With my own self attacked by this disease, I turned to
Mexico and other scientific methods that are known not to have side effects. Yes, it has been six years since my
treatments and I do not have any signs of cancer. The key is not just treatments, but also,
what was the cause. So the treatments
are not the only method to stop cancer.
It’s the environment that we live in, the products we use (may it be
what we put on our bodies to chemicals we spray to clean with), foods we eat
(gluten and processed sugar feeds on cancer, foods that are GMO and are
sprayed), and stress all contributes to lowering your immune system which
causes this type of disease and many more.
We need to look at the bigger picture. What is the best way
for one to live a quality of life?
People say they would never go to Mexico for treatment for they fear
that it is not safe!! Has anyone watched the news in the states recently? Nonsense,
I went six years ago and fell in love with the people and the culture. Yes, I went over to the other side and never
regret the decision I and my husband made.
Now, for nearly four years we have made it our home along with our other
family member Heckle our pet turtle. I
have learned a lot of survival from him by the environment he lives in that we
have provided for him. It’s the little
things that matter from the space you live in, to the type of foods.
Now let’s get into the treatments in United States compared
with the treatments in the Mexico that I had.
The pricing is different and it varies where you go in Mexico and it
includes more than what is done in the United States. First, in the states it is per treatment
(each time) compared in Mexico it is either per week or a package which
includes education, stem cell, hyperthermia, your stay, food and any other type
of functional medicine. The difference
is the professionals trained in Functional Medicine are more educated in Mexico
with treating the individual person then the disease itself.
Both the United States and Mexico the treatment is not
covered by most insurances for it is not FDA approved. However, we need to again look at the big
picture. Look at the stats for the
coming years at the prices for cancer treatments in the United States.
Based on growth and aging of the U.S. population, medical
expenditures for cancer in the year 2020 are projected to reach at least $158
billion (in 2010 dollars) — an increase of 27 percent over 2010, according to a
National Institutes of Health analysis. If newly developed tools for cancer
diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up continue to be more expensive, medical
expenditures for cancer could reach as high as $207 billion, said the
researchers from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the NIH. The
analysis appears online, Jan. 12, 2011, in the Journal of the National Cancer
Institute.
The projections were based on the most recent data available
on cancer incidence, survival, and costs of care. In 2010, medical costs
associated with cancer were projected to reach $124.6 billion, with the highest
costs associated with breast cancer ($16.5 billion), followed by colorectal
cancer ($14 billion), lymphoma ($12 billion), lung cancer ($12 billion) and
prostate cancer ($12 billion).
If cancer incidence and survival rates and costs remain
stable and the U.S. population ages at the rate predicted by the U.S. Census
Bureau, direct cancer care expenditures would reach $158 billion in 2020, the
report said.
However, the researchers also did additional analyses to
account for changes in cancer incidence and survival rates and for the
likelihood that cancer care costs will increase as new technologies and
treatments are developed. Assuming a 2 percent annual increase in medical costs
in the initial and final phases of care — which would mirror recent trends —
the projected 2020 costs increased to $173 billion. Estimating a 5 percent
annual increase in these costs raised the projection to $207 billion. These
figures do not include other types of costs, such as lost productivity, which
add to the overall financial burden of cancer.
"Rising health care costs pose a challenge for policy
makers charged with allocating future resources on cancer research, treatment,
and prevention,” said study author Angela Mariotto, Ph.D., from NCI’s
Surveillance Research Program. “Because it is difficult to anticipate future
developments of cancer control technologies and their impact on the burden of cancer,
we evaluated a variety of possible scenarios."
To project national cancer expenditures, the researchers
combined cancer prevalence, which is the current number of people living with
cancer, with average annual costs of care by age (less than 65 or 65 and
older). According to their prevalence estimates, there were 13.8 million cancer
survivors alive in 2010, 58 percent of whom were age 65 or older. If cancer
incidence and survival rates remain stable, the number of cancer survivors in
2020 will increase by 31 percent, to about 18.1 million. Because of the aging
of the U.S. population, the researchers expect the largest increase in cancer
survivors over the next 10 years to be among Americans age 65 and older.
"The rising costs of cancer care illustrate how
important it is for us to advance the science of cancer prevention and
treatment to ensure that we’re using the most effective approaches,” said
Robert Croyle, Ph.D., director, Division of Cancer Control and Population
Sciences, NCI. “This is especially important for elderly cancer patients with
other complex health problems."
To develop their cost projections, the authors used average
medical costs for the different phases of cancer care: the first year after
diagnosis, the last year of life, and the time in between. For all types of
cancer, per-person costs of care were highest in the final year of life.
Per-person costs associated with the first year after a cancer diagnosis were
more varied, with cancers of the brain, pancreas, ovaries, esophagus and stomach
having the highest initial costs and melanoma, prostate and breast cancers
having the lowest initial-year costs.
These new projections are higher than previously published
estimates of direct cancer expenditures, largely because the researchers used
the most recent data available — including Medicare claims data through 2006,
which include payments for newer, more expensive, targeted therapies which
attack specific cancer cells and often have fewer side effects than other types
of cancer treatments. In addition, by analyzing costs according to phase of
care, which revealed the higher costs of care associated with the first year of
treatment and last year of life (for those who die from their disease), the
researchers were able to generate more precise estimates of the cost of care.
The researchers used 2005 incidence and mortality data from
NCI's Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program to estimate
cancer prevalence for 2010 and 2020. Population estimates for the United States
was obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau's National Interim Projections for
2006 to 2020. Medical cost estimates were obtained using the SEER-Medicare
database which links SEER data to Medicare claims data from the Center for
Medicare and Medicaid Services.
No comments:
Post a Comment