E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Luis Robayo / AFP - Getty Images file
A plan to urge hepatitis C testing for all baby boomers could promote treatment and save lives, but a positive result could also cause problems getting various kinds of insurance.
A government proposal that all baby boomers get tested for hepatitis C may be drawing high praise for its potential health benefits, but it’s also raising questions about the unintended consequences of screening for those seeking insurance.
Experts in health insurance, life insurance and long-term care insurance warn that boomers who test positive for the blood-borne virus before being approved may dash their chances for coverage.
“I would never, ever tell anybody to delay getting any kind of medical exam,” said Jesse Slome, executive director of the American Association for Long-Term Care Insurance. “But you have an advantage over the insurance company if you apply for insurance before undergoing any kind of medical checkups.”
For the first time, government health officials suggested in May that anyone born between 1945 and 1965 be tested for the hepatitis C virus, which can destroy the liver.
The draft proposal, which could see a final ruling later this year, is aimed at getting some 800,000 baby boomers into treatment and potentially saving more than 120,000 lives, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Baby boomers make up about 2 million of the estimated 3.2 million people infected with hepatitis C, the CDC says. About three-quarters of those who have the virus don’t know it -- and many don’t think they’re at risk for it, said Dr. John Ward, director for the Division for Viral Hepatitis.
“Testing is the only way to identify these individuals in order to connect them to life-saving care and treatment,” he said.
Hepatitis C is spread through contact with contaminated blood or organs. It was widely transmitted through routine health care practices before the virus was identified in 1989 and before widespread screening of the U.S. blood supply began in 1992.
Social practices such as injection drug use and tattooing contributed to the problem, but so did unexpected transmission from routine exposures such as sharing toothbrushes or razors, even manicures and pedicures.
Getting tested may confirm the unsuspected exposure and prompt treatment, a plan that’s drawing praise from many of the dozens who publicly commented on the CDC’s draft proposal.
“This birth cohort screening, in my opinion, is the right methodology at the right time,” wrote Dr. Donald Jensen, a clinical and research expert in hepatitis at the University of Chicago. “The baby boomers are aging and need to be identified quickly before their disease and co-morbidities overtake them.”
But a positive test for hepatitis C also can raise worries for those who aren’t insured or who want more or different insurance.
“I am concerned that this will allow insurance companies to deny treatment for pre-existing conditions,” wrote Donna Bailey, a consumer commenter on the site.
Even treatment for hepatitis C might not guarantee acceptance since current protocols may not be 100 percent effective.
It’s true that hepatitis C is one of several chronic, life-threatening diseases that can exclude people from being insured, said Susan M. Pisano, vice president of communications for America’s Health Insurance Plans, the national trade association representing the industry.
“You would have a condition if you were diagnosed, the same way you’d have a condition if you had asthma, diabetes or another condition,” she said.
The difference is, a leading government health agency is suddenly recommending that an entire generation be screened for the condition in question.
CDC officials say they’ve considered the problem. About two out of three people diagnosed with hepatitis C have health insurance -- but about a third of those diagnosed do not, officials said.
“Considerations regarding insurance coverage are real, affecting individuals and their loved ones ... ” Ward said in a statement to msnbc.com. “ ... These issues are ones we must continue to consider as part of any implementation of these recommendations.”
Under the Obama Administration’s health reform law, insurers would not be able to reject adults with hepatitis C or another pre-existing condition starting in 2014. But the Supreme Court is expected to rule within the week on overturning all or part of the Affordable Care Act, so that mandate is unclear.
Anticipating that the hepatitis C proposal may become final, CDC officials are working with insurance providers, public health agencies, commercial labs and others to coordinate the mechanics of such large-scale testing.
Until something changes, at least one insurance broker advises his clients to think about the consequences of the test results.
“It’s up to you,” said Michael McDonnell, a financial adviser who works at Individual Commercial Brokerage in northern California. “Test or not, insure or not. If you’re going to insure, wait until you are approved before doing the test.”
Related stories:
- Boomers wonder: Why test ME for hep C?
- Readers reveal hopes, fears about health care hearings
- A modest proposal: To solve health spending crisis, tax cats
More than three million Americans already have the liver disease Hepatitis C, and according to the Centers for Disease Control, one in 30 baby boomers have it – and most do not know it. NBC's Robert Bazell reports.
Leave a Comment:
For a great country, we sure have a despicable health system. These bastards are realizing their American dreams, preying on the sick and the elderly. On every level, it is the epitome of greed, blackmail, extortion and a lack of moral values. Individuals and businesses need affordable health care.
My husband gave gallons of blood over the years to the Red Cross and one time we got a letter saying our test say you may have hep c see your doc immediately, which he did and was tested and told doesn't have it and never did. Red Cross says can never give blood again even though it was a false positive, which they were having a lot of, he is on their records saying he does have it. Then they are always saying there is a shortage of blood donors, now you know why.
A friend of mine, just turning 50, is banned from ever giving blood, along with her healthy young adult kids. The friend's great-grandmother (kids' great-great-grandmother) had Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. Seems excessive to ban the whole family forever because of one now-distant ancestor. Great-grandma never set foot in the US, she lived her entire life in the old country. Maybe this ancestor will make this family hard to insure, too, someday.
essie222==Do you KNOW what Jakob Creutzfeldt disease IS???This seems like a reasonable precaution for a horrible disease.. WHY on earth would you want a person who is already in crisis medically to be given blood that might carry a horrible disease?
Every week, the media comes out with a story, such as this one, that tries to use fear as a means of garnering support for Obama-care. These fears are biased because they're being generated by a government that would benefit from passage of Obama-care.
I don't care what position you have on these issues, but please think for yourself - don't let the media and/or the government lead you to where they want to go.
Finally someone who realizes that when the government "proposes" something it should be looked at with much suspicion.
I am not a supporter of Obama care. What I am a supporter of is, affordable health care. Politicians have enabled insurance companies, drug companies and health care providers to extort money out of us for years. Yes, there are fears. The fear of being financially destroyed if one of your kids, your wife or yourself, become sick. Talk about kicking the can down the road!
Mike--I was struck by the timing of this and other similar articles too.
so much for obamacare, "affordable health care for everyone" except for those with certain diseases.
once again, obamacare is NOT the answer!
insurance reform IS the answer, yet politicians are afraid of the insurance industry, just look at the AIG debackle. AIG has not been made to adequately repay the federal bailout that let them party like rock stars.
insurance companies are exactly like the mafia, sure they cover people in need but they bilk the majority of the nation for trillions of dollars while claiming hardship for having to payout billions. and the feds back every thing they want to do.
and they want to deny coverage, which put the citizen in violation of the law and risks fines and jail time.
THE systems in America are broken and the public refuses to see it because the would rather stay blind and ignorant to fact. they just want to keep their heads in the sand and claim they're not racist because they voted for incompetence.
Redblooded AZ--My MAIN objection to the Obama ''health care" (does NOTHING to improve health OR care!) bill is that with it's mandate, it FORCES people to become unwilling customers of what I consider to be the REASON our health care industry is in crisis: The "health" INSURANCE business.
There should be no delay in policy coverage of a health check and should be part of annual exams and screenings as well that ALL health insurances must cover. Better to find and treat it early instead of expensive treatment through delayed screening and detection. In the long run, it will be cheaper for most health insurance providers.
Not when it is just easier to drop you from coverage after the condition is found.
It would effect profit margins
Sounds like another reason for the Supreme Court to uphold the Affordable Care Act (for you Repubicans, OBUMMER Care).
SCOTUS is only going to judge whether or not the entire ACA or its component parts are unconstitutional or not. All other considerations are irrelevant (or they are supposed to be). Some of the discussion during arguments looks like some of the court is in favor of striking the entire thing down as they do not want the task of disassembling the law into parts to strike and parts to uphold and end up with the upheld parts being unworkable. If it is upheld, the country will have to choose from bankruptcy or death panels when the private insurance companies go under.
Neal;
Death Panels, OMG more death camps. I thought we were over that. HAHAHAHA
rfrisch--nope, sounds like a good reason to SCRAP Obamacare, and start again ELIMINATING the health care INSURANCE industry from the equation.
I was diagnosed in 2005 took the 48 week treatment of injectable peg-intron & Ribaviran (sic) believe it or not the side effects weren't that bad for me. I am a very small guy tall but skinny my Doc was worried that I wouldn't be able to handle the side effects, If not they would have stopped treatment. But after the first injection which pretty much floored me for the rest of that day. But all the others went off without a hitch worked the whole time I was on treatment. Also thank God for health insurance the treatment is very expensive. But I am no longer detectable for Hep C I also had a liver biopsy done and i do have cirrhosis but that is attributed to me drinking very heavily for several years without the knowledge of having Hep C so now I am Sober and free of Hep C and my liver is well on it's way to regeneration. I advise anybody out there on the fence to go ahead and get tested it's painless and if you don't have it hopefully your educated enough not to contract it. Beleive me there's no symtoms at all until the damage is already done.
So much for the free love hippie generation. What goes around comes around.
Is this really a health issue for ALL Boomers or just insurance companies waiting to drop current patients or not insure those without insurance health care? It is also unfair to judge all Boomers as drug users and having sex with many partners.
I would also point out that there were lots of drug users during the 1970s - many more than I remember in the mid to late 1960s. Also, many people could have been exposed to Hepatitis C through no fault of their own - through medical practices that have since been better screened and done. As far as I can see, young people of today are far more sexually active and with more partners than when I grew up. Maybe everyone should be tested if we are going down that path.
It's insulting to think all of us born between these years have to be screened - surely there is some sort of questionnaire doctors could use to screen patients and treat those truly in need - saving money for all of us.
Here we go again. More reasons to despise the health care delivery system in this country. Since I am Christian, I won't hope that you self-righteous right-wing bigots or your families suffer from uncovered illness. Health care insurance -- what a farce!
Read the cause of contracting Hep C you morons. It's bloob borne. Yes, there are people who were reckless, but it's also been transmitted by transfusions, transplants, razors,toothbrushes even today emergency service people are told to take universal pre-cautions because the virus can live in dry blood on tools and equipment. It has nothing to do with sex. If drug companies didn't try to make extreme profits on meds in this country more people could afford treatment thereby reducing the risk to others. Keep watching faux news, someday something they report will be true.
I've said this before and I will say it again ad nauseum, My history does not predicate infection with hepatitis c. Therefore, if you still want to test me, PAY ME!!!!!
Republicans want to get rid of your protection against the rampant pre-existing exclusions; this is just one GOOD thing about ObamaCare; keep this in mind come November, especially if you want a Supreme Court that doesn't lean heavily to the Right.
van man--riddle me this. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is elderly, has been coping with cancer, AND YET, despite being a DEM nominee, she has NOT chosen to retire from the Supreme Court while it is still a guarantee that a DEM president would nominate her successor.
Could it BE that she has not been too thrilled with Obama's FIRST two nominees?
And PS-- the court does NOT lean "Heavily to the right." The vote is usually 5-4. Any time it leans "heavily to the right" that means that some of the DEM judges agree with the 'right'.
This is a load crap. My sister had Hep C long before anyone knew who Obama was. She had no insurance. She got STATE PROVIDED MEDICAID, treated, CURED and has survived 15 years. All her tests have come back negative each year since. People today can get the very same state provided insurance.
This is a *Scare the old and ignorant people* tactic the left has used since I've been around for SIXTY ONE YEARS. It's amazing to me that the dems can find more and more ignorant people each year but then we have our liberal base public school systems that indoctrinate our kids to thank for that.
Ignorant are easier to lead around by the nose.
Well, I have Insurance and can't afford the treatment. Sucks doesn't it when if I quit my job and give everything away - I would qualify for medicaid and the govt could pay for it. Sucks being responsible.
One more thing. If Obamacare survives the supreme cluck muster and ruling, and it does become law, we can't be denied treatment for this or anything else because of pre-existing conditions. The insurance companies lose. I don't believe the public health nazis in this country or anything they say because it is all to line their own pockets. Take your chances and save your money because we all get to die anyway. Something is going to kill us all someday.
Sounds to me like the buddy of some government official just started up a new Hep C testing/treatment company.
Personally, I think the practice of requiring a physical exam before being insured should be outlawed. Why?
Simple. Insurance is a gamble, for both sides. A physical could give the insurance co's an unfair advantage. They should be required to take everyone, no matter what.
Better yet, let's just get rid of the whole industry. They provide no real health services, only add another layer of cost, and an extremely inflated one at that. Leave the health related decisions to the doctor and patient. Accountants have no place in this. Same goes for the religious views of doctors and pharmacists.
It's not about you and your beliefs, it's about the patient, and only the patient! Don't like it, find another profession!
AIG=All Intrusive Government. Leave me alone. Whenever I go, I go.
It will soon be a Brave New World and it won't be pretty.
The Feds are RECOMMENDING Americans get checked for hep C not requiring it, big difference. I happen to agree with getting tested because it's easily transmitted in bodily fluids. There are no vaccines for hep C yet but there is a hep B vaccine.
What boomer is getting life insurance? too old to begin with.
Does anyone remember the movie Solient Green ??? Do you remember seeing all the people walking shoulder to shoulder all over the place because the Earth had become overpopulated ??? And we are trying to save more lives so they can use up more resorces...The Earth wasn't ment to support this many people and death is Mother Natures way of restoring the balance...we need to lose 2 billion people not save more.
actually healthcare is drivien by profit, so keeping someone alive and in need of constant care is far more profitable than a dead person. they've been very good at exploiting religious zealots in those efforts as well, some have even proposed allowing living wills to be nullified in the name of preserving "life".
that's why we have republicans in Iowa wanting to ban funding for abortions in case of rape, because they have to let the religious hypocrites whine and snivel like serpents, and then they'll also be seeking to pull funding for ADC for the resulting pregnancy, telling the victim it's her attackers responsibility to support the child he "fathered".
the day is coming when we will have to decide whether we wish to continue living as pawns in corporate games or willingly die defending our freedom.
outriderJNS--this is why I am opposed to "comprehensive immigration reform" as envisioned by liberals. Currently the US is admitting over a million LEGAL immigrants per year. That is ONE per every 300 US citizens. In my view, we are already "full up", and certainly should ONLY be admitting immigrants who have some special skill or education that will ADD to our country, rather than becoming a draw on it.
Kind of like most OTHER 1st world countries do?
There is an article on MSN today's front page about the 60 WORST countries in the world, and only two are in the western Hemisphere--Columbia and Haiti.
The rest are MOSTLY in Africa, and in southern Asia (the exception being N. Korea.) And if you look at the one common factor it is overpopulation. Sadly, if you go one step down, another common factor for many is ISLAM.
The US has an obligation to it's CURRENT citizens to protect them from over-population via immigration, legal AND ESPECIALLY illegal.
A perfect example of how The Best Health Care "System" In The World amounts to one perverse incentive piled on another.
Republicans want a population desperate enough to sell their souls to companies like Koch, the democrats want a populace so desperate as to think they need to give complete control of their lives to government.
I just bought my first gun, I can see the day approaching where I will unfortunately need to use it to defend my freedom.
I believe all health decisions should be between an individual and his or her doctor......period. Including the costs. No government, no insurance, you pay for yours, I'll pay for mine. I you can't afford it, tuff. If I can't afford it, tuff. Do not ask me to pay for yours and I promise, I will not ask you to pay for mine. Fair enough?
As has been pointed out here, then you'll be paying for your own roads, police, fire protection, air traffic control. I don't think we need so many troops stationed in foreign countries, so the army is on you. Don't you dare look at the satellite weather pictures, I paid for those. My relative in the Army Corps of Engineers will get laid off, so I hope his dam doesn't burst and drown your family. I hope you like eating at restaurants that never passed a health inspection.