s as sleeping pills of the past times.
Merely chances stay on — particularly for humans who have particular
health conditions, including bouncier and nephropathy. Always speak
with your physician before attempting a new therapy for insomnia.
Prescription sleeping medications are reachable to assist you falling
at peace easier, remain at rest longer or both. Prior to prescribing a
remedy to assist you sleeping, your physician will enquire you a
number of inquiries to get a vivid image of your sleeping patterns. He
and/or she might also buy tests to preclude any fundamental conditions
that might be inducing trouble sleeping.
To reduce the chance of side effects and of getting reliant on
medications to sleep, your physician probably will prescribe remedies
for fortnight or less. If the initiative remedy you take does not act
after the full administrated course, address your physician. You might
need to attempt more than one prescription sleep tablet prior to
discovering one that acts for you.
Several prescription sleeping medications are reachable as generic
medications, which are generally less expensive than trade names.
Enquire your physician whether there's a generic variation reachable
of the remedy he or she administrates.
SleepWell is the complete heal for sleeplessness and restless
nighttimes. Although most sleeping aids trust man-made and
habit-forming chemicals, SleepWell is projected to act in harmony
with your body's own analytical balance. That 100% herbal, secure and
non habit-forming herbal sleep aid acts in the head by suppressing the
impulses that foreclose the physical structure from achieving pure,
continuous sleep.

Sleeping Pills

If you are on a regular basis having difficulty either falling or
remaining at rest (insomnia), attain an appointment with the
physician. Therapy is reachable — but it counts on what is inducing
your sleeplessness. In a lot of cases a fundamental health or sleep
condition could be named and addressed, a much more efficient approach
than only addressing the symptom of sleeplessness itself.
Demeanor alterations are broadly the best therapy for relentless
sleeplessness. For episodic sleepless nighttimes, nevertheless,
prescription sleeping medications might be helpful. Though sleeping
pills do not address the fundamental cause of your sleep troubles,
they might assist you getting some much demanded sleep.
Nowadays prescription sleeping medications do not carry the equal rate
of chances of addiction and o.d.s as sleeping pills of the past times.
Merely chances stay on — particularly for humans who have particular
health conditions, including bouncier and nephropathy. Always speak
with your physician before attempting a new therapy for insomnia.
Prescription sleeping medications are reachable to assist you falling
at peace easier, remain at rest longer or both. Prior to prescribing a
remedy to assist you sleeping, your physician will enquire you a
number of inquiries to get a vivid image of your sleeping patterns. He
and/or she might also buy tests to preclude any fundamental conditions
that might be inducing trouble sleeping.
To reduce the chance of side effects and of getting reliant on
medications to sleep, your physician probably will prescribe remedies
for fortnight or less. If the initiative remedy you take does not act
after the full administrated course, address your physician. You might
need to attempt more than one prescription sleep tablet prior to
discovering one that acts for you.
Several prescription sleeping medications are reachable as generic
medications, which are generally less expensive than trade names.
Enquire your physician whether there's a generic variation reachable
of the remedy he or she administrates.
SleepWell is the complete heal for sleeplessness and restless
nighttimes. Although most sleeping aids trust man-made and
habit-forming chemicals, SleepWell is projected to act in harmony
with your body's own analytical balance. That 100% herbal, secure and
non habit-forming herbal sleep aid acts in the head by suppressing the
impulses that foreclose the physical structure from achieving pure,
continuous sleep.

CAN PUBLIC HEALTH INSURANCE FIX HEALTH CARE?

Years ago, a woman was wheeled into my E.R. in critical condition. She was comatose, and her blood pressure was sky high. I didn’t need a CAT scan to know what was wrong. A vessel deep in her brain had burst, filling her head with blood. She never had a chance.

When I broke the news to her sisters, I learned that she had stopped taking her blood pressure medicine several days before. Why? Although employed, she was uninsured. And when money got tight, she had to choose between buying medicine for herself or food for her kids. Like most moms, she put her children’s needs ahead of her own. She paid for the decision with her life.

This story illustrates what is wrong with America’s health care system. My patient got excellent, high-tech care, but too late to do any good. Ironically, my team’s futile effort to save her life cost far more money than the medicine she needed to stay healthy.

There is great health care in this country, but too often we fall short. According to the CIA’s World Factbook, 40 countries have lower infant mortality rates than ours. We rank 46th in the world for life expectancy at birth. A study of death rates from treatable health conditions ranked the U.S. 19th among 19 wealthy nations —- dead last.

One reason America scores so poorly is that we ration health care, based largely on ability to pay. Uninsured Americans get about half the care of insured Americans, so they tend to be sicker and to die sooner.

American health care is incredibly expensive. We pay $2.2 trillion per year —- about $7,400 per man, woman and child. That’s twice the median per capita spending of our global competitors —- the 30 industrialized nations of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. We pay 16 times the OECD median for private health insurance, and twice as much out-of-pocket. France, Germany, Great Britain and Canada cover everyone, but we spend more public money on health care than they do.

Costs continue to rise. Just last week, The Wall Street Journal reported that some hospitals and big pharmaceutical companies are pushing hefty price increases to boost their earnings.

If these double-digit price increases stand, insurers will pass them on to employers, who will pass them on to us in higher co-pays and deductibles. Over the past nine years, employer-sponsored insurance premiums have risen six times faster than wages.

This can’t continue. Hard-working American families deserve better; so do American businesses that are struggling to compete in the global marketplace. To level the playing field, three things must happen:

First, we need fair rules that promote real competition.

Second, we need a public health insurance option that is affordable and always available. That way, employees of firms that don’t offer coverage and workers who are between jobs will have a competitive alternative to the overpriced and skimpy plans offered through the insurance market.

Third, your doctor needs up-to-date information on the best treatments, so he or she can identify the option that’s best for you.

Health care industry executives and their congressional allies oppose these measures. The outcome of this struggle may determine if you and I can get affordable coverage in the future.

To keep America strong, everyone needs access to quality, affordable care. The best way to do this is craft a uniquely American solution —- one that combines private-sector ingenuity with public-sector fairness.

> Dr. Art Kellermann is associate dean for health policy, Emory School of Medicine. His opinions are his own.

—-

No: Government intervention stifles competition, innovation

By WAYNE OLIVER

All Americans want health care coverage. All Americans like choice. Americans who like their current health insurance coverage should be able to keep it.

Those without coverage should have the freedom to choose the most appropriate plan that fits their specific needs and that of their family. But, everyone should have access to affordable health coverage.

President Obama wants to create a public plan option for health consumers under the age of 65. The public plan option will establish a government-run health insurance company —- a move that is poised to undermine health care providers, employers and the very sustainability of the entire health care system, not to mention the health and well-being of patients.

Big government should not stick its nose into private markets —- much less compete in them.

We have tried something similar to a public plan option. It was called TennCare in Tennessee, and it failed miserably. After the better part of two decades of out-of-control expenditures, TennCare is now being dismantled because it was too bureaucratic, too inefficient, did not improve health outcomes and was costly for taxpayers.

Rather than compete with the private sector, the appropriate role of the government should be to create incentives for innovation through the private health insurance market. Plans must focus on prevention, wellness and effective disease management.

The creation of a government-run health insurance company could jeopardize coverage for 130 million Americans who are currently receiving it through the private sector.

What happens when health insurers begin to withdraw from the private sector? A lack of competition results in higher costs.

Then, we are left with fewer choices of health insurance coverage and even fewer options of medical treatments. Having fewer choices at higher costs of lower quality is not how we believe we should approach reform.

Everyone should be required to have health insurance coverage; or, if they are opposed to insurance, they should post a bond. Insurance can be issued by employers or purchased by an individual from a private health insurance company. If purchased by an individual, they should be able to deduct health insurance premiums from their taxes just like employers can.

The working poor could receive subsidies to help with the cost of coverage. Everyone would have coverage —- all 300 million of us.

Our goal should be to have a 300 million-payer system that is individually focused, wellness- and prevention-driven and based in the private sector.

At a time when new scientific breakthroughs are occurring almost daily, we must have a system that accelerates the discovery, development, dissemination and delivery of those solutions that can save lives and create better health.

Yet by their very nature, government bureaucracies are slow, inefficient and stifle innovation. It is exactly the opposite of what we need today.

Actuaries have said that the Medicare system is going to start running deficits as soon as 2017.

If federal bureaucrats can’t manage Medicare, why then do we want these same bureaucrats to run a new government-managed health insurance company?

America has really good sick care, but we need a system that creates incentives for physicians, clinics and hospitals to keep individuals healthy.

We need to let the private sector lead the way by implementing innovations to develop an individually centered, wellness- and prevention-focused, coordinated system of care.

> Wayne Oliver is a project director at the Center for Health Transformation, founded by Newt Gingrich
Sourse: http://www.ajc.com

Why private health insurance is still popular

During times of economic turmoil, insurance policies are usually among the first cost-cutting casualties. Unfortunately, the true value of any policy is often not revealed until it is needed, whereas the regular cost of premiums is likely to stretch an already tight budget.

Research from Sainsbury's Finance reveals half a million Brits have cut back on home contents cover in the past 12 months, leaving themselves with no protection in the event their property is stolen, destroyed or damaged.

However, private medical insurance (PMI) seems to be faring surprisingly well during the economic downturn. Bupa recently released results that show customer numbers were up 2% by the end of 2008, and figures from Simplyhealth reveal sales of HSA's employee paid Health Cash Plan were up 25% in the final quarter of last year.

When cutting back costs more

The appeal of PMI
Private medical insurance (or private health insurance) is designed to meet the cost of non-NHS medical treatment in the event you experience health problems.

Holding a PMI policy means you may have a say in which hospital you are treated at and which specialists you see. You're also likely to have more comfortable accommodation if you are treated privately, probably in your own en-suite room.

It seems the key appeal of PMI is that it allows individuals swift access to health care when they need it. Although the NHS says its '18 weeks' waiting time target has now been met (whereby patients referred from a GP for further treatment can expect it to commence within that timeframe), research from Bupa shows more than 80% of people feel this is still too long to wait for medical care.

The insurer's survey found that 49% of respondents believed hospital waiting times should be less than one month. Meanwhile, 69% of people were concerned their health could deteriorate further if they went without medical attention for as long as 18 weeks.

Compare quotes on private health insurance

A necessity or a luxury?
Despite the effects of the economic downturn, it seems some people view private medical insurance as a necessity rather than a luxury.

This may be because getting back to work as soon as possible after an illness is an important priority. In the case of self-employed people, PMI can be invaluable. Ensuring medical treatment is concluded as swiftly as possible may help minimise loss of earnings.

In recent years, many private companies have offered PMI as a benefit for their workers. Private health cover is advantageous both for the employer and the employee, as it can help to reduce the amount of sick leave an individual needs should they become ill.

Keep in mind that even if you think private medical insurance is a must-have, it's still important to consider the price of your policy.

Protecting your income in the crunch

Cutting the cost of PMI
As with any form of insurance, your insurer will calculate your PMI premium based on risk. The more likely it is you will make a claim, the more expensive your policy is likely to be.

Therefore, your age, current state of health and lifestyle are likely to have an impact on the price you pay for PMI. If you are overweight or a smoker you should expect to pay more for private health cover.

Some private medical insurers offer incentives to policy holders encouraging them to lead healthier lifestyles. Companies may reward such activities as going to the gym and giving up smoking by reducing the price of future PMI premiums.

The level of cover you choose will also have a significant effect on the price of PMI. Some policies will cover overnight in-hospital care only, while a more comprehensive policy could include cover for day-patient treatment (where you have a procedure done and leave hospital on the same day) as well as out-patient care.

Similarly, a policy that includes GP services, overseas medical treatment and offers the patient a high level of choice with regards to which hospitals and specialists they visit is likely to be more costly than a basic PMI plan.

Small things that make a big difference to insurance costs

Comparing cover
If you're considering taking out a PMI policy, or would like to cut the cost of your existing health insurance, it's crucial to shop around.

In addition, it's essential to ensure you compare similar policies. Some PMI policies come with exclusions and rules which will prevent customers claiming for certain conditions, such as illnesses that arise as a result of drug abuse, pre-existing conditions and terminal illnesses. It is important to know exactly what is and what isn't covered by a PMI policy in order to assess its suitability and decide whether or not it offers you value for money.

The price of peace of mind?
It may be that as the effects of the recession continue to unfold, PMI policies will decline in popularity.

However, it seems there are many people in the UK who would rather make cutbacks elsewhere than sacrifice the peace of mind PMI offers.

Eamon Hynes, protection insurance expert at BeatThatQuote.com, says, "Once consumers experience making a claim under a PMI policy, they generally have an immediate understanding of the benefits of the policy and why they need it.

"Many other forms of insurance are much more intangible and are therefore easier to let go when money feels tight. However, people can more easily perceive the advantages of private medical insurance and may feel a stronger, more emotional pull towards these types of policies."
sourse: BeatThatQuote.com

37% of Californians without health insurance at some point, study finds

The health advocacy group Families USA says about 12.1 million residents were uninsured for at least one month -many for at least six months - during 2007 and 2008.
More than one out of three California residents went without health insurance for at least some point in the last two years, according to a health advocacy group’s analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data.

About 12.1 million Californians, or 37% of non-senior residents, were uninsured for at least one month during 2007 and 2008, Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, a Washington, D.C.-based group, said Thursday.

Most of them were uninsured for at least six months, Pollack said, and more than 80% of them were in working families. Minorities were more likely to be uninsured; 53% of Latinos and 38% of blacks were uninsured during the two-year period; for whites, 25% were uninsured.

They were among the 86.7 million U.S. residents who went without insurance for at least one month during the same two-year period, according to the organization's count.

Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access California, a patient advocacy organization, said the data represent the need for healthcare reform.

"Being uninsured is not something that happens to only some people in California," he said. "It is a condition that all of us are faced with the potential of, and that many of us face on a regular basis."

Families USA's methodology in tracking the uninsured differed from the census calculations. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of people who had no health insurance for any part of 2007 was 45.7 million, down from 47 million in 2006.

Some experts attribute the drop to rising enrollment in government health programs for the poor and children.
Sourse:http://www.latimes.com/

Economic recovery requires affordable health care system

Hawaii's successful system for providing health care at relatively inexpensive rates has been replicated in many states and may be a partial model for nationwide health care reform. The rise in the number of workers laid off from jobs that included health insurance shows the need to extend employer-based insurance to universal coverage.

Hawaii became the first state to require minimum mandatory employer-based health insurance 35 years ago. As a result, a study released this week by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation showed that one in seven adult workers in Hawaii are insured, compared with one in five nationally.

Meanwhile, a study by the Dartmouth Institute last month showed that the national average cost of Medicare, which covers the elderly and disabled, was $8,304 in 2006, while the cost in Hawaii was $5,311, lowest in the nation. Some attribute that to systems like Kaiser Permanente, a health plan that directly employs doctors. Still, small businesses in Hawaii complain about the rising cost of providing health benefits to employees.

During last year's presidential campaign, then- candidate Barack Obama proposed requiring most companies to offer their employees health insurance or pay a payroll tax of 7 percent into a pool financing government-sponsored insurance. The president now says he doesn't "presume that it was a perfect plan or that it was the best possible plan."

The number of uninsured Americans has reached 46 million, and there is talk of expanding Medicare, a step toward a government-run system that some fear would come close to nationalizing the health care industry.

Republican Senate leaders have warned Obama in a letter that "forcing free-market plans to compete with these government-run programs would create an unlevel playing field and inevitably doom true competition," resulting in "a single government-run program controlling all of the market." Private insurers maintain they can guarantee affordable, adequate health coverage without resorting to a government plan.

Obama has become flexible about what health care reform should include and he has solicited leaders of labor unions, business groups, hospitals, insurance companies and consumer organizations to engage in discussion. That contrasts with the approach of the Clinton administration, which unloaded on Congress a comprehensive, detailed reform measure that sank on arrival.

Health care reform should not be put off because of the current economic crisis, which has thrown millions of families into their own crises by the loss of health insurance because of job losses. Obama's proposed expenditures of at least $634 billion — it could be much more — on reform over 10 years is needed to assist those families and create universal health care for the future.
Sourse: starbulletin.com

Personal Private Medical Insurance Launched By NPA Insurance

NPA Insurance is launching Private Medical Insurance designed for pharmacists and their families. The NPA's medical insurance offers comprehensive benefits such as out-patient, inpatient and day-treatment. Complementary therapies and medicines are also included as standard along with helpful advice lines and a claims service with experienced and friendly staff.

Key benefits

- A comprehensive product covering complementary medicines and therapies - these could include physiotherapy, chiropractic, osteopathy, acupuncture or homeopathy
- No excess
- Easy arrangement of treatment over the phone
- Optional cover for long term health conditions such as heart and cancer treatment
- Easy transfer from existing private health insurer
- A range of helpful advice lines and a 24 hour counselling service.

A bespoke group health scheme can be arranged for larger groups.

Paul Coleman, NPA Insurance Director, explains some of the particular advantages of taking out medical insurance from NPA Insurance: "Our research showed that many NPA members already have some form of health insurance but that there is a need for a more comprehensive offering. We believe our policy will fulfil this need.

"We have made transferring from an existing provider easier and we offer the same rates to customers switching from their existing health provider as we offer to first time customers. Making a claim is even easier. In most circumstances, our customers will simply need to call the Claims Helpline and treatment will be arranged and approved over the telephone - no forms will have to be completed. This makes things so much simpler, and is likely to be especially helpful at a time when you could be under particular stress."

Notes

Core Benefits - Cover Available
Out-patient
Specialist consultation fees - Core benefit
Diagnostic tests - Core benefit
Physiotherapy, chiropractic, osteopathy, acupuncture or homeopathy - Core benefit
Heart treatment - Core benefit
Cancer treatment - core benefit
In-patient and day-treatment
Diagnostic tests - Core benefit
Surgeons' and Anaesthetists' fees - Core benefit
Hospital charges - Core benefit
Physiotherapy - Core benefit
NHS cash benefit - Core benefit
Parent accommodation - Core benefit
Heart treatment - Additional benefit
Cancer treatment - Additional benefit

Further information can also be obtained from npainsurance.co.uk. 

Healthy San Francisco Costs Less Than Private Health Insurance, Report Shows

Australians should be able to choose either private health cover or Medicare to ensure a more efficient and fair system and help reduce public waiting lists, a health care economist from The Australian National University has proposed.

Dr Francesco Paolucci - a Research Fellow at the Australian Centre for Economic Research on Health (ACERH) at ANU - says the current public/private mix in health care financing leads to duplication, high-transaction costs, and long waiting times in the public health sector.

"Although the policy goals of subsidising private health insurance in Australia are, among others, to decrease the pressure on the public system, increase choice and affordability of health coverage to Australians - the current arrangements have led to some perverse incentives and undesirable effects" Dr Paolucci said.

"Giving consumers a choice between Medicare and private health insurance (PHI), combined with a system of risk-adjusted subsidies, would improve incentives for efficiency and increase stability in the PHI market."

Dr Paolucci says Australia should explore introducing consumers' choice of health plan and leave Medicare and the private insurers to compete with each other to be a 'prudent buyer of care'.

"The crucial element of this approach is that it removes duplication of coverage by allowing individuals to choose to be enrolled in one plan or the other. Private health insurers would have to cover all types of services and pay all health care expenses, which is not the case now.

"An essential component of the 'Medicare/PHI choice' would be that as compensation for covering all health care costs, PHI holders or funds receive a risk-adjusted subsidy. In the long run, both PHI and Medicare might receive the same risk-adjusted subsidy from the Government who collects the funds, and manages the risk equalisation fund."

Prior to his appointment at ACERH, Dr Paolucci worked for five years as a researcher at the Institute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University of Rotterdam. In June this year he organised and presented in an ACERH Research Forum on Risk Equalisation in Health Insurance Markets, which included international and national experts from the academia, the Private Health Insurance Council and industry.

The argument about reforming health insurance is outlined in a new ACERH working paper, which is available from the ANU media office on request.

The Australian National University anu.edu.au

Comparing Public And Private Health Insurance: Would A Single-Payer System Save Enough To Cover The Uninsured?

The Manhattan Institute released a new report by senior fellow Benjamin Zycher, entitled "Comparing Public and Private Health Insurance: Would a Single-Payer System Save Enough to Cover the Uninsured?" In it, Zycher dispels a common misconception regarding single-payer health insurance.

Among the attractions of a government-provided health-care system has been the possibility that it might broaden coverage, while simultaneously reducing costs. As economist Paul Krugman has written: "Eliminating the excess administrative costs of private health insurers . . . would by itself more or less pay the cost of covering all the uninsured" (New York Times, 02-16-07).

Similarly, this week a Majority Report issued by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee made the claim that "the administrative expenses, sales costs, and profits of the privatized [Medicare] Part D program are almost six times higher than the administrative expenses of traditional Medicare."

In his new study, Zycher tests this proposition by comparing the costs of administering Medicare with the administrative costs of a private system. His data reveal that the costs of administering Medicare are twice as high as is commonly asserted. Furthermore, Zycher computes that a switch to a single-payer system would, in fact, not yield savings sufficient to cover the costs of the uninsured.

Specifically, Zycher finds that:

- Administrative costs for private health insurance, defined broadly, are in the range of 11-14 percent of total premiums.

- Administrative costs reported directly in the Medicare budget, combined with a proportional allocation of the costs of other federal government administrative functions, yields a finding of 6 percent of Medicare outlays - twice the proportion of Medicare outlays that is commonly asserted.

- A shift to a single-payer system would yield net savings of about $2100 in potential health-care benefits for each of the 47 million individuals cur¬rently uninsured.

- Under a single-payer system, the increase in average health-care consumption by those currently uninsured would be in the range of about $1700 to $3400; this results in an annual impact on govern¬ment costs, as measured, between a saving of about $19 billion to a funding shortfall of about $61 billion. The midpoint estimate thus is an approximate funding shortfall of $21 billion annually.

The author concludes that the total economic cost of delivering health insurance benefits under a single-payer system would be substantially greater than that under the current private system. Moreover, the administrative and other net costs of private health insurance programs are more likely to be efficient in terms of satisfying the preferences of consumers.

Benjamin Zycher writes extensively on economic and political effects of government regulation and taxation. His research interests include health care policy and the pharmaceutical sector. Benjamin Zycher is available to discuss this report and matters relating to economics and public expenditures.

The Manhattan Institute, a 501(c)(3), is a think tank whose mission is to develop and disseminate new ideas that foster greater economic choice and individual responsibility.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org