Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Nice post locks. TY
MrLong, do you know how much profit CBAI makes per contract? I don't know that I've ever seen that posted but haven't been here that long. diane
That's a really interesting observation regarding China Stem cells. Doesn't seem like wild speculation at all IMO. Thanks for sharing. (btw I have a healthy respect for lawyers in general because of their analytical mind and intelligence. I was married to one for 10 years which is why I have a sense of how legal minds work. I do think the medical malpractice field has gotten a bit out of hand, hence my passion on that topic.)
Anyway, have a great weekend tbk!
Does anyone here remember or have access to the Mirant chart showing PPS during bankruptcy, examiner, and beyond? I thought it was interesting at the time but more relevant currently. Could be in the IBOX. Please advise.
CBAI or anyone...why does the pps go up in September? I believe you said that before but if not...my bad.
I agree with you that on the surface the statement below seems rather innocuous. The problem is narrowing the event to fall under the definition of "fail to engraft." Again, these patients a horrifically ill. If the patient died, post transplant it's a safe bet that an attorney would attempt to tie the event and the guarantee to CBAI. If the patient did OK with a few complications I wouldn't put it past a few patients with thousands upon thousands of debt to pursue. Who could blame them as they are truly desperate? IMHO it would take 50K in lawyers fees to dismiss any claim that would be filed against CBAI in reference to a failed stem cell transplant OR CBAI opens itself up to greater legal exposure. There must be some legal minds on the board??? What say you?
Corcell is offering the best possible solution immediatedly following the slim chance the stem fails: Money.
Only time for a quick response now but I don't think the Corcell guarantee is sinister or greedy at all. But I do think the approach is naive. It is a delicate balance working with patients desperately fighting for their lives. Any hospital administrator works routinely with Risk Management dept to answer some of these type of questions. Let me tell you it ain't easy. As you may or may not know, in health care it's a lawyers world. If you open the door to pay part of a claim you open yourself up to a lawyer then expanding the claim to say that yes the transplant failed and cord blood company acknowledged it. In fact the patient stayed in the hospital for 10 months, was on dialysis for 6 months and died...all because of a failed stem cell transplant. You get the picture. It's a sad situation for clinicians trying to do the right thing with patients and having to consider medmal lawyer ramifications. But such is the health care system today in America.
Time will tell. I hope it's the most successful strategy yet and I'm wrong.
Thanks for the info locks. Although I don't agree with the approach, this is really the first strategy with CBAI I don't support. Can't have it all, right?
Cause I try not to be too grumpy in the AM, suffice it to say i think the approach lacks sophistication as well as opens the company up to unnecessary medical legal intervention. Patients having transplants are some of the sickest patients on the planet. Unfortunately it is almost impossible in many cases to determine if a rejection of transplant source is due to the donor cells, pre existing conditions, infection, bad genes or bad luck. Also, transplants may not fail at first but after a period of time. What is the window? 3 months? 10 months? 10 years? Because transplant patients have astronomical medical bills, you can be sure someone will ask. CBAI could waste a lot of time analyzing that info to pay a claim as even the best medical professionals can't pinpoint the exact cause of a rejection. If Matt has estimated in his business plan that every patient will receive the 50K and if not, then not paying 50K is icing on the cake, I could live with that. He seems very astute.
OK too grumpy this early but I'm still long. GLTU
Believe it or not medical professionals working directly with patients don't like quantifying health in terms of dollars and cents. In fact they hate it. It's why many went into the profession, myself included, to avoid the sales mentality. The "greater good" idea.
CMS has advanced the thinking in that area recently by defining "never events." This is an event that is related to clinicians not providing excellent care to patients resulting in compications. An example would be infection related to an IV or Central Line that should be handled according industy standards. There are other never events in place and on the horizon. CMS (Medicare in this case) has said that they will scrounge the bill and not pay for anything related to the complication. No one has a problem with this whatsoever as it translates to providing good patient care. That's why the idea of finding an alternative stem cell donor would fare well with clinicians who could support the idea to patients. But if a hospital said they would give $50,000 to any patient getting a bloodstream infection from an IV, I think they would be the laughing stock of the industry.
The 50K idea I think would be particularly unattractive to delivering mothers IMO. Having a transplant and rejecting a transplant are the furthest things from their minds. IMO it wold be a turnoff as too much of a sales pitch. GLTU
I have to respectfully disagree with you on this one, my friend. While HC reform has some really good attributes come 2014, it will be interesting to see who survives until then which is where the real problem lies.
Why Hospitals Are Loving Health Care Reform
So don’t listen to the insurance companies. Hospitals are going to be just fine when health care reform gets passed. In fact, they’re quite likely to come out ahead in the game.
Wow. You and ML both posted this info. Thank you. It has caused me to think about why I don't like the 50 K concept at all. On the one hand I suppose it could be a marketing tool attractive to some... on the other hand it offends me as I think it may offend others. People in general don't like to put a dollar value on human life, which is often the position individuals find themselves in with life threatening illnesses. I think the message should be softened somehow. Even a guarantee to try to find another match or a removal from an insurance bill would be better than a 50K rebate for bad results??? Who thought of that? Medical science needs to be lot more sensitive to the consumer. AIMVHO
Nice. Unless you are ERic Clapton
Nice post catz. I wish more people on boards could agree to disagree. It would be boring if we all had the same opinions but why get overly excited about it? GLTU
I don't know of course, but since it's fun to speculate, maybe Matt had some potential private or public funding sources on the hook who were trying to decide whether to fund embryonic projects or another option related to cord blood(non embryonic) pending the outcome of the judge's decision. Wouldn't that be nice?
The absolute worst, right? You get it!
You didn't ask me but from a blood bank point of view...yes absolutely O negative a much bigger reach and more valuable than B positive. O neg the universal donor.
mofnc...I don't know the answer to your question but I think it is totally valid. Why not?
I looked up her info. Nice. Seems like a great advocate. The people in the know in science seem to accumulate a lot of post docs, which apparently is the case with her.
I don't know that the CE offering attendance is easily accessible in terms of who has accessed the info and who has not. Often the CE is free and it comes across the hospital community network as webadvisory available in room xxx at 12 noon. Nurses have a two year cycle to attain their CE requirement. Not specific at all in terms of quality of info one must obtain. If it gives you any frame of reference, I attained the requirement in my state by March of this year for the 2 year cycle by going to mandatory meetings that I wasn't particularly interested in. It is more difficult for those not working regularly, of course, but those who are actively employed have no problem.
In terms of the nursing school community, I wouldn't hold my breath for the cord blood info.Might be a nice to know item. Nursing schools are judged on their performance purely in terms of "pass rate" for state boards. I doubt highly that there is any cord blood info on the state board exam to become a nurse. Their questions encompass a broad array of topics and are more or less "dated" as well as "tried and true" info.
I don't know about the coming of Jesus thing but I sympathesize with researchers who know how to structure an experiment to answer the scientific question posed and at the same time have to respond to ethics debates to get approval in order to go forward. It saddens me really. You may or may not have met pure scientists who do these weird things to mice and draw these intelligent conclusions about medical conditions and related treatments. I met a few myself within the past year. One of them told me he was the leading expert in Arterio Venous Malformations in the USA based on his work with mice and had never met a patient with that condition. At first his statement really bothered me from an ethical standpoint. The more I thought about it I concluded that some research is so high level that the best research is conducted away from patients who I believe should absolutely pull at our heartstrings and make us make decisions subjectively ...which of course would mess up the research process. Who could be scientist and lobbyist at the same time? Hurts my brain. I'm not sure if this corresponds to your post exactly but sharing my thoughts on today's news.
blog fodder...interesting expression. I like it
I understand NDMP, what is Kurtzberg? I think there's a Kurtzberg who files legal documents but that doesn't seem to fit. Spelling may be wrong. Tell me more.
IMHO I think stem cell research and related solutions so broad right now that Pharma waiting for the racehorse who pulls ahead. After all, they have CASH in their back pockets. Make it work on short notice. (Dang why don't I??)
In answer to your second ?, I have no idea. I try not to comment on things upon which I dont have knowledge (Asia). Having said that, international exposure usually good in stock market, right?
Personally I think the least expensive way to get parents to bank cord blood is to somehow capture the public/private thing. ie donate your placenta (which will be discarded anyway) and after xx days either pony up the down payment or contribute to the greater good of those in need. AIMHO.
Good. Then we have a lot in common, Morley. GLTU
Universal newborn screening has to do with whether a state uses the expanded screening technology for newborns available (something like 32 screening tests from the same drop of blood used for less tests)or the more traditional 8 or 16 tests that have been used for a long, long time. A few years back a mother with a child who had a disorder that would have been picked up with expanded testing was able to get Texas, her home state, to adopt the newer technology. Something like 20 states have expanded the expanded "panel" of testing for a broader number of disorders. Those who advocate for the newborn, as anyone should IMHO, want to standardize the testing available to them so as to identify at risk babies at the earliest moment and provide appropriate treatment. All good so far. Problem is that each state has the ability to mandate best practices, such as expanded testing, but then has to pay for the improved technology, once mandated. It's that budget thing, of course. Hope I answered your question but if you want links, I can provide.
If you listen to Cramer today and evidently the NYtimes yesterday, the small investor is fleeing and retail has so many possibilities to make money. I don't care. Still lots of opportunites if you don't get weak in the knees.
Wow. Now that's impressive. Race to the moon, it is.
Corcell named in 11 patents
Don't have a link but the conventional wisdom in health care is to tell a story about a patient to advertise new services vs. put on a TV ad reflecting adding a new service. Great post.
Chart not so good but your dogs are awesome!
MrLong, My second thought in response to this post is that the March of Dimes is a natural partner and advocate for this legislation. I'm sure someone in the know already thought of that. Check it out. www.marchofdimes.com
Thanks for the info. I'm out for the weekend but I will look at it later and respond. diane
Sure. Quite a knack for picking stocks, right? Go MVBY.
Hey Booger, if you have PM can you explain to me how to insert a text on an ihub post?
Me too eyes...That's the honest truth...waiting for a new solution.
So interesting to see how the legislation will all come out. What are your thoughts concerning cord blood cell regulation?
Yes??? Tell me more...
That's hilarious. Post of the day.
Paid in full of nothing is still nothing.
Love the pre meditated murder clause...
The more I think about it...maybe it was a downpayment???
Your posts are awesome locks
I don't know the answer to your intelligent questions either mofnc. My observation, in recent months, is that investors seem to be considerably more conservative. OK. I get it. They seem ready to pounce at the drop of good news. They hold on to their $$$ in between. Darn I wish I had more. As you point out, the good news threshold seems rather high. I hope I can be smart enough to develop my own financial infrastructure amongst all the doubting thomases... GLTU
Let me see if I can stand up to your hopefully good spirited questions. It is Friday and Happy Hour but hey I'll give it a try. I want to understand what you are saying but it is so different than the info I have.
1. No I am proud to say I do not work for HCA.
2. Where are you getting the additional 32 million Americans insured recently? I would love to have that information. Several of the state programs have been expanded which primarily target children who may be eligible for Medicaid, especially with newer programs, a bit different from Medicaid (All Kids in my state). I have a PDF file that outlines HC reform. It does not say that more Americans have been insured until 2014 for Medicaid or Medicare. If I was a bit more technically competent, like Booger, I would cut and paste the darn thing. If you can tell me how please do so or provide your email address.
3. Your third statement is the most intriguing to me. I can't for the life of me figure out why HCA (for profit) would take that stance. I'm sure you know that the Government is not a good payor for either Medicaid or Medicare. It would be interesting to see how the 80 mil breaks down. I would venture 70/10 or 60/20 Medicare/Medicaid. The patients eligible for Medicaid, of course, are young or poor to put it bluntly. The young with horrific health conditions have a bit of an edge lately because of the newly developed state programs. Maybe the states HCA operates in have excellent children's health programs. Writedowns of 20 billion believe it or not is nothing to write home about. The primary Children's hospital could write down 3 billion without blinking and that is one hospital/one state. Think about it.
4. My hospital is in an affluent area with a huge number of births around 3800, easily accessible in a metropolitan area. So yes that does make a diff. For example,compare one large University Hospital that we work with very closely. Their children's services are 85% Medicaid and let me tell you they are not exactly making money. Believe it or not, payor mix is straightforward. You tell anyone in the industry that you have a 4% Medicaid payor mix they instantaneously understand. In short, you get some of the best reimbursement in the country for children and the poor.
Additionally, I would like to learn how specifically HCA will support birthing mothers. If you think about it, in terms of Medicaid, the population translates to teen mothers and mothers with very limited resources. Medicaid is not going to approve storage of cord blood based on the medicaid eligible baby. No, in the insurance industry's infinite wisdom, the bill would be on the mother or partner's insurance because the baby is not yet a "member" so not eligible for Medicaid. (Placentas don't count lol) Perhaps that is why HCA is willing to make the statement that they will cover all comers. It puzzles me.
Whew! How do you write these long posts...wears me out??? haha GLTU
Mr. Long, do you know what percentage of Medicaid patients are in the HCA case mix? I think that would be important information. Our percentage is 4%. Not much at all.