Articles by admin

No Image

Today in Movie Culture: 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' Easter Eggs, a Celebration of Costume Designers and More

Here are a bunch of little bites to satisfy your hunger for movie culture:

Easter Eggs of the Day:

Now that you hopefully have seen Spider-Man: Homecoming, check out Mr. Sunday Movies’ amusing look at its Easter eggs, cameos and post-credits scenes:

[embedded content]

Franchise Trivia of the Day:

Ranker offers an animated look at the conventions of Spider-Man movies, most of which Homecoming broke from:

[embedded content]

Fan Theory of the Day:

MatPat of Film Theorists scientifically makes a case that a real Spider-Man would never survive his web-slinging and swinging:

[embedded content]

Movie Science of the Day:

Speaking of Spider-Man and science, Kyle Hill explains how the superhero could still climb walls while wearing his suit:

[embedded content]

Vintage Image of the Day:

Chiwetel Ejiofor, who turns 40 today, with Morgan Freeman, Matthew McConaughey and others on the set of his film debut, Steven Spielberg’s Amistad, in 1997:

Actor in the Spotlight:

Can you spot when there’s a fake Arnold Schwarzenegger on screen in his movies? This video helps differentiate between the real deal and his CG and stunt double impostors (via Geekologie):

[embedded content]

Filmmaking Lesson of the Day:

Learn about the science of deep focus and the hyperfocal distance from John Hess of Filmmaker IQ:

[embedded content]

Movie Craft of the Day:

The latest video essay from Now You See It celebrates the importance of costume designers, often the “secret heroes” of filmmaking:

[embedded content]

Cosplay of the Day:

Star Wars meets classic literary icons with the inventive cosplay mashup “Edgar Allen Poe Dameron” (via Fashionably Geek):

My Edgar Allen Poe Dameron cosplay #cvg2017pic.twitter.com/aqPQocdMzM

— Beth Grimes (@victrolavixen) July 10, 2017

Classic Trailer of the Day:

Today is the 25th anniversary of the release of Ralph Bakshi’s Cool World starring Brad Pitt and Kim Basinger. Watch the original trailer for the live-action/animation hybrid below.

[embedded content]

and

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Doctor Accused Of Molesting U.S. Gymnasts To Plead Guilty To Other Charges

A photo provided by the Michigan Attorney General’s office shows Dr. Larry Nassar, who treated female gymnasts and is accused by many of molesting them. He has agreed to plead guilty to child pornography charges on Tuesday.

AP

hide caption

toggle caption

AP

A plea deal could mean a doctor at the heart of a sexual abuse scandal involving more than 100 girls and women, including top American gymnasts, won’t face federal criminal charges in those cases.

Dr. Larry Nassar, a former team doctor for USA Gymnastics, signed the agreement June 23. He’s scheduled to change his plea from not guilty to guilty on Tuesday morning in a Grand Rapids, Mich., federal court.

According to the agreement, Nassar will plead guilty to three counts relating to child pornography. The document states that between 2003 and 2016, Nassar knowingly possessed thousands of images and videos of child pornography.

He could get up to 20 years in prison on each pornography count.

In return for his guilty plea, federal authorities agree not to further prosecute Nassar “for sexual exploitation and attempted sexual exploitation of children.” That relates to allegations that Nassar molested two minors in his swimming pool in 2015. And he won’t be prosecuted for “interstate/international travel with intent and engaging in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places.” This relates to a period between 2006 and 2013, when Nassar is alleged to have abused some elite U.S. gymnasts competing overseas.

“This affects any federal charge involving [alleged] abuse overseas or at the Karolyi ranch,” says John Manly, a lawyer for many of the plaintiffs. Famed gymnastics coaches Bela and Martha Karolyi have a ranch in Texas that serves as a training site for top U.S. female gymnasts.

Manly says the plea deal would affect about 10 percent of the estimated 119 women who’ve alleged sexual abuse by Nassar — but that would include some of the most prominent plaintiffs, including gymnasts who competed in the Olympics and other major sports competitions.

According to Manly, his clients’ reactions range from sadness to anger.

“The message the federal government is sending, and the U.S. Attorney’s office is sending [with the plea bargain],” Manly says, “is either it didn’t happen or it doesn’t matter. In my view that’s a breach of faith with our athletes.”

The U.S. Attorney’s office in Grand Rapids did not respond to two requests to talk about the Nassar plea deal. NPR also was unable to reach Nassar’s lawyer.

Manly says the plea deal does not affect Michigan state charges of sexual abuse, and a number of cases against Nassar still are moving forward. If Nassar is convicted in those cases, he reportedly could receive a life sentence.

[embedded content]

Nassar worked with female gymnasts in Michigan as far back as the late 1970s. In 1986 he became a member of the USA Gymnastics medical staff, a role in which he attended several Olympic games. In 1993 he earned an osteopathic medical degree from Michigan State University, where he worked from 1997 until last September, when the school fired Nassar amid the emerging allegations of longtime sexual abuse.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

New Rule Opens Credit Card Companies, Banks To Class-Action Suits

A federal consumer watchdog agency has issued a new rule that will prevent credit card companies and banks from requiring customers to agree to settle disputes by arbitration rather than going to court.

In a statement released Monday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau explained:

“Hundreds of millions of contracts for consumer financial products and services have included mandatory arbitration clauses. These clauses typically state that either the company or the consumer can require that disputes between them be resolved by privately appointed individuals (arbitrators) except for individual cases brought in small claims court. While these clauses can block any lawsuit, companies almost exclusively use them to block group lawsuits, which are also known as ‘class action’ lawsuits.”

CFPB Director Richard Cordray said the current rules “make it nearly impossible for people to take companies to court when things go wrong.” He said the new rules would “stop companies from sidestepping the courts.”

The CFPB has a website and a video explaining the new rule.

[embedded content]
Consumer Financial Protection BureauYouTube

The requirement is set to take effect in 60 days.

The Associated Press notes: “Consumer advocates have been pushing for years for stricter federal regulation of these types of clauses. But the move is likely to face pushback from the banking industry and the Republican-controlled Congress.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Health Care Debate Heats Up In Mitch McConnell's Home State Of Kentucky

Voters in Kentucky react to the efforts by Senate Republicans to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. The Senate bill is extremely unpopular, especially in Kentucky, where Obamacare had great success.

KELLY MCEVERS, HOST:

Congress returns to Washington this week. Senate Republicans are still looking for a way to find 50 votes to pass its version of a bill that would repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. It hasn’t been easy. The bill is extremely unpopular. NPR White House correspondent Tamara Keith reports from Kentucky, a state that was one of Obamacare’s greatest success stories.

TAMARA KEITH, BYLINE: Kentucky’s senior senator, Mitch McConnell, is trying to guide the GOP health care bill through the Senate. But even in his solidly Republican home state, McConnell’s effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act isn’t universally popular.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

UNIDENTIFIED SINGER: (Singing) Oh, health care blues, I ain’t…

KEITH: Last night, more than 2,000 people gathered in a convention center in Covington, Ky., for a rally to fight the GOP health care bill organized by Vermont Senator and former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders. Brian Friedel drove 90 minutes from Kentucky’s capital in part to send a message to McConnell.

BRIAN FRIEDEL: Basically fight for our health care rights. That’s pretty much what I’m doing here.

KEITH: Last week he went to McConnell’s office to protest, but the majority leader wasn’t there. Friedel is 49 years old and has been only marginally employed for years.

FRIEDEL: I used to do construction. And then I hurt my neck, so I can’t do that anymore.

KEITH: He got insurance through Medicaid expansion a couple of years ago. Under the Affordable Care Act, states could choose whether to expand who was covered by the health insurance program for the poor. Kentucky opted in. But for Friedel, it wasn’t a magical fix to all that ails him. It took a while to get connected with a primary care physician and actually see a doctor. Those are the kinds of challenges Republicans often point to in critiquing Obamacare. The GOP bill would phase out the expansion of Medicaid that brought coverage to more than 400,000 Kentuckians. And Friedel is afraid of what would happen if he loses insurance again because his blood pressure is through the roof.

FRIEDEL: I don’t know. Maybe I have a heart attack and die. But how many other people that have even more strenuous conditions than I are going to have to die as a result of this?

KEITH: This morning at a nearby shop called Covington Coffee, I asked Joe Nagle if he had any thoughts about the GOP health care bill, and the thoughts tumbled out fast. Nagle has been mostly unemployed for more than a decade and about two years ago, without insurance, found himself in the emergency room.

JOE NAGLE: And as soon as I got there, you know, they came in and registered me right away. As I was laying there, getting my liquids, they had me hooked up. That was September 1, 2015. It was a watershed day for me.

KEITH: The health insurance he registered for is Medicaid. Nagle says it changed his life.

NAGLE: Since then, I’ve had everything I need. I mean I don’t take advantage of it. But when I need to see a doctor, I get there, and that’s because of the Affordable Care Act. I wish people could get the kind of care I get.

KEITH: Drea Holbert was dropping in for coffee on her way to work. She voted for President Trump, but now she has mixed feelings about the health care debate underway in Washington. She gets insurance through her employer.

DREA HOLBERT: So I pay, like, a hundred and almost $40 every two weeks out of my paycheck for me and my three kids to have health care. And it’s not even that good of health care.

KEITH: She says her aunt’s family got coverage through Obamacare, and it’s worse.

HOLBERT: And it’s really hard for them to find doctors that actually accept it.

KEITH: But Holbert doesn’t like what she’s hearing about the GOP health care bill.

HOLBERT: I don’t think that’ll work either. I think hopefully they can take a look at what, like, Canada is doing and even Cuba.

KEITH: A single-payer, government-run system like that isn’t under serious consideration in Washington right now. But it’s not clear what, if anything, McConnell and Senate Republicans will be able to agree on. Tamara Keith, NPR News, Covington, Ky.

Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Words You'll Hear: The Better Care Reconciliation Act

Republican senators are trying to revive their health care bill. While voters weren’t fond of the the original version, but they’re not always clear about what they want when it comes to health care.

LAKSHMI SINGH, HOST:

With Congress back in Washington this week, we wanted to take a look at a Word You’ll Hear. And in this case, the word is actually letters – BCRA. That’s the acronym for the Better Care Reconciliation Act. It’s the proposed Senate bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. So far, this GOP draft is very unpopular, with just 17 percent of Americans supporting it according to an NPR “PBS NewsHour” Marist Poll. With so many people unhappy with this proposal, we were curious what they do want to change about the Affordable Care Act. NPR political reporter Danielle Kurtzleben has been looking into that. Hi, Danielle.

DANIELLE KURTZLEBEN, BYLINE: Hello.

SINGH: So we know Republicans are working on different options for how to approach their repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act. What are some of the ways the system could change?

KURTZLEBEN: So Obamacare, of course, expanded Medicaid. What the Senate bill would do would be to rollback that Medicaid expansion. Plus, it would cap Medicaid spending further. Aside from that, it would provide less generous subsidies for people to buy insurance on those individual markets. And it would get rid of a lot of the taxes that Obamacare imposed to help pay for itself.

SINGH: What did you see when you looked more closely into what people might actually want to see in health care reform?

KURTZLEBEN: You know, it’s hard to say. For example, right now, a majority of Americans – about 60 percent according to the Pew Research Center – say it’s the government’s responsibility to make sure people have health care. OK, so that’s cut and dried, 60 percent. And that was true before Obama took office, as well. But while Obama was in office, there was no clear majority on either side of that. So clearly people’s opinions on this can vacillate one way or the other pretty quickly depending on what’s going on.

Likewise, a growing share of Americans – right now it’s 53 percent – they say that they want single-payer health care. Once again, that sounds cut and dried. But what the Kaiser Family Foundation found out is if you present people with an argument for or an argument against, you can swing public opinion in a massive way on single-payer. So it’s not really clear how much people do like that idea.

SINGH: So it can depend a lot on how this is actually framed.

KURTZLEBEN: Right. Absolutely. And one way to think of this is, you know, you can say, yeah, Americans are just squishy on this, but if you really think about it, health care is just a very personal, really kind of scary issue for people. It could be a life-or-death issue for many of us at some point. So the idea of massively overhauling, it you can understand how that would make people feel in conflicting ways about it.

SINGH: What about this current system? We’ve seen figures that indicate Obamacare is getting consistently more popular, right? So what does this mean? Are people generally satisfied to keep things the way they are?

KURTZLEBEN: Sort of. I mean, Gallup did find in late 2016 – I mean, even before the election – that around two-thirds of Americans say they’re satisfied with the health care system. And Gallup also found that right now, for the first time this year, Obamacare had majority approval. But certain parts of Obamacare are very popular in certain parts, namely the individual mandates are not popular at all.

The individual mandates, that provision that says you have to have insurance or pay a penalty, that’s the only one that a majority of Americans didn’t approve of. Only 30 percent of people like that. The irony, of course, is that you need the individual mandate to make the rest of Obamacare work.

SINGH: What might congressional leaders keep in mind then if they’re looking to please as many Americans as possible, if not all Americans?

KURTZLEBEN: Right. Well, I mean, of course, you can’t please all Americans. You know what? You might not even be able to please everyone in your own party fully. It’s a very unforgiving topic to try to create legislation on just because it is such a complicated topic. This is not repealing or imposing a tax. This is making a whole massive system for a whole bunch of Americans work correctly.

SINGH: That’s NPR’s Danielle Kurtzleben. Thanks, Danielle.

KURTZLEBEN: Thank you.

Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Baseball Players On Track To Hit More Home Runs Than Ever This Year

Strikeouts and home runs are both up in Major League Baseball. Sports Illustrated‘s Tom Verducci joins host A Martinez to talk about what that means for fans and the pace of the game.

A MARTINEZ, HOST:

This summer, the bats are hot in ballparks around the country.

(SOUNDBITE OF BASEBALL COMMENTARY MONTAGE)

UNIDENTIFIED COMMENTATOR #1: Deep right centerfield – gone to souvenir city.

UNIDENTIFIED COMMENTATOR #2: Oh, my – put into orbit.

GARY THORNE: That thing went over the popcorn wagon in the concourse, I think.

UNIDENTIFIED COMMENTATOR #3: Way back and goodbye, home run.

UNIDENTIFIED COMMENTATOR #4: And that baby’s gone – even further than the last two.

MARTINEZ: That is happening a lot this season. Major League Baseball players are on track to hit more home runs than ever – more than 6,000 if the numbers hold up. But as exciting as homers can be, they’re actually part of the problem with the sport. This week on Out Of Bounds – long shots, strikeouts and the slowing pace of baseball.

Tom Verducci is senior baseball writer for Sports Illustrated, and he joins me now from Princeton, N.J. Tom, welcome.

TOM VERDUCCI: Thanks for having me.

MARTINEZ: All right, so let’s start with those home runs. People are hitting more and more of them, and the ball is going further. Why?

VERDUCCI: (Laughter) Well, let’s look at it from two perspectives. First, from the hitters’ perspectives – there is more of an emphasis on power, so they don’t mind striking out at the risk of just swinging for the fences because a lot of guys now get paid on not how much they get on base, how often they get on base, but how much damage that they do. And that comes with the home run ball.

Now when you talk to the pitchers, they go directly to the favorite conspiracy theory, that it must be about the baseball itself – that the baseball is actually tighter than in previous years and the seams are lower. Lower seams mean less drag on a baseball. Less drag means more carry. And of course, more carry means more home runs.

MARTINEZ: What about drug testing? I know that Major League Baseball is trying to test a lot more.

VERDUCCI: Well, absolutely. They are. And especially this year, their incidents of tests, off-season and in-season, have gone way up. But listen, with the amount of money that’s in the game, there are certainly incentives still for someone to try to beat tests and get that extra edge. But baseball will tell you that it’s much more difficult to circumvent these tests than they were, say, even five years ago because they are much more sophisticated.

MARTINEZ: Tom, I’m a big baseball fan. I’ve been a baseball fan my whole life. It’s like pizza for me. I will eat it and consume it however it’s served up. So I don’t mind the home runs and the strikeouts, but I can see how a fan might think this is boring. What’s going on that got us here if maybe fans aren’t so in tune to the in-between?

VERDUCCI: Yeah. Well, certainly love home runs – they literally bring people to their feet. And even the home run – the game literally stops so someone can take a jog around the bases. So when you factor in the fact that strikeouts now are for the 12th consecutive year going up to a record level, it’s the yawning gaps in between the excitement in the game that have people concerned.

MARTINEZ: Which fans suffer the most with this? Is it the ones that are watching on TV or the ones that are at the ballpark?

VERDUCCI: I think it’s the viewer experience at home that is the one that concerns baseball because we have so many distractions available to us. And I think when we get these gaps in between pitches or the ball being put in play, it’s very easy for someone to get disengaged from the game that they’re watching on television or a phone, however. But it really is about – how do we as baseball attract and keep viewers, especially the younger ones?

MARTINEZ: Are they struggling getting these younger viewers? Or – how are baseball ratings in general?

VERDUCCI: The ratings last year for the World Series were the highest in 25 years, a quarter of a century. That was primarily due to the Cubs. And even if you weren’t a Cubs fan, you wanted to see if they could break a 108-year drought. As far as the regional sports network goes, their ratings are actually very strong. I think the concern, based on polling that MLB has done, is that the audience does tend to skew a little older. So they’re looking at the polling and saying, hm, you know, where are our next generation of fans? And that’s what they’re seeing, some erosion in the younger demographic.

MARTINEZ: Tom Verducci, senior baseball writer for Sports Illustrated. Tom, thanks a lot.

VERDUCCI: Thanks for having me.

Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Trump And Mexico's President Talk Need For Guest Worker Program

Dallas Morning News reporter Alfredo Corchado talks with NPR’s Michel Martin about President Trump’s meeting with President Enrique Pena Nieto at the G-20 summit amid tensions over the border wall.

MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:

We’ve got one more story coming out of the G-20. A bit of a surprise was President Trump’s down with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto on Friday. Now, this comes after a visit between the two that had been set for Washington, D.C., earlier this year was canceled because of the ongoing dispute about that border wall that President Trump wants Mexico to pay for. Just before their meeting started on Friday, reporters asked President Trump if he still intended to have Mexico pay for the war, and he said, absolutely. But according to official reports of the meeting, the wall didn’t come up.

Curious about the disconnect, we called Alfredo Corchado, who covers the border and Mexico for the Dallas Morning News. I started by asking him about reaction to the meeting in Mexico because the Mexican press had called it a humiliating moment.

ALFREDO CORCHADO: Another humiliating moment. And it wasn’t just Mexico who covered it. I mean, it was covered all over the world. And I think that’s the strategy behind, you know, the Mexicans once again trying to show that the two countries have a relationship. And to be fair to the Mexicans, I think optics aside, officials on both sides will agree that the relationship has improved from January, from that encounter that never happened in D.C. And I think they’re learning that to deal with President Trump, you focus on what he does and not what he says. But even that one word – absolutely – just played all over the world. And, you know, Mexico again had egg on his face.

MARTIN: Do we know about what they did talk about? They say – both sides actually say, like, they didn’t talk about this border wall or this proposed tax on Mexican imports. But what did they talk about? I mean, we say that, for example, President Trump’s long talked about his displeasure with the U.S. trade deficit with Mexico. He says he wants to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement or NAFTA. Did they talk about this?

CORCHADO: Yeah, they talked about that. I mean, officially, the officials will say, you know, from both sides the meeting was very productive, emphasizing how things are well between both countries. There is something that the foreign minister from Mexico spoke to Mexicans during a radio interview which I thought was interesting. It wasn’t really covered by the White House press, but apparently they talked about the need for a guest worker program, something similar to the Bracero Program which from 1940 to the 1960s, 5 million Mexicans received contracts to work in the United States legally as seasonal workers.

And that’s interesting because in the last few years, we’ve seen that the Mexicans coming to the United States has really fallen to an all-time low throughout the United States whether, whether it’s the meatpacking industry in the Midwest or the agricultural fields in Central California. So there is a kind of a growing sense of nostalgia for the Mexicans. I think employers are beginning to really miss the Mexicans. And the fact that the two sides even broached the issue I thought was quite significant.

MARTIN: Alfredo Corchado is the former Mexico bureau chief for the Dallas Morning News. He’s currently a correspondent covering the Borderlands and Mexico. He’s writing a forthcoming book about the U.S.-Mexico relationship. And he was kind enough to join us from El Paso. Alfredo, thanks so much for speaking with us.

CORCHADO: Thank you, Michel.

Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

3 Doctors On What Works And Doesn't Work In U.S. Health Care

Doctors Julie Gunter, Rob Stone and Gary Sobelson talk with Scott Simon about the problems with American health care and what they think of the current Republican health care plan.

SCOTT SIMON, HOST:

The United States spends about $9,000 per person per year on health care, the highest in the world. But our life expectancy is still lower than France, Switzerland, Japan, the United Kingdom, all of which spend less. With the Republican health care bill still on the Senate docket, we thought it would be a good time to hear from U.S. doctors. We have three with us now, Dr. Julie Gunther, a family doctor in Idaho, Rob Stone, an ER turned palliative care doctor in Indiana, and Dr. Gary Sobelson, a primary care doctor in New Hampshire. Thanks so much for being with us.

GARY SOBELSON: Thank you.

ROB STONE: Thank you.

JULIE GUNTHER: Thank you.

SIMON: Let me begin, if we can, with you, Dr. Gary Sobelson there in New Hampshire. Seven years since the Affordable Care Act – three since most of the changes went into effect. How is health care different? Is it better, worse?

SOBELSON: Much better coverage for our patients, particularly, in my case as a family doctor, for the working poor. I have people coming in for preventive services, for hypertension management, for cardiovascular disease prevention, for cancer screening who really had not been coming in except for the most acute needs. And that’s been meaningfully different.

SIMON: Dr. Rob Stone in Indiana, you were an ER doctor. You must have seen patients who who came to the ER because they didn’t have insurance to cover primary care visits. Has that changed under the Affordable Care Act for you?

STONE: It’s changed very noticeably. And a far smaller percentage of people are coming in uninsured, although we still continue to take care of those folks, too. Our hospital’s also affiliated with some very small-town hospitals in Bedford, Ind., Paoli, Ind. And in those areas in particular, I think the Medicaid expansion part of the Affordable Care Act has helped to solidify the financial standing of those hospitals, which was somewhat questionable earlier.

So I would say that’s all good. The downside – and this started before the Affordable Care Act – before Obamacare – is that co-pays and deductibles and premiums keep going up for the people who aren’t on Medicaid. And so people coming into the ER find themselves underinsured too often when they realize they can’t afford their co-pays or their deductibles.

SIMON: Dr. Julie Gunther, you’re a family doctor in Idaho. And I gather you’ve kind of opted out of the typical model and you have your own direct primary care practice.

GUNTHER: Yes, I have. I was a system-employed outpatient physician until 2014. And then I left and started a solo, independent, cash-based practice. So I no longer bill insurance.

SIMON: And why did you take that step?

GUNTHER: The simple answer is I had to leave the system to save myself to be the doctor I wanted to be. It’s valuable for me to hear Dr. Sobelson and Dr. Stone’s experiences. My experience was very, very different. Even before the Affordable Care Act – but especially after – the progressive amount of regulations made it almost impossible for me to serve people the way I was originally called to serve them as an outpatient family doctor.

And so I have built a rather successful cash-based practice that charges very, very little per month. The majority of my patients are either uninsured, underinsured or so frustrated with the current system and its barriers that they would rather pay a small amount out of pocket every month for more direct care.

SIMON: Well – and so I’m going to bring Dr. Rob Stone into this conversation because I’ve been told you’re an advocate for a single-payer system. Is Dr. Gunther onto something?

STONE: Well, I don’t know how generalizable it is widely – and particularly not to very poor areas like the inner city. But my feeling is that we have a good model for how to take care of everybody, which some people still think is kind of a pie-in-the-sky dream. But I’m still going to push for it. And I think that is expanding Medicare, which already takes care of everybody over 65. And I happened to turn 65 a couple months ago. And I’m on Medicare now. And I’m pretty happy with that.

SIMON: Dr. Gary Sobelson, are the high costs of health care unavoidable? Can’t we, after all, just do more for people – a lot more – than we could even 10 and 20 years ago?

SOBELSON: While there are many things that we can do, the high costs are things that the system itself brings about. We’ve designed a system that rewards high-reimbursement procedures, surgeries and undervalues the things that are cost-effective. And it doesn’t really matter how much we research this or prove this to ourselves within our profession. We don’t seem to move in that direction. We don’t have the political will.

Dr. Stone’s comments about Medicare for all are not isolated to small groups of the population. We’ve studied this in New Hampshire, and over 80 percent of our primary care physicians are in favor of a system that some would call single-payer – and the majority of our overall doctors, even including specialists. And that’s been replicated across the country, too. We as Americans seem to value our independent decision-making over collective wisdom, though I would argue that when simple procedures like common arthroscopic knee surgery, something that takes 15 to 30 minutes, is costing $15,000 to $25,000 in community hospitals around our country – that no one has the freedom to make that decision.

GUNTHER: I was just going to say I normally talk about a single payer system. And we use Medicare as a model. My patients who have Medicare say that it works. My mother and father who are economically well off pay $150 a month towards their health care. My Americans who are age 30 to 60 are dropping their health care plans. And they come in, and they tell me, I can choose between putting food on the table, paying for my kid to go to college or getting a health plan that I can’t afford.

So it’s not that I oppose a broader solution. But I would contend we have a system that is completely crumbling and unsustainable. And in my opinion and experience, I don’t think Medicare is working all that well, especially not in a way that we could roll it out to our whole country in any sort of sustainable way. And the heart of it in my opinion is we talk a lot about who’s going to pay for health care. But what we should be talking about is the price of health care.

SIMON: Do we have an unrealistic expectation that health care costs can be reduced when we expect health care to do more and more?

GUNTHER: I think there’s great examples that current health care prices are upwards of a thousand times more than anywhere close to true cost. My patients can get a CAT scan – cash price for $300. If they go into the local ER, it’ll bill out at $2,400. So I think we need to start asking why. Because we keep talking about who should pay or how we should pay for health care.

But if we allow free market forces and competition to create price transparency, then we start to have the opportunity for price control, cost control. And then I think we can completely change the dialogue from who should pay and how should we pay too to what parts of health care do people need help paying for.

SOBELSON: I think Dr. Gunther is describing the problems that we’ve created by more or less – and this is a failing of the ACA – allowing corporate profitability to be the driving force of how we set these so. So, again, if you’re not under Medicare or Medicaid in this country, you’re depending on a private insurance industry to somehow control costs, when, in fact, it’s not really in their interest. They don’t have skin in the game here.

They make their profitability based on how much they collect in revenue. And, in fact, it’s written into the law. So, again, it’s not surprising that we’ve created a model where, in fact, more spending will be encouraged, not discouraged because the only people who really would care about it would be the consumers. And they don’t seem to believe that they can control it.

SIMON: Let me ask this finally, if I could. The Senate bill that’s under consideration right now may or may not be going anywhere. Could each of you give us one idea that you would like to see the government adopt that could improve health care in this country? – or not just the government. What can we do?

STONE: Well, I would say first that the Senate bill is a terrible thing that would set us back and would cost lives. And the people who would be hurt the worst would be children, the disabled and the elderly and nursing homes because of the ravages to Medicaid. So the first thing I would do would be, say, save Medicaid and continue to expand it. And then the second biggest problem in the Senate bill is that it would make health care very expensive for people ages 50 to 65 or 55 to 65 – would be to think about lowering the age of Medicare eligibility to, say, 55 and not cut those people out into the cold.

SIMON: That’s Dr. Rob Stone in Indiana. Dr. Julie Gunther, what would you suggest?

GUNTHER: I would agree with Dr. Stone. I don’t think the Senate bill provides the improvements to the Affordable Care Act or some of our biggest health care problems that we need. If I had one ask it would be that we allow consumers – we allow patients who do have health savings accounts to use those health savings dollars to pay their physician, whether it’s a periodic fee or a direct payment.

And one of my favorite quotes about health care in our country is that we continue to tape wings on a car and call it an airplane. I think we have to radically transform the system at its core if we hope to end up in a different place.

SIMON: And Dr. Gary Sobelson.

SOBELSON: Yeah. From my perspective in New Hampshire, I think the damages to Medicaid that the Senate bill would bring about would be devastating to us and take back so much positive progress we’ve had in terms of access and cost containment.

And if I had to add one thing to it, I think Dr. Stone’s idea of expanding Medicare to populations that traditionally have a hard time buying insurance could be extended into the whole idea of the ability of a public option, the ability of the Medicare and Medicaid programs to work out ways to compete with private insurers so that the public could become more comfortable with them.

SIMON: Doctors Rob Stone, Julie Gunther and Gary Sobelson, thanks so much for joining us.

GUNTHER: Thank you.

STONE: Thank you.

SOBELSON: Thank you.

Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Saturday Sports: Venus Williams And Tennis, Tour De France

We discuss the latest news about Wimbledon and Venus Williams, and talk about a nasty crash during the Tour de France and competitive imbalance in the NBA.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

SCOTT SIMON, HOST:

And it’s time for sports.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

SIMON: Wimbledon is in full swing. Whap (ph). Venus Williams faces challenges off and on the court. And the Tour de France is marred by a nasty crash and questionable call. NPR’s Tom Goldman joins us. Good morning, Tom.

TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: Hello, Scott.

SIMON: Venus Williams has been playing some terrific tennis. But she’s been playing under stress and a cloud. Has that been lifted?

GOLDMAN: Yeah, well, a little bit. You know, she was involved in a car crash a month ago. And a passenger in the car that hit Williams’ car died a couple of weeks later. Now, initially, police said Williams was at fault. But just yesterday police released a video that showed the accident. And because of the video, police retracted that initial statement that she was at fault. But the crash is still under investigation.

The family of the victim has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Williams. So she’s carrying all that while playing and, as you say, playing well. She appears able to compartmentalize. Although, she did break down earlier in the week when asked about the accident at a press conference.

SIMON: She plays a fourth round match on Monday. So does Nadal on the men’s side. And he seems to be staging a comeback.

GOLDMAN: Yeah. Oh, a great one. Before this season, his last gold – glam – sorry – grand slam title…

SIMON: It’s early. It’s early where you are, Tom.

GOLDMAN: It really is. His last Grand Slam title was in 2014. And it looked like illness and injuries were going to derail his career only in his 20s. But here he is 31. He got to the finals of the Australian Open early this year. He won the French Open last month. And he’s playing great. And he’s only three Grand Slam singles titles behind another fantastic geezer, 35-year-old Roger Federer.

SIMON: Yeah. Let’s cross the channel and ask about the Tour de France. This week, Peter Sagan – not to be confused with Peter Segal, whose program follows ours in many markets. We’re talking about the great Slovak cyclist. He was disqualified – accused of causing a crash on the sprint to the finish the other day. Mark Cavendish was injured and sent to the hospital. You’ve seen the video. I’ve seen the video. Did that look like an intentional elbow to you?

GOLDMAN: Before I answer that, if it were Peter Segal instead of Sagan, the video would have shown him leaning over and cracking a joke sending Cavendish to the pavement or one of those…

SIMON: But no – but no beer – no, you know, beer company is going to pay to see that, yeah.

GOLDMAN: I will defer to the experts who fairly unanimously say Sagan shouldn’t have been disqualified. Those final wild sprints can be rough and physical. And slow motion does seem to show Cavendish trying to squeeze through too small an opening and Sagan moving his elbow out after Cavendish starts to go down almost as a steadying move. But the race organizers are serious about cyclists safety. And they made their decision.

SIMON: Back here to the United States, and NBA players have just been going back and forth between trades and free agency. By the way, anybody sign BJ Leiderman yet, who writes our theme music?

GOLDMAN: Not yet. But stay by the wires.

SIMON: All right. Boy, there’s a lot of money being passed around. Where is it come from in basketball?

GOLDMAN: You and me because we like to watch and talk about the NBA. And multiply our interest by tens of millions of people and that’s made networks willing to pay billions of dollars to the NBA to broadcast games. The current TV contract is 24 billion over a number of years. And that ends up – that money ends up going to players partly because, remember, if you are put off by Steph Curry’s 40 million a year or Gordon Hayward’s 30 million plus a year, I talked to two sports economists – Andrew Zimbalist, David Barry – who pointed out, A…

SIMON: And you have Andrew Zimbalist on your speed dial, don’t you? So do I.

GOLDMAN: Absolutely, yeah. These players generate as much, if not more, value as their contracts are worth. And, B, the salaries are only about half of what those players should make because players and owners split revenues about 50/50. Barry points out the players generate most, if not all, of the NBA revenue but only get half.

SIMON: And what’s your cut of that, Tom?

GOLDMAN: Not much.

SIMON: (Laughter) Well, that’s not fair. NPR’s Tom Goldman, thanks so much for being with us.

GOLDMAN: You’re welcome, Scott.

Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

The Week in Movie News: Here's What You Need to Know

Need a quick recap on the past week in movie news? Here are the highlights:

BIG NEWS

Samuel L. Jackson will return as Nick Fury in Captain Marvel: We are unsure if Nick Fury will finally return to the MCU for Avengers: Infinity War, but we have gotten confirmation Samuel L. Jackson will reprise the role in Captain Marvel, due in 2019. Read more here.

GREAT NEWS

Edgar Wright might make a Baby Driver sequel: With Baby Driver already Edgar Wright’s top-grossing movie, there’s a call for a follow-up, and Wright might just be down for the challenge. Read more here.

COOL TEASE

Creed 2 could be set in Russia?: Sylvester Stallone teased on social media that the sequel to Creed (aka Rocky 7) should be set in Russia given that it’s so timely. Plus, it’d be fitting for Adonis Creed to get revenge for the man who killed his father in Rocky IV. Read more here.

EXCLUSIVE SCOOP

Matt Reeves on the possibility of another Batman trilogy: We talked to Matt Reeves, director of War for the Planet of the Apes, about his next movie, The Batman, and his ideas for possibly staying on for more with the Caped Crusader. Read all about it here.

MUST-WATCH TRAILERS

Kidnap Looks Intense: Halle Berry gets her Taken on in the intense new trailer for Kidnap, a movie where she’s a mother chasing down her son’s abductors. Watch it here:

[embedded content]

Borg vs. McEnroe promises a mighty match: Shia LaBeouf is John McEnroe and Sverrir Gudnason is Bjorn Borg in another big tennis match biopic out this fall. Check out the trailer here:

[embedded content]

Fun Mom Dinner should be a fun movie for all: Straight from this year’s Sundance Film Festival, Fun Mom Dinner is a hit comedy about a group of mothers looking for some time away from the kids, and the trailer alone has a lot of great laughs. Watch below.

[embedded content]

Let’s block ads! (Why?)