Posts - Health Care Chief

Elon Musk has revised the timeline for Neuralink’s brain implant, three years after introducing it and promising to start human trials by the end of 2020, a target that was covertly missed and forgone in favor of continuing animal studies. He predicted that by the middle of 2023, the business may finally begin implanting people, a year after its competitor Synchron. Musk stated, "We've been working hard to be prepared for our first person. I believe we’ve filed most of our documentation to the FDA, and we believe that in about six months we should be able to have our first Neuralink in person. We want to be very careful and confident that it will operate properly before putting our device in a human.” The CEO himself could be among the first to use the technology. He states that the device is discreet enough that people will not know if he has had it placed or not. To stimulate both mental and physical activity, the Neuralink implant is made to replace a removed portion of the skull by matching its size and thickness. Musk said it was similar to inserting an Apple Watch or Fitbit in a portion of the skull. According to the CEO, the company will prioritize the implant’s first two applications once it has the FDA's approval to start conducting human studies. The first application is focused on restoring vision to those who are visually impaired. Musk claims that the implant will be able to correct blindness in even those who were born blind. The second will be designed for those who are paralyzed and the aim is to restore movement. Plans for Neuralink include deploying numerous Neuralink implants in the brain and spinal cord to assist paraplegic individuals in regaining their ability to move and walk. Beyond its medical applications, Musk stated that the implant may assist all people to move closer to becoming half-human, half-robot hybrids, ideally with sufficient superintelligence to topple any potentially harmful artificial intelligence that may emerge to endanger mankind. Several claims had risen regarding the mistreatment of animals in testing. Musk reassured the audience that animal testing started only after the device had passed multiple testing phases on a sample artificial human brain, to which it was confirmed as a usable product. Neuralink’s brain implant has not shown success in animal trials as of yet and the claims made by the CEO are hypothetical at this point.

Technology & AI

Elon Musk believes Neuralink is six months away from human testing

Editorial Team

December 6, 2022
3 min read

Texas Medical Association files third suit against No Surprise Act, claiming arbitration process is unfair to providers the No Surprise Act 2021 is a federal law that aims to assist consumers when they are stuck with hefty medical bills and are in dispute with their provider over payer pricing. The law establishes a process under which payers and providers seek third-party arbitration to settle pricing disputes, both parties submit a price they think is appropriate for the service in question to the arbitrator who then picks the price they think is most appropriate. In this process, patients are removed from the dispute. The Act has been facing legal challenges since 2020. The first lawsuit that the Texas Medical Association (TMA) filed against the Act and won had to do with its implementation. The victory forced regulators to make changes to the language in the final rule. Previously, arbitrators were instructed to begin with the assumption that the qualifying payment amount (QPA), that is the median in-network rate for a specific service in a specific region, was an appropriate amount. Providers fought against this stipulation arguing that this set a ceiling on prices and in a February ruling, a federal judge agreed to strike down this language. The Associate, however, was still not satisfied with how the judge drafted the final rule and claimed that the ruling still unfairly benefited insurers. This was because arbitrators were still putting undue weight on the QPA and so, a second suit was filed in September. In the latest lawsuit that the TMA has filed, they allege that certain aspects of how the QPA is calculated automatically deflate prices. In the final ruling, arbitrators were instructed to consider QPA when picking between a provider’s and payer's proposed amounts, the TMA argues that there are several ways in which the QPA can be calculated by payers that deflate the value of the QPA, meaning that inevitably payers will have to pay a low amount. For example, insurers can include “ghost rates” when calculating their QPA which essentially are rates that are the contracted amounts with the providers for the services that are not subject to arbitration. Insurers are able to include the rates of healthcare providers that are not necessarily in the same specialty as the provider in the payment dispute. “TMA is concerned that these provisions unfairly disadvantage physicians in payment disputes with health insurers and will ultimately rob patients of access to physicians’ care,” said TMA President Gary Floyd. Floyd further explained how all these factors rig the arbitration process in favor of insurance companies to the detriment t of providers and patients. Another objection against the ruling is that the ruling goes against Congress’s intent of the law as the body could not have intended to introduce a benchmark average rate for the arbitration process.

Insurance Providers

Texas Medical Association files third suit against No Surprise Act, claiming arbitration process is unfair to providers

Editorial Team

December 6, 2022
3 min read

Japanese company Eisai has not rejected the possibility that its Alzheimer’s drug had a hand in the brain bleeds of two patients. The patients died during the trials but the company insists that the drug was not the cause of the deaths. According to Eisai, the deaths could not possibly be directly credited to lecanemab, which is a drug used to decelerate cognitive decline in patients with early-stage Alzheimer’s by 27%. Lecanemab is being developed in collaboration with Biogen. Both the patients who passed had taken blood-thinning medication and were elderly, one in his 80s and the other in her 60s. Knowing this Eisai told doctors to hold the risk-benefit dialogue with the caregivers before a prescription for patients taking anticoagulation medication. Eisai stood by its monoclonal antibody therapy’s safety, which is the very first to reduce the rate of the condition’s progression in a big trial. It has raised expectations of a new treatment for the disease which is affecting over 50M people globally. Ivan Cheung, the CEO of Eisai US said, “Our assessment is that these deaths cannot be attributed to lecanemab. Of course, we cannot rule out the possibility that lecanemab might have increased the susceptibility of bleeding risk in the brain.” The results of the trial showed that 13 out of about 1,800 participants (Below 1%) died in the first year and a half of the trial. However, none of the fatalities were credited to lecanemab. 7 of the 13 deaths were of people in the placebo group. Two deaths that were alarming for the investors took place during an extension period after the first 18 months. During this period lecanemab was administered in placebo group patients as well. Doctors have long been worried about the chance of swelling and bleeding in the brain due to monoclonal antibodies. According to Eisai, one of the deaths was due to a brain hemorrhage, while the other cause of death was concluded as cardiopulmonary after autopsy. Vice-President of clinical research at Eisai, Michael Irizarry said that there were complicating aspects in both cases and lecanemab does not seem to be directly responsible for the deaths. However, he said that the possibility of its involvement cannot be ruled out. Michael Irizarry also mentioned the need of discussing the benefit-risk concerning lecanemab use for people who are consuming or intend to start consuming anticoagulative medicine. Hostile events befell 14% of the participants in the active drug group while 11.3% of the placebo group participants faced similar problems. Nearly one in six participants (16.7%) who were given the drug went through micro-bleeds in the brain compared to below one in ten (

Alzheimer’s drug did not lead to trial patients’ deaths according to Eisai

Editorial Team

December 6, 2022
3 min read

The audit report shows million in Medicare overcharges federal audit reports disclosed recently show excessive charges in terms of pending payments charged to Medicare Advantage health plans for senior citizens. These included plans overcharged to the government by over $1,000 per patient annually. The government's audits revealed around $12 million in net overpayments for the care of over 18,000 patients who were sampled, however, the actual costs to taxpayers are likely substantially more significant. Medicare Advantage is considered an expanding alternative to traditional Medicare, which is mostly managed by large insurance firms. CMS officials have stated that they will cover the payment rate mistakes for the entire membership. They anticipate collecting over $650 million in compensation. CMS had scheduled to implement the mentioned rule in November but delayed it until February of next year. According to CMS, most of the audited plans were of high sensitivity. They were among the most active in pursuing additional compensation for patients they said were sicker than others. The government pays healthcare providers using a mechanism known as a "risk score," which is expected to result in higher charges for sicker patients and lower prices for healthy ones. Over the past ten years, CMS has completed 90 audits, During that time, enrollment in Medicare plans increased nearly four times to twenty-eight million dollars as of 2022, increasing the cost to the government to over $420 billion. According to government statistics, audits have shown overpayments of $1,000 per patient. Additionally, Humana, one of the top Medicare Advantage sponsors, had overpayments above the $1,000 average in 10 audits. Auditors characterize overpayments as when patient records do not justify the payment made by the government for their health condition, or when doctors are unable to identify the intensity of sickness. Over the three years, this occurred for little over 20% of the medical disorders evaluated; rates of unconfirmed illnesses were greater in other plans. Three groups, including KHN, have filed a lawsuit against CMS to get information regarding the overpayment audits, known as Risk Adjustment Data Validation. As per legal reports, CMS had charged a legal firm a search cost worth $120,000, leading to giving nothing in return. The law firm filed a suit in federal court in Washington, D.C. last year, and the case is still pending. In September 2019, KHN filed a lawsuit against CMS after the agency failed to reply to the audit request. CMS agreed to turn up the audit summaries and other records in exchange for $63,000 in legal costs to Davis Wright Tremaine, the law firm that represented KHN. CMS has made no admission of wrongdoing in withholding the documents. Mary Beth, President of Medicare Alliance stated: "While this data is more than a decade old, more current research shows Medicare Advantage's affordability and good management of Medicare resources, the sector provides superior service and outcomes for patients.

Hospitals & Providers

Audit report shows million in Medicare overcharges

Editorial Team

December 3, 2022
3 min read

mRNA Technology Successfully Tested for Universal Flue Vaccine researchers may be one step closer to creating the long-desired universal flu vaccine as a result of mRNA technologies. In a study published online in Science on November 24, researchers from the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine stated that they had created an mRNA-based vaccine that is effective against all 20 known variations of the A and B flu viruses. For the production of a successful seasonal flu vaccine, some foresight is required. There are numerous influenza viruses, but each vaccine can only target up to four of them. If scientists fail to correctly make predictions about different strains each season, that typically leads to a waste of a lot of time and money. Moreover, it puts the public at risk, as they stay unprotected from the flu. This is why the mRNA technologies at work here are in such high demand. Each year, experts forecast which four influenza viruses will cause the most damage during the coming season. On the basis of those strains, they create a "split virion protein vaccine," which involves growing the viruses in chicken eggs before cutting them up to render them inactive. These inactive fragments are then injected into the body, prompting the immune system to generate antibodies against the four different strains. The issue with this method is that it necessitates the development of new vaccines every year, some of which may prove inadequate against the season's main flu strains if initial predictions are inaccurate. The split virion protein vaccine can't protect against a wide range of strains because it can only handle up to four of them. Hence, scientists have tried developing universal vaccines targeting common parts of the flu virus, albeit without much success. In the Penn study, mRNA was used to generate an antibody response to Hemaglutinin (HA) proteins that protrude from the surface of the virus and enable it to infect host cells. The 20 subtypes of A and B influenza viruses that infect humans have their own unique HA proteins. Scientists tested the vaccine's efficacy by administering it to mice and ferrets and then exposing them to flu viruses representing 20 different lineages 28 days later. They discovered that while not all of the animals were completely immune to infection, they were protected from death or serious illness. Four months after receiving the vaccine, their antibody levels were still quite high. Additionally, the vaccine was effective in rodents that had already contracted the flu prior to vaccination. The vaccinated rodents developed antibodies against all 20 lineages, protecting them from lethal doses of influenza A, B, and C viruses. Scott Hensley, Ph.D., and senior author said in a press release, “The idea here is to have a vaccine that will give people a baseline of immune memory to diverse flu strains so that there will be far less disease and death when the next flu pandemic occurs.” The researchers are currently planning clinical trials in humans. They also want to include young children in the trials because they think the vaccine has the potential to create a long-lasting immune memory against all 20 flu variations.

Technology & AI

mRNA Technology Successfully Tested for Universal Flue Vaccine

Editorial Team

December 3, 2022
3 min read