Click a topic below for an index of articles:

 

New-Material

Home

Alternative-Treatments

Financial or Socio-Economic Issues

Forum

Health Insurance

Hepatitis

HIV/AIDS

Institutional Issues

International Reports

Legal Concerns

Math Models or Methods to Predict Trends

Medical Issues

Our Sponsors

Occupational Concerns

Our Board

Religion and infectious diseases

State Governments

Stigma or Discrimination Issues

 

If you would like to submit an article to this website, email us at info@heart-intl.net for a review of this paper
info@heart-intl.net

any words all words
Results per page:

“The only thing necessary for these diseases to the triumph is for good people and governments to do nothing.”

        

Another health insurer benefits from a slowdown in some costs, but premiums have not fallen.

 

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA081EF73B580C758CDDAC0894DB404482

 


Business/Financial Desk | May 6, 2003, Tuesday
THE MARKETS: Market Place;

By Milt Freudenheim (NYT) 780 words
Late Edition - Final , Section C , Page 12 , Column 1

ABSTRACT - Oxford Health Plans reports improved first-quarter earnings and raises its profits forecast for year, becoming latest health insurer to benefit from nationwide trend of moderating hospital and drug costs; says net income rose 2.1 percent, to $72.9 million from $71.4 million year earlier; industry executives and analysts say they are not sure whether easing of medical costs for insurance companies will be powerful enough to translate into price breaks in premiums that health plan customers pay (Market Place column) (M) OXFORD HEALTH PLANS reported improved first-quarter earnings yesterday and raised its profits forecast for the year, becoming the latest health insurer to benefit from a nationwide trend of moderating hospital and drug costs.

    

A combination of slowing sales of expensive drugs and softening demand for hospital services has reduced medical costs for most managed care companies. Oxford, for its part, said net income rose 2.1 percent, to $72.9 million, or 86 cents a share, from $71.4 million, or 78 cents a share, a year earlier, as costs rose 8.4 percent, compared with 10 to 11 percent in 2002.