Sensation! Scientists have learned how to protect against AIDS!

The researchers found that the characteristics of the structure of the blood can increase a person's chances to avoid contracting HIV. This conclusion was Swedish and Canadian scientists.

Doctors examined the blood cells, and found that on the surface are special molecules, designated Pk. The concentration of these molecules can be divided people into different categories, such as blood type or Rh factor. A large number of molecules Pk reduces the sensitivity to the AIDS virus, and a small number or absence greatly increases vulnerability to HIV infection, according to RIA Novosti.

We found that the expression of molecules Pk a strong influence on susceptibility to HIV-1. Thus, Pk is a novel endogenous factor that can give protection against HIV - the authors of the study. However, Dr. Don Branch of Canadian Blood Service warned that even belonging to a stable blood group did not give an absolute guarantee, but in certain cases it may block the development of the virus.

At the same time, Professor Martin Olsson from Lund University in Sweden believe that the high level of molecules Pk is a completely new type of cell protection from HIV infection. In this regard, the scientist in favor of continuing studies of blood that have proven useful.

Note that shortly before that American physicians from Northwestern University in Chicago have opened new properties AIDS. The experimenters found that immunodeficiency virus can enter the body much more easily than previously thought. As written Dni.Ru, HIV can quickly overcome the protective mucosal barrier and hit the immune system cells.
medicine should help anyone for free

Sensation: a new era of medicine - any body can grow!

Parts of the body, grown in the laboratory, will be available in the near future for general use, because scientists have found more than 20 ways of growing, writes The Daily Mail.

They have managed to raise the bladder, urethra and windpipe, which transplant patients in clinical trials.
Now the experts are going to grow organs like the heart, kidneys, liver, pancreas and thymus.
Create a full body more difficult than growing in laboratory tissue.

The plans were announced during a conference on technologies for rejuvenation and held at Cambridge University, reports The Sunday Times.
Among the participants was Professor Paolo Machchiarini of the Karolinska Institute. He told how he had implanted lab-grown trachea Icelander who had the cancer.

The basis of the technology lay artificial scaffold, repeating shape trachea. He hoisted on stem cells of the patient.
But John Jackson of the Institute for Regenerative Medicine, University of Wake Forest made replacement thymus. This gland plays an important role in terms of the normal functioning of the immune system, but with age, no longer function properly.
All this marks the beginning of a new era in medicine. This breakthrough was made possible by the discovery, made about ten years ago. It turned out that the protein skeleton, which cause organ structure can be separated from their cells and to fill other, taken from the patient. So we have the new organ.
Using the technology, Professor Sheyu Sokeru already managed to create a miniature human livers (he sowed "framework", derived from the body of rats, human cells), and Professor Doris Taylor - a beating human heart.

State regulation of medicine in France

Much more important, however, is different: the recent state began limiting access to doctors. In a study conducted in 2004 by the Supreme Council for the development of health insurance, the question of "legitimacy of absolute freedom enjoyed by the medical profession in terms of the base's own practice." Then, in 2005, the Government introduced a system of "coordinated routes to health services." As part of this system - its mechanism resembles our "regulated medical care" - the patient is recommended to choose "PCP", which will develop for a "route" for further medical care. The goal here is to "fix" the consumer to the physician of his choice and to make the latter the "gatekeeper," which will limit patient access to specialists, various surveys and some particularly complex and "advanced" medical procedures.

While the new system is more "gently pushing" people in a certain direction, but is not mandatory. If you do not want to use the "route", your share will increase slightly, and the insurance compensation fell slightly - about the same as it does with the Americans that "out of the system." But if health care costs will continue to increase, the new system can be expanded and tightened.

More pressing is another problem: the general budget and limit tariffs for medical services, within which the hospital, lead to chronic underfunding of fixed assets, whose result is a shortage of advanced medical technology and unavailability most "advanced" services. Thus, the apparatus for magnetic resonance imaging in terms of a million people in the United States, there are eight times higher than in France, and apparatus for computed tomography - four times more. Partly to show a greater emphasis on technology, characteristic of American medicine, but as a result of some French patients have to wait for the opportunity when they can get the help they need. In addition, the country is experiencing a strong disparity in the geographical distribution of health care resources: in some regions of the health services available than in others.

Thus, although in general the French system avoids the "waiting list" for medical services typical of other countries with public health, for some specialized treatments and access to certain technologies turn, albeit to a limited extent, still exist. In some cases, the hospital, fearing overspend their allocated budget, in order to save refer patients to other medical facilities.

Finally, the state is trying to limit holiday medicines on prescription. French traditionally take an extraordinary amount of drugs. In this country, the average physician writes prescriptions for the year amounting to 260,000 euros]. However, the National Board of Health launched the "cleansing" of the form of drugs, for which compensation is paid insurance. Many French-patients are switched in response to the reception of similar effects of drugs remain in the list, but some may eventually be left without the drugs they desired. For example, in one study found that nearly 90% of asthmatics in France do not receive drugs to improve their condition

There is also a view that government regulation and bureaucracy deprives French system flexibility, do not allow it to respond quickly to changing circumstances. Thus, the incompetence and inability of managers to cope with emergencies, as some believe, have contributed to the deaths of 15,000 elderly people in the summer of 2003, when Europe established an abnormally high temperature, and the shortage of beds in the flu and bronchitis in 2004 .

Recent innovations, of course, did not amount to the introduction of rationing medical services, but 62% of French citizens have argued that "felt the" consequences of these restrictions. In addition, more than half of French people believe the waiting period between diagnosis and initiation of treatment is unacceptable long.

Valentin Petkanchin, Researcher Economic Institute. Molinari (Institut Economique Molinari), warns that France could "be among those countries - they include, in particular, the UK and Canada, where the rationing of medical services and the queues for health care raises serious questions about the availability of treatment for those who are in the need it. " Some medical professionals in France also noted that the waiting period before treatment is gradually increasing.

The impact of all these measures, cost containment is partly mitigated by the fact that in France, the patient can secure medical care in private, out of the system. Say, if he needed medication removed from the list, he can buy it, if it is willing to spend on their own money. The same goes for access to medical technologies. Finally, the patient is free to ignore "a coordinated route" and immediately he needed to get help, even for a higher price.

In addition, the diffusion of new medical technologies and services contribute additional funds derived from payments by private insurers. Increasing the total amount of capital that can be used for such investments, the payments can overcome within the limits set by the state system, and to ensure an increase in the number of beds, as well as the technical equipment in the system. Financial investment through private insurance may also increase the number of doctors and the quality of their training.

In fact to avoid extensive use of normalization French health can because, in contrast to the "pure" single-payer systems, it uses market mechanisms. Even the OECD notes that "the proportion of the population to purchase health insurance from private companies 'and consumers' level of equity in the costs of medical services are the main factors affecting the duration of the wait in line," Queues for elective surgery usually exist in countries where public health insurance (at zero or low equity participation of patients), combined with restrictions "supply" of surgical services. National health insurance removes the financial barriers for patients, which in theory should provide a high potential demand for such services. However, the limitations ... do not allow the proposal to come into compliance with this demand. Under such conditions, non-price rationing in the form of a "waiting list" replaces price rationing as a factor that ensures the balance of supply and demand. "

Ezra Klein, while appreciating the French health care system, says: "[France's ability to restrain the growth of medical costs] is partly due to the fact that the French health care system has found an innovative way to address one of the most complex problems haunting the experts involved in policy-making in this sphere, these are symptoms of the economic order, called "moral hazard." Moral hazard is called propensity to over-consume goods and services that make them a higher profit without a corresponding increase in costs. Translated into normal English, this means people eat more for the "buffet" because there are free to put yourself additive, and often seek medical care, you pay them in advance in the form of insurance premiums, and not after the fact. The obvious solution is to carry a larger share of the cost of contributions to equity and insurance deductions, thereby increasing awareness of consumers of the real cost of each "unit" medical care that they get. "

At the same time, it should be noted that the possibility of a private insurance are not at all. Most often, thus "avoid" wealthy citizens of the state system, which actually leads to the formation of two levels of care. The result is a disparity in the results of therapeutic measures related to income patients. While this situation, of course, is also observed in the U.S. and other countries, and there is no harm in that the rich can afford to pay more for higher-quality care, no, it shows that the stated goal - to ensure that all citizens are absolutely equal access to health services - in mostly remains elusive even in the state-run health care system.

The results of a survey conducted in 2004, show that the French more than citizens of other European countries, are satisfied with their health care system. This is partly due to the fact that the hybrid nature of the system allows to avoid some of the most serious problems encountered by other models of public health. In part, however, the reason lies in the peculiarities of the French national character. For example, two-thirds of those polled said that the quality of the medical care is not as important as the universal and equal access to this assistance. This means that the French experience is likely to be difficult to implement in the United States - it is typical for the Americans is far less egalitarian ethic.

However, although the French and satisfied with the current state of his health and future of concern to them. In particular, they recognize the need for greater control over costs in this area. As a result, the usual controversy associated with the services provided by the state: most people do not want to pay more for them (either by raising taxes or directly out of your pocket), and at the same time citizens are concerned that measures to contain costs in the future may result in to poor quality of service. Regarding the nature of the French health care reform in the society, are divided. However, 65% of adult citizens are convinced that the reform "urgently needed", while 20% consider it "desirable."

Moreover, there is growing dissatisfaction with the French "social state" - an important element of which is the health care system - and the level of taxation required to finance it. Recent election of French President Nicolas Sarkozy is widely seen as one of the manifestations of this attitude. Indeed, the new government as one of its priorities considers reducing healthcare costs.

So, to sum up: certainly, the French health care model works better than most of the other public systems in the field. While there are some problems in the whole of France avoided rationing medical services, typical of other such systems. However, a serious threat to the growth of this program is cost, in the future, it could force the government to introduce rationing in healthcare.

The effectiveness of the French system is partly linked to those of its features, to which Michael Moore and other supporters of the state of medicine are the most negative in relation to the American health care. In France, large enough share patient cost of care, avoiding excessive use of health services, a significant role in the country is largely unregulated market for private health insurance, filling the gaps in the proposal. In addition, consumers are allowed to pay more out of pocket for better or additional services, resulting in a two-level system becomes character.

Obviously, this picture does not match the most common ideas about what should be the public health sector.
medicine should help anyone for free

Medical Technology in France

Technology, which the National Board of Health classifies as "providing inadequate medical services" are prohibited from acquiring public hospitals, and their use in clinics are not eligible for compensation from the national insurance fund. However, refusing to compensate for the use of these technologies, the French state recognizes: the exclusion of the product, "providing inadequate services" covered by insurance from the list does not mean that it is not effective for the treatment of certain diseases. The point is that the government prefers to spend money on compensation for the use of other means, in his opinion more useful with the collective interest.

In general medical services in France are of high quality, but there is their "problem areas." Until recently, most of the French, in principle, there were no problems with fast access to their chosen physician. Today, however, more serious problem "medical nomads": patients who visit a doctor after another, until they put that diagnosis, which they prefer. This phenomenon is, of course, increases costs on the health system. The government responded by increasing the equity of consumers to pay for services, as well as attempts to restrict compensation to doctors.

A significant part of the burden to curb rising costs in the French system, apparently passed on to physicians. French doctor earns an average of 40,000 euros (55,000 dollars) a year. For comparison, in the U.S. the average salary of a general practitioner is 146 000, and the expert - 271 thousand dollars a year. Such a situation can not be unambiguously interpreted as negative (or a clue as to what "should" be a doctor's salary, does not exist), and also low earnings of French doctors partially offset by the following advantages: first, training in medical schools in France, paid by the state, so that, in contrast to their American colleagues, budding doctors are heavily in debt, and, secondly, the French legal system restricts the supply of class actions, which significantly reduces the cost of medical insurance in case of medical errors. The French authorities are also trying to limit the total number of practicing physicians, setting strict quotas for admission to the second year of medical school.

However, the French doctors increasingly to oppose attempts to limit their remuneration in the health insurance system - they recently conducted several strikes and protests. Since the budget problems in the country intensified, proliferation of such conflicts is very likely.

Insurance of medical services in France

For most services provide a significant share of the insured consumer - from 10 to 40% of their value. As a result, about 13% of the French pay for medical services out of pocket (about the same as the Americans). [53] Moreover, since many types of medical care not covered by insurance, and some of the most high-quality health care providers refusing to work at the rates imposed by insurance funds, more than 92% of the population of France acquire additional insurance policies from private entities. [54] In reality, private insurance in France today is approximately 12.7% of all health care costs, this indicator among the industrialized countries, it is second only to Belgium (15.2%) and U.S. (35%).

In connection with the combination of payments by consumers and insurance on non-state sources account for about 20% of total health care costs - more than two times less than in the U.S., but more than in most countries where there is a public health system.

The private insurance market in France in many ways less exposed to regulation than in the U.S.. For example, if in the U.S. in 20 states operates a standard system of premiums, or their scope is limited, the French contributions to the system of private health insurance are largely differentiated. There exists no regulations that specify what benefits must be included in insurance coverage, or compulsory "guaranteed issue", pre-existing conditions of the insurance contract may subsequently be excluded from it. The only real limitation is the "guaranteed renewability" of the policy after two years of coverage. Currently, various forms of health insurance in the country offer more than 118 private insurers.

Typically the patient himself in France shall pay for treatment, and then receives compensation from public funds and / or private insurer. The amount of compensation, net of the equity of the insured based on the tariffs agreed by health care providers and the national insurance fund. These rates are similar to form our 'clinical statistical groups. "

But if the rates of compensation fixed by the State, the amounts charged for the services of doctors, are not regulated. The French system allows providers to submit bills in excess of the basic rates, and up to 30% of the doctors and do [59]. In some areas of the country, including in Paris, the proportion of physicians whose fees exceed the base rates as high as 80%. In general, however, the competition does not allow the majority of physicians over inflate their prices, compared with levels in addition, doctors working in hospitals, as opposed to-employed are less likely to go beyond the agreed tariffs.

The government also set the amount of compensation for both public and private hospitals, which are often not permitted to increase prices compared to the agreed tariff. But, while the fees for services and limited private hospitals (called "clinics") - they account for 37% of all beds for short-stay patients and 50% of beds in surgical wards - retain control of their budgets, while public hospitals operate within the overall annual budget, prepared by the Ministry of Health.

Economic indicators of Medicine in France

French health care system is the third largest in the world in terms of cost: the cost of it is about 11% of GDP, and by this indicator France is second only to the U.S. (17% of GDP) and Switzerland (11.5%). The largest source of financing is the tax on wages. Employers pay for each employee a tax of 12.8% of his salary, and another 0.75% adds the employee - so the total tax rate on wages is 13.55%. In addition, the country has a universal social tax of 5.25% of revenue, for pensioners and those receiving unemployment benefits, it is reduced to 3.95%.

Thus, most of the French workers actually pays for health insurance 18.8% of revenue. Finally, the special taxes levied on income of tobacco, wines and spirits and pharmaceutical companies.

In theory, all of these dedicated revenues to provide funding for the system in its entirety. In fact, they are not enough to compensate for all the costs of this program. National Board of Health each year is the total budget of the health system across the country, but the actual costs always exceed those of orientation.

In 2006, the budget deficit of the French health care system amounted to 10.3 billion euros. In fact, this figure is not too bad, because in the previous year, the deficit was even higher - 11.6 billion euros. Healthcare - the largest volume of expenditure, not allowing balance the state budget as a whole - its deficit rose to 49.6 billion euros, or 2.5% of GDP, jeopardizing compliance with the French financial Maastricht criteria for the countries of the zone euro. Not possible, however, that it is - just the tip of the iceberg. According to the forecasts of some government departments, the budget deficit of only one of the health system could exceed € 29 billion by 2010 and reach 66 billion by 2020.

In general, insurance funds provide cover inpatient and outpatient treatment services to general practitioners and specialists, diagnostic tests, drugs, prescription, and home care. Most of the services covered by the insurance coverage, specifically listed in the regulations. However, there were some "indirect" benefits often leads to conflict on the question of what services are fully insured, and which - in part

Medicine in France

Some of the most knowledgeable supporters of the public health system is considered the country of France, where it has proven its effectiveness. Jonathan Cohn of the New Republic said: "Perhaps, France can be considered as a model of what can be achieved within a system of universal health insurance." And Ezra Klein of the American Prospect called French medicine "as close to the sample of all existing systems." According to most comparative studies of the French health care system gets the highest or one of the highest points in the ranking of WHO, it takes the 1st place. Although the French health care system in the near future will burden the state budget, it does provide a universal health insurance - at least to a certain extent, and allows you to avoid many of the problems faced by the socialized medicine in other countries. However, this is achieved largely through the "market" approach, including the division of the costs to the consumer. As for the other aspects of the system, they appear to reflect the French traditions and political specificity, and because of this it would be difficult to implement on American "soil."
In France, the base level of compulsory health insurance is provided through a system of insurance funds, mainly linked to the workplace. Formally, these funds are private companies, but in fact they are strictly regulated and controlled. Levels of insurance contributions (funded primarily through payroll taxes), fees and compensation health care providers are determined by the government. In this sense, the French funds resemble utilities in this country.
The largest of these funds - it is called the "Universal national health insurance" - provide insurance to 83% of the population, ie most workers outside the agricultural sector and their families. Private insurance schemes cover agricultural workers, persons, self-employed and members of some "special" professions - miners, transport workers, artists, priests, and notaries public. Another fund specializes in insurance unemployed. These large insurance organizations on a regional basis are divided into smaller funds. In general, the national health insurance system covers about 99% of French citizens.
medicine should help anyone for free