Connect with us

COVID-19’s parallel pandemic: Why we need a mental health ‘vaccine’

The mental health effects of the pandemic will likely outlive COVID-19. The goal should be to target mental health symptoms early in order to decrease major long-term effects.

Published

on

Early evidence suggests that younger people are at the highest risk of poor mental health outcomes from the COVID-19 pandemic. (Canva)

Younger people are at lower risk of severe health outcomes if they develop COVID-19, and are therefore not a priority group for vaccine rollout. However, a silent mental health pandemic wave is in full force, and this time it is targeting younger age groups.

It is well recognized that older age groups (ages 60+) are at increased risk of severe illness and death if they develop COVID-19. As such, several regions are rolling out vaccines according to age, with priority for older adults.

The pandemic’s mental health impact by age

The pandemic’s impact on mental health throughout our society will likely outlive COVID-19. As clinical psychologists and trauma researchers, our team is interested in understanding mental health risk and resilience factors during COVID-19. In terms of high-risk groups from a mental health perspective, early evidence suggests that the age trends are inverted, where younger people are at the highest risk of poor mental health outcomes.

Our recent study published in the Canadian Journal of Psychiatry looked at early anxiety symptoms during the pandemic. In close to 50,000 Canadians across several age groups, we showed this trend.

There were clinically significant levels of anxiety in 36 per cent of younger Canadians (ages 15-34), followed by 27.1 per cent of people aged 35 to 54, and finally 14.5 per cent of those 55 and older. Younger people also had more COVID-19 worries compared to older groups.

These early trends of age-related differences in mental health symptoms have also been shown in other studies, both COVID-19 specific studies and pre-COVID-19 research. Indeed, our previous research has shown that older adults have lower rates of common mental disorders such as anxiety and depression.

One theory is that older adults have advanced cognitive and behavioural strengths that allow them to have greater emotion regulation. These strengths are developed over time as a result of age-related changes in perspective.

From this viewpoint, older adults may have a learned “antibody” against the COVID-19 mental health impacts. Nonetheless, despite these apparent strengths in older groups, mental health symptoms are elevated across all ages compared to pre-COVID times.

Pandemic mental health ‘vaccination’

As with the development of the vaccine to reduce the physical health impacts of the pandemic, we must also consider how to address the mental health impacts. If we had a mental health “vaccine,” what might that look like? Based on the research related to collective or mass traumas (traumas affecting large groups of people), we are best suited to aim for secondary prevention.

Young man sitting with his head in his hands
Mental health must be a priority across all ages, but may be especially important in younger people. (Canva)

Secondary prevention means reducing the effects of a disease when the disease is already present in its early form. Essentially, it means preventing it from worsening. In the context of mental health, this would mean targeting mental health symptoms early in order to decrease major long-term effects.

Early intervention research suggests that cognitive behavioural therapies (CBTs) can be especially effective at reducing the risk of worsened mental health issues. It may be appropriate to implement a “CBT-vaccine” for those showing early elevated symptoms. If so, younger people would be a high-risk group to target for priority prevention.

Younger people have higher rates of anxiety and other mental health problems. There is also early evidence to suggest that when mental health symptoms are present, younger people may have worse outcomes than older groups (similar to current poorer physical outcomes we are seeing when older adults develop COVID-19), but this research is mixed.

What we do know is that mental health problems, especially when long-lasting, can have a major impact on quality of life, daily functioning and physical health, including illness onset and death, for all ages. Longstanding issues may result in loss of employment and are costly for our health-care system.

Mental health must be a priority across all ages, but may be especially important in younger people. We need to engage in similar efforts toward applying a widely accessible mental health “vaccine” as we are doing for the COVID-19 vaccine if we truly want to get all elements of this pandemic under control.

Unfortunately, for many, receiving scientifically supported treatments delivered by a qualified mental health professional is a luxury. Services are difficult to access, especially during this time when the need is higher. Long term, we must continue investing in mental health professionals to meet the service needs of the population.

The initial dosage is digital

Due to the limited supply of qualified mental health professionals, a good place to start may be providing widely accessible and scientifically supported online CBT programs. This would eliminate difficult decisions regarding prioritizing access to care.

Illustration of girl sitting in a sad pose, with a coronavirus in the background
A good place to start addressing mental health issues in young people may be providing scientifically supported online CBT programs. (Canva)

Although people recognize the current need for mental health supports, there has been confusion regarding available resources. Uptake has also been low to moderate for publicly funded online mental health programs. In a nationally representative Canadian study conducted in late May, only two per cent of Canadians reported using virtual mental health resources.

Publicly funded programs such as Wellness Together and AbilitiCBT are also limited by the duration and frequency of usage available, and there is little scientific information about understanding how these pandemic-specific programs may reduce mental health symptoms, and who might benefit the most. Internet or app-based CBT programs widely vary in terms of content, level of engagement and how effective they are. In a recent publication on digital advancements in mental health, the authors accurately state:

we applaud investments in virtual mental health services by governments and industry but caution that a thoughtful approach is needed to direct those resources to realize its full potential.

Providing effective online self-guided programs could potentially keep milder mental health cases out of the queue for one-on-one treatment with a mental health professional. This would create greater opportunities for more complex and severe cases to receive intensive individual treatments. Several existing online programs targeting specific mental health symptoms are supported by large numbers of clinical trials such as This Way Up.

However, they are occasionally costly and it is challenging for consumers to know which programs are scientifically supported and effective, especially with the massive increase of online programs and apps in the past decade. The responsibility should not fall on consumers to figure that out. Think of it this way — we would never ask people to go figure out which COVID-19 vaccine or treatment is best. Health professionals make clear recommendations based on existing well designed clinical trials.

The COVID-19 pandemic is merciless and has targeted all walks of life. It disproportionately affected older generations in its initial physical effects. It will likely disproportionately affect younger generations in its sustained mental health effects. We need to start talking about the mental health vaccine.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Illegal Immigrants Leave US Hospitals With Billions In Unpaid Bills

Illegal Immigrants Leave US Hospitals With Billions In Unpaid Bills

By Autumn Spredemann of The Epoch Times

Tens of thousands of illegal…

Published

on

Illegal Immigrants Leave US Hospitals With Billions In Unpaid Bills

By Autumn Spredemann of The Epoch Times

Tens of thousands of illegal immigrants are flooding into U.S. hospitals for treatment and leaving billions in uncompensated health care costs in their wake.

The House Committee on Homeland Security recently released a report illustrating that from the estimated $451 billion in annual costs stemming from the U.S. border crisis, a significant portion is going to health care for illegal immigrants.

With the majority of the illegal immigrant population lacking any kind of medical insurance, hospitals and government welfare programs such as Medicaid are feeling the weight of these unanticipated costs.

Apprehensions of illegal immigrants at the U.S. border have jumped 48 percent since the record in fiscal year 2021 and nearly tripled since fiscal year 2019, according to Customs and Border Protection data.

Last year broke a new record high for illegal border crossings, surpassing more than 3.2 million apprehensions.

And with that sea of humanity comes the need for health care and, in most cases, the inability to pay for it.

In January, CEO of Denver Health Donna Lynne told reporters that 8,000 illegal immigrants made roughly 20,000 visits to the city’s health system in 2023.

The total bill for uncompensated care costs last year to the system totaled $140 million, said Dane Roper, public information officer for Denver Health. More than $10 million of it was attributed to “care for new immigrants,” he told The Epoch Times.

Though the amount of debt assigned to illegal immigrants is a fraction of the total, uncompensated care costs in the Denver Health system have risen dramatically over the past few years.

The total uncompensated costs in 2020 came to $60 million, Mr. Roper said. In 2022, the number doubled, hitting $120 million.

He also said their city hospitals are treating issues such as “respiratory illnesses, GI [gastro-intenstinal] illnesses, dental disease, and some common chronic illnesses such as asthma and diabetes.”

“The perspective we’ve been trying to emphasize all along is that providing healthcare services for an influx of new immigrants who are unable to pay for their care is adding additional strain to an already significant uncompensated care burden,” Mr. Roper said.

He added this is why a local, state, and federal response to the needs of the new illegal immigrant population is “so important.”

Colorado is far from the only state struggling with a trail of unpaid hospital bills.

EMS medics with the Houston Fire Department transport a Mexican woman the hospital in Houston on Aug. 12, 2020. (John Moore/Getty Images)

Dr. Robert Trenschel, CEO of the Yuma Regional Medical Center situated on the Arizona–Mexico border, said on average, illegal immigrants cost up to three times more in human resources to resolve their cases and provide a safe discharge.

“Some [illegal] migrants come with minor ailments, but many of them come in with significant disease,” Dr. Trenschel said during a congressional hearing last year.

“We’ve had migrant patients on dialysis, cardiac catheterization, and in need of heart surgery. Many are very sick.”

He said many illegal immigrants who enter the country and need medical assistance end up staying in the ICU ward for 60 days or more.

A large portion of the patients are pregnant women who’ve had little to no prenatal treatment. This has resulted in an increase in babies being born that require neonatal care for 30 days or longer.

Dr. Trenschel told The Epoch Times last year that illegal immigrants were overrunning healthcare services in his town, leaving the hospital with $26 million in unpaid medical bills in just 12 months.

ER Duty to Care

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act of 1986 requires that public hospitals participating in Medicare “must medically screen all persons seeking emergency care … regardless of payment method or insurance status.”

The numbers are difficult to gauge as the policy position of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is that it “will not require hospital staff to ask patients directly about their citizenship or immigration status.”

In southern California, again close to the border with Mexico, some hospitals are struggling with an influx of illegal immigrants.

American patients are enduring longer wait times for doctor appointments due to a nursing shortage in the state, two health care professionals told The Epoch Times in January.

A health care worker at a hospital in Southern California, who asked not to be named for fear of losing her job, told The Epoch Times that “the entire health care system is just being bombarded” by a steady stream of illegal immigrants.

“Our healthcare system is so overwhelmed, and then add on top of that tuberculosis, COVID-19, and other diseases from all over the world,” she said.

A Salvadorian man is aided by medical workers after cutting his leg while trying to jump on a truck in Matias Romero, Mexico, on Nov. 2, 2018. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

A newly-enacted law in California provides free healthcare for all illegal immigrants residing in the state. The law could cost taxpayers between $3 billion and $6 billion per year, according to recent estimates by state and federal lawmakers.

In New York, where the illegal immigration crisis has manifested most notably beyond the southern border, city and state officials have long been accommodating of illegal immigrants’ healthcare costs.

Since June 2014, when then-mayor Bill de Blasio set up The Task Force on Immigrant Health Care Access, New York City has worked to expand avenues for illegal immigrants to get free health care.

“New York City has a moral duty to ensure that all its residents have meaningful access to needed health care, regardless of their immigration status or ability to pay,” Mr. de Blasio stated in a 2015 report.

The report notes that in 2013, nearly 64 percent of illegal immigrants were uninsured. Since then, tens of thousands of illegal immigrants have settled in the city.

“The uninsured rate for undocumented immigrants is more than three times that of other noncitizens in New York City (20 percent) and more than six times greater than the uninsured rate for the rest of the city (10 percent),” the report states.

The report states that because healthcare providers don’t ask patients about documentation status, the task force lacks “data specific to undocumented patients.”

Some health care providers say a big part of the issue is that without a clear path to insurance or payment for non-emergency services, illegal immigrants are going to the hospital due to a lack of options.

“It’s insane, and it has been for years at this point,” Dana, a Texas emergency room nurse who asked to have her full name omitted, told The Epoch Times.

Working for a major hospital system in the greater Houston area, Dana has seen “a zillion” migrants pass through under her watch with “no end in sight.” She said many who are illegal immigrants arrive with treatable illnesses that require simple antibiotics. “Not a lot of GPs [general practitioners] will see you if you can’t pay and don’t have insurance.”

She said the “undocumented crowd” tends to arrive with a lot of the same conditions. Many find their way to Houston not long after crossing the southern border. Some of the common health issues Dana encounters include dehydration, unhealed fractures, respiratory illnesses, stomach ailments, and pregnancy-related concerns.

“This isn’t a new problem, it’s just worse now,” Dana said.

Emergency room nurses and EMTs tend to patients in hallways at the Houston Methodist The Woodlands Hospital in Houston on Aug. 18, 2021. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)

Medicaid Factor

One of the main government healthcare resources illegal immigrants use is Medicaid.

All those who don’t qualify for regular Medicaid are eligible for Emergency Medicaid, regardless of immigration status. By doing this, the program helps pay for the cost of uncompensated care bills at qualifying hospitals.

However, some loopholes allow access to the regular Medicaid benefits. “Qualified noncitizens” who haven’t been granted legal status within five years still qualify if they’re listed as a refugee, an asylum seeker, or a Cuban or Haitian national.

Yet the lion’s share of Medicaid usage by illegal immigrants still comes through state-level benefits and emergency medical treatment.

A Congressional report highlighted data from the CMS, which showed total Medicaid costs for “emergency services for undocumented aliens” in fiscal year 2021 surpassed $7 billion, and totaled more than $5 billion in fiscal 2022.

Both years represent a significant spike from the $3 billion in fiscal 2020.

An employee working with Medicaid who asked to be referred to only as Jennifer out of concern for her job, told The Epoch Times that at a state level, it’s easy for an illegal immigrant to access the program benefits.

Jennifer said that when exceptions are sent from states to CMS for approval, “denial is actually super rare. It’s usually always approved.”

She also said it comes as no surprise that many of the states with the highest amount of Medicaid spending are sanctuary states, which tend to have policies and laws that shield illegal immigrants from federal immigration authorities.

Moreover, Jennifer said there are ways for states to get around CMS guidelines. “It’s not easy, but it can and has been done.”

The first generation of illegal immigrants who arrive to the United States tend to be healthy enough to pass any pre-screenings, but Jennifer has observed that the subsequent generations tend to be sicker and require more access to care. If a family is illegally present, they tend to use Emergency Medicaid or nothing at all.

The Epoch Times asked Medicaid Services to provide the most recent data for the total uncompensated care that hospitals have reported. The agency didn’t respond.

Continue reading over at The Epoch Times

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/15/2024 - 09:45

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Fast-food chain closes restaurants after Chapter 11 bankruptcy

Several major fast-food chains recently have struggled to keep restaurants open.

Published

on

Competition in the fast-food space has been brutal as operators deal with inflation, consumers who are worried about the economy and their jobs and, in recent months, the falling cost of eating at home. 

Add in that many fast-food chains took on more debt during the covid pandemic and that labor costs are rising, and you have a perfect storm of problems. 

It's a situation where Restaurant Brands International (QSR) has suffered as much as any company.  

Related: Wendy's menu drops a fan favorite item, adds something new

Three major Burger King franchise operators filed for bankruptcy in 2023, and the chain saw hundreds of stores close. It also saw multiple Popeyes franchisees move into bankruptcy, with dozens of locations closing.

RBI also stepped in and purchased one of its key franchisees.

"Carrols is the largest Burger King franchisee in the United States today, operating 1,022 Burger King restaurants in 23 states that generated approximately $1.8 billion of system sales during the 12 months ended Sept. 30, 2023," RBI said in a news release. Carrols also owns and operates 60 Popeyes restaurants in six states." 

The multichain company made the move after two of its large franchisees, Premier Kings and Meridian, saw multiple locations not purchased when they reached auction after Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings. In that case, RBI bought select locations but allowed others to close.

Burger King lost hundreds of restaurants in 2023.

Image source: Chen Jianli/Xinhua via Getty

Another fast-food chain faces bankruptcy problems

Bojangles may not be as big a name as Burger King or Popeye's, but it's a popular chain with more than 800 restaurants in eight states.

"Bojangles is a Carolina-born restaurant chain specializing in craveable Southern chicken, biscuits and tea made fresh daily from real recipes, and with a friendly smile," the chain says on its website. "Founded in 1977 as a single location in Charlotte, our beloved brand continues to grow nationwide."

Like RBI, Bojangles uses a franchise model, which makes it dependent on the financial health of its operators. The company ultimately saw all its Maryland locations close due to the financial situation of one of its franchisees.

Unlike. RBI, Bojangles is not public — it was taken private by Durational Capital Management LP and Jordan Co. in 2018 — which means the company does not disclose its financial information to the public. 

That makes it hard to know whether overall softness for the brand contributed to the chain seeing its five Maryland locations after a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing.

Bojangles has a messy bankruptcy situation

Even though the locations still appear on the Bojangles website, they have been shuttered since late 2023. The locations were operated by Salim Kakakhail and Yavir Akbar Durranni. The partners operated under a variety of LLCs, including ABS Network, according to local news channel WUSA9

The station reported that the owners face a state investigation over complaints of wage theft and fraudulent W2s. In November Durranni and ABS Network filed for bankruptcy in New Jersey, WUSA9 reported.

"Not only do former employees say these men owe them money, WUSA9 learned the former owners owe the state, too, and have over $69,000 in back property taxes."

Former employees also say that the restaurant would regularly purchase fried chicken from Popeyes and Safeway when it ran out in their stores, the station reported. 

Bojangles sent the station a comment on the situation.

"The franchisee is no longer in the Bojangles system," the company said. "However, it is important to note in your coverage that franchisees are independent business owners who are licensed to operate a brand but have autonomy over many aspects of their business, including hiring employees and payroll responsibilities."

Kakakhail and Durranni did not respond to multiple requests for comment from WUSA9.

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Industrial Production Increased 0.1% in February

From the Fed: Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization
Industrial production edged up 0.1 percent in February after declining 0.5 percent in January. In February, the output of manufacturing rose 0.8 percent and the index for mining climbed 2.2 p…

Published

on

From the Fed: Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization
Industrial production edged up 0.1 percent in February after declining 0.5 percent in January. In February, the output of manufacturing rose 0.8 percent and the index for mining climbed 2.2 percent. Both gains partly reflected recoveries from weather-related declines in January. The index for utilities fell 7.5 percent in February because of warmer-than-typical temperatures. At 102.3 percent of its 2017 average, total industrial production in February was 0.2 percent below its year-earlier level. Capacity utilization for the industrial sector remained at 78.3 percent in February, a rate that is 1.3 percentage points below its long-run (1972–2023) average.
emphasis added
Click on graph for larger image.

This graph shows Capacity Utilization. This series is up from the record low set in April 2020, and above the level in February 2020 (pre-pandemic).

Capacity utilization at 78.3% is 1.3% below the average from 1972 to 2022.  This was below consensus expectations.

Note: y-axis doesn't start at zero to better show the change.


Industrial Production The second graph shows industrial production since 1967.

Industrial production increased to 102.3. This is above the pre-pandemic level.

Industrial production was above consensus expectations.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending