An Open Letter to the Obama Health Team

It seems likely that the Obama administration and Congress will spend a significant amount on health IT by attaching it as a first-order priority to the fiscal stimulus package … The easy solution would be to spend most of the health IT funds on EHRs. The EHR industry has made it easy by establishing a mechanism to “certify” EHR products if they incorporate certain features and functions. But the easy solution would not be the right one. EHRs still are notoriously expensive. Often, practicing physicians do not consider many of the features and functions to be useful or important.

kibbe_health_20

It seems likely that the Obama administration and Congress will spend a significant amount on health IT by attaching it as a first-order priority to the fiscal stimulus package.

We take the President-elect at his word when he recently said:

“…we must also ensure that our hospitals are connected to each other through the Internet. That is why the economic recovery plan I’m proposing will help modernize our health care system – and that won’t just save jobs, it will save lives. We will make sure that every doctor’s office and hospital in this country is using cutting edge technology and electronic medical records so that we can cut red tape, prevent medical mistakes, and help save billions of dollars each year.” (December, 6, 2008)

Whether the health IT money is well spent will depend on how it is distributed and what it buys. Most observers suppose that federal health IT investment dollars will be used to help doctors’ offices and hospitals acquire and implement electronic health record systems (EHRs or EMRs). These are commercial software suites for entering, storing and managing patient health data within a practice or health organization.

We agree that some of the federal health IT money should go to purchase EHRs, especially to doctors and hospitals in rural and under-served areas, which otherwise could not afford them.

The Easy, Wrong Solution

The easy solution would be to spend most of the health IT funds on EHRs. The EHR industry has made it easy by establishing a mechanism to "certify" EHR products if they incorporate certain features and functions.

But the easy solution would not be the right one. EHRs still are notoriously expensive. Often, practicing physicians do not consider many of the features and functions to be useful or important.  It can cost as much as $40,000 per physician in a medium size medical practice at the beginning of an EHR implementation. Even that regal sum may not completely cover the hardware and technical support necessary.

EHRs can be difficult to implement, upsetting practice workflows. In general, physicians’ practices have not adjusted quickly or smoothly to the disruptive nature of the switch from paper to electronic systems for patient care. Implementations can take months or even years to stabilize.

And the turmoil associated with the implementation can often have negative revenue repercussions for the medical practices they are intended to help. Physicians routinely report that, during the adjustment period, the number of patients they can see and treat in a day drops by twenty to thirty percent, with a commensurate decline in revenues.

Nor is there conclusive evidence that the use of EHRs improves patient care quality.

Finally, EHRs from different vendors are not yet interoperable, meaning that patient information cannot yet be easily exchanged between systems. If America’s physician practices suddenly rushed to install the systems of their choice, it would only dramatically intensify the Babel that already exists.

These barriers to adoption are well documented; they form the wall that has kept physician EHR adoption overall to less than 25 percent in this country. Even if a hefty federal subsidy reduced the exorbitant cost of the EHRs, many practices would suffer severe negative business impacts, and primary care access could temporarily be reduced on a national scale.

So important as EHRs are, at this point there are far better ways to invest in health IT for the doctor’s office and hospital. These approaches are low cost and would have immediate high impact on the quality and safety of care. They could build on and utilize existing health IT infrastructure, and be relatively non-disruptive to practice workflows. These factors would encourage adoption by minimizing risk for the doctors, their staffs, and their patients.

E-prescribing As A Model

The success of e-prescribing – as health technology and as public policy – makes it a model for future efforts. E-prescribing uses computing devices to enter, modify, review, and communicate prescription information. The entire process can be automated, from a prescribing doctor’s fingertips on the keyboard to the receiving pharmacist’s view of the medication order on his/her monitor. All this is possible through the use of standards- and web-based software that is free or inexpensive to the medical practice.

The only technology required of the doctor is Internet connectivity and access to one of the popular browser software programs, like Internet Explorer or Mozilla Firefox, which are already present in most offices and clinics around the country. E-prescribing takes advantage of this existing infrastructure, which is why its adoption is growing rapidly, particularly after CMS authorized an incentive payment to e-prescribing physicians of 2 percent of their total Medicare allowed charges during 2009.

E-prescribing has succeeded because it is an incremental and low-risk health IT that made it easy for physicians and pharmacists to electronically share prescription data, and because it was encouraged by financial incentives. E-prescribing produced significant benefits to physicians over the short term, but simultaneously provided a pathway to more comprehensive IT use over time. It also avoided a sharp decline in access to primary care.

More Bang, With Less Turmoil, for the Buck
We believe that the Obama administration could leverage IT spending in similarly inexpensive ways. Smaller, incremental steps would likely impact a larger number of medical practices in the short-term, benefiting patients while limiting the disruption to doctors.

Here are three suggestions:

1) Referral Management. No patient ought to be referred from a primary care provider to a specialist unless the relevant personal health data are available. Yet, as often as half the time the paperwork arrives, if it arrives at all, after the patient’s specialist appointment. This wastes time, results in duplication of tests, medications and procedures, and may imperil personal health.

Care can only be coordinated and continuity assured if information follows the patient wherever the next care event will occur. The solution is relatively easy and no more difficult than e-prescribing.

Create financial incentives for the implementation of simple tools that allow doctors and practices to share health data and communicate with other doctors. It should start with the specialists to whom they refer patients, and include the specialist when (s)he returns the patient to the primary care physician. A 1-2 percent bonus to doctors who e-refer would significantly increase continuity of information among doctors, which would translate to better continuity of care for patients, and lower costs to the system.

2) Patient Communications. Patients want and deserve to communicate through secure email with their medical home practices. They also increasingly want to use the Web to schedule appointments, pay bills and view portions of their medical records, such as lab results. These online services are not expensive for medical practices to provide through companies that offer them as “web portals” and they offer more than convenience to patients.

These communication tools are a means of closing the “collaboration gap” that exists between busy physicians and their busy patients, allowing routine tasks to be moved outside the rushed seven-and-a-half-minute office visit. This gives consumers time to digest and reflect upon how best to meet their health and wellness goals and offers doctors the luxury of better-informed patients. While some consumers are willing to pay their doctors an additional monthly fee to obtain these online services, a small payment from Medicare similar to that offered for e-prescribing would make the business case for doctors’ adoption of these patient-friendly online services. Adoption would surge.

3) Infrastructure Build-Up and Maintenance. Nowhere is access to the Internet more essential than in health care. We must assure that broadband Internet connectivity reaches every medical practice and every home in America, no matter how rural a region or how low income a neighborhood. Currently there are too many areas in the country where cable and DSL do not reach, often due to the small numbers of subscribers and the consequent barrier to investment by network carriers this imposes. The federal health IT initiative should subsidize both the establishment of broadband service in those areas, and the subscription fees for low income and health disparity populations that could benefit the most from Internet connectivity with health care providers and online care services.

The new Administration and Congress are about to throw a lot of money at the health IT problem, and the conventional thinking is to buy everyone an EHR of his/her choosing. While we enthusiastically applaud the vision that this represents, a more measured approach would create a smoother and more productive transition. At the same time, it would signal the EHR industry that, for national deployment, they need to come to terms with issues they have avoided so far, like interoperability and cost.

This letter was written by Dr. David Kibbe, our partner on a recent Health 2.0 documentary we produced, and Brian Klepper, a health care market analyst. Our goal is to promote dialogue and debate around what major problems we need to tackle.

David C. Kibbe MD MBA is a Family Physician and Senior Advisor to the American Academy of Family Physicians who consults on healthcare professional and consumer technologies. Brian Klepper PhD is a health care market analyst and a Founding Principal of Health 2.0 Advisors, Inc.

Clark Reed, Environmental Protection Agency

Video: Energy efficiency investments are becoming more and more cost effective. The return on investment is one of the safest returns any organization can expect. Traditionally, energy has accounted for around 2% of a healthcare facilities operating costs. That has been increasing over the past few years in an industry that typically earns slim profit margins to begin with. Money that used to go towards utilities can now be re-invested to provide better patient care.

We had a chance to interview Clark at the Healthcare Facilities Summit in Boca Raton, Florida.

Thanks to HFS for letting us attend and to everyone who sat down with us.
Healthcare-Facilities-Summit

I had a chance to talk to Clark Reed, Director, Healthcare Facilities Division for Energy Star, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at the Healthcare Facilities Summit in Boca Raton Florida.

Energy Star was created in 1992. It’s mission is to help individuals and businesses protect the environment by increasing their energy efficiency.

Energy Star identifies the energy efficiency leaders in an industry, discerns what their best practices are, and helps disseminate those best practices throughout the industry.

While Energy Star has no regulatory authority, it has seen increased participation in the program through the use of simple carrots such as use of the Energy Star logo as a form of recognition for those organizations that meet or exceed expectations. Energy Star works with partners to understand what technology and operational and maintenance practices they use to decrease energy consumption

Energy Star has a ratings system that goes from 1 to 100. Participating companies start by doing a self assessment to determine where they fit on the scale. 50 is considered the average. Once a company determines where it falls on the scale, it can develop a game plan for where it wants to be and how to get there through projects such as capital upgrades.

Energy Star is comprised of three divisions. The first is product related (TVs, VCRs, Refrigerators, electronic equipment, etc). On this front, Energy Star works with manufacturers to set voluntary energy efficiency thresholds. Companies that meet these thresholds get to put the cyan blue Energy Star logo, the symbol of energy efficiency, on their products.

The second division is focused on homes. An individual can ask their home builder to build an Energy Star certified home, which uses 30% less energy than a typical home.

The third division within Energy Star works with the commercial and industrial sectors of the economy. The goal is to promote whole building energy efficiency. Energy Star provides tools and resources to identify energy waste within the facility, make financial business cases to upgrade and promote energy efficiency, and offers recognition for leading companies around the country.

70 hospitals nationwide have earned the Energy Star label.

Energy efficiency investments are becoming more and more cost effective. The return on investment is one of the safest returns any organization can expect. Traditionally, energy has accounted for around 2% of a healthcare facilities operating costs. That has been increasing over the past few years in an industry that typically earns slim profit margins to begin with. Money that used to go towards utilities can now be re-invested to provide better patient care.

Energy efficient investments are a strategic hedge against energy price volatility in the market and help organizations reduce their carbon emissions, a goal that is gaining momentum within all industries.

Esther Dyson on Health

Video: Esther Dyson, Internet mover and shaker and board member of 23andMe, a consumer-facing genetic testing company, discusses the future of the Internet and the challenges and opportunities associated with the genomics movement.

Talking Genetics & The Internet With Esther Dyson.

In this episode of The Digital Health Revolution, we are pleased to feature Esther Dyson, Internet mover and shaker and board member of 23andMe, a consumer-facing genetic testing company. In this interview, Dyson discusses a range of subjects, including the future of the Internet and the challenges and opportunities associated with the genomics movement.

The User Experience with Health 2.0: Doctors and Patients

Video: Over the past six weeks we’ve interviewed doctors and patients about how they use Web 2.0 technologies to manage disease and conditions. We traveled from San Francisco to Brooklyn, with a pit stop in Second Life.

About These Videos

Health 2.0 commissioned ScribeMedia.Org to interview doctors and patients about how they use Web 2.0 technologies to treat and manage various illnesses and conditions. These videos premiered at this week’s Health 2.0 conference in San Diego.

Future Videos

We plan on continuing this video series and explore the intersection between technology and healthcare. Please contact us if your company would like to sponsor us so we can continue to produce doctor and patient documentaries, or if you can recommend interesting doctors and patients to feature.

For the Internet and technology literate, there is Web 2.0. For all of us, there is Health. What happens when you combine the two? You get Health 2.0…naturally. Increasingly, Patients and Doctors are using Web technologies to diagnose, treat and manage diseases and conditions.

In today’s world, with healthcare being a huge issue for practically everyone, the health care industry has had to struggle to find new ways of keeping up with patients, diseases, charts, and doctor-patient communication. As for the patients, regular people like you and me, we have all become much more educated about our own health, taking matters into our own hands to make sure we get proper care and treatment. One of the ways we do this is by using technology.

Just last week I was asked to fill out an electronic questionnaire online that would be submitted to my doctor before I actually saw her. I’m sure this is as useful to her as it is to me. No more having to verbally stumble and stamper when trying to explain my symptoms. No more wasting time in a waiting room filling out paper work until my hand feels like it’s about to fall off. With a simple 20-minute online questionnaire, I was able to document and submit all of my medical history, current symptoms, and reason for my visit.

As part of the Health 2.0 Conference, held in San Diego, March 3-4, 2008, we interviewed 3 doctors and 3 patients who all use technology to diagnose, treat and manage diseases and conditions. These videos were played at the conference in front of hundreds of leaders in the Health 2.0 space and are now available to watch online.

The Line-Up

Doctor 2.0: Dr. Jay Parkinson walks us around Brooklyn and discusses his Web-centric practice.

On-Call, and Online: Dr. Jordan Schlain of San Francisco’s On Call Medical Group discusses their use of communications technology in the field.

Managing Pain, Managing Expectations: Shiri Sandler discusses how she uses the Web site Relief in Site to manage the chronic pain associated with Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy.

A Second Change in Second Life: Alice Krueger discusses the Heron Sanctuary, a Second Life island she founded for for the disabled.

Patient 2.0: I’m Too Young for This founder Matthew Zachary talks about the online community he founded for young people with cancer.

Our goal is to continue to feature patients and doctors around the country (and even the world) who are using innovative tools and technologies. We view this 6 part video series as the beginning of the conversation. If you would like to help out as a sponsor of future documentaries, or if you know a doctor or patient who is using Web technologies in innovative ways, please contact us.

The American Alpine Club

Video: As climbing becomes more and more popular, and people are running farther into the mountains and scaling harder and harder cliffs, the presence of a strong organization – a not-for-profit organization, by climbers and for climbers – becomes even more important.

 

The American Alpine Club has been promoting the climbing way of life in this country and around the world since 1902. Since its inception, the club has promoted environmental awareness, safety, outdoor education, and has been instrumental in seeing the proud tradition of mountaineering and exploration continue.

As climbing becomes more and more popular, and people are running farther into the mountains and scaling harder and harder cliffs, the presence of a strong organization — a not-for-profit organization, by climbers and for climbers — becomes even more important. And no matter what kind of climbing you’re into — from light-and-fast alpinism to sport climbing to bouldering — the AAC is the place to be. (And please click those links — wiki has some very good entries about climbing.)

On a personal note, I’ve been climbing for a long time, but no one would ever mistake me for a great climber. From the outside looking in, the AAC always seemed a little out of my league. But since I joined a few years ago, I’ve encountered nothing but a friendly, welcoming atmosphere. I’ve been in the presence of some of the most inspiring people I’ve ever met. And I realized that no matter what level you climb at, what all the members of the AAC have in common is a deeply powerful love of the wilder places in the world — and that’s really all you need, especially these days.

So to do my part as the AAC springboards into the digital video age, I’ve created a highlight reel of some of the best climbers of this and past generations. It’s a quick, simple taste of how exciting, fun and life-fulfilling climbing can be, and I hope that after you see it, you’ll visit the Alpine Club’s website, sign up for a membership and become a part of this great climbing organization.

And after you’ve done that, get out and climb.

A Brief History of Medicine

VIDEO: How to tell the history of medicine in under four minutes, thirty seconds.

 

We want to give a big New York hello to Matthew Holt, Indu Subaiya and all the good folk attending the Health 2.0 Conference in San Francisco.

Fard Johnmar is representing the greater ScribeMedia family and shooting an episode for the Digital Health Revolution, a new show we’re producing that chronicles how the Internet, computers, mobile phones and other technologies are impacting health globally.

Here at the home front, we had a flurry of late nights putting together a video to open the Health 2.0 conference. You can see it above: A Brief History of Medicine… . We could/should add, “American Style.”

A lot was left on the cutting room floor in order to keep this within the few minute time frame we were operating under. However, new favorite person in medical history is Andreas Vesalius. His anatomical sketches are amazing.

For those who’ve seen it, the video’s an obvious homage to Michael Wesch’s Web 2.0… The Machine is Us/ing Us.

The music’s by Luxxury (hilarious video and site), the words are based off a ream of notes sent our way, and the video’s the work of Alexandra Lerman… some of you might know her as Pharma Girl.

Enjoy.

Déme La Vaca

Article: My sister and I just arrived in Buenos Aires, the starting point to our adventures in Argentina. Next stop, Las Lenas, where we’ll be skiing for the next seven days. My phrase of the day so far has been “déme la vaca”, which i will use frequently in the restaurants. This is all part of my research into Argentinian beef versus American beef.

peter_buenos_aires_rooftop

My sister and I just arrived in Buenos Aires, the starting point to our adventures in Argentina. Next stop, Las Lenas, where we’ll be skiing for the next seven days. My phrase of the day so far has been “déme la vaca”, which i will use frequently in the restaurants. This is all part of my research into Argentinian beef versus American beef.

So far the argentinian wine, a 2002 Tupungato from Mendoza, cigarrettes and beef have passed muster. They get the muy bueno.

The picture above is my response to my brother telling me to stop working and enjoy my vacation. Michael, so far so good….

– Peter

Alzheimers and RFID: Safety First or Privacy Violation?

ARTICLE: Radio Frequency Identification Devices are not new. They’ve just never been used this way in humans.

RFID Chips

In the state where Terry Schiavo was eventually allowed to die, privacy is being challenged again. Alzheimer’s Community Cares, based in West Palm Beach, Florida, has agreed to test the use of an electronic tag inserted under a patients skin to see if it will improve medical care. Protocols for the pilot program, the first of its kind in the United States, are still being developed, said Mary Barnes, CEO at ACC.

The technology, called Radio Frequency Identification Devices, is not new. RFIDs have been used as tracking and security devices for years. They’re the tags used on retail items like clothing and over-the-counter medications that make security alarms beep when people walk out the door with them. However, they’ve never been used in this way in humans.

So why now?

“Alzheimer’s is doing to privacy, what 9/11 did to civil liberties,” according to Barnes. “I don’t want to see images in Florida like I saw at the Super Dome.” She stresses that this is a story about safety. “The people laying dead on the stairwells were probably unable to communicate because of Alzheimer’s or a similar mental disorder,” said Barnes.

VeriChip, the manufacturer of the VeriMed chip, traces its own roots to disaster. After 9/11, when the World Trade Center lay smoldering in a pile of rubble, rescue workers scrawled ID numbers across themselves for fear they would go missing in the fray. According to VeriChip, “it was evident there was a desperate need for personal information in emergency situations.” A short-time later VeriChip was founded and the idea to use RFIDs in humans was hatched.

The Food and Drug Administration approved the use of VeriMed in December 2004. Today, over 600 hospitals across the U.S. have the equipment to use VeriMed, supplied to them at little or no cost by VeriChip. In February 2007, VeriChip also went public. The stock rose from a low of $4.27 to a high of over $9.00 in less than six months.

A singer and volunteer at ACC, Richard Ribner thinks the chips could be a great help to patients. “Anything you can do to help these guys would be great,” said Ribner. “They can’t remember much.” Ribner moved to Florida after working in New York City his whole life. He sounds like Tony Soprano, “I ran a biz-ness,” he said. Ribner, who’s been using a computer to sing Bobby Darin and Frank Sinatra tunes at ACC, said he doesn’t fear technology. “If it’s 80 percent helpful and only 20 percent a risk, why not?”

It’s an opportune time for VeriChip to push VeriMed. Health care costs continue to climb at twice the rate of inflation and policy experts are recommending technology be integrated into health care. They believe technology has the potential to cut costs and medical errors by as much as 20 percent. President Bush seems to agree, having signed an Executive Order last year designed to get health care providers to use Electronic Health Records by 2012. However, there are still no privacy guidelines to steer the creation of EHRs.

A letter sent by the General Accounting Office to Mike Levitt, Secretary of Health and Human Services, highlights the problem. Levitt was reprimanded for allowing technology companies to enter the market without privacy guidelines in place (there are about 20 technology companies selling the hardware and software for EHRs – including Microsoft). The Health Insurance Privacy Protection Act (HIPPA), passed in 1996, does not cover internet and electronic technologies, an integral part of EHR’s.

Paul Tagliaferri, another Florida retiree, said he’s concerned the wrong people will get access to private medical information. “Who’s to say how private medical information could be used to discriminate,” said Tagliaferri. Tagliaferri worked as a comptroller in Philadelphia until retirement. He’s unsure how the chips will ultimately be used, especially by the government. “Can you imagine the day the government requires Medicaid or Medicare enrollees to get implanted with a chip? It won’t be mandatory, but I can hear it,” said Tagliaferri, in a sardonic-troubling way, “No chip, no caid.”

Surprisingly, the one group consistently opposed to RFIDs is End-Timers: people who believe future events will unfold as described in the Bible. Most conservative Christians think the devices are the “the Mark of the Beast.” According to the Bible, it’s is a sign the world is coming to an end.

Ironically, it was pressure from conservative Christians that lead key Republicans to pass a law blocking Terry Schiavo’s husband from removing her feeding tube. Lawmakers were criticized at the time by members of both parties for meddling in the affairs of a private citizen. If the VeriMed pilot program proves a success, politicians may again feel the heat from Florida, caught between the need for personal privacy, and the President’s goals for EHRs.

John Mikytuck is a Scribemedia health reporter. He currently hosts Reporting AIDS, the only WebTV show devoted exclusively to covering the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

The Living Brain – An Interview with Norman Doidge

AUDIO: Did you that your brain can grow new cells, reorganize its networks, and improve with time? This is not the immutable organ you learned about in high school biology class. The human brain is in fact a living, changing structure with immense potential for development.

About Norman Doidge

Norman Doidge, M.D., is a psychiatrist, psychoanalyst, researcher, author, essayist and poet. He is on the Research Faculty at the Columbia University Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research in New York and the University of Toronto’s Department of Psychiatry. You can visit his website at NormanDoidge.com.

Did you that your brain can grow new cells, reorganize its networks, and improve with time? This is not the immutable organ you learned about in high school biology class. The human brain is in fact a living, changing structure with immense potential for development.

If you find this notion interesting, you must read The Brain that Changes Itself by Norman Doidge. It’s one of the most exciting books of 2007.

In the podcast above, ScribeMedia.Org had the opportunity to discuss his ideas above the current revolution going on in neuroscience.

ACT UP Turns 20: The Voice of AIDS in America

“Could anyone have imagined six million Jews would be exterminated during World War II,” says Andrew Velez, Chair of the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power Action Committee during the recent taping of our web TV series Reporting AIDS. “Nor did I think AIDS would become a world-wide epidemic killing millions of people.”

In 1981, recognized as the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, gay men mysteriously started getting sick and dying from rarely before seen forms of pneumonia and cancer. San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, Miami and Key West — all gay-Meccas in the 1970’s, became paralyzed as thousands of men succumbed to the disease.

GRID (Gay Related Immune Deficiency), as it was called at the time, destroyed immune systems and left those afflicted powerless to fight the most minor infection.

Public health officials, doctors, nurses — those entrusted to help — retreated in fear, leaving the sick and suffering to die without basic care or dignity.

By 1987, when ACT-UP was formed, people were desperate.

I was fresh out college working in a restaurant on Market Street in San Francisco when I witnessed for the first time what AIDS was doing to people. There were scant ways to see the scope of the suffering from AIDS if you didn’t live in a city where people were dying.

Media attention and government information was sparce. Nothing had given me an understanding of the problem. Until I saw it.

A young man, maybe 35, walked into my restaurant around lunch-time. He seemed confused and slightly disheveled. It looked like he was unaware and unconcerned about being in the restaurant, but rather purposefully found a seat and waited for someone to approach him. He seemed to recognize the waiter helping him and somewhat acknowledge, though not warmly, what was happening. Nothing was said, but over a twenty minute interplay, he got food, ate, and left.

I asked a co-worker what was happening. I was told the man was suffering from Dementia, a symptom of AIDS much like the late stages of Alzheimer’s. It turned out the man had once been a waiter at the restaurant and knew it was a place where he could come to get food, no questions asked.

There it was, black and white, AIDS had the power to render a fully-engaged, ambitious, and hopeful human being down to the most basic level of human behavior, instinct. That’s what it was like when ACT-UP was formed.

“It’s amazing what desperate and dying people will do,” says Eric Sawyer, a co-founder of ACT-UP, during the show. Sawyer, along with the entire ACT-UP membership, turned rage and fear into targeted, effective political activism, taking non-violent demonstrations to entirely new levels. Their efforts changed the course of the AIDS epidemic and saved millions of lives.

To mark the 20th Anniversary of the first ACT-UP demonstration, March 24th, 1987, we invited Velez and Sawyer to talk on-camera about some of ACT-UP’s most important demonstrations; shutting down the FDA, protesting the Catholic Church and delivering political funerals.

After watching the show, we hope you’ll take a minute to share your thoughts on ACT-UP. The comments section below should provide enough room for you to be as concise or verbose as you’d like.

Tell us about your experience of ACT-UP, the impact they had on you personally, and how you think they changed our society.

John Mikytuck is a ScribeMedia.Org healthcare reporter. He’s hosting an ongoing series and dialog on HIV/AIDs.