CIRS Blog about Rural California
Much has been written about the disproportionately high incidence of health problems such as diabetes and obesity among African Americans and Latinos when compared to non-Hispanic whites. But health disparities among smaller minority groups such as American Indians and Pacific Islanders have received far less attention.
A new report out of University of California Riverside aims to change that. Led by Andrew Subica, an assistant professor of social medicine, population and public health, the study examines seven years worth of data on health trends among American Indians and Alaskan natives, native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders and multiracial adults living in California.
The findings paint a startling picture of ill health among these small and historically neglected populations. Not only do their rates of diabetes and obesity surpass those of non-Hispanic white people, but many are just as or even more likely to suffer from these diseases than African Americans and Latinos.
By Linda Childers
Olivia Basurto was concerned when her nine-year-old son Samuel came home from school with a rash on his arms. After trying to treat the pink bumps with over-the-counter creams, and having no success, Basurto called to make an appointment with a dermatologist.
She quickly learned that in her small rural town of Pixley (population 3,310), in the Central Valley, physician specialists are a rare commodity. The nearest specialist was either in Porterville or Fresno, located almost an hour away, and they had a three-month wait.
But then, the Pixley Medical Clinic, a rural health clinic that provides family practice medicine to residents of Pixley and the surrounding cities, asked Basurto if she would be open to a telemedicine appointment with a dermatologist. The doctor, a retired dermatologist volunteer with The MAVEN Project, could assess her son’s rash and offer medical advice.
BY SEAN COCKERHAM AND MICHAEL DOYLE
WASHINGTON — California Republicans representing some of the nation’s most Obamacare-dependent areas in America took a giant political risk on Thursday by voting to repeal the landmark health care law, as they believed their political danger was eased as they got something to brag about back home.
They said they were convinced for much the same reason as so many other undecided Republicans who helped give GOP leaders the health care win they had so desperately sought: The addition of $8 billion to the bill to help with insurance costs for people with pre-existing conditions.
The congressmen dismissed estimates that the money isn’t nearly enough: an analysis by the liberal Center for American Progress said it would subsidize care for only 76,000 people out of millions.
By Daniel Weintraub
California is a land of health extremes, and to see what that means, you need only travel a few miles from the state Capitol.
Placer and Yuba counties border each other about a half hour’s drive north of downtown Sacramento. Both places are largely rural. But the similarities end there.
Placer’s residents are, on average, much healthier than their neighbors across the county line. A person living in Yuba County is much more likely to suffer from chronic disease and die at an early age than someone living in Placer. In fact, Placer’s residents are among the healthiest in California, while Yuba’s are among the sickest by many measures.
The easiest explanation for the difference is wealth. Health and wealth are connected, here and almost everywhere in California and across the country. No one is sure exactly why they go together, but the answer is more complicated than the fact that people with higher incomes also tend to have better access to medical care. Even when access to care is the same, health disparities remain, because a large share of a person’s health is determined by things outside a doctor’s office or hospital room.
By Lynn Graebner
Counties all over California are cheering the state’s decision to expand Medi-Cal to more than 1.4 million low-income adults – and bracing for the $1.3 billion the state expects to take away from county health services over the next four years.
Counties should see savings on January 1, 2014, when Medi-Cal expands to include childless adults under the age of 65 with incomes less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level or $15,856 for an individual annually. The federal government will pay 100 percent of the costs for new enrollees from 2014-2016 and 90 percent in 2020 and beyond.
“On paper, you’d think there would be savings,” said David Luchini, Assistant Director of the Fresno County Department of Public Health. But the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research predicted in a Sept. 12, 2012 report that three to four million Californians would remain uninsured in 2019. Counties say it is way too early to count on savings from the ACA and to chop away at county health care safety nets.