Are You What Edelman Calls a “Health Info-ential”?
February 28, 2009
I like to read what Richard Edelman, of Edelman of course, has to say, and I have attended some of their presentations. I stumbled on their “HealthEngagement Barometer: Health Influence in the Era of Public Engagement” report @ www.engageinhealth.com. Nancy Turett, Edleman Global Prez of Health has this to say in the report’s Foreword.
“Health is under extreme pressure.” - Due to aging populations, pandemics, advances in med technology and now the economic crisis. “ . . . the digital revolution has exponentially increased the interactions among disparate publics. People are empowered to freely and fluidly discuss business and societal issues that previously were not part of popular culture and conversation.
“Because health is pivotal to personal and societal well-being, everyone is not only a health stakeholder but also has multiple stakes in health (e.g. as consumer, patient, citizen, professional,
advocate, caregiver) and is a member of multiple health publics.”
Turett continues, “The new era of public engagement in health calls for organizations and brands to make deeper, more fluid, and open connections with their publics; to engage with individuals with cognizance of their multiple health stakes; and to influence personal, professional and policy decisions without seeking to control them.”
Thus Turett concludes, “The public has rewritten the rules of health engagement.”
Edelman’s “HealthEngagement Barometer” report identifies three groups of people engaged in health: those engaged in health but not necessarily gathering or sharing information (Health Involved – represent 80% of health-involved people), those who gather and share health information more than once a week (Health Informed – represent 33% of health-involved people), and those who self-identify as actively gathering and sharing health information, and advocating a point of view (Health Engaged – represent 39% of health-involved people).
The intersection of the three groups of health-involved people – Involved, Informed and Engaged – Edelman identifies as “Health Info-entials”, the 22% that wields the most influence on issues of health. This would include a physician who acts as a “key opinion leader” for other doctors and influences their viewpoints. Health Info-entials also have more personal experiences in health compared to the general population, either as a caregiver or a worker in the health field, or as a person with severe or chronic health conditions or taking prescription medications.
Interestingly the Edelman study showed there to be no differences between Health Info-entials and other people “with regard to age, income level or marital status” and minimal demographic differences. Health Info-entials though are “slightly more likely to be women, have children, and be employed”. What I found particularly interesting were the data related to the percentage of Health Info-entials by country. China at 33%, followed by Germany at 23% and Russia at 21% led the U.S. at 20% in the percentage of Health Info-entials in their health-informed populations. The United Kingdom trailed at 13%.
The Study looked next at how Health Info-entials engaged or more importantly ACTED in their health engagement. The majority of Health Info-entials talked to their friends, family members or peers about their health issues. They also talked to their healthcare provider, researched information, recommended products or services, and shared this information on-line at significantly higher rates than the general population. Only 15% of Health Info-entials took NO action as opposed to 28% of the general population.
It is also clear in the Edelman report that “My Health” is more important than “Our Health” as Health Info-entials, although interested in “macro” or “global” healthcare issues at a greater rate than the general population, found personal healthcare issues (i.e. prescriptions, hospitals and healthcare products) that affected them personally more important than companies, technology, social networking or world health issues. Health issues to most are still personal, and people require open and transparent, positive and negative, risks and benefits engagement with healthcare professionals.
And what do Health Info-entials seek? They seek engagement on 5 key issues related to them:
1. Maintaining health and well-being
2. Solving Chronic Health Problems
3. Preventing Disease
4. Providing Access to Affordable Heathcare
5. Access to Health Information
And where do they seek this information?
Ninety-six percent of Health Info-entials rate their doctor or healthcare professional as the #1 source of health information, followed by friends and family at 91%, a “person like me” at 88%, and “someone personally affected by a disease or medical condition” at 88%.
Edelman’s data also shows which Personal and Professional Expert Channels are Becoming More Important, and which are declining in credibility.
Health Information Channels Increasing in credibility and importance are:
1. Conversations with doctors
2. Conversations with friends and family members
3. Medical journals
4. Consumer health web sites
5. Government agencies
6. Conversations with people like me
7. Google and other search engines
8. Health-expert blogs
9. Health-related newsletters
10. Nonprofit or health advocacy websites
11. Wikipedia
12. Publications from nonprofits or NGOs
13. Books
Health Info Channels Declining in Importance and Credibility:
- Health companies’ websites
- TV news coverage
- Articles in magazines
- Web sites for specific brands of medication
- Films or documentaries
- Online message boards, forums, or newsgroups
- Articles in newspapers
- Radio news coverage
- Personal blogs
- Social networking web sites
- Video sharing web sites
- Corporate and product advertising
The above lists reflect four items: one, health is personal; two, old forms of information dissemination are dying, i.e. TV, magazines, TV, newspapers, and radio; three, social networking is just that, for social; and four, information from corporations “selling” the products is suspect.
For more details of this informative report go to: http://www.engageinhealth.com.
The Dangers of Turning Inward /WSJ.com
February 28, 2009
Countries are attempting to protect their own companies and workers from the economic crisis. The financial and political damage will be severe, argues Jeffrey E. Garten.
By Jeffrey Garten
Not long ago, on a visit to Bangalore, India, I made what I thought would be a 15-minute trip to the outskirts of the city. The journey took 90 minutes on roads filled with cars, trucks, bicycles, push carts, children, all kinds of animals and giant potholes. At one point my taxi was at a dead stop for what seemed like an eternity, waiting for a small group of cows to move to the side of the road. It was dusty and noisy, filled with the sounds of buzzing scooters and honking horns.
We eventually came to our destination: the campus of Infosys, an Indian technology company with major operations around the world. Here was a city within a city, with ultra-modern buildings, movie theaters, restaurants with international cuisine, workout facilities, classrooms for executive education, accommodations for workers who had to stay late and communications capabilities that I had never seen in American companies.
Two worlds. One globalized, the other not. One that had access to the world’s capital, technology and management, the other stuck in another century. Many of Infosys’s management and employees came from that poorer world. I wondered what it would take to pull up the millions of others.
Joel Kotkin Says Tensions Are Growing Between the Gentry and Populist Factions of the Democratic Party – WSJ.com
February 28, 2009
‘Gentry’ and ‘populist’ factions square off on energy and the environment.
By JOEL KOTKIN
This is the Democratic Party’s moment, its power now greater than any time since the mid-1960s. But do not expect smooth sailing. The party is a fractious group divided by competing interests, factions and constituencies that could explode into a civil war, especially when it comes to energy and the environment.
Obamas Bush Vindication (I heard it) / WSJ.com
February 28, 2009
Editorial – The Presidents good turn on Iraq.
It was never very likely that President Obama would come out and praise George W. Bush for the latters handling of the Iraq war, and in his speech yesterday to the Marines at Camp Lejeune, N.C., he didnt. Then again, we didnt quite expect to find ourselves praising President Obama for his handling of Iraq.
via Barack Obama Commits to a U.S. Transitional Force in Iraq – WSJ.com.
A historian urges us to take a deep breath before we answer.
By THOMAS FLEMING
Several polls of historians have named George W. Bush the worst president in American history. This baffles me. Ive been writing about presidents for a long time. What I know, and what I presume these gentleman know, doesnt connect.
via Thomas Fleming Asks Whether George W. Bush Was the Worst President – WSJ.com.
How Amazons Bezos Sparked Demand for Kindle 2 – BusinessWeek
February 27, 2009
Eight techniques to craft memorable messages about a new product
By Carmine Gallo
Amazon’s (AMZN) new e-reader, the Kindle 2, began shipping Feb. 24. The press conference and subsequent interviews CEO Jeff Bezos used to play up the launch of the product include several techniques that may help improve your pitches. Here are eight Bezos messaging techniques that you can incorporate into them today
via How Amazon’s Bezos Sparked Demand for Kindle 2 – BusinessWeek.
Research suggests increases in healthcare costs may be in part due to physicians’ discretionary decisions / NAHU.org
February 27, 2009
Modern Healthcare (2/27, Zigmond) reports that “technology is often cited as the culprit of healthcare’s rising costs, but a new study in the New England Journal of Medicine suggests that differences in cost growth are largely because of the discretionary decisions of physicians.” During the study, researchers “found that while Medicare spending rose nationally by 3.5 percent from 1992 to 2006, there was significant variation among regions of the country.” After further analysis, the team saw that “physicians in higher-spending regions were much more likely than those in lower-spending regions to recommend discretionary services, such as a referral to a subspecialist.”
COBRA coverage extended to 18 months, costs lowered / NAHU.org
February 27, 2009
The Hill (2/27, Youngman) reports, “President Obama announced that, starting Thursday, the federal health insurance program COBRA will be expanded to ‘make healthcare affordable’ for an additional 7 million unemployed Americans.”
The AP (2/27) notes that the “stimulus package that Obama signed into law includes a dramatic, temporary expansion of the program that lets unemployed people keep health insurance from their old job for up to 18 months if they pay for it in full. The new provision lowers the costs by about two-thirds for a year.”
The AP (2/27, Gines) reports, “In testimony Thursday to Nevada lawmakers, state officials listed hard realities, tough choices and increased waiting lists among issues they face as a result of Gov. Jim Gibbons’ (R) proposed budget cuts to mental health services.” The proposal would decrease funding for Nevada mental health services “five percent, to $473 million, although overall human services spending, accounting for about a third of the state’s general funds for the coming two fiscal years, is up.” The governor has also “proposed closing 11 of the state’s 21 rural mental health clinics, and increasing the number of patients per staff member at mental health facilities in Reno and Las Vegas.” On Thursday, “Dr. Harold Cook, head of the [Nevada] Mental Health and Developmental Services Division, said the reductions will mean longer waits for service, fewer job and training programs and possible elimination of services such as life-skill activities.” State Sen. Bob Coffin (D-Las Vegas) “said state health officials are working under difficult circumstances.” Sen. Coffin admitted, “We know this is not a budget that the people who run development services would have liked to see.”
Obama expected to move to rescind conscience rule / NAHU.org
February 27, 2009
The Los Angeles Times (2/27, Levey) reports that “the Obama administration today will move to rescind a controversial rule that allows healthcare workers to deny abortion counseling or other family planning services if doing so would violate their moral beliefs, according to administration officials.” So far, “seven states, including California, Illinois and Connecticut, and two family-planning groups have filed lawsuits challenging the Bush rule,” arguing that “it sacrifices the health of patients to the religious beliefs of medical providers.” But, “before the administration finalizes the rollback, a standard 30-day comment period seeks input from people across the ideological spectrum.” Officials also indicated that “the administration would consider drafting a new rule to clarify what healthcare workers could reasonably refuse to do for their patients.” They added that “the administration’s goal is to make the rule clearer rather than force doctors to provide abortions.”
Health insurance share prices plummet as Obama targets Medicare Advantage / NAHU.org
February 27, 2009
The Wall Street Journal (2/27, Fuhrmans) reports, “Health-insurance stocks plunged Thursday, led by a 19 percent drop in Humana Inc. shares, after the Obama administration outlined plans to finance a big chunk of its health-reform agenda with $175 billion in cuts to private Medicare plans.” The “biggest portion” of the budget proposal will come from “requiring health insurers to competitively bid to offer so-called Medicare Advantage plans.” Medicare Advantage has “been a hot political target of Democrats because the plans are paid an average 14 percent more per beneficiary than what traditional government Medicare spends.” Karen Ignani, president of the health-insurance lobby America’s Health Insurance Plans, argued that private Medicare plans “have made inroads in better managing patient’s care.”
The Wall Street Journal (2/27, Jannarone) reports that Medicare Advantage “accounts for 10 percent of Aetna’s profit and 15 percent of UnitedHealth’s, according to Citigroup. Even in the unlikely event that the plan destroys all their profits from the program, the share-price reaction is excessive. Most of their business relates to private-sector health plans. Those could even benefit from broad moves to expand coverage.” The actual “fear is creeping nationalization, or at least uncertainty over how rules for private plans will shake out. But while details of Mr. Obama’s plan remain a mystery, talk of a free-market bidding process hardly smacks of full government control.”
The Los Angeles Times (2/27, Petruno) reports, “Managed-care companies took the biggest hit: The HMO index of 11 major healthcare providers plunged 10 percent, bringing its decline so far this week to 20 percent.” For example, “UnitedHealth Group slumped 13 percent and is down 28 percent this week. Humana plunged 19 percent, giving it a 42 percent decline so far this week. Woodland Hills-based Health Net slid 9.4 percent and is down 20 percent for the week.”
The Chicago Tribune (2/27) reports, “As investors became aware of the impact that the budget, if enacted, could have on the companies, they turned against what had been one of the strongest industries in the stock market recently.” The Tribune notes, “Market watchers had been looking to healthcare to help lead the market’s recovery along with other more recession-resistant industries, such as consumer staples.”
Obama budget includes creation of 10-year, $634 billion “health reform reserve.” / NAHU.org
February 27, 2009
Media reports are casting President Obama’s first budget plan as a clear break with past US policies on a variety of issues. The story led all three network newscasts and appears on most major newspaper front pages. ABC World News (2/26, lead story, 3:20, Gibson) described the size of the budget as “staggering” and notes that “one out of every two dollars spent by the government will be deficit spending.” But “it would lead to a seismic shift in policies, and would touch the lives of nearly every American.”
The CBS Evening News (2/26, lead story, 3:10, Reid) reported, “The budget also includes a long list of White House spending priorities. The largest by far, $634 billion over the next 10 years to take a big step towards universal healthcare. About half of that would come from taxes on high-income earners, the rest from cutting payments to insurance companies, hospitals, and doctors.”
NBC Nightly News (2/26, lead story, 3:20, Williams) also noted that “the budget calls for $635 billion over ten years, as a down payment on healthcare reform, paid for in part by cuts in Medicare spending.”
In a front-page story, the New York Times (2/27, A1, Calmes) explains that “with higher taxes on the wealthy and savings squeezed from healthcare providers, drugmakers, and insurers, Mr. Obama would create a $634 billion, 10-year ‘health reform reserve’ as a down payment to finance disease prevention, wellness programs and research on cost-effective treatments ultimately to cut healthcare costs. More than any other expense, healthcare is driving future projections of unsustainable deficits. The health reserve would also be used to create affordable insurance programs for individuals and employers.”
In its front-page story, the Washington Post (2/27, A1, Balz) asks whether Obama will be able to build a coalition in support of healthcare reform noting, “The prospects for healthcare reform may be brighter than they were when President Bill Clinton tried unsuccessfully to enact his program in 1993-94, but Obama will still have to defeat the arm of interests and lobbyists that sank Clinton’s plan.” And “he may run into resistance from some Democrats as well, given the size of his ambitions.”
The Los Angeles Times (2/27, Reynolds), USA Today (2/27, Wolf, Jackson), the Financial Times (2/27), the AP (2/27, Crutsinger), McClatchy (2/27, Thomma, Lightman), The Hill (2/27, Alarkon), Bloomberg News (2/27, Donmoyer), and AFP (2/27) also cover the story.
Gone, but not out? Dobson resigns as chairman of Focus on the Family – AP/washingtonpost.com
February 27, 2009
By ERIC GORSKI
DENVER — Conservative evangelical leader James Dobson has resigned as chairman of Focus on the Family but will continue to play a prominent role at the organization he founded more than three decades ago.
via Dobson resigns as chairman of Focus on the Family – washingtonpost.com.
