Search Results

The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) is an internationally-recognized organization of patients, providers, community organizations, business and labor groups, and health policy experts committed to raising awareness of the number one cause of death, disability, and rising health care costs: chronic disease Resources RESOURCES > MIGRAINE Migraine According to the National Institute of Health's National Institute on Neurological Disorders and Stroke, the pain of a migraine headache is often described as an intense pulsing or throbbing in one area of the head. The International Headache Society diagnoses migraine by pain level and number of attacks, and additional symptoms like nausea, vomiting, sensitivity to light and sound. More than 10 percent of people worldwide experience migraine, and it is thee times more common in women than men. Chronic Migraine Chronic migraine is defined as a headache that occurs on 15 or more days per month for at least three months. According to the National Headache Foundation, studies have shown that nearly 80 percent of patients with chronic migraine have depression. Raising awareness of the prevalence of chronic migraine and exposing its extensive impact on productivity are critical to highlighting the need for more research in order to support the millions who suffer daily. For a patient perspective on chronic migraine please visit PFCD's YouTube channel for video testimonials from three chronic migraine sufferers: http://www.youtube.com/ThePFCD

The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) is an internationally-recognized organization of patients, providers, community organizations, business and labor groups, and health policy experts committed to raising awareness of the number one cause of death, disability, and rising health care costs: chronic disease Resources RESOURCES > HEART DISEASE Heart Disease According to a recent report commissioned by the American Heart Association, costs associated with heart disease in the U.S. will reach $818.1 billion a year by 2030. Most of these costs are associated with the treatment of high blood pressure, which the report states are predicted to increase to $389 billion by 2030. Cardiovascular disease is largely a preventable chronic disease, yet the report warns that the number of heart disease cases will grow by 10 percent over the next 20 years if nothing is done. High Blood Pressure: What You Need to Know Blood pressure is the force of our blood being pushed against the artery walls when our heart beats. However, when the heart must exert more force to pump blood through the arteries, high blood pressure, or hypertension, may occur. Left unchecked, this can lead to various health concerns, most notably heart attack and stroke. Fortunately, there are many ways you can help reduce your blood pressure to healthy levels. Read the full article here .

The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) is an internationally-recognized organization of patients, providers, community organizations, business and labor groups, and health policy experts committed to raising awareness of the number one cause of death, disability, and rising health care costs: chronic disease Resources

Medicare Open Enrollment starts this week and changes coming in 2026 warrant close consideration. Many will face fewer choices and higher costs, particularly for people who rely on traditional Medicare and purchase stand-alone prescription drug plans. Slightly less than half of Medicare’s 63 million beneficiaries enroll in traditional or fee-for-service Medicare (Parts A and B) compared to Medicare Advantage plans (Part C). Among rural beneficiaries, traditional Medicare is particularly popular. Beneficiaries who prefer traditional Medicare purchase stand-alone Part D plans for their prescription drug coverage. Fewer Plans to Choose From The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) just released new data, and here’s the headline: the Medicare Part D market is shrinking again in 2026. The number of standalone prescription drug plans (PDPs)   will drop by 22%  - from 464 in 2025 to 360 in 2026 The number of Medicare Advantage plans with drug coverage (MA-PDs, not including Special Needs Plans) will also fall by 9% , from 3,246 to 2,967 over the same period That means fewer choices for people shopping for drug coverage this fall. Some insurance companies are pulling out of the market, while others are cutting back on the types of plans they offer. Interestingly, one area that’s still growing is Special Needs Plans (SNPs)   - these are designed for people with certain health conditions or lower incomes, and they’ll increase by 20%  next year. That’s good news for people living with specific needs, including serious chronic conditions, for which SNPs are available . Why All the Changes? The Inflation Reduction Act made significant changes to Medicare Part D. Some of these changes will help beneficiaries manage out-of-pocket costs, including the new annual out-of-pocket cap ($2,100 in 2026) and the Medicare Prescription Payment Plan. Launched in January 2025, the Medicare Prescription Payment Plan  offers seniors with any Medicare Part D plan (including PDPs or MA-PDs) the option to break their out-of-pocket prescription drug expenses into monthly installments to avoid having to make large payments earlier in the year. However, other aspects of the IRA, like the drug pricing provisions, risk undermining the Part D program. In 2026, the Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation program kicks in for the first ten prescription medicines selected for price-setting. How the program affects beneficiary costs at the pharmacy counter and the impact on access restrictions will be closely watched. Expect Higher Premiums Even though Medicare is trying to limit premium increases, many people will still see their monthly drug plan costs go up in 2026. For those not receiving low-income help , average premiums for standalone drug plans are expected to rise by about a third. According to a new analysis by Avalere : About 1 in 4 people  will see their drug plan premium go up by $30 or more per month Around 17%  will see little to no change Most people with Medicare Advantage drug plans (MA-PDs)  will still have a $0 drug premium , but about 16%  will see an increase of $10 or more Fewer Choices for Low-Income Beneficiaries If you get help paying for your drug plan through the Low-Income Subsidy (LIS) , your options are also narrowing. The number of benchmark plans  - the ones available at no extra cost - will dip slightly from 90 in 2025 to 88 in 2026. This erosion of choices continues an alarming decline in the options of LIS plans for low-income beneficiaries. In 2023, before passage of the IRA , there were 191 LIS plan options. In some states, that means people will have only one or two of these no-cost plans to choose or face picking a plan for which they must pay premiums. What This Means for You Bottom line? The 2026 Medicare open enrollment will involve fewer plans and higher premiums . If you’re on Medicare, it’s going to be more important than ever to review your plan during open enrollment this fall. Even if you’re happy with your current plan, take a few minutes to compare your options - you might find that your plan’s price or drug coverage is changing.

The Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease opposes the Trump administration’s “Most Favored Nation” drug pricing proposal because it would import international price controls that threaten patient access, adopt discriminatory metrics of value, pose ethical concerns and stifle U.S. medical innovation.  Leading voices from patient, provider, and other stakeholder communities are raising serious concerns about the impact of the “Most Favored Nation” pricing proposal on patient access in America:  *DOWNLOAD INFOGRAPHIC * Alliance for Aging Research :  “Just as worrisome, international reference pricing policies effectively endorse the use of discriminatory cost-effectiveness standards often used by other governments. Many countries likely to be referenced, such as the United Kingdom and Canada, make drug reimbursement and coverage decisions based on cost-effectiveness assessments that are measured by the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). These assessments assign a financial value to the patients for whom a given treatment is intended. The Affordable Care Act banned the use of QALYs for coverage and reimbursement decision-making in the Medicare program.  “QALYs originated in the 1960s and have been used by the British government to ration health care for its National Health Service. If we embrace an MFN-type reference pricing policy, it means embracing health care rationing as well. This type of rationing in many European countries has not only resulted in access issues but has also translated into higher mortality rates for chronic diseases, such as cancer. ”  American Society of Clinical Oncology : “High drug prices in the United States must be addressed, but MFN would impose a nationwide, mandatory experiment on people with cancer and their providers that could significantly restrict patients’ access to care—without any evidence that it will actually cut care costs .” Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America :  “The U.S. health care system is complex, and pushing on one lever to reduce costs may unintentionally increase costs to patients by other mechanisms. Without addressing all of the root causes, policies like MFN risk reducing availability or shifting costs elsewhere in the system, which could delay access or limit options for patients. ” “...we are deeply concerned that the proposed Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) pricing framework—while well-intentioned—fails to address the underlying complexities of the U.S. drug pricing ecosystem and risks creating unintended consequences that could restrict access for patients who rely on life-saving medications.” Caregiver Action Network :  “People on Medicaid already have broad access to medicines at little to no cost-sharing. The MFN model could lead to cuts in Medicaid and reduced access to lifesaving treatments for vulnerable populations. ” Coalition of State Rheumatology Organizations : “CMS also acknowledged that ‘beneficiaries may experience access to care impacts,’ including difficulty finding  providers and extended traveling to seek care. These are alarming forecasts  about the future impact of these proposals if applied to Medicaid, which we believe should sufficiently deter members of Congress from advancing this proposal.” Council for Affordable Health Coverage : “Entering critical steps to enact budget reconciliation, Congress should focus on dismantling the drug price control regime that already exists in the U.S. health care system, such as those enacted by the Biden administration in the Inflation Reduction Act — not reinforce it with a European model. European price controls are controversial because they restrict access to treatment, promoting worse health outcomes that cost more. Replacing efforts to control fraud in Medicaid with controversial price controls will hold up progress on the budget bill and should be rejected by Congress.” Healthy Men : “Time and time again, across numerous market sectors, artificially setting prices using foreign reference pricing has been unsuccessful. And when applied to pharmaceuticals,  it could ultimately harm patients and undermine the administration’s important goal of ‘Making America Healthy Again’. ” Let My Doctors Decide : “MFN may appear to lower costs on the surface, but in reality, it imports price controls that could restrict access to life-saving therapies. Countries whose pricing models would be adopted under this proposal routinely deny or delay access to innovative treatments —this includes patients battling cancer and other chronic, complex conditions that need access to new and existing ground-breaking treatments.” National Minority Quality Forum : “The MFN model would encourage a standardization of treatment options, moving away from personalized medicine toward a more limited formulary of options that satisfy price constraints. This is especially concerning for a nation as diverse as the United States , which serves populations with widely varying health needs and often complex, co-occurring conditions” “While making medications more affordable is an admirable goal, applying this price control strategy may unintentionally harm the very patients it aims to help—not just the 77 million Americans on Medicaid, but potentially all Americans if expanded throughout our healthcare system.” Part B Access for Seniors and Physicians (ASP) Coalition : “Linking U.S. health care policy to other countries, that artificially suppress prices through access restrictions and subjective controls, would tie the hands of providers in the United States by narrowing and delaying access to available treatments due to market forces outside of their control. Moving forward with this MFN… would irrevocably change health care in the country by disrupting provider’s ability to deliver patient-centric care  and upending the future development of innovative medicines.” RetireSafe : “By giving other nations the power to effectively control Medicare prices, MFN will decrease access to treatments seniors rely upon. Furthermore, altering the Medicare market could have unintended or unforeseen side effects on senior treatments more broadly, as well as premium costs, and mirroring smaller socialized healthcare markets  would only upend a working program and cause larger cost issues in the long term. ”  Former Congressman Michael Burgess, MD in Dallas News : “Those countries’ socialized health care systems achieve their lower prices, in large part, by negotiating prices which results in routinely delaying or denying access to new therapies. Older adults, people with disabilities, and patients with complex or rare conditions often lack access to lifesaving medicines in those systems. Adopting other countries’ prices would mean far fewer medical advances, and ultimately lead to the same access restrictions that patients face abroad. ” Former Congressman Larry Bucshon, MD in Indy Star : “ If it takes effect, companies will simply stop investing in most new drug research. It's simple economics — kill the potential return, and you kill the risk-taking too.  That'd come at a massive human cost.  New drugs have been responsible for more than a third of the decline in cardiovascular deaths since 1990. They've turned certain cancers from imminent death sentences into manageable, even curable, conditions. Now we're seeing promising treatments for obesity, ALS, and rare genetic disorders. Imagine telling families that future breakthroughs won't be coming — because we chose to import foreign price controls .”

Childhood health lays the foundation for lifelong health, influencing whether adults thrive or struggle with preventable disease. A solid foundation in childhood creates healthier populations, stronger communities, and a more resilient nation while decreasing the burden on the U.S. health care system. Using new research that will be featured in a broader analysis of medical and economic costs associated with chronic disease among adults, the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease created a one-page fact sheet  to capture the current state of health for US children and what lifestyle and treatment improvements could mean. Data shows that the U.S. is projected to spend $1.15 trillion over the next 15 years on chronic diseases occurring during childhood, such as asthma, cancers, and obesity. This burden not only disadvantages children and their families, but adds costs for hospitals, schools, and workplaces alike. Prevention, better management, treatment advances, improved adherence and enhanced coverage all represent opportunities that could cut these costs by more than half while saving lives . Children today face personal health challenges unique from ones their parents faced. For example, technology such as video games and social media provide mental stimulation for children that discourage physical activity. Given the prevalence of screen time, it’s no surprise that less than half of high school students meet activity guidelines. Policies that encourage physical activity are increasingly important in the fight for better health, particularly for children. Social media also heightens risks of mental illness. One in five adolescents has a diagnosed mental or behavioral condition, most often anxiety. Among those needing mental health support, more than half report difficulty accessing essential treatment or counseling services. Research and development to drive improvements in medical technology and other tools to prevent and manage chronic disease in children remain essential. Advances in childhood cancer treatments already show what is possible with the potential to save more than 10,000 additional lives. Innovation in prevention and chronic disease management could avert millions of future cases. Policymakers have the opportunity and the responsibility to act. Prioritizing children’s health through sustained investment in research, development and innovation will save lives, reduce costs, and strengthen America’s future. Childhood health is not merely about today. It’s about every stage that follows.