. . . real news for a change about public health around the U.S, posted at the WSJ Healthblog.
The article contains a link to the results of the study; click on any state to see that state's data summarized by county, with comparisons to statewide and national U.S. averages.
One of the commenters brilliantly points out that the report classifies being "uninsured" as a "clinical care" factor, and inquires what the ICD-10 code may be for uninsured.
Any InsureBlog reader happen to know?
Popular Posts
-
For those in the path of Hurricane/TS Sandy (and/or for those who may face other severe weather conditions) the Insurance Information Instit...
-
So it appears that women "of a certain age" may well benefit from not one, but two shots of the good stuff: " A glass or two...
-
I've always subscribed to the conventional wisdom that emptying a full bladder as soon as (practically) possible was always the "wa...
-
HHS Secretary Shecantbeserious may be relaxing some privacy rules: " The Department of Health and Human Services says patients should h...
-
Nina Kallen hosts this week's outstanding collection of risk-related posts , with a twist: she's nicknamed this edition "the...
-
■ First the bad news. From the Annals of the Much Vaunted National Health System© comes this alarming development: " Almost half of Bri...
-
HHS is spending $700 million of YOUR money to teach you something your parents did not. In an effort to save Obamacare the government is hop... -
An overarching theme here at IB has been that health care costs drive health insurance costs. While this may seem obvious to us, it bears ...
-
FoIB Michael Cannon , the Cato Institute's Director of Health Policy Studies, alerts us to this outstanding video that perfectly illustr...
-
It amazes me how often I see comments like this from Jodi Kantor of the NY Times: " By summer 2009, with the country still stunned by e...
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar