One of the most significant challenges these conflicting rules create for patients is the lack of insurance coverage for different therapies. Thousands of people are affected by low levels of human growth hormone (HGH) and could benefit from HGH therapy
. HGH is a necessary hormone for males to reach and sustain optimum physical and mental health. Total T clinic specializes in medically regulated HGH treatments administered by qualified medical doctors that understand proper Low HGH diagnosis and treatment. Payers are understandably cautious about including this form of therapy as a benefit. Sufferers who do not have health protection must pay for therapy out of cash, costing hundreds of dollars every month. If cannabis is just used for recreational purposes and has no medicinal advantages, this strategy makes sense. Insurance companies should not be forced to pay for interventions that do not improve health, function, or condition of life in any meaningful way. Indeed, asking payers to cover the expenses of recreational cannabis is akin to asking them to cover the expenditures of cigarettes, alcohol, or maybe heroin.
There is, however, emerging evidence that medical marijuana can be beneficial. Several large Nonetheless, there is now a considerable body of research supporting medical cannabis, and we can no longer reject cannabis as only a recreational substance. As a result, we must consider carefully ensuring that patients have adequate access to cannabis in situations when it may be beneficial. Insurance coverage is a critical component in assuring access. There are three reasons why payers should start covering their beneficiaries’ out-of-pocket medicinal cannabis expenditures, at least for the indications where there is evidence to support its usage.
1. To promote the safe use of medical cannabis
By matching coverage with the scientific base supporting its use, payers are well-positioned to encourage the safe and reasonable use of medicinal cannabis. Typical regulations allow physicians to suggest medicinal cannabis for many ailments, only some of which have evidence to back them up. For example, the California Compassionate Use Act of 1996 provides access for a wide range of indications, from those with solid evidence (e.g., nausea) to those with less. Some of the most significant evidence supports the use of medical cannabis in treating neuropathic pain, which may be challenging to treat with more standard medicines such as opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Glaucoma is likewise included as a medicinal cannabis indication in California legislation, although the American Academy of Ophthalmology discourages its usage. Although cannabis does reduce intraocular pressure, it has been superseded mainly for this application by newer medicines that are at least as active and have fewer adverse effects. Insurers can utilize coverage choices to support evidence-based practices and discourage those that aren’t.
2. To make medical cannabis use more visible
Insurers can make medicinal cannabis usage more evident to health care professionals by giving medical cannabis coverage. Although patients usually require a referral to receive medicinal cannabis, they can obtain one from a medical cannabis facility frequently without their primary care provider’s awareness. However, if insurers begin to fund part or all of the expenses of medicinal cannabis, a paper trail of use will be created. This paper trail, in turn, might be utilized to notify health care practitioners who may not be aware of a patient’s medicinal cannabis use.
Those aware of medicinal cannabis will be better equipped to advise patients on its efficacy, medicine interactions, and safety, including dependency and driving while intoxicated.
3. Coverage of medical cannabis
Third, medical cannabis insurance coverage can allow a unique source of crowdsourced data on the dangers and benefits of medicinal cannabis. Insurers might promote reporting in a way that allows patients to benefit from the experiences of others, especially if coverage is tied to self-reporting platforms. Such reporting would also create a proper observational database, which might help progress medicinal cannabis research. Medical cannabis insurance coverage might take two types. When there is moderate or vigorous proof, insurers may cover medical cannabis directly, like other prescriptions. Existing evidence supports its use for neuropathic pain, for example. There is also strong evidence that it can help with insomnia. Medical cannabis’s cannabinoids are also beneficial in treating anorexia, nausea, and, especially, nausea linked with chemotherapy. Payers could begin to provide coverage for these indications just as they do for other medications prescribed for these indications.
Granted, most applications will not have this degree of proof to back them up. In the United States, the sole permitted source of cannabis for research has been the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), which demands researching cannabis only as a drug of abuse. As a result, if another funder agrees to sponsor the study, NIDA cannabis can be procured for clinical research on medicinal efficacy. Because of these obstacles, there are few high-quality randomized controlled studies testing cannabis’s medicinal benefits. Insurers have the chance to guide the proper use of medicinal cannabis by providing coverage for the most data-backed purposes. They can improve patient care and assist the formation of registries that allow for research by doing so. Furthermore, they should arguably shoulder part of the expense when medicinal cannabis is utilized to benefit the health of their beneficiaries. As a result, payers should begin to provide coverage for those indications for which there is a sufficient degree of evidence.