4 Responses

  1. Scott K. Johnson
    Scott K. Johnson October 29, 2008 at 8:13 am | | Reply

    Thanks Alexis (and Amy for bringing Alexis to us)!

    Very interesting information. I’m a big fan of Symlin, and feel it has changed my life with diabetes for the better. I had to push really hard to get it because my doctor didn’t seem to know much about it. That was unsettling and a bit scary to me.

  2. elizabeth joy
    elizabeth joy October 29, 2008 at 11:27 am | | Reply

    Well that’s just fascinating, Alexis, because that was exactly my job before I got to quit and become a writer. (I was actually a QA GCP Analyst and then in Regulatory Affairs for pharmas, but it’s the same sorta deal.)

    I’m a type 1 compliance analyst also on the OmniPod, probably about your age. I’m your doppelganger (although, sadly, I’m not on Symlin and, also sadly, not a blonde…)

  3. tmana
    tmana October 29, 2008 at 1:11 pm | | Reply

    The argument could be made that, given FCC clearance to advertise medications directly to the patient, and given the amount of information available on the Internet, the responsibility for finding appropriate tests and medications should fall to the patient, with the doctor as the professional sounding board (the prescription being the yea/nay). For many of the readers here, it is our activity within the diabetes community that makes us aware of new tools and options, as well as sufficient background to discuss these intelligently with our care team — and our health is more a cooperative venture between us and our clinicians than it is “trickle-down” medicine.
    The sad truth is that for many others, health care is — and always will be — a “trickle-down” venture, filtered through doctors’ knowledge of “this has worked in the past” and insurance carriers’ narrow-necked funnels of “this is what we will cover”, occasionally given a vague push from the bottom through media advertisement (mostly TV ads, and print ads in drugstore- and pharma-sponsored free healthzines).

  4. Lauren
    Lauren November 3, 2008 at 9:30 pm | | Reply

    Why isn’t it illegal for insurance companies to pick and choose what they will and won’t cover? I understand it if health insurance won’t pay for face-lifts. But to refuse to pay for life-saving, quality-of-life-improving technologies, medication, and therapies? That is criminal. You bet insurance company CEOs wouldn’t want their children’s care to be “pre-authorized,” appealed, denied, denied again, etc. How can they get away with making profits by hurting sick people?

Leave a Reply