Proven practices that help people reverse heart disease through proper nutrition by forming a diet that is idea for humans to eat

We had a recent interview Dr. Joel Fuhrman the founder of the nutritarian diet and NY Times best selling author of Eat to Live who just released his new book, The End of Heart Disease. Dr Fuhrman is often seen and featured on the Dr. Oz Show.

He discusses his new book, which supports the proven practices that help people reverse heart disease through proper nutrition by forming a diet that is idea for humans to eat. He describes how a heart healthy diet can help people lower blood pressure and allow people to stop using their medications as well as how they can reduce the plaque in their arteries.

Dr Furhman explains the difference between the flexitarian diet, vegan diet, what vegetarians should really do and why vegans should take vitamin B12.

Aside from becoming healthier, you’ll be able to find out how you will lose weight fast by following this diet and way of eating. How to drop your LDL numbers and why having a high HDL may actually NOT be a good thing.

Are you a weight lifter interested in how a vegetarian or vegan diet could affect your body building goals? He also covers that topic and you will be surprised as to his input!

Candidly hear Dr. Fuhrman’s input to all of these topics, how to cure most diseases through nutritional excellence and much more in this exciting interview! We guarantee some of this information will really surprise you and best of all; it is backed up with decades of science.

The Smoke and Mirrors of Health Care Reform for the Elderly

I’m deeply concerned that the American public, especially our nation’s elders, will be relying on our government to provide long term care services they’ll never see. They’ll only see the “smoke and mirrors” of Health Care Reform.

Our nation’s seniors are the most vulnerable segment of the U.S. population; vulnerable both health wise and financially. They’re silently discovering the savings they thought would be enough is not enough. They’re silently fearful of running out of money with no one to care for them as they become more frail. The silence is about to become deafening.

Regrettably, when Health Care Reform proudly announced New Long Term Care Services, it discouraged many American’s from purchasing Long Term Care Insurance.

The New York Times reported on ‘Options Expand for Affordable Long-Term Care’ THE NEW OLD AGE. The Associated Press announced ‘New Health Care Law Has Benefits for Seniors’. Point being, the casual reader was relieved to hear their government will “take care of them” when they need long term care services. We now know that is not about to happen.

Fortunately our representatives in Washington discovered that Health Care Reforms answer to the problem of Long Term Care, “CLASS”, (Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act) legislation would have been fiscally unsound. $70 billion in premiums that was expected to be raised for the new “long term care” program would have been counted as “deficit reduction”. The long term care benefits it was intended to finance were assumed not to materialize in the first 10 years. However, that money was not accounted for anywhere in the legislation.

The new legislation proposed to “trim” $463 billion from Medicare. Yet Medicare is currently having trouble balancing its books today. Yet, why does the health care bill tell us Medicare can operate more cheaply going forward without the accompanying reforms?

Our national media gave enormous fanfare to the CLASS ACT when it passed. Unfortunately the media has given the CLASS ACT’s demise little attention. Now what?

Projections show that the federal deficit is expected to exceed $700 billion annually over the next decade. This essentially will double the national and $900 billion represents interest on previous debt. Would the CFO of any major corporation in the United States allow the company he worked for to end up in this type of financial position? Absolutely not.

Our officials in Congress have been elected to protect the best interests of the American people. “Robbing Peter to pay Paul”, and once again printing more currency, has become our government’s mantra for the future. Yet the magnitude of the mismanagement of America’s purse strings has now reached an unconscionable state.

The United States of America cannot continue to mismanage its financial future. Future Congresses will have to deliver a multitude of future reforms and, regrettably, history tells us THAT will never happen. Proposals for financing health reform were based on more “smoke and mirrors”. The “Cadillac” tax is scheduled to begin in 2018.

The health care legislation that has been forced on each and every one of us is known to be fiscally unsound. Where do we go from here? It’s too easy to point the finger at the President and his administration. Yet Congress owns the responsibility of passing Health Care Legislation. And THAT is the problem.

The 535 voting members of Congress shared the responsibility equally. If one clear thinking, intelligent, honorable Congressman had the entire responsibility for Health Care Reform, he or she would not have forced a fiscally unsound Health Care Reform Bill down our throats.

Now let’s again evaluate how Health Care Reform will work against our senior citizens.

A most recent government report identified that in 2000 there were 1.8 million available nursing home beds. As the year 2010 came to a close, there were 1.7 million nursing home beds; a net 5 percent reduction in available beds. And, there are no new nursing homes being built.

Today there’s less than 1.5 million Americans confined to nursing homes. Reportedly 10 percent of these nursing homes are operating under bankruptcy protection. It’s well known that most of these facilities are understaffed and many don’t have competent help.

Next, let’s consider that the Alzheimer’s Association tells us the likelihood of developing Alzheimer’s after age 85 is 50 percent. By 2030, they tell us that the number of people age 65 and older with Alzheimer’s disease is estimated to reach 7.7 million, a 50 percent increase from the 5.2 million age 65 and older currently affected.

The logical question I must ask is “if we cannot take adequate care of 1.5 million people today, how can we possibly take care of 7.7 million people in 2030?” We cannot. More simply put, when you or your spouse or your parent has Alzheimer’s, there is no place for them to go. Not to be cruel, but if you ever think for a moment about taking in an aged parent with Alzheimer’s into your home, please think again. Ask any caregiver who’s been through it. It’s GUARANTEED to destroy any families’ peace of mind and harmony.

Why aren’t our political leaders actively working on solutions? Where’s the outcry? Regrettably our political leaders only align themselves with solvable problems.

America’s seniors became more hopeful reading that Health Reform will help them with added Long Term Care services. And we now know THAT is not going to happen. There are no plans in place to help our nation’s seniors think they’ll receive the comfort and dignity of adequate long term care services. What’s worse is the silence shared by all our political leaders. The silence is now deafening.

Now there’s newfound hope on the horizon. We have a new President election just starting to evolve. What the Republican and Democratic candidates have to say about our nations seniors need for long term care services? What do they think about the need for 7.7 million Americans with Alzheimer’s that need a place to spend the night and be cared for when we can’t take care of 1.5 million seniors today?

The national media needs to start reporting that our nation’s seniors will have no place to spend the night when they become too old or frail to take care of themselves. Then the upcoming election presents one more opportunity for our political leaders to pay attention to our nation’s elderly and their need for long term care services.

How Freedomland Became A ‘Health Care’ Center

My parents were in their early 40s in 1969, the year we moved to the massive Co-op City housing development in the Bronx. My brother and I were preteens.

When it was completed a few years later, Co-op City had more than 15,000 apartments, most of them in high-rises scattered across 300 formerly swampy acres that had once been the Freedomland amusement park. Within a few years, the community’s schools and shopping centers appeared. Most of Co-op City’s occupants were working-class laborers and civil servants, drawn mostly from elsewhere in the borough. Direct and indirect subsidies made their new apartments affordable.

My brother and I both left for college within a decade. Our parents stayed until 1990, when they retired, departed for the suburbs of central New Jersey and rebuilt their lives around the activities of the local senior citizens’ center. But many of their peers stayed in Co-op City, and quite a few of the kids my brother and I grew up with ended up staying with their parents, or inheriting apartments when their parents died.

For thousands of people like my parents, Co-op City became a “naturally occurring retirement community,” also known as a NORC. The survivors of their generation who have stayed put, now advanced far into old age, have had the benefit of family, friends, familiar neighborhood institutions and a host of social services to sustain them. The phenomenon of this open-air retirement home that came into being quite by accident has been apparent for more than a decade. The New York Times wrote about it as far back as 2002. (1)

In New York, Medicaid pays for a lot of the services these people need. To the extent that Medicaid is a low-income health care program, this is not necessarily surprising. Yet what makes New York’s situation different is that Medicaid often covers even those services that don’t have much to do with health care as most people understand it. In literature about the “Health Homes” initiative, introduced in 2012, the state’s Medicaid administrators described the function of a “care manager,” an individual who coordinates those seeing to an individual’s medical, behavioral health and social service needs. The theory is that by making sure people can live independently in their own homes, Medicaid saves money on hospital costs, ambulance rides, repetitive doctor visits and, most of all, nursing home care.

The same thing is happening in the mental health arena. Several years ago, New York expanded Medicaid coverage to provide housing for individuals with mental illness. In addition to the Health Homes program, New York also offers “supportive” housing that combines subsidized housing with a host of services, including medical, but also legal, career and educational, among others. Keep people off the streets and make sure they take their meds and get regular meals, the theory goes, and you’ll ultimately save money on emergency room and other acute-care costs.

Brenda Rosen, the director of the organization Common Ground, which runs a supportive housing building called The Brook, told NPR, “You know, we as a society are paying for somebody to be on the streets.” (2) And the outgoing New York State commissioner of health published an article in December 2013 arguing that housing and support services are integral to health, so Medicaid should help support the costs.

The state may be on board, but the arguments in favor of these programs haven’t made much headway with the federal government, which normally shares Medicaid expenses with the states. The feds won’t pay for these housing services, on the grounds that housing is not health care. Bruce Vladeck, who formerly administered the federal Medicaid (and Medicare) programs, said, “Medicaid is supposed to be health insurance, and not every problem somebody has is a health care problem.” (2)

That’s true. Not all care that leads to better health is health care. Good nutrition, having the time and place to get a full night’s sleep, and access to clean air and water are all essential for health, but we do not expect health insurance to pay for these things. Providing housing to people who need it is what we used to call social work, and most people don’t view social workers as health care providers.

But it is easier to gain political support for providing health care – with its image of flashing ambulance lights and skilled professionals dressed in white – than for subsidized housing for the aging or the disabled, especially the mentally disabled. So it is easier for Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration to organize these services under the label of Medicaid Health Homes. They are not homes at all in any traditional sense. Care managers are typically not doctors or nurses, but they are trained in social services or health care administration. Health Homes is a potentially worthwhile initiative that comes with clever, voter-ready branding.

The approach itself is not nearly as novel as the marketing. We have known for decades that good community support, including safe housing and close supervision for people who need it, is a lot less expensive than parking people in hospitals, nursing homes and other institutions. As New York State Medicaid Director Jason Helgerson pointed out when arguing in favor of Medicaid-funded housing support, Medicaid (and taxpayers) bear the cost of long, expensive hospital and nursing home stays. Giving people support to stay in their own homes is also a lot more humane in many, if not most, cases.

The challenge is to develop and market these programs in ways that sustain public support in the face of their predictable abuse. People misusing a service does not make it bad, but it does make it harder for politicians to defend. Disability insurance is also a good thing, but the Social Security disability program is just a couple of years away from going broke, in large part because of the wave of malingering that accompanied and followed the recent recession. Offer a benefit and people will want to use it, even if they are not genuinely part of the target population.

Well-supported housing with an effective array of social services for people who need them can do a lot of good, and can save society significant money as long as we are not prepared to make people in need survive on their own. NORCs can make excellent places for the elderly to live out their days, and housing for mentally ill and developmentally disabled people can keep them safely off the streets and out of the ERs.

But the feds are right that efforts to do so are not health care. It’s human care. If we don’t manage it effectively – keeping the malingerers out and holding costs at sustainable levels – some humans are going to be left on their own, no matter what we call it.

Health Care Reporting Requirements for Business

Smart business owners know the importance of keeping good records. The Affordable Care Act has created one more incentive for employers to keep abreast of sometimes complicated reporting requirements, by requiring them to provide information about company-provided health care to both their employees and the government.

Not all of the law’s employer responsibility provisions have been implemented yet. Nevertheless, it makes good business sense to establish effective systems to meet obligations that are likely to be rolled out soon. Acting early will give business owners more time to iron out any wrinkles before the law comes to bear.

Reporting to Employees

The Affordable Care Act requires most employers to report the cost of any employer-sponsored group health plan on employee Forms W-2. This requirement applies to all employers who provide what the government defines as “applicable coverage,” even if the employers are religious organizations or are not subject to Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) requirements. Small businesses issuing fewer than 250 Forms W-2 total are exempt from the reporting requirement until further guidance is issued.

For businesses subject to the rules, the amount reported in Box 12 of Form W-2 must include both the employer and employee portions of the plan’s cost. Certain forms of coverage must be reported, while other forms are either optional or excluded. For more information, see the IRS’ full chart of reporting requirements. (1)

Affected employers are not required to issue Forms W-2 to workers who would not normally receive one, such as retirees, simply to fulfill the requirement. For terminated employees, employers may use any reasonable method to report partial-year coverage, as long as the method is applied consistently. For employees who voluntarily leave and request Forms W-2 in writing prior to year-end, employers must provide the forms within 30 days of the request, but are not required to report the health benefit amounts.

Proposed Section 6056 regulations from the Internal Revenue Service would mainly affect reporting to the Service, though they would also require employers to notify employees in writing of any employee-related information shared with the IRS. These statements will need to be provided annually by January 31. Note that these regulations are still under discussion, and that there is a chance Form W-2 reporting alone could satisfy the requirement. Nevertheless, employers should pay attention to how the final regulations are worded.

Employers subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act have a responsibility to provide all new employees, both part- and full-time, with a written notice pertaining to the Health Insurance Marketplace. These employers include federal, state and local government agencies; hospitals and institutions engaged primarily in the care of the sick, the aged or the developmentally disabled who live on the premises; preschools, elementary and secondary schools, postsecondary institutions of higher learning and schools for gifted children; and companies or organizations with annual sales of receipts over $500,000.

The Health Insurance Marketplace, often referred to as the exchanges, may provide alternatives that cost less than the employer-provided health care plan, if any. Employers must make clear that employer contributions, if any, may be lost if the new employee chooses to pursue private insurance instead. Employers may satisfy the notice requirement through third-party entities, such as insurers or multiemployer health plans, as long as every new employee receives such a notice regardless of whether he or she plans to enroll in the company health care plan.

Finally, any employer providing a health care option must also furnish employees with a standard Summary of Benefits and Coverage (SBC) form. This form explains what services and care the plan does and does not cover. It also lays out the plan’s cost clearly.

Reporting to the IRS

As previously mentioned, the Affordable Care Act introduced new reporting guidelines for employers, known as Section 6056 rules, which mainly affect how employers will report to the IRS. Last September, the Treasury issued proposed regulations to provide further guidance on how businesses should observe the rules; the final regulations were released in mid-February. For the most part, these regulations only apply to employers that had 50 or more full-time employees (or full-time equivalent employees) for the prior year.

Affected large employers must file a return with the IRS reporting certain information for every employee who was full-time for at least one month during the calendar year, including:

The employee’s name
The employee’s address
The employee’s Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN)
Information about the health care coverage offered to each employee by month, including
What coverage was available
The employee’s share of the lowest-cost, self-only premium
Which months, if any, the employee was actually covered under the plan

The return will also specify how many employees the business had each month in the calendar year. These requirements are currently scheduled to take effect in 2015.

In addition to Section 6056 rules, certain employers may also fall subject to Section 6055 rules, regardless of size. These rules mainly apply to institutions providing health insurance, such as insurers. However, businesses that self-insure may also need to follow these rules. Affected businesses must provide information for each individual enrolled in minimum essential coverage, including the individual’s name, taxpayer ID number and the months in which the individual received coverage.

The IRS is currently considering allowing Section 6055 and Section 6056 reporting to be submitted together for organizations subject to both sets of rules. However, this concession has not yet been granted. Like Section 6056 rules, Section 6055 rules are scheduled to become mandatory in 2015, but are optional in 2014.

Employers that self-insure may also fall subject to the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund fee (the PCORI fee). The fee applies to policy years ending after September 30, 2012 and before October 1, 2019, and is equal to the product of the average number of individuals covered for the year and the applicable dollar amount. Organizations subject to the fee will need to file Form 720 annually to report and pay the fee.

If any of a business’ employees are liable for the Additional Medicare Tax, employers will also need to withhold the tax, set at 0.9 percent, and report the withholding. The threshold earnings amount to determine the tax liability is $200,000 for single filers and $250,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly. This tax should not be confused with the Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT), which is also sometimes called the Medicare surtax. The NIIT does not affect wages and is not the employer’s responsibility.

While small businesses are largely exempt from these mandatory reporting requirements, businesses with fewer than 25 full-time employees may wish to secure a tax credit for voluntarily providing health care coverage to their workers. Qualifying businesses will need to apply for the credit using Form 8941.

Self-employed individuals may also be eligible for a tax deduction for the cost of their health care. However, the Affordable Care Act has made this deduction solely applicable to income taxes, whereas in the past a deduction against self-employment taxes was available. Eligibility for this deduction is determined on a month-by-month basis.

Reporting to States

Certain states may have their own health care reporting requirements. For example, Massachusetts-based employers with 11 or more employees must file an Employer Health Insurance Responsibility Disclosure and an Employee Health Insurance Responsibility Disclosure for each employee. While these rules are not a product of the Affordable Care Act, employers should take care to comply with all state-specific reporting requirements as well as with federal rules.

As with most parts of the Affordable Care Act, reporting requirements will remain a moving target for some time. As a result, satisfying all of the rules may be a challenge for some employers, at least in the near term. However, the sooner you begin, the sooner you will be able to identify the more difficult rules to follow and develop adequate systems to address them, regardless of whether regulators extend leniency for what is technically required.

Choose The Right Health Care Practitioner Based On Your Health Requirements

A Health care practitioner is the one who is given the license or authority by the state to provide health care services. Anyone starting from a doctor of medicine, a dentist, pediatrician and chiropractor to a nurse practitioner, clinical psychologist and even a clinical social worker can be defined as a health care practitioner. In case a health maintenance provider does anything to violate the regulations and limitations determined by the state law, the health care entity has the right to review and judge their actions, thereby seizing their medical license if required. In such cases the health care entity is bound to provide the Board of Medical Examiners with the name of the concerned health maintenance provider and the details of their action for taking accurate review action.

There are various types of health care providers. Some of them are:

Primary Care Providers (PCP): The first person you visit for a health check-up serves as your primary care provider. On the basis of your health maintenance plan and the type of health problem you are having, you have to decide who can be the best PCP for you.

You can appoint a general practitioner as your PCP. A general practitioner involves doctors of medicine or osteopathy specialized in internal medicine and family practice.
Obstetrician and Gynecologists, specializing in women’s health and prenatal care, can also be appointed as your PCP.
Nurse practitioners with graduate degrees can serve as primary care providers in the field of family medicine, pediatrics, adult care, women’s health, etc. They are authorized to provide services for regular checkups and general concerns.
Physician assistants are licensed to provide a various services in association with a general practitioner.

Nursing Care: There are various categories in the nursing division.

Registered Nurse (RN): RN is licensed by the state to provide health maintenance services. They have to pass a state board examination and obtain a graduate degree from a nursing program.
Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN): LPN is a trained nurse, who is authorized by the state to provide health maintenance.
Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN): APRNs obtain special degrees and advanced training, which is beyond and above the normal nursing care trainings. APRNs include clinical nurse specialists, nurse practitioners, certified registered nurse anesthetists and licensed nurse midwives.

Licensed Pharmacists: Licensed pharmacists hold a graduate degree from pharmaceutical colleges. They provide health maintenance by preparing prescription drugs that have been prescribed to you by your primary or specialty care provider. Pharmacists also provide adequate information to patients regarding medicines, and explain to them the dosages and side effects of medicines after discussing with the doctor.

Specialty Care Providers: Health care practitioners providing health services in various specialized fields are referred to as specialty care providers, like:

Cardiology for heart problems.
Dermatology for skin problems.
Allergy and asthma.
Gastroenterology for digestive disorders.
Hematology for blood disorders.
Immunology for problems with the immune system.
Orthopedics for bone and tissue problems.
Nephrology for kidney disorders.
Psychiatry for mental and emotional problems.

Computer Mate, Inc. is a reputed company providing various IT solutions for health care practitioners like electronic medical records, medical billing software, electronic claims and much more.

What to Look for in a Home Health Care Provider

Anyone in need of home health care deserves non-medical care or in home medical care that is compassionate whether the patient is a child, adult or elder. Home health care services are provided anywhere except for in nursing homes or a hospital. These services may even be provided at an assisted living facility, a school, apartment or house.

As far as care plans go, there are a wide variety of personal care and nursing services that are not just available, they are tailored for the needs of each individual recipient. Customized care plans and follow up assessments should be provided by a registered nurse.

Nursing Supervision and Case Management

The care that is provided by personal care assistants and home health aides is typically supervised by a registered nurse. One of these registered nurses should be on call at all times in order to assist the caregivers as well as to provide medical training and oversight and to implement the plans of care.

Elder or Adult Care

Are you aware of the fact that 75% of the health care costs in the US are incurred by only 12% of Americans? These people generally have some type of chronic illness. The benefits of this type of individualized home care include much more than just being able to keep someone at home for their illness as opposed to being institutionalized or put in a long term care facility. As far as cost goes, home care visits are roughly only 10% of what a single day in the hospital will cost.

Additionally, home health care has a track record that has been proven when it comes to things such as reducing readmissions to the hospital, expensive visits to the emergency room and in managing chronic illnesses. In addition, there is scientific evidence that has proven that patients are able to heal faster when they are in their own homes. Both morbidity and mortality rates are reduced in patients who take advantage of home health care. In fact, 90% of seniors facing long term care in nursing homes prefer to stay home and get the services of a home health care provider.

Private Elder Care Coordination, Planning and Management

This involves both advising and then assisting families when it comes to determining the necessities of an aging adult. These caregivers are able to navigate many of the long term type of care resources that are available in your area. The goal here is to educate and inform the family of what the options are and them to assist them with the implementation of their decision. Typically this is done by an RN who has been certified and specially trained in the area of geriatrics who can provide:

The services of being a liaison for family members who may live a great distance away
Educating and advocating for the patient
Assisting with paperwork and forms that are related to insurance, medical assistant and Medicare
Screening, arranging for and then monitoring any in home help or options for institutional or residential care options
Care planning that is tailored to the patient

In the long run home health care is a compassionate and caring choice for anyone who needs care and wishes to remain in their own home.

Kathryn McDowell is a health writer and believes in the advantages of home health care. She recommends talking to your primary care provider about this care option if you or a loved one is in need of long term care.