Here's Her Secret to Longevity ( World's Oldest Woman is 114 )



Misao Okawa with her granddaughter and her three-month-old great-grandson. (Photo: Guinness Book of World Records )

With 50,000 living centenarians in Japan, there's evidence that the country's residents hold the secret to longevity: a healthy diet.
 Japanese women have one of the longest life spans of any country, only second to those in Hong Kong. The oldest living man (also the oldest living person) is also Japanese. Jiroemon Kimura is 115 years old. 

“The Japanese diet is the iPod of food," Naomi Moriyama, co-author of Japanese Women Don't Get Old or Fat: Secrets of My Mother's Tokyo Kitchen told Web MD. "It concentrates the magnificent energy of food into a compact and pleasurable size." 

The typical Japanese person consumes about 25 percent less calories per day than the average American. The base of their diet is vegetables and fish, a great source of omega-3 fats, which are excellent for heart health. Because their meals are largely vegetarian, they eat very little red meat, which can lead to health problems if eaten regularly.

The results of a 25-year study of the longest living group of Japanese people, the Okinawans, revealed that their traditional diet of rice, soy, and vegetables could be the reason that, on average, Okinawan women live to be 86 years old.

Misao Okawa at her nursing home. (Photo: Guinnes Book of World Records)

Japanese women also go through natural menopause and don’t use hormone therapy, which can lead to health complications. Researchers believe they struggle less with the changes of menopause because their diet is high in soy. But American women hoping to take soy supplements will be disappointed: in order to receive the benefits, phytoestrogens must be ingested naturally, through foods rich in soy.

With all dietary suggestions aside, there is of course a genetic component to aging, meaning Japanese people are less genetically predisposed to certain diseases. A positive and low-stress lifestyle has also shown to lengthen life. The Okinawans don’t have rush hour or alarm clocks, and many meditate daily.

Okawa was born in Osaka 1898, the year that the boroughs of New York were annexed, the Spanish American War began, and radium was invented. In 1919, she married and had three children with her husband. After his death, she moved back to Osaka. She has four grandchildren and six great-grandchildren.

Speaking to a group at her nursing home on making the Guinness Book of World Records, she said, “given everything, it’s pretty good.” ( shine.yahoo.com )


READ MORE - Here's Her Secret to Longevity ( World's Oldest Woman is 114 )

Five distinct psychiatric disorders


Five distinct psychiatric disorders—autism, attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder and schizophrenia — may share some genetic risk factors, a new study finds.

During the study, researchers found four genetic markers that may play a role in all five diseases. These  markers were more common in people with the one of the psychiatric disorders compared to healthy people.

Two of these markers are found in genes thought to be involved in balancing the level of calcium in brain cells, the researchers said. (Calcium plays a role in many different cell functions, including communication between cells.) Of these two markers, one has been previously linked to bipolar disorder and depression, and the other to schizophrenia.

Although these five psychiatric disorders are thought of as separate conditions, they share some symptoms. For instance, mood and thinking problems can occur with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and depression. And children with ADHD often have symptoms of other developmental disorders, such as autism. In fact, a 2011 study detected genetic changes that were common to both ADHD and autism.

Because these psychiatric disorders share symptoms, researchers have not always agreed on how to classify them. The new findings might one day help researchers reclassify psychiatric conditions in a way that incorporates genetics, the researchers said.
The new study will be published online Feb. 28 in the journal The Lancet.

To find the shared genetic markers, Dr. Jordan Smoller from Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and colleagues analyzed information from 33,332 people who each had one of the psychiatric disorders and 27,888 people who did not.

Because the study involved only people of European ancestry, it's not clear whether the results apply to other populations as well. In addition, the study only found an association between the four genetic markers and these conditions, but cannot prove that the markers play a role in causing the disorders. (That is, just because a person has one of these markers, does not mean that he or she will develop a psychiatric disorder.)

The findings confirm what many researchers already thought — that genetic risk factors aren't necessarily specific to one disease, said Dr. Joachim Hallmayer, an associate professor of psychiatry at Stanford University who was not involved with the study.

Some psychiatric disorders already share some treatments, such as medications aimed at easing symptoms. But genetic studies like these may reveal new targets for drugs "that go more to the root of the condition and prevent the condition," Hallmayer said.

However, more research is needed to determine how these genetic markers cause problems that might lead to disease, Hallmayer said. Future studies might investigate whether environmental factors could interact with these genetic markers to trigger disease, he said.

Ellen Quillen, a geneticist at Texas Biomedical Research Institute in San Antonio, said genetic studies that analyze several disorders at the same time are important to identify the genetic risk factors these various disorders share. Previously, evidence has shown that multiple disorders run in the same family.

"I hope these results will encourage more researchers to look for shared variants underlying clinically distinct disorders, as well as focusing on particular shared symptoms," Quillen said.
Pass it on: Autism, ADHD, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder and schizophrenia may share genetic risk factors. ( LiveScience.com )

READ MORE - Five distinct psychiatric disorders

Why you can’t vote with your iPhone



Blog : Contents Of Human Life | Why you can’t vote with your iPhone: There may be an app for it, but there isn’t an appetite

READ MORE - Why you can’t vote with your iPhone

On Facebook, more women than men post about having voted


"This map is a representation of people on Facebook who clicked an Election Day prompt to share with their friends that they're voting in the 2012 US election," Facebook wrote on the site. The information has been aggregated, and people remain anonymous.

According to Facebook's data, by 4:15 p.m. ET on Election Day at least 1,635,000 male Facebook users had told friends that they'd voted. But female Facebook users were beating them to the polls—or at least to their computers. More than 3,218,000 women had shared their voting status.

Thirty percent of the data came from Facebook users ages 18 to 24; people ages 25 to 34 clocked in at 32 percent.

Older people may not be able to log on to Facebook from the office or may be planning on voting on the way home: Just 18 percent of users 35 to 44 said they had voted early in the day. Only 10 percent of users 45 to 54 told their Facebook friends that they had voted. Just 7 percent of the data came from Facebook users who were 55-plus. ( news.yahoo.com )


READ MORE - On Facebook, more women than men post about having voted

Three myths about women voters that wouldn’t go away in 2012



Myth No. 1: Women are more in favor of abortion rights than men are

For the past year, Democrats argued Republicans are waging a "war on women" for wanting to make all abortions illegal, while Republicans  countered that Democrats don't want any restrictions on abortion. Each side is attempting to paint the other as extreme, hoping to pick up on-the-fence women voters in the process.

But, despite how they're sometimes portrayed in the news media and by political candidates, female voters are about as divided on abortion as men are.

"One of the central myths in American politics is that women are more pro-choice than men," Karen Kaufman, an associate professor at the University of Maryland who has researched the gender gap, told Yahoo News.

In 2011, 59 percent of men and 56 percent of women said in a Gallup poll that abortion should be legal in no circumstances or only in a few.

Men and women are much more divided on the issue of war (women oppose military interventions) and the role of government (women are more wary of federal spending cuts) than on abortion.

That fact may come as a surprise in this election in particular, as abortion and reproductive issues took on a huge role. Mitt Romney criticized President Barack Obama for requiring employers' insurance plans to provide free contraception, calling the health care reform's mandate an infringement on employers' freedom of religion. Meanwhile, to paint Romney as extreme and out of touch, Obama seized on the abortion-related comments of a handful of Republicans like Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin, who said women who are raped should not be allowed to access legal abortions because he believed, falsely, that they could not physically become pregnant.

Rutgers political scientist Susan Carroll told Yahoo News she has not seen a presidential election contest as focused on abortion and reproductive rights since 1972, the year before Roe v. Wade was decided.

"Candidates have wanted to run away from abortion in previous elections," Carroll sad. "When you talk about it, you alienate someone."

Despite the fact that women are about equally split on abortion, it still makes sense that the Obama campaign has relentlessly highlighted comments from Akin, Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock, and a few other Republicans explaining why they think abortions should be illegal in all circumstances. The majority of both men and women think abortions should be legal in cases of rape or the health of the mother, so the ads paint the candidates—and by extension, Romney—as outside of the mainstream.

Playing defense, Romney put up TV ads in three key swing states saying he would not outlaw abortion in these cases and does not oppose contraception. (An anti-abortion group, meanwhile, bought ads in swing states calling Obama "an abortion radical" for sending federal funding to clinics that perform abortions.)

According to a CBS News poll, more women than men (38 percent) will only support a candidate who shares their views on abortion. One such voter is Susan Moore, an anti-abortion physical education teacher in the Columbus, Ohio, suburb of Groveport. She told Yahoo News that she's voting for Romney even though she disagrees with the Republicans' tough line on teachers unions.

"It's economics versus values," she said. "I'd vote conviction over jobs, I guess." Moore said she would support Obama if he were against abortion.

Polls suggest that birth control and funding for Planned Parenthood are more clearly winning issues for the Obama campaign. A majority of both women and men in a Gallup/USA Today poll from last month rate Obama higher than Romney on his handling of birth control policy. 

Myth No. 2: The gender gap is about the "war on women"

Carroll says the Obama campaign's focus on reproductive rights is ultimately a way to motivate women who already support Obama to vote on Election Day, rather than a way to sway women in the middle away from Romney. "The people in the base turn out the vote and they need to mobilize them," Carroll said. "Those issues, the fact that women might not be able to get contraception, that can help to motivate women in the base."

That prediction seems to be supported by polling. The latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll shows that the female gender gap in favor of Obama has held steady at 7 percentage points. Meanwhile, men back Romney by six points more than women, which keeps the race at a dead heat.

The 7-point female gap in favor of Obama is in line with the female-male spread that political scientists have observed for 30 years. (Women began consistently voting for Democrats in higher proportions than men starting in the 1980 presidential election between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan.)

But you wouldn't know that if you turned on cable news, where pundits wonder whether women don't support Romney because Democrats say he and other Republicans are waging a "war on women" on abortion and contraception.

Right now, "the average gender gap is approximately the average of the past nine presidential elections," ABC News/Washington Post pollster Gary Langer told Yahoo News. "It doesn't come from any dynamic in this election. Women are about 10 percentage points more likely to describe themselves as Democrats than Republicans. [The gap] comes from a substantial sense among women that the Democratic party is better attuned to women's issues."

Political scientists say more women than men vote Democratic in part because men and women see the role of government fundamentally differently. Women are more wary of federal spending cuts, and tend to support safety net programs more than the average male voter. Women are also more opposed to military interventions than men.

Shirley Hutner, a manager at a manufacturing company in Indiana, told Yahoo News she voted for John McCain in 2008 but is voting for Obama this time around in part because of his stance on welfare programs.

"I've never been unemployed, I've always been lucky, I've always had a job," Hutner, 40, said. "But if I ever needed help, I would feel like I would be able to get help from the Obama administration and not so much from Romney."

Hutner said she also worries about older workers who were laid off and can't get companies to hire them.

Two of Hutner's female friends adamantly disagreed, however, saying many people on welfare feel "entitled" and are riding the system. "The problem is, everybody counts on that," said Hutner's friend Beverly Brouse, who is voting for Romney. "At some point, that's going to blow up."

Myth No. 3: Women vote like they date

Pundits often conflate a woman's voting and dating preferences. Matthew Dowd, a former aide to President George W. Bush, wrote in an ABC News article ("What women want in a president") that women "want to be in a relationship with a man who is clear, strong, kind ... and can make a woman feel protected and safe." Dowd used this dating prism to postulate that women voters moved to Romney after the first presidential debate in Denver because he came across as strong and the president as weak.

Kevin D. Williamson at National Review argued that because women select reproductive mates for their "status," Romney should emphasize his personal wealth to win the female vote by a landslide.

"From an evolutionary point of view, Mitt Romney should get 100 percent of the female vote. ... You can insert your own Mormon polygamy joke here, but the ladies do tend to flock to successful executives and entrepreneurs," Williamson wrote.

We're not quite sure where the trope that women approach the ballot box like it's an episode of "The Bachelorette" comes from. But pollsters are skeptical of the claims.

"I don't know where that comes from," Langer said.  "I think women base their political attitudes on substantive issues."

Studies have shown that both men and women tend to unconsciously vote for more attractive candidates, which fits in with a large body of research that shows physical attractiveness is rewarded in the workplace.

Because the major presidential candidates over the past 20 years have been wealthy, there's not much research on how a candidate's personal wealth affects voters, male or female. ( news.yahoo.com )


READ MORE - Three myths about women voters that wouldn’t go away in 2012

Four signs of aging may be linked with heart disease risk



Danish researchers found that people were 39 percent more likely to have heart disease, and 57 percent more likely to have a heart attack, if they had at least three of these four signs: baldness on top of the head, receded hairline, a crease in the earlobe, and fatty deposits on the eyelids known as xanthelasmata.

The researchers accounted for people's ages in their results.

Therefore, the study shows "looking old for your age, by [having] these aging signs, marks poor cardiovascular health," said study researcher Dr. Anne Tybjaerg-Hansen, a professor and chief physician in the department of clinical biochemistry at Copenhagen University Hospital.

While the exact reason for the links between these signs and heart disease risk remains unclear, the study "validates the common clinical practice that the clinician examines the patient, and often looks at whether a person looks older or younger for her age," Tybjaerg-Hansen said.

The researchers used data from the Copenhagen Heart Study, which included10,885 people who were over the age of 40. Over the 35-year study, 3,401 participants developed heart disease, and 1,708 had a heart attack. Researchers examined six physical features associated with aging, but found that two — gray hair and wrinkles — did not appear to be linked with increased risk of heart problems.

The study included 5,828 men and 5,057 women. When the researchers considered the genders separately, they found that hair loss in women was not linked with an increased risk of heart disease. However, among the 737 men who had a receding hairline, 82 suffered a heart attack, meaning there a 40 percent higher risk in men with hair loss than those without.

Previous research has looked at whether hair loss may be a warning sign of heart disease, but results have been conflicting. Some studies have linked the severity and type of baldness with the risks of heart disease or heart attacks to varying degrees, but others have found no connection. Because the risk of both heart disease and baldness rise with age, it can be difficult for researchers to separate the two in studies.

Tybjaerg-Hansen said the four signs identified in the new study should give clinicians greater incentive to treat patients who have them. "The suggestion is that lifestyle changes and lipid-lowering therapies should be intensified, because their risk is higher," she said.

However, the area needs more research, because "it would be nice to know why these [varying factors] would be associated with increased risk," she said.

Tybjaerg-Hansen said, for example, that hair loss is linked with levels of testosterone in the blood, so the new study suggests the hormone also plays a role in heart disease, but there's "no hard data there at all, [it's] only speculative."

She said the group for whom the new results would raise the greatest concern is men between ages 70 and 79. In this group, 45 percent of those with all four aging signs developed heart disease, versus 31 percent of those with none of the four.

"This study underscores the importance of doing a good physical exam, in addition to any testing we're going to do for risk for heart disease," said Dr. Nieca Goldberg, director of the NYU Center for Women's Health and American Heart Association spokesperson, in a statement in response to the study.

While the researchers adjusted their results to account for other risk factors for heart disease, Goldberg noted that, for example, xanthelasmata is a sign of high cholesterol levels, a traditional risk factor for heart disease.

Goldberg concluded that while the length of the study made the results compelling, doctors "need to continue to monitor our standard testing for heart disease risk, such as measuring cholesterol, blood pressure, glucose for diabetes."

The researchers are presenting their findings today (Nov. 6) at an American Heart Association research conference. The findings have not been published in a scientific journal. ( LiveScience.com )


READ MORE - Four signs of aging may be linked with heart disease risk

Ten Things Medicare Won’t Tell You


1. “We’re in the cross hairs like never before.”

The Centers for Medicare, Medicaid Services, or CMS, the federal agency that administers Medicare and other health programs, got smacked with cuts early this month as lawmakers failed to avert the sequester, $1.2 trillion in spending cuts designed to help trim the country’s budget deficit. Hospitals and doctors face 2% cuts in the amounts that Medicare reimburses them for services rendered to recipients—cuts of $10.7 billion this year and $118.8 billion over nine years, according to a report by consulting firm Tripp Umbach.

While patients themselves won’t see any direct reduction in their benefits, experts say the ripple effects of the sequester could indeed hit older Americans. Doctors and hospitals had warned that their industries would have to slash more than 200,000 jobs this year alone if the sequester went through.

“It would be disingenuous to think that, if the job losses are that severe, beneficiaries wouldn’t feel it,” says Jeff Smith, assistant director of public policy at the College of Healthcare Information Management Executives, a professional organization for senior hospital information technology professionals. Beneficiaries could face longer wait times for appointments or any number of other negative consequences if those job losses happen, Smith says.

Even if lawmakers were to restore the cuts, Medicare would remain in their sights, experts say. “Whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat, the fact of the matter is that something’s got to give,” says Ross Blair, CEO of PlanPrescriber.com, a Medicare division of eHealth, an online health insurance marketplace. Current and future projected rates of spending, Blair says, are “unsustainable.” The federal insurance program—which covers 49 million Americans, those ages 65-plus and those of any age with disabilities—accounts for 16% of federal spending, or $551 billion in 2012.

 
Thinkstock -
To be sure, spending cuts to the popular program won’t come easy. While far from perfect, Medicare has provided vital coverage to hundreds of millions since its inception in the mid-1960s, experts say. “Medicare is more than a line item in the budget,” says Stuart Guterman, executive director of the Commission on a High Performance Health System at the Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation. “It’s one of the most successful programs ever.”

CMS officials declined to comment on this issue. But as Jonathan Blum, deputy administrator and director of CMS’s Center of Medicare, said when he spoke about health-care delivery-system reform before the Senate Committee on Finance in February, CMS “has been working diligently to implement the changes and innovations” that lawmakers outlined in President Obama’s signature health-care legislation, the Affordable Care Act. CMS “has already made real progress, demonstrated by decreasing readmissions to hospitals and a reduced growth in Medicare costs,” Blum said.

2. “Think Social Security is broke? Just look at Medicare.”

With the debate raging over the astronomical cost of entitlement programs, experts say, it’s easy to forget that Medicare and Social Security are two different programs under very different financial strains. In the short term, at least some parts of Medicare are worse off than Social Security, according to a 2012 report from the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees. The Medicare hospital trust fund—which funds Medicare Part A—“faces depletion earlier than the combined Social Security Trust Funds,” according to a summary of the report. Hospital trust funds are expected to run out completely in 2024, versus in 2033 for Social Security. Medicare Part B, which funds doctors’ visits and other outpatient expenses, and Part D, which covers prescription drug benefits, are funded differently and “will remain adequately financed into the indefinite future,” according to the report.

It’s easy to see why parts of Medicare are in such bad shape, experts say. A couple earning average annual wages of $44,600 each who turn 65 in 2020 will receive a total of $427,000 in lifetime Medicare benefits, but will have paid only $153,000 in lifetime Medicare taxes, according to an analysis by the Urban Institute, a research organization that studies social and economic issues. (All figures are in 2012 dollars.) By contrast, the couple will receive $632,000 in lifetime Social Security benefits after paying a total of $700,000 in Social Security taxes.

The picture doesn’t look much better going forward. Medicare trustees project that Medicare costs will grow from approximately 3.7% of gross domestic product in 2011 to 5.7% of GDP by 2035, and will increase gradually thereafter to about 6.7% of GDP by 2086. And baby boomers account for a big part of this projected growth. Roughly 10,000 baby boomers will turn 65 every day over the next couple of decades, according to the nonpartisan Pew Research Center. The vast majority of people 65 and over rely on Medicare and not employer-based coverage, experts say.

Medicare officials say the program is working hard to address its many challenges. “The Affordable Care Act included important reforms to improve the quality of health care for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries and, in doing so, lower costs for taxpayers and patients,” Blum testified before the Senate Committee on Finance.

3. “Marketing isn’t our strong suit.”

In 2011, Medicare launched a free, new benefit: annual “wellness” visits for recipients. Only 9% of beneficiaries took advantage of this benefit in 2012. And in a poll released last spring by the John A. Hartford Foundation, a philanthropy focused on training and research on geriatric health care, more than half of respondents said they had never heard of the wellness visit.

Experts say it can take time for a new benefit to gain traction with both patients and doctors, but there’s another issue at play: When Medicare communicates with the public, the program’s written materials tend to be on the hefty side. “Medicare & You,” the official handbook for 2013, runs 140 pages. Some elder advocates praise the booklet as clearly written and relatively jargon-free—making it helpful for those who bother to crack the cover. Still, Medicare’s mailings are “intimidating by size,” says Mary Dale Walters, senior vice president of Allsup Medicare Advisor, a Belleville, Ill.-based provider of Medicare consultation services. “People look at the envelope and panic.” What’s more, those with private Medicare Advantage plans usually get a thick packet from their own plan each year, adding to the overload, Walters says. Those who took the time to look would discover that the wellness visit is mentioned on pages 50 and 51 of “Medicare & You.” (The booklet has an index.)

But there are ways to cut through the paperwork, some experts point out. Retirees and caregivers can visit Medicare.gov to find details like whether a particular service is covered, how much premiums cost, and other information. People can call 800-Medicare, or 800-633-4227, for help with a variety of issues; those who are placed on hold will hear a recording mentioning the new wellness visit.

4. “Don’t expect a five-star plan.”

Medicare’s five-star quality-rating system, outlined in the Affordable Care Act, ranks Medicare policies sold by private insurers, known as Medicare Advantage plans. These plans are referred to collectively as Part C, and beneficiaries can choose a Medicare Advantage policy in lieu of traditional Parts A and B, which are often referred to as “original Medicare.”) These scores are based on multiple performance measures—in 2011, for example, CMS used 53 different measures derived from plan and beneficiary surveys and administrative data, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit foundation that analyzes major health care issues.

For 2013, there are about 11 five-star plans nationwide, according to CMS data. Consumers can switch to a five-star plan at any time during the year—they don’t have to wait for the annual open enrollment period. But “it’s a challenge” for beneficiaries to research all the offerings to see whether a five-star plan is available in their area, Walters says. There are an average of 22 Medicare Advantage plans in each market nationwide, she notes.

A spokesperson for CMS says “a five-star rating is Medicare’s highest mark of excellence, and can only be obtained by those plans that are truly providing the highest quality care to beneficiaries.” More than 37% of Medicare Advantage enrollees are now in a four- or five-star plan, Blum said in his Senate testimony.

In 2012, Medicare Advantage plans that receive four or five stars began to receive bonus payments aimed at encouraging more plans to meet the standards. Baby boomers, who have become accustomed to rankings in other aspects of their consumer lives, will likely embrace this system as they age into Medicare, experts say. “You see how consumers flock to cars that Consumer Reports rates highly,” says Joe Baker, president of the Medicare Rights Center, an advocacy group. “The expectation is that it will happen in the Medicare Advantage market as well.”

Indeed, Blum testified that the quality ranking system has already gained traction among beneficiaries: The higher the quality ranking, he said, the more likely it is that a beneficiary will enroll in a specific program.

5. “We’re not popular with many doctors.”

Roughly 20% of physicians across all disciplines limit the number of Medicare patients they will take on at any given time, according to a 2010 study by the American Medical Association, the organization’s most recent look at the issue. For primary care physicians, this number jumps to 31%.

The reason? Among doctors who limit Medicare patients, 85% say they think Medicare payment rates are often too low, according to the study. And 78% say they think “the ongoing threat of future payment cuts makes Medicare an unreliable payer.” The threat of future payment cuts stems largely from Congress’s inability to permanently fix the formula that Medicare uses to reimburse doctors to allow for increased payments, according to some critics, including the AMA.

Although some doctors limit the number of Medicare patients, very few don’t accept the insurance at all, experts say. This group primarily includes those in wealthy urban areas who have decided not to take any insurance—government or commercial—Baker says. 

6. “We get ripped off a lot.” 

Thousands of doctors and other medical professionals have sharply increased the rates at which they bill Medicare for treating older patients, according to an investigation released last fall by the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit investigative news organization. Medicare allows doctors to pick from among five different codes to bill their services, from a low number for a simple visit to a higher number for a complex visit; the system largely relies on the honor system of doctors choosing the billing code that accurately reflects their level of service. From 2001 to 2010, this practice padded practitioners’ fees by $11 billion or more, signaling possible medical billing abuse, the study found.

According to the Center for Public Integrity investigation, doctors have increasingly abandoned the lower-level codes for the better paying ones, a practice known as “upcoding.” The study—which analyzed a representative 5% sample of Medicare patients and their claims, submitted by more than 400,000 medical practitioners and 7,000 hospitals and clinics starting in 2001—found no evidence that Medicare patients are sicker and older than in the past, which if true might have justified doctors billing at the higher rates. “Medicare is susceptible to fraud not only because of its size and complexity, but because the system itself makes it easy to defraud the government,” says Ken Nolan, a partner at Nolan & Auerbach, a health-care fraud law firm. “Most of the scrutiny, if any, is made after the payment is made—not before, as in traditional business transactions.” Dr. Jeremy A. Lazarus, president of the American Medical Association, said in a statement that more analysis was needed on the issue: “Attributing the trend solely to fraudulent and abusive behavior remains an unproven assumption.”

That said, fraud recoveries have increased to a record $4.2 billion collected in 2012, and $14.9 billion over the past four years, Blum told the Senate Committee on Finance. In addition, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services recently launched a fraud prevention system, which aims to identify aberrant and suspicious billing patterns before payment, he said.

7. “We don’t cover a lot of the care seniors need most.”

If your aging mother needs care in a nursing home or even in her own home, she will have to meet some strict criteria to get Medicare to cover it. For the most part, Medicare pays for nursing home care only for those who were hospitalized for at least three days for an illness or injury and who require “skilled” care that only a medical professional like a registered nurse can provide. Even then, it only covers or partially covers up to 100 days per benefit period. (A benefit period begins the day you’re admitted as an inpatient to a hospital or skilled nursing facility and ends after you haven’t had any inpatient hospital care, or skilled nursing care, for 60 days in a row.)

Qualifying to get reimbursement for home health care is also difficult, as you must meet all of the following criteria: be homebound; require skilled nursing care, physical therapy, speech-language pathology services or continued occupation therapy; and be getting regular services from your doctor under a plan of care he or she has ordered. Medicare does not cover meals delivered to a home, cleaning and laundry services or, in most cases, help with personal care like bathing, dressing or using the bathroom.

What’s more, original Medicare doesn’t cover hearing aids, dentures or most dental services. (Medicare Advantage plans vary and may cover some of the services not covered by traditional Medicare.)

Many people are shocked when they learn of these restrictions: “It’s a big knowledge gap,” Walters says. But the onus to educate shouldn’t fall only on the government, some say: Companies could do a much better job of teaching their employees what to expect once they retire, so there are fewer such surprises, says Edmund F. Murphy III, head of defined contributions at Putnam Investments, which oversees companies’ 401(k) plans.
A spokesperson for CMS notes that the organization aims to engage with members of Congress, aging and disabled community members, and experts to “explore solutions to the nation’s long-term care needs.”

8. “And you’ll pay for the coverage we do provide.”

Many people reach age 65 thinking Medicare is free, according to Baker, of the Medicare Rights Center. In reality, it’s anything but. Premiums for Part B (medical insurance for doctors’ visits and other outpatient expenses) are $104.90 monthly if a recipient’s annual income is $85,000 or less; beneficiaries pay on a sliding scale after that, with the highest monthly premium $335.70 for those with gross incomes above $214,000. Beneficiaries don’t pay a monthly premium for Part A (hospital insurance) if they paid Medicare taxes and earned 40 Social Security credits while working (people can earn a maximum of four credits a year; for 2013, $1,160 earns one credit). The average premium for Part D, or optional drug coverage, is around $30 per month.

On top of the premiums, seniors in original Medicare pay 20% of the cost of all doctors’ visits aside from some preventative services that are free. (That percentage climbs higher if a doctor doesn’t accept Medicare’s reimbursement rate for a given procedure, and also for certain treatments, like mental health coverage.) Hospital coverage, or Part A, requires a deductible of $1,184 for each benefit period in 2013 and then various coinsurance payments depending on the length of stay. The annual Part B deductible is $147.

Many beneficiaries buy a supplemental, or Medigap, policy to help cover these out-of-pocket costs. But these don’t come cheap either: a comprehensive supplemental policy that eliminates almost all out-of-pocket expenses can cost as much as $350 a month, Blair of PlanPrescriber.com says.

To be sure, in most cases, these costs remain much lower than what people ages 55 to 64 currently pay for individual health insurance. The average individual policy for someone in that age range (with a $3,194 deductible) cost $588 monthly in 2012, according to eHealth, although costs can run much higher in states that have more stringent rules for insurers.

And Medicare is hardly stockpiling the cash: As Blum testified, every workday, Medicare pays out more than $1 billion from some 4.6 million claims.

9. “Paws off that cash, Grandpa: Your settlement is ours.”

Let’s say something goes terribly wrong, you sue your doctor for malpractice and win. Don’t go counting the money just yet. If Medicare paid some of your doctor bills, it can recoup out of the malpractice settlement what it paid out in claims, says Joan Robert, a partner at elder law firm Kassoff, Robert & Lerner. (Medicare only gets money for what it paid, not a percentage of punitive damages, she says.) A spokesperson for CMS says that claims are handled in this manner “in order to protect the Medicare trust funds when other sources of payment are available.”

The lawyers involved in the case should make sure that Medicare gets repaid as part of any malpractice settlement, says Glenn Jarrett, an elder law attorney in Burlington, Vt. This will help ensure that malpractice victims don’t get surprised if CMS tries to collect later, after they have already spent the money on something else, he notes. Medicare must be paid within 60 days of the receipt of the settlement from the “third party,” according to a fact sheet for attorneys on the CMS website. (The “third party” is usually the insurance company of the doctor or other person found liable.) If Medicare isn’t repaid in a timely manner, the fact sheet notes, interest may be assessed.

10. “Did we turn you down? Keep trying.”

When Medicare denies a claim, experts say, recipients will often simply pay out of pocket, even if they can’t afford it. That’s the wrong strategy. Oftentimes, it’s better to appeal, says Judith Stein, the executive director of the Center for Medicare Advocacy. “People are denied Medicare like any other kind of insurance,” she says. “Insurance wants your money and doesn’t want to give it back.” Only about 2.5% of people with original Medicare appealed their denied claims in 2011, but of those that did, 33% were granted a full overturn of their denial with Part A, and 50% were granted a full overturn with Part B, according to CMS data.

Filing an appeal is not hard, experts say. Those with original Medicare need only fill out a Redetermination Request Form and send it to their Medicare administrator within 120 days of the date they received their Medicare Summary Notice (the form that Medicare sends when it pays or denies a claim). Those in a Medicare Advantage plan need to read the materials the plan sends each year to learn how to appeal. ( MarketWatch  )


READ MORE - Ten Things Medicare Won’t Tell You