About those uninsured...

I've been listening to all the pundits discuss the 40 million - or 47 million uninsured (whatever number is handy).

No one wants to say the cruel truth, so here it comes from this opinionated old man:

First, I must point out that I am not a "mean-spirited little weasel" as Don Imus described Jimmy Carter. At our house, I am not permitted to answer the doorbell. If the person at the door is a peddler, which they most frequently are, I will buy whatever they are selling. I just like people and admire the hell out of people who persist in the face of repeated rejection on people's front porches. Recently, when I was home alone, a man came selling magazines to support what seemed a worthy cause. I just didn't want any of his magazines, at any price, but I gave him a couple of bucks for his cause.

Back to the truth about the uninsured. Linda Halderman, a lady doctor on the west coast wrote a revealing piece which you can read courtesy of Investor's Business daily, at

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=507807.

Here are some excerpts:

"Upon questioning a pretty 46-year-old seeking wrinkle relief, I learned that four of her immediate family members had been diagnosed with breast or colon cancer before 50. Alarmed, I asked why she had not had the recommended screening mammogram for more than four years. She said that she knew already that her risk for developing breast cancer was likely higher than that of most women. "But I don't have insurance," she replied.
A screening mammogram could be obtained for about $90 and was discounted or free at local facilities every October for "Breast Cancer Awareness Month." She smiled when I proposed a deal: If she were to get a screening mammogram within 60 days of her treatment, I would offer a discount on what she paid me for cosmetic services.
"I'll think about it," she said, then shelled out over $400 for Botox injections that took me 10 minutes to administer.
Five months later, when she returned for her next wrinkle treatment, she still had not obtained a mammogram.

"I encountered patients who gladly paid upward of $1,000 in cash for laser hair removal treatments. The paperwork filled out during their initial consultation asked them to indicate whether or not they had health insurance. Several hair-removal patients reported being covered by Medi-Cal, the government-funded health coverage for California's low-income population.

"A friend of mine sells private health insurance plans. He told me of the 39-year-old father of two whose family was quoted a monthly insurance premium of $250.
"Are you kidding?" he said, refusing the coverage. "That's almost as much as my boat payment!"

"When serving in the rural health center in my community, my colleagues and I offered free or discounted care for a large number of patients. Many were covered by Medi-Cal or one of dozens of state programs paid for by the taxpayers of California.
The following items were commonly seen on patients or carried by their dependent children, who were also covered by subsidized programs:
• Cell phones and BlackBerry PDAs, including just-released models with a price tag of $400, plus an ongoing monthly service fee of $65-$150.
• IPods and portable DVD players.
• Game Boys and handheld electronic games.
• Artificial fingernails requiring maintenance every two weeks at a cost of $40-$60 per salon visit.
• Elaborate braided hair weaves, $300 per session plus frequent maintenance.
• Custom-designed body art, including tattoos covering the entire torso, neck and arms, as well as body jewelry piercing every skin surface imaginable — and a few unimaginable ones.
Custom tattoo work, particularly the "portrait-type" and "half sleeve" art popular in this area, runs from $100-$300 per hour and can require up to 20 hours of work, depending on the complexity of the design."


The cruel truth is that a lot of the uninsured prefer not to pay for health insurance, not because they are poor, but because they would rather buy a BlackBerry, or an elaborate tattoo, or Botox.

Sometimes people are honestly "poor" (out of money, that is) because of circumstances. I will help those folks when I can.

But for those who are "poor" by choice? Sorry, but my sympathy just ran out.