Connect with us

INSIGHTS

What if insurance companies were held accountable for health outcomes?

Published

on

Picture this: You’re sitting in a courtroom, and the defendant in front of you is a major insurance company. The charge? Denying a life-saving claim that led to devastating consequences for someone’s health. The prosecutor stands up, looks toward the jury—a group of everyday people like you and me—and declares, “They prioritized profits over the lives of people.” Doesn’t that statement hit differently this morning, especially as you sip your coffee?

It sounds outrageous, doesn’t it? Or does it? What if insurance companies were actually held liable for the outcomes of their decisions? After all, when we visit a doctor, we expect accountability, expertise, and a commitment to our well-being. Why should insurance companies, which wield life-and-death power over critical care, be any different?

Picture this: You’re sitting in a courtroom, and the defendant in front of you is a major insurance company. The charge? Denying a life-saving claim that led to devastating consequences for someone’s health. The prosecutor stands up, looks toward the jury—a group of everyday people like you and me—and declares, “They prioritized profits over the lives of people.” Doesn’t that statement hit differently this morning, especially as you sip your coffee?

It sounds outrageous, doesn’t it? Or does it? What if insurance companies were actually held liable for the outcomes of their decisions? After all, when we visit a doctor, we expect accountability, expertise, and a commitment to our well-being. Why should insurance companies, which wield life-and-death power over critical care, be any different?

When physicians call the shots

Let’s take a trip down the rabbit hole of “what ifs.” What if the people who decided whether or not your claim would be approved weren’t just numbers-crunching office workers, but real doctors—experienced, compassionate clinicians? Imagine a board made up of physicians who have spent decades in patient care, not just reading policies but understanding the human side of medicine. Decisions wouldn’t be based purely on data or cost-cutting; they’d be centered on people and their health.

We already trust physicians to make split-second decisions in life-or-death situations, right? Why, then, shouldn’t we trust them to decide whether your cancer treatment gets covered? If doctors were the ones in charge, we might not see absurd situations where a sprained ankle requires 15 years of medical records just to get a claim approved.

Incentivizing healthier lives

Here’s another thought: What if your insurance policy actually rewarded you for making good choices for your health? Imagine this: You get a routine mammogram or go in for a check-up, and your insurance premium drops. You finally quit smoking or meet your weight-loss goal? Your deductible decreases. You stay on top of your mental health with regular check-ins? Maybe that’s another reason to save. The possibilities are endless. Not only would this approach save lives, but it could also reduce the overall costs to the health care system.

Preventive care works. The CDC reports that chronic conditions like diabetes, heart disease, and cancer account for 90 percent of the staggering $4.5 trillion the U.S. spends annually on health care. Imagine the savings if people got screened and treated earlier rather than waiting until it’s too late.

And picture how satisfying it would be if your insurance statement included a line that says, “Congrats, your healthy choices saved the system $12,430 this year!” That would definitely be a conversation starter at your next family gathering, don’t you think?

Breaking free from employer ties

What if, instead of fearing job loss as the potential end of your health insurance, we lived in a system where your health coverage wasn’t tied to your employer? In the U.S., 60 percent of people rely on employer-sponsored insurance. If you lose your job, you lose your health coverage. It’s an unfair blow when you’re already struggling.

A nation’s strength should be measured by more than just its GDP. It should be measured by the health of its citizens—mentally, physically, and emotionally. Why should a job loss or a career change mean the end of your access to critical care? It’s not just unfair; it’s inhumane.

Countries with universal health care systems, like Canada or the U.K., don’t tie health insurance to employment. Sure, there are frustrations with wait times, but rarely does anyone have to worry about bankruptcy from a hospital stay. I’ve lived in both systems, and trust me, there’s something deeply reassuring about not having to fight for basic care when you’re already dealing with health issues.

A brief history of health insurance chaos

The health insurance system we have today didn’t always look like this. It evolved out of necessity during World War II when companies began offering health benefits to attract workers during wage freezes. Over time, what was once seen as a bonus turned into a must-have, and now we’re tangled in a maze of bureaucracy that even Kafka might find overwhelming.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) tried to bring some order to this mess, but we’re still far from a system that prioritizes health over profit. Just take a look at this: In 2023, U.S. insurance companies made a combined profit of $88 billion. Meanwhile, medical debt continues to be the leading cause of bankruptcy in this country. Something doesn’t add up—and it’s not just the hospital bill for a single aspirin costing $30.

A nation’s health is its wealth

As a physician and a coach, I see firsthand the toll this system takes on people’s health and happiness. Imagine a world where advocacy wasn’t just a buzzword but a movement. Where health care systems were designed to lift people up, not drown them in red tape.

I’m hopeful that someday, we’ll look back at this era of insurance-driven chaos and laugh—hopefully, from a place of health and well-being. But for now, it’s up to all of us to keep pushing for change. We need to use our voices and demand a health care system that’s actually designed to help people.

If you’re reading this and feel fired up, good. Health care advocacy is no longer a “nice-to-have” thing—it’s essential. Because at the end of the day, the true strength of any nation lies in the health of its citizens.

As for me, I’m optimistic. I truly believe change is possible. As the late U.S. Senator John Lewis said, “Never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble.” It’s time we made that noise.

Tomi Mitchell is a board-certified family physician and certified health and wellness coach with extensive experience in clinical practice and holistic well-being. She is also an acclaimed international keynote speaker and a passionate advocate for mental health and physician well-being. She leverages over a decade of private practice experience to drive meaningful change.

Dr. Mitchell is the founder of Holistic Wellness Strategies, where she empowers individuals through comprehensive, evidence-based approaches to well-being. Her career is dedicated to transforming lives by addressing personal challenges and enhancing relationships with practical, holistic strategies.

Tomi Mitchell, MD 
Courtesy of KevinMD.com
Continue Reading

INSIGHTS

Is COP Kicking the can further down the road…again?

Published

on

COP must evolve with the times, or go down the abyss of irrelevancy.

 

COP 30 lands in Belém, a vulnerable Amazon city, Nov 10–21, 2025. The host nation hopes to spotlight deforestation, Indigenous rights, and climate inequity. Brazil plans to launch the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF)—a proposed $125 billion blended‑finance fund to reward forest conservation.


What’s at risk

  • Affordability crisis: Belém has ~18,000 hotel beds for ~45,000 expected attendees. Room rates surged to $700–$2,000/night. Developing nations may be shut out.) Brazil has deployed cruise ships and capped rates for poorer countries—but gaps remain.
  • Credibility gap: A new highway cutting through protected rainforest (Avenida Liberdade) contradicts the summit’s conservation message—even though officials deny federal involvement.
  • Fossil fuel influence: COP media deal awarded to PR firm Edelman, which also represents Shell—sparking conflict concerns.

Why it may just “kick the can”

  • Progress stalled in Bonn: Critical texts—like the Just Transition Work Programme and the Gender Action Plan—are underpowered, with weakening language on Indigenous and gender justice. Negotiations postponed to Belém.
  • Ambitious goals, low political will: The annual climate finance scale-up roadmap to $1.3 trillion by 2035 lacks binding commitments. Most countries’ updated NDCs remain underwhelming.
  • Logistical chaos: Thousands of civil society, women groups, and youth may be excluded by cost and infrastructure constraints, undermining representation.

Why it still matters

  • Location is symbolic: Holding COP in the Amazon aims to humanize climate action, not sanitize it in luxury venues.
  • TFFF could deliver: If fully funded by COP or 2026, the forest conservation fund could redefine climate finance.
  • Health in focus: A WHO-led Climate & Health conference in Brasília is shaping a Health Action Plan for COP, embedding public health in climate policy.

Bottom line

COP 30 has the potential for impact—but so far, optics risk overshadowing outcomes. High costs, diluted ambition, fossil-fuel influence, and delayed mechanisms could make Belém another kickoff, not a game changer. Unless financial pledges and rights-centered action materialize, COP 30 may merely defer real climate solutions to the next summit.

 

Continue Reading

INSIGHTS

Understanding the Brazil Golden Visa Program

Published

on

As people in America–and worldwide–are rethinking their residencies, Brazil offers a unique opportunity.

Why it matters

Brazil’s investor visa (VIPER), launched in 2018 and expanded in 2025, offers straight to permanent residency, family inclusion, and a path to citizenship in ~4 years. Designed to attract foreign capital, it’s one of Latin America’s most competitive options.

✅ Pros

  • Low investment threshold: BRL 700K (~USD 140K) in the North/Northeast; BRL 1 M (~USD 200K) in other regions.
  • Fast processing: Approval typically in 3–6 months.
  • Minimal stay requirement: Spend just ~14 days every 2 years in Brazil to maintain residency.(
  • Path to citizenship: Apply after 4 years of residency; dual nationality allowed.
  • Family included: Spouse and dependents can join under the same investment.
  • Access to MERCOSUR: Freedom to live/work across South America and access public services locally.

❌ Cons & caveats

  • Capital-intensive: Though cheaper than many EU programs, still requires upfront investment.
  • Low liquidity: Must hold qualifying property or business for residency status.
  • Complex documentation: Must transfer funds through formal Brazilian banks; property deed must be fully registered.
  • Tax implications: Residents become Brazilian tax-liable; must file global income.
  • Risk & bureaucracy: Mistakes in property purchase or application can lead to denial.

⚙️ How it works

  1. Choose investment route:
    • Real estate: BRL 1M (~USD 200K), or BRL 700K in North/Northeast.
    • Business investment: As low as BRL 150K (~USD 30K) if it creates jobs or invests in tech.
  2. Acquire property or company with clean title in urban region.
  3. Transfer funds via central‑bank‑approved channels.
  4. Apply via MigrantWeb and attend a brief visit (~30 days in-country).
  5. Receive temp residency (2–4 years), then upgrade to permanent if holding the investment.
  6. Citizenship after residency plus Portuguese proficiency and clean record.

Real-world impact

  • Stimulates foreign investment into Brazilian real estate and startups.
  • Helps diversify global mobility: Dual citizens gain visa-free access to ~171 countries.
  • Competitive edge: Lower thresholds than Spain, Portugal, and others, with faster timelines and better climate

Who should consider it

  • Remote workers or retirees seeking affordable residency in Latin America
  • Investors looking for second passports or access to Mercosur markets
  • Entrepreneurs or families seeking global mobility and alternate residency options

Bottom line

Brazil’s Golden Visa isn’t just another residency-by-investment program—it’s a strategic gateway to permanent residency, citizenship, and regional access, at competitive cost and with minimal residency obligations.

Whether you’re buying property in Recife or launching a startup in São Paulo, Brazil offers a forward-facing bridge for global citizens—without the EU price tag.

Continue Reading

INSIGHTS

We don’t do “that” anymore!

Published

on

America’s public media system is stuck in a time warp — built for a world that no longer exists.


Back then…

When the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) was founded in 1967, there was:

  • ❌ No internet
  • ❌ No YouTube
  • ❌ No MP3s or MP4s
  • ❌ No smartphones
  • ❌ No TikTok, file sharing, livestreams, or global DIY distribution

NPR, PBS, and local community stations were born in the age of vinyl and rabbit ears — and many still operate like it’s 1975.

The old model

  • Broadcast licenses → transmit radio/TV signals
  • Federal subsidies + pledge drives → fund operations
  • Audience = passive receivers
    All built for one-to-many media when the internet has made everyone a node.

The new reality

Welcome to media in motion:

  • Creators self-distribute across platforms
  • Real-time news spreads peer-to-peer
  • Audiences expect participation, not programming
  • Livestreams, podcasts, and video-on-demand rule attention

It’s horse and buggy vs the electric car, and too much of public media is still shoveling hay.

Why it matters

Then Now
Top-down Peer-to-peer
Static schedules On-demand, everywhere
Centralized stations Decentralized communities
Annual pledge drives Micro-giving, crowdfunding, subscriptions

We can’t build the future with our minds in the past. Yet too much of public media clings to legacy systems, dated org charts, and siloed content.

What’s being lost

  • Entire generations under 40 have no relationship with public radio or TV
  • Community voices, diverse stories, and local impact are drowned out by outdated delivery
  • Opportunity for global collaboration, multilingual content, and co-creation is missed

Public media could be a participatory ecosystem — but instead, it’s often a museum exhibit of what media used to be.

What’s next

✅ Shift from broadcast to networked ecosystems
✅ Enable community-owned media nodes
✅ Train creators in digital-first storytelling
✅ Embrace open-source, global collaboration
✅ Reimagine the CPB as a commons infrastructure, not a broadcast subsidy

Bottom line

We don’t do that anymore.

Public media must evolve—or become irrelevant. This is not business as usual. It’s time to flip the script—before the last station fades to static.

 

Continue Reading