A Curious Statistical Anomaly

I’m sure out there somewhere is a nice blues jazz number with that this title, “Medical Insurance Blues”. However, it’s two days later and I’m still seeing red. Here’s the background. I have allergies — lots and lots of them. Basically, if you say I’m allergic to the world you’ve got it. I don’t even bother with the skin test anymore because the very last time I had one everything reacted so they tested for the base (no reaction) and for the needle invading the skin (no reaction). So, now I have them test my blood (RASP test). The doctors explain (patiently I might add) that the test is not sensitive enough and we should do the skin test. I counter with “Do the blood tests and if you need the skin test for some items, we’ll do those.” I’ve never been asked to retake a test because everything tests high enough.

Now for the problem. It’s pollen season in force big time down here in Maryland. My eyes have been itching like crazy and at times I wish I could do the cartoon thing of popping them out of my head and running water over them. So, I’ve been using the over the counter allergy drops and tears and anything else I could find. Finally, I gave up and saw the doctor. He gave me a prescription (hereafter Rx) for some eye drops. We dropped it off at the pharmacy but had to wait to pick it up the next day.

Go to pick it up and insurance has refused to pay for the Rx. Why, you might ask. Are you ready for this one. The insurance won’t pay because, get this, over the counter eye drops work just as well as the Rx ones. I just love the way an insurance clerk, whom I have never met, and who doesn’t have a medical degree, and who has never talked to my doctor, can make such judgments. Yes, statistically, for some people, maybe the over the counter drops work just as well. But to make this declaration without ever asking if I’d used over the counter drops is pure bottom-line bean counting.

Will I fight this? No. This is the third time they’ve done this. Insurance is Anthem BC/BS PPO — the plan is a good one and generally they’re okay but every now and then they come up with these gotchas. I fought for one drug and finally got them to pay for it but it took 5 months of fighting and faxing documents and getting papers signed and made out by the doctor. But I couldn’t afford the over $110/month to pay out of pocket for the drug. It was exhausting and depressing experience and in this case not worth the effort.

The doctor gave me a sample and I’ll use it sparingly until the season is over. The insurance covered it last year and maybe they’ll cover it again next year, but this year they decided to make me suffer. The thing is it would be easier to take in some ways IF the insurance company would at least acknowledge that they’re playing with my health. When they refused the sleeping pills about two years ago they said, and this is almost a direct quote from the manager of the telephone support.

We’re not making medical decisions and we’re not stopping you from getting the drug. You can get it anytime you want, you just have to pay the full price for it.

I just love the way they can distance themselves from the suffering they cause. What did I do about the sleeping pill. I decided to do without. It’s easier since I quit work and now work at home. Every now and then I just can’t sleep until after being awake for 36 to 48 hours.   I usually finally manage to sleep 8 hours and then I’m back to my normal 4-6 hours a night (if I’m lucky). Somedays, there just aren’t enough spoons within reach.

What I know is that I’m lucky. We have insurance through the company my husband works for, and many people don’t have any at all. I did find out that people with no insurance pay more for drugs than people with insurance. I’m not talking about the copay. If you pay attention to the sheets that come with your Rx, in some places they say the drug costs X and the insurance pays Y and your co-pay is Z. Then if insurance won’t pay, you usually pay the cost, X. However, if they make out the payment sheet thinking you don’t have insurance it’s usually X+some number B. So not having insurance costs even more for health care.

None of the present candidates have a decent health care plan. Mandatory health care unless the government is going to pay for it all isn’t going to do anything. If people can’t afford it now, they can’t afford it when it’s mandatory. Do govvies really think people don’t have it because they’d rather get a six pack? People don’t have health insurance because A) they have pre-existing conditions that run the cost through the roof or B) they’d rather feed their kids and keep a roof over their heads or C) they’ve got A and B. Let’s face it medical care should not be a profit making proposition.  I mean who came up with the brilliant idea to put the health of our citizens in the hands of someone whose business model makes money by NOT providing healthcare?  In America, we need free basic medical care for all citizens and clerks should not be denying things that a licensed doctor has prescribed for a patient. Why bother to license physicians if office clerks can over-rule them.

I feel better having let off steam. But I’m still outraged — and — my eyes still itch!

Today I had jury duty. I got the notification quite a while ago and was supposed to call last night to see if my group had to report to the court house — I did. So today, I gathered lots of reading material, bottled water, and lunch and reported to the court house at 7:30. I’ve only done this once before so everything seems new to me.

First you have to go through security to get into the building. Smooth and quick and they let me have my sock knitting. Then sign in with the clerks and wait, and wait, and wait, and get assigned a panel color and number (criminal case), then wait, and wait, and wait some more. Five hours later we were told we were all dismissed. So, we turned in our colored numbered cards and could go home.

Last time I actually got into the court room and the lawyers and the judge whittled down our panel pool of less than a hundred and more than 50 down to the twelve jurors and the four alternates. So, this time it I spent the day in the jurors assembly room. Got a lot of reading done. Drank moderately okay coffee and my bottled water. But even though I forced myself to do isometric stretches every chapter and got up and stood every so often — those chairs are killers. I would have found them guilty in a heart beat. They weren’t even cheap chairs. I’m sure the county government spent an indecent amount on these padded chairs for the assembly room. I’m just not sure why chair manufacturers, especially those making chairs for people to sit in for more than ten minutes at a stretch, can’t make a chair that doesn’t kill your back or put your legs asleep.

So in discomfort and in between breaks, I observed my fellow potential jurors. Most brought something to occupy them during the long waits. Many, as I did, brought a book or two or three. Some had magazines. Some had portable craft projects. Some talked on the phone. Some worked on their laptop or PDA. And here’s the group that baffles me — some did nothing but sit and stare into space usually while turning their colored numbered panel card over and over. I’d go bonkers in about 20 minutes if I had to just sit with nothing to do. In an hour, I’d be climbing the walls. How do they do it? Are they all Zen masters? I’m totally baffled by people who can just sit like that and not go berserk. I’m not sure if I should be in awe of people so centered that they can quietly sit for hours or spend my time wondering what they’re thinking about while they’re sitting there — calmly, turning their cards over and over and over.

After I was dismissed, I called my husband from outside the building and walked a mile and a half to the nearest Starbucks to have coffee and wait for him. We only have one car so these sorts of things are a bit of a scheduling problem. While walking out the back tension, I found the day just wonderful. The sun was out and the sky was bright blue with white fluffy clouds. The forsythia was in bloom with its jaunty yellow flowers proclaiming spring to anyone with eyes to see. The Bartlett pears are also filled with their white flowers. But even more startling because I hadn’t yet noticed them this month was the magnolias — white and pink — beautiful blooms that look so startling on the trees without leaves.

In spite of the chairs, it was a glorious spring day.

So, I’ve got insomnia and I’m catching up on some of the tech sites I haven’t read in a while and I come across an article about a bill being presented by LeRoy E. Myers Jr. that would make it a crime to surf the internet using unsecured wireless networks without permission. The article quotes Myers:

He (Myers) told the House Judiciary Committee that one of his neighbors, after buying a new laptop computer, got onto the Internet, thinking it was through a cable TV hookup.
Actually, the connection was through Myers’ home wireless Internet system.
He said he didn’t want unintentional use like that to be prosecuted the same as computer hacking.
According to the bill, intentional unauthorized access to another person’s computer, network, database or software is a misdemeanor. The penalty is up to three years imprisonment and a fine of up to $1,000.

A quick search of Amazon showed at least a half-dozen books on wireless network and the one shown here is for people who aren’t that techno-savvy but want to set up a home network. I checked the table of contents and there is a section on securing your network. In fact, most of the books with a look inside have a section on securing your network.

We have a home network and it’s secured. No one can use our network unless we put them into the allowed table of MAC addresses and give them the proper security key, or if we intentionally open it up for all users. It’s simple and easy to do. I’ve read about other states trying to pass similar legislation and find it hard to believe that our representatives are so clueless. If you don’t want people surfing by using your wireless network — secure it. Networks left open are assumed to be available for use since they are so easy to secure against outside users connecting.

It’s kind of like McD’s putting those newspapers up by the front counter. It’s assumed because the papers are there and there’s no price on them that they are for people to read and return. At least I’ve never seen anyone pay for using the papers there. On the other hand, in hotels there is prominently displayed price lists by the fridges in the room so that you know if you take something, you will be charged.

All use of an unsecured network is unintentional use, in that I couldn’t use it if you didn’t specifically allow me to. If you don’t want someone using your wireless network Rep. Myers then secure it. Don’t try to penalize others for your lack of attention to detail in such a critical area. It seems that Maryland’s motto should match that of the US — Never take responsibility for your own mistakes, just criminalize anyone who happens to stumble over your mistakes. Isn’t that why whistle-blowers still take the fall for pointing out errors?

Yesterday, I got an ad for the Gattaca (Special Edition) DVD. I watched the trailers and spots and got to thinking about the movie and what it says about potential. Originally released on DVD in 1998, the film is about genetic engineering and its effects on society. Once people can have their children engineered to be what they want them to be, very few parents opt to have God children. God children are simply children who have not been engineered and are a random mix of the parent’s DNA. Vincent, a God child, has a dream and does all in his power to achieve his goals in a society that sees him as a lesser human. His younger brother has been engineered and is a police officer. Once, as children, Vincent and his brother had a competition/race — the result has haunted Vincent’s brother. Why? Because, Vincent won. There’s a lot more to the plot of the movie but what I want to discuss is the underlying theme of potential and capacity for growth.

Earlier, my husband and I got to talking about the big fish in a small pond phenomena for students and how it effects their college years. For example, in high school I got decent grade by just going to class and listening to the teacher. I read a lot outside of school and skimmed the textbooks and did the homework (sometimes without actually reading the books). In other words, I never learned how to study because I never had to. Then came college. All the students were smart. I had to read all the assignments, sometimes more than once to understand them because the lectures built on the readings rather than, as they did in high school, simply hit the high/important points of the readings. So, I had to learn to study. First semester was a disaster as I scrambled to keep up, with no clue how to study, outline, highlight material, pick out the important points of a lecture. I was totally lost because I was beyond my native intelligence to where I really had to push to reach my potential.

Now, in Gattaca, everyone is genetically engineered for abilities. There are no interviews for a job, they take a blood sample and see what you are capable of. So, why push yourself to go beyond what you can comfortably do? Why struggle to be more when your DNA has already given you everything and you can’t be more than that anyway.

The key to the movie is someone who pushes to grasp a dream. Someone who knows what they want and is willing to push themselves to the limit to get that dream. There is no magic bullet that can make people better, they have to strive to be better every day. You have to reach beyond yourself and push yourself to achieve. Expecting that you will have, or get, anything you want simple because of who you are or what you are — that is the first step towards a stagnant society. Right now we have a lot of people who feel they deserve things (the thing changes with the person) but they don’t want to work for it because they feel it’s owed. I’m not talking about Equal Rights, that’s just leveling the playing field and erasing the barriers, you still have to work to get the job or whatever. I’m talking about those who feel they are owed just because they exist. I’m sure we all know people who feel they are owned respect, not because they have earned it, but because they are better dressed, richer, more educated, whatever than someone else. On the other hand, there are people who are given respect from others because they just do what they do to the best of their ability while respecting others. Sort of a Golden Rule result.

Everyone has potential. Yes, disabilities can limit the range of opportunities, but there is still potential. On the other hand, there are groups, laws, etc. that limit potential. For example, people on welfare are often not allowed to own cars or can only own a car worth less than a certain amount of money (a clunker lucky to move at all). Therefore, while forcing them off welfare and to find work, they are artificially limited in where they can look and what they can do for work. There are always problems trying to live up to your potential — money, physical defects, environment, education, and location. But usually, there are ways to achieve your dreams against the odds even then.

However, there is little support for those on the lower end of the economic scale to achieve their potential. I have to wonder why. Right now higher education is out of reach for many from middle income to poverty level. Students from poor families are just as likely (and often more likely) to be motivated to succeed in education — yet their potential is limited by income. There’s something wrong with a country that has no real mechanism for those with lower incomes to attend colleges while high income students don’t even have to actually make the grades if daddy can endow a chair or building.

So, maybe it’s money more than DNA that determines potential. It’s a thought anyway.

I heard today that the Virginia Senate passed a law to remove mentally retarded from all public documents and signage — the phrase intellectually damage will be used in its place. I admit that I haven’t followed up on this to make sure it’s correct, but that’s not really important because the point is the PC (politically correctness) of such motions in general. First mentally retarded is an actual definable term (follow the link), however intellectually damaged is not so this is a change for the sake of change not a change for clarity.

[NOTE: Image is from an interesting article “A Politically Correct LexiconYour ‘how-to’ guide to avoid offending anyone” by Joel Bleifuss.]

It seems to me that a lot of the changes in language that are urged upon us in order to stop bias, negativity, and various fill-in-the-blank-isms don’t really make a difference. Over the last several decades many changes have been made but I can’t see that the world is any better for it. Hate is still alive and well and so is bigotry and discrimination. All that’s changed is our words, but the venom and emotion behind those words just moved — now the words may sound nicer but the attached emotional-negativity is still there. While changing language does do a lot in some cases for example changing fireman to fire fighter does make sense because a female fireman — well, it’s just weird. Having the job isn’t weird it’s the verbal label for the job that’s weird — the occupational title should be gender neutral. However, many of the latest changes are just a result of someone somewhere getting their knickers in a twist and thinking if they change the label the problem will go away.

Problems don’t go away when you ignore them, cover them up, hide them, or relabel them. They just go along for the ride and eventually get in your face again. You can’t change discrimination by changing labels — you must change the underlying emotional baggage that causes the problem in the first place.

As Juliet says in Shakepeare’s Romeo and Juliet:

What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;

However, a skunk cabbage labeled a rose is still going to smell to high heaven. It seems that too often we opt for the easy way out of our problems. We stick on a bandaid or give it a nice coat of paint. What we need to start doing is the hard stuff — we need to look at the underlying causes of the problems and deal with them. If you can manage to change things at the bottom the sting will come out of the hurtful words because there won’t be the emotional baggage attached.

So, do we want clarity and change, or just a bandage feel-good effort?

I’ve noted over the last few years that the United States seems to be taking some very unexpected turns. But with the article in CNN on New Rules on Licenses, I’ve realized that without changing my abode, I’ve ended up living in 1960s USSR.

When I was growing up the Cold War was very hot. People were afraid most of the time: of rock and roll; of hippies; of Cuba; of communists; of nuclear war; and of fear being afraid. I remember hearing in talks among adults, seeing in movies and books, the evils of communism. The biggest one talked about was how citizens couldn’t go anywhere or do anything without (and this last was usually mentioned in a whisper as if it was a dirty word) papers. Guess what. Soon Americans are going to need papers (disguised as a RealID) to travel within their own country. American’s use to pride themselves on not having a National ID, of being able to travel where they wanted, when they wanted, without having people track their every move, library book, and purchase. Personal anonymity use to be a hallmark of our society. We only gave up what we absolutely had to, and only when there was an overriding imperative, because we believed we had the right to be left alone. Those days seem to have passed.

What happened to move us in this direction? Fear. People today are afraid: of terrorists; of strangers; of each other; of immigrants; and, worst of all, of fear itself. Once people are filled with fear, they want to do things that will make them feel safer. Polls show that a whopping (that’s a technical term) percentage of Americans are willing to give up most, if not all, of the rights guaranteed to them in the Bill of Rights to be safe.

“Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” Benjamin Franklin.

Whenever you give up your freedoms to be safe, you’ve started on a downward slope that will rob you of your freedom and make you even more vulnerable than you were before you gave away your rights. In listening to people, I hear them say over and over that all this security is making us safer. How? That they can’t answer, because they don’t feel safer. Studies show that with all the extra security at the airport, we’re no safer now than we were before 9/11. Most of the security that’s been implemented here in the US is more for show than for safety. Most American feel that if they get horribly inconvenienced then they must be safer. Well, they’re not.

The problem is 9/11 can’t happen again or at least not the way it did. The paradigm used won’t work anymore. In fact, due to communications technology it didn’t work on the third plane. Once people realized that the “hijacking” wasn’t in fact a hijacking, they fought back and kept that third target from being hit.

Are we safer today than the day after 9/11? No, we’re not. In fact, in some distressing ways, the terrorists have won. The United States of America, Home of the Free and the Brave, the country I grew up in no longer exists. Our Constitution is in shreds under attack by our executive, congressional, and judicial branches. Our Bill of Rights is being eroded away by the courts and people who are afraid to have too much freedom because someone might do something someday that they might get hurt by. So, the US is gone, it’s now becoming the USSR of the 1960s; a land of scared people, constantly under watch by their government. Its kind of ironic that the USSR has been broken up and is working on becoming a democracy.

I miss my country and I want it back. I want to once again be able to be proud of my country and its accomplishments. I want to live in a country where human rights are for everyone, torture is abhorred and not sanctioned by the government or its president, and with a Constitution and a Bill of Rights that apply to everyone, not just a select few. I didn’t want to move, I want to live in America, too bad it moved out from under me.

Every now and then I think about what I would do IF I ruled the world. Today, I was thinking about voting reform for the US.

1. Get rid of the electoral college. It was a great idea in the beginning because travel was difficult and communications weren’t as swift. But in today’s world of instant communication, where the votes are tallied and counted within hours of the closing of the poles there’s no need to have it — it’s another way that the will of the people can be changed by a group that really, in many states, isn’t even obligated to vote inline with the popular vote for that state. So, get rid of it. The vote is the vote and that’s that.
2. Add two new categories to every slate of candidates. First, “None of the Above”. If “None of the Above” wins the office then none of the candidates who are running are allowed to run again for that office for at least 2 years. The office needs a new slate and another election. So, it costs a bit more to run a second election but finally the people might actually get a slate where they are not voting for the lesser of two evils but actually voting for someone. Second, “Don’t care”. This isn’t the same as “None of the Above” because it’s similar to leaving the ballot blank. What it provides is a measure of voter apathy. If “Don’t Care” wins, well, it’s an indication that this is a bad group running for office particularly if “None of the Above” comes in second.
3. Count votes with the “Australian Run-Off System”. This method has a lot of different names but that’s the one I’m familiar with. Basically, voters rank the candidates as first choice, second choice, and so forth. You don’t have to rank them all you could just have a first choice pick. However, if the first choice doesn’t win by a specified margin then the candidate with the lowest number of votes is thrown out and the votes are recalculated so that all the ballots that had the disqualified person in 1st place, now have their 2nd place person become their 1st place person, and all the ballots are counted again. You can read here for a more detailed explanation as it’s used in the Hugo voting. This would allow 3rd party candidates to actually have a shot at winning. Right now 3rd party candidates really don’t have a chance as so many voters are trying to make sure that the greater evil doesn’t win and don’t want to split votes to get who they want because they have to make sure the evil one doesn’t win. With this system, if your first candidate is eliminated, you get to automatically try again with your second place candidate and your vote isn’t “wasted” by voting for someone that “can’t win”.
4. Get rid of the proprietary and secret electronic voting machines. If we’re going to use electronic machines, then they should be open source. All the code should be available for anyone to inspect, and the certified code that is going to be used should be check-summed so that the polling places can verify that the certified code is, in fact, what’s being used. Furthermore, the raw vote counts should be made immediately available after the vote for review. Lastly, every voting machine should print out a record which is reviewed by the voter and then placed in a hopper for recounting purposes. A certain percentage of voting districts should be randomly selected and have recounts performed and compared to the electronic totals. Elections results in America should be the property of the American people and therefore be as open and transparent as it is possible to be.

That’s it for now. I really think that some of these should be instituted as a way to make sure the actual will of the people prevails, rather than the whole thing being to see that the lesser of several evils doesn’t win. I probably still won’t like the outcome but at least I’ll feel that every candidate had a fair shot at the office they wanted.