Gayle powers Royal Challengers to 5-wicket win



Mohali, Apr 21: West Indies batsman Chris Gayle struck a brilliant 87 as Royal Challengers Bangalore beat Kings XI Punjab by five wickets in the IPL match here last night.

Gayle and AB de Villiers (52) added 131 runs for the fifth wicket partnership as RCB , set a target of 164, made 166 with three balls to spare.

Gayle was adjudged the man-of-the-match for his brilliant 56-ball innings that included eight fours and four sixes.

With their second consecutive win, Royal Challengers Bangalore got their campaign back on track after having suffered three losses on the trot.

RCB move up a place to the seventh spot with six points from six matches while Kings XI slipped a spot to the eighth with four points from six matches.

Asked to bat first, Kings XI Punjab, who were without their captain Adam Gilchrist, again made a poor start.

Hoever, stand-in skipper David Hussey (41) and former Pakistan all-rounder Azhar Mahmood (33 not out) helped them get to a score of 163 for six in 20 overs.

Gilchrist is down with a hamstring injury. Kings XI bowler Parvinder Awana took four wickets for 34 runs.

He took the wickets of opener Mayank Aggarwal (1), Virat Kohli (4) and Saurabh Tiwary (4) to reduce RCB to 25 for three in six overs.

Gayle took his time to settle down before an onslaught. He took 28 balls to score 31 runs but once he took off, there was no stopping him.

The match looked evenly balanced till the 17th over as Royal Challengers needed 24 runs off the last three overs.

But Awana, who was the best bowler for the Kings XI till then, bowled a pathetic 18th over that made things easy for the visitors.

Gayle smashed Awana for 17 runs in the eight-ball over before departing on the fourth ball but by then he had taken Royal Challengers to the threshold of a win.

Hussey took a brilliant catch at extra cover to end Gayle's whirlwind knock.

Mahmood, who registered himself as a British citizen, made a memorable debut in the IPL smashing 33 off 14 balls that helped Kings XI get a competitive total on board. Mahmood's arrival to India was delayed due to visa issues.

The 37-year-old, who has played 21 Tests and 143 ODIs, had surprisingly applied for visa in his Pakistani passport that delayed his arrival.

Clinical KKR Thrash Kings XI By 8 Wickets



Mohali, Apr 18: Kolkata Knight Riders put up a clinical performance to beat Kings XI Punjab comfortably by eight wickets in an Indian Premier League match here today.

Riding on a disciplined bowling and fielding display, KKR first restricted Kings XI to 124 for seven after sent into bowl, and then skipper Gautam Gambhir led from the front with a fine unbeaten half century to overwhelm the target with 21 balls in hand.

Gambhir scored an unbeaten 66 off 44 balls with the help of seven fours and a six to hold the chase together and see his side home.

Gambhir was ably supported by Jacques Kallis, who scored an unbetaen 30 off 23 balls. The duo stitched unconquered 53 runs for the third-wicket as KKR scored 127 for two in 16.3 overs.

Earlier, Kings XI batsmen lost wickets at regular intervals to be restricted to the modest total after opting to bat at the PCA stadium.

Captain Adam Gilchrist, who retired hurt in the sixth over with a right hamstring problem only to return later to drag his side out of trouble, top-scored with an unbeaten 40, while Shaun Marsh made a 30-ball 33 with the help of four boundaries.

Kings XI batsmen struggled from the onset against a determined KKR bowling line up and it could be gauged from the fact that only three of their batters could manage double figures.

Wily West Indian off-spinner Sunil Narine (2/24) and Brett Lee (2/26) starred with the ball for KKR, sharing four wickets between them. Laxmipathy Balaji (1/20) and Rajat Bhatia (1/23) also picked up a wicket each for the visitors.

KKR’s started their run chase on a blistering pace, racing on to their fifty inside the sixth over.

Brendon McCullum (15) was the initial aggressor as he clobbered Praveen Kumar for two boundaries in the first over.

Pietersen Powers Daredevils To Victory



New Delhi, Apr 19: Kevin Pietersen produced a blistering unbeaten 103 to almost single—handedly steer Delhi Daredevils to a five—wicket victory over Deccan Chargers in an Indian Premier league match here today.

The lanky Pietersen unleashed an array of breathtaking shots as he took the responsibility after his team was struggling at 23 for three to overhaul the target of 158 with five balls to spare at the Feroz Shah Kotla here.

During his sustained onslaught that saw him record his first century and highest score in Twenty20 format, Pietersen slammed a staggering nine sixes and six fours in his 64—ball knock.

The star England batsman was, however, dropped thrice and he ensured that Deccan paid the price for their sloppy fielding.

This was the Daredevils’ fourth win from five matches in even as Deccan suffered their fourth defeat on the trot.

Pietersen finished the match in style, smashing Ankit Sharma over his head for six, which also brought up his century, the second of this edition of IPL.

The highlight of Pietersen’s innings was the three successive sixes off Jean—Paul Duminy and the one against leg—spinner Amit Mishra, which was probably the biggest ever at this venue.

Bowling from the Delhi Gate end, Mishra was smashed straight down the ground by Pietersen, with the ball landing on the top tier of the old pavilion. As the ball disappeared, Sehwag, sitting on the dugout with his team—mates, was seen smiling.

Before that, one of the sixes against Duminy went 98 metres. And moments later, Steyn was hit over long—off for a maximum. Pietersen’s onslaught started after Mishra was introduced into the attack, and there was no looking back after that.

In pursuit of 158, Daredevils lost Naman Ojha as the batsman’s poor run of form continued. Skipper Virender Sehwag, after hitting Veer Pratap Singh straight down the wicket for a boundary, was dismissed by Dale Steyn who induced an edge for Dan Christian to take a simple catch at first slip.

Steyn, in fact, could have had one more to his name had Bharat Chipli not dropped Pietersen at mid—wicket. Pietersen was batting on six when he was offered the life.

Duminy then failed to take a difficult caught and bowled chance when Pietersen was on 68. He got one more life towards the end, just before reaching his century.

The Daredevils soon found themselves in a spot of bother at 23 for three in fifth over with the dismissal of normally calm and composed Mahela Jayawardene who, while trying to hit one over the in—field, looped a catch to his Sri Lankan teammate Kumar Sangakkara at wide mid—off, off the bowling of Dan Christian.

More misery was in store for the Daredevils as Ross Taylor, responding to Pietersen’s call for a risky single, was run out by a direct throw from Shikhar Dhawan. At 65 for six in the 10th over, Daredevils needed someone to hold the innings together and they found their man in Pietersen.

The home side needed 87 runs in the last 10 overs, but as long as Pietersen was at the crease, they were very much in with a chance. KP first flicked Steyn for a boundary through mid—wicket. On and off, he hit a few more of those before launching into a brutal assault, which left the Chargers shocked.

Earlier, Parthiv Patel (45) and Dhawan (45) chipped in with useful contributions as the Chargers managed to post a fighting 157 for eight. The two put on 71 runs for the second wicket in little under seven overs to put the Chargers back on track after the early loss of skipper Kumar Sangakkara.

But Shahbaz Nadeem, who triggered a batting collapse against Mumbai in Daredevils’ last match, did a repeat as the Chargers seemed to have lost the plot in the middle overs.

It was thanks to some effective hitting from Bharat Chipli that lifted the Chargers towards the end after Morne Morkel threatened to run through the line—up with two blows.

Chipli hit three fours and a six during his 17—ball 25.

Morkel finished with impressive figures of three for 23 while Nadeem was even better with three for 16 runs.

Opting to bat, the Chargers were dealt an early blow as they lost Sangakkara in the third over off Morne Morkel. But Dhawan and Patel not only steadied the ship, but also maintained a healthy scoring rate, bringing up the team’s 50 in 36 balls.

Both Dhawan and Patel played some effective shots, particularly on the on side —— the two left—handers executed the pull and hook shots quite often and to good effect.

A collapse was, however, waiting to happen, and it was Nadeem once again who triggered it. While the 22—year—old left—arm spinner bowled to a good line and length, he must thank Dhawan for his first wicket.

Living up to his reputation of throwing it all after getting a start, Dhawan went for a needless reverse sweep to be trapped in front of the wicket off Nadeem’s first delivery of the match.

At the other end, Patel was living dangerously as he got three reprieves. Lady luck was on his side, but the pint—sized batsman from Gujarat failed to capitalise.

Nadeem had his second wicket as Patel’s sweep was caught at deep square—leg by Jayawardene. Next to go was Duminy as the South African holed out to the mid—wicket fielder, giving Nadeem his third wicket.

Dan Christian tried to hold the innings together but fell after collecting 19 runs from 21 balls. Morkel then sent back Abhishek Jhunjhunwala and Steyn to make it 134 for seven in the 18th over. In the end, it took a bit of enterprise from Chipli to take the Chargers past 150.

Chennai Kings Beat Pune Warriors By 13 Runs



Chennai, Apr 20: Chennai Super Kings rode on a half century each from Subramaniam Badrinath and Faf du Plessis and a disciplined show from their bowlers as they beat Pune Warriors by 13 runs in their Indian Premier League match here yesterday.

Badrinath (57) and du Plessis (58) shared IPL five’s highest opening stand of 116 runs from 15.3 overs to help Chennai raise 164 for five before they restricted Pune to 151 for seven on a M A Chidambaram Stadium pitch which became more difficult for batting as the match wore on.

Chasing 165 for a win, Pune lost wickets at regular intervals but Steven Smith (23) and Angelo Mathews (27) kept them in the hunt only to lose the plot towards the end.

Pune needed 25 runs from the last two overs with five wickets in hand but once Smith was out in the second ball of the penultimate over bowled by Doug Bollinger, it was all over for the visiting side.

They needed 21 from the final over and Dwayne Bravo clean-bowled Mathews with the first ball to seal the issue for Chennai who took the sweet revenge for their loss against the same opponents in Pune on April 14.

With the win, Chennai jumped to fifth position with six points from six matches. Pune also have six points from six matches and they are at fifth just above Chennai on better net run rate.

For Chennai, Nuwan Kulasekara took two wickets for 10 runs while Dwayne Barvo chipped in with two for 28.

Pune began their run chase promisingly with Robin Uthappa (8) and Jesse Ryder (9) hitting a four each in the opening over bowled by Doug Bollinger.

Uthappa smashed another four in the next over bowled by Nuwan Kulasekara but the bowler had the last laugh as the batsman fell while going for another big hit, only to lob the ball to mid-off for R Ashwin to take a fine catch.

Sexual Problems Overview

Sexual problems are defined as difficulty during any stage of the sexual act (which includes desire, arousal, orgasm, and resolution) that prevents the individual or couple from enjoying sexual activity. Information
Sexual difficulties may begin early in a person's life, or they may develop after an individual has previously experienced enjoyable and satisfying sex. A problem may develop gradually over time, or may occur suddenly as a total or partial inability to participate in one or more stages of the sexual act. The causes of sexual difficulties can be physical, psychological, or both.
Emotional factors affecting sex include both interpersonal problems and psychological problems within the individual. Interpersonal problems include marital or relationship problems, or lack of trust and open communication between partners. Personal psychological problems include depression, sexual fears or guilt, or past sexual trauma.
Physical factors contributing to sexual problems include:
• Drugs, such as alcohol, nicotine, narcotics, stimulants, antihypertensives (medicines that lower blood pressure), antihistamines, and some psychotherapeutic (drugs that treat psychological problems such as depression) drugs
• Injuries to the back
• An enlarged prostate gland
• Problems with blood supply
• Nerve damage (as in spinal cord injuries)
• Disease (diabetic neuropathy, multiple sclerosis, tumors, and, rarely, tertiary syphilis)
• Failure of various organs (such as the heart and lungs)
• Endocrine disorders (thyroid, pituitary, or adrenal gland problems)
• Hormonal deficiencies (low testosterone, estrogen, or androgens)
• Some birth defects
Sexual dysfunction disorders are generally classified into 4 categories: sexual desire disorders, sexual arousal disorders, orgasm disorders, and sexual pain disorders.
Sexual desire disorders (decreased libido) may be caused by a decrease in the normal production of estrogen (in women) or testosterone (in both men and women). Other causes may be aging, fatigue, pregnancy, and medications -- the SSRI anti-depressants which include fluoxetine (Prozac), sertraline (Zoloft), and paroxetine (Paxil) are well known for reducing desire in both men and women. Psychiatric conditions, such as depression and anxiety, can also cause decreased libido.
Sexual arousal disorders were previously known as frigidity in women and impotence in men. These have now been replaced with less judgmental terms. Impotence is now known as erectile dysfunction, and frigidity is now described as any of several specific problems with desire, arousal, or anxiety.
For both men and women, these conditions may appear as an aversion to, and avoidance of, sexual contact with a partner. In men, there may be partial or complete failure to attain or maintain an erection, or a lack of sexual excitement and pleasure in sexual activity.
There may be medical causes for these disorders, such as decreased blood flow or lack of vaginal lubrication. Chronic disease may also contribute to these difficulties, as well as the nature of the relationship between partners. As the success of Viagra attests, many erectile disorders in men may be primarily physical, not psychological conditions.
Orgasm disorders are a persistent delay or absence of orgasm following a normal sexual excitement phase. The disorder occurs in both women and men. Again, the SSRI antidepressants are frequent culprits -- these may delay the achievement of orgasm or eliminate it entirely.
Sexual pain disorders affect women almost exclusively, and are known as dyspareunia (painful intercourse) and vaginismus (an involuntary spasm of the muscles of the vaginal wall, which interferes with intercourse). Dyspareunia may be caused by insufficient lubrication (vaginal dryness) in women.
Poor lubrication may result from insufficient excitement and stimulation, or from hormonal changes caused by menopause, pregnancy, or breast-feeding. Irritation from contraceptive creams and foams may also cause dryness, as can fear and anxiety about sex.
It is unclear exactly what causes vaginismus, but it is thought that past sexual trauma such as rape or abuse may play a role. Another female sexual pain disorder is called vulvodynia or vulvar vestibulitis. In this condition, women experience burning pain during sex which may be related to problems with the skin in the vulvar and vaginal areas. The cause is unknown.
Sexual dysfunctions are more common in the early adult years, with the majority of people seeking care for such conditions during their late 20s through 30s. The incidence increases again in the geriatric population, typically with gradual onset of symptoms that are associated most commonly with medical causes of sexual dysfunction.
Sexual dysfunction is more common in people who abuse alcohol and drugs. It is also more likely in people suffering from diabetes and degenerative neurological disorders. Ongoing psychological problems, difficulty maintaining relationships, or chronic disharmony with the current sexual partner may also interfere with sexual function.


Prevention
Open, informative, and accurate communication regarding sexual issues and body image between parents and their children may prevent children from developing anxiety or guilt about sex, and may help them develop healthy sexual relationships.
Review all medications, both prescription and over-the-counter, for possible side effects that relate to sexual dysfunction. Avoiding drug and alcohol abuse will also help prevent sexual dysfunction.
Couples who are open and honest about their sexual preferences and feelings are more likely to avoid some sexual dysfunction. One partner should, ideally, be able to communicate desires and preferences to the other partner.
People who are victims of sexual trauma, such as sexual abuse or rape at any age, are urged to seek psychiatric advice. Individual counseling with an expert in trauma may prove beneficial in allowing sexual abuse victims to overcome sexual difficulties and enjoy voluntary sexual experiences with a chosen partner.

Symptoms
• Men or women:
o Lack of interest in sex (loss of libido)
o Inability to feel aroused
o Pain with intercourse (much less common in men than women)
• Men :
o Inability to attain an erection
o Inability to maintain an erection adequately for intercourse
o Delay or absence of ejaculation, despite adequate stimulation
o Inability to control timing of ejaculation
• Women:
o Inability to relax vaginal muscles enough to allow intercourse
o Inadequate vaginal lubrication before and during intercourse
o Inability to attain orgasm
o Burning pain on the vulva or in the vagina with contact to those areas

Call Your Health Care Provider if
Call for an appointment with your health care provider if sexual problems persist and are a concern.
Signs and Tests
Specific physical findings and testing procedures depend on the form of sexual dysfunction being investigated. In any case, a complete history and physical examination should be done to:
• Identify predisposing illness or conditions
• Highlight possible fears, anxieties, or guilt specific to sexual behaviors or performance
• Uncover any history of prior sexual trauma
A physical examination of both the partners should include the whole body and not be limited to the reproductive system.

Treatment
Treatment depends on the cause of the sexual dysfunction. Medical causes that are reversible or treatable are usually managed medically or surgically. Physical therapy and mechanical aides may prove helpful for some people experiencing sexual dysfunction due to physical illnesses, conditions, or disabilities.
For men who have difficulty attaining an erection, the medication sildenafil (Viagra), which increases blood flow to the penis, may be very helpful, though it must be taken 1 to 4 hours prior to intercourse.
Men who take nitrates for coronary heart disease should not take sildenafil. Mechanical aids and penile implants are also an option for men who cannot attain an erection and find sildenafil isn't helpful.
Women with vaginal dryness may be helped with lubricating gels, hormone creams, and -- in cases of premenopausal or menopausal women -- with hormone replacement therapy. In some cases, women with androgen deficiency can be helped by taking testosterone.
Vulvodynia can be treated with testosterone cream, with use of biofeedback and with low doses of some antidepressants which also treat nerve pain. Surgery has not been successful.
Behavioral treatments involve many different techniques to treat problems associated with orgasm and sexual arousal disorders. Self-stimulation and the Masters and Johnson treatment strategies are among the many behavioral therapies used.
Simple, open, accurate, and supportive education about sex and sexual behaviors or responses may be all that is required in many cases. Some couples may benefit from joint counseling to address interpersonal issues and communication styles. Psychotherapy may be required to address anxieties, fears, inhibitions, or poor body image.

Prognosis and Outcome
The prognosis (probable outcome) depends on the form of sexual dysfunction. In general, the probable outcome is good for physical dysfunctions resulting from treatable or reversible conditions. It should be noted, however, that many organic causes do not respond to medical or surgical treatments.
In functional sexual problems resulting from either relationship problems or psychological factors, the prognosis may be good for temporary or mild dysfunction associated with temporary stress or lack of accurate information. However, those cases associated with chronically-poor relationships or deep-seated psychiatric problems typically do not have positive outcomes.

Complications
Some forms of sexual dysfunction may cause infertility.
Persistent sexual dysfunction may cause depression in some individuals. The importance of the disorder to the individual (and couple, when applicable) needs to be determined. Sexual dysfunction that is not addressed adequately may lead to conflicts or potential breakups.

Are Women Less Satisfied With Their Care Than Men?

Early on in my residency, a fellow surgeon-in-training revealed that she was switching fields. Her real love was not general surgery, she explained, but urology.

As she recounted the steps leading to her decision to focus on diseases of the urinary tract, I couldn’t help wondering about her future practice. She might see an occasional woman or child; but most of her patients would be men.

I shared these thoughts with her, and she laughed. “Male patients have different expectations than female patients,” she said. “Somehow, I think I’m a better fit as a doctor for men.”

It wasn’t the first time a colleague had made a sweeping generalization about patient care, but what struck me was how boldly she had emphasized differences between men and women. As medical students we were taught to care for all patients equally, and as young practicing doctors, most of us assumed that at least as far as gender was concerned, that meant treating everyone the same.

It turns out that my colleague was onto something.

In a study published this year in the journal Health Services Research, researchers analyzed the results of a survey that asked nearly two million patients how they felt about their hospitalization. Known as the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems, or Hcahps (pronounced “H-caps”), and administered to patients within six weeks of discharge, the survey consists of 27 questions about topics ranging from communication with nurses and doctors and responsiveness of hospital staff to general cleanliness and noise levels. When the researchers divided the questionnaire results by the patients’ sex, they discovered that men tended to be more positive over all about their hospital experiences. Women were less satisfied with staff responsiveness, their discussions with nurses, communication about medications and discharge plans and the general conditions of the hospital. Among men and women who were older or felt sicker, these differences were even more pronounced.

“What patients require when they are ill and feeling vulnerable is not the same,” said Marc N. Elliott, the study’s lead author and a senior statistician at the RAND Corporation in Santa Monica, Calif. “What’s becoming clear is that we are not meeting the needs of female patients.”

In some cases the extent to which male and female patients differed in their satisfaction levels was substantial, surprising even the researchers. “There was a fairly consistent gender gap,” Dr. Elliott said. “But some of the differences were on the same magnitude as what you might see among patients from different ethnic groups or widely disparate socioeconomic backgrounds.”

One of the more marked differences was the amount of information about medications or discharge plans that patients needed to feel sufficiently informed. Women generally wanted more information than they received, while men were satisfied with what they were told. There were also considerable disparities between men and women regarding cleanliness, with women inclined to be less satisfied with the hygiene of hospital surroundings.

The findings from this study underscore how complex addressing quality and patient experience can be. Currently, most health care improvement efforts tend to treat patients as a monolithic group. It’s an oversight that can be attributed, at least in part, to the relative paucity of research and data on the patient experience.

That situation may change, as the Hcahps survey becomes linked to reimbursement and more hospitals begin administering the questionnaire to their patients. While some hospital administrators and clinicians are concerned about this prospect, Dr. Elliott and his colleagues believe their study is an indication of what this survey could help to do. By offering patients an opportunity to express their opinions, Hcahps might uncover issues that have gone unnoticed.

“Patients are hesitant to tell us what they are feeling because they don’t want to be seen as confrontational,” Dr. Elliott said. “To make substantial improvements, we need to get at that information.”

He added: “Real quality improvement is not one-size-fits-all.”

States Seek Curb on Patient Bills for Costly Drugs

Insurance now pays most of the price of the costly drug William Addison, 7, Victoria Kuhn’s son, takes for uncontrollable bleeding.


The hemophilia drug that saves 7-year-old William Addison from uncontrolled bleeding costs $100,000 a year. His family’s insurance pays virtually all of it. But his mother, Victoria Kuhn, says she is terrified that the insurance company may start requiring patients to pay as much as a third of the cost of the drug. “I don’t know where we’d find $30,000,” said Ms. Kuhn, who lives in Falmouth, Me.

Spurred by patients and patient advocates like Ms. Kuhn, lawmakers in at least 20 states, from Maine to Hawaii, have introduced bills that would limit out-of-pocket payments by consumers for expensive drugs used to treat diseases like cancer,rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis and inherited disorders.

Pharmaceutical companies would also benefit from such legislation because high co-payments discourage patients from taking their medicines. The pharmaceutical giant Pfizer has been helping the legislative drive behind the scenes, even drafting some of the bills, according to legislators and patient advocates.

The bills aim to counter efforts by health plans to reduce the amount they pay for expensive medicines by making the patients pay a percentage, typically 20 to 35 percent, of the cost.

While some insurers have said the laws are unnecessary because of the federal health care law, backers say the state bills would supplement the federal law and take effect before 2014, when most of the federal law is to become operative. They say too much uncertainty remains about how the federal law will work and whether it will survive the challenge before the Supreme Court.

New York State passed the first law prohibiting such high patient payments in 2010. Vermont enacted a one-year moratorium that lasts until July 1. Maine’s governor, Paul LePage, signed a bill into law on Monday that would set a yearly cap on patient payments for such expensive drugs. Hearings on similar bills were held last month in Connecticut and Rhode Island. Delaware’s Health Care Commission just finished a study on the matter. And a bill that would cover all states was recently introduced in the House by David McKinley, a West Virginia Republican.

Insurance companies are pushing back, so some bills are dying, as in Washington State, or being watered down, as was the one in Maine. The insurers argue that reducing payments by users of the expensive drugs would raise premiums for everyone else.

“There’s no free dollars in the mix here,” Melvin N. Sorensen, a lobbyist for insurers, said at a hearing in the Washington State Senate in late January.

The controversy centers on so-called specialty drugs, a somewhat imprecise term that generally encompasses products that can cost tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

Such drugs account for only 1 percent of total drug use, but 17 percent of drug spending by private insurers, according to IMS Health.

And costs are soaring as more such drugs come to market and as manufacturers raise prices. In 2010, spending on specialty drugs jumped 17.4 percent, compared with only 1.1 percent for other drugs, according to Medco Health Solutions, a pharmacy benefits manager that merged this month with Express Scripts.

Insurers typically encourage patients to use less expensive drugs by classifying products into tiers with successively higher co-payments, like $10, $30 and $50. Generic drugs are usually in the lowest tier, preferred brand-name drugs in the second tier and other brand-name drugs in the third.

But some insurers are now putting specialty drugs into a fourth tier of their own with extra high co-payments, or even co-insurance, in which the patient pays a percentage of the drug cost.

About 14 percent of workers with insurance are in plans that have four or more tiers, up from 7 percent in 2008, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s 2011 survey of benefits.

Patient advocates say that for some diseases, like multiple sclerosis, none of the drugs are inexpensive, making it impossible to avoid the high out-of-pocket costs unless people stop taking their medicine and endanger their health.

That discriminates against people with certain diseases, they say, and contravenes the whole idea of insurance, which is to help people pay for costly medical problems.

Mark Merritt, president of the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, which represents pharmacy benefit managers, said the real problem was the price of the drugs. The legislation, he said, was an effort by the pharmaceutical industry to “turn a pricing problem into a coverage issue.”

Sharon Treat, executive director of the National Legislative Association on Prescription Drug Prices, an organization of state lawmakers, said that was a drawback of the bills. Insulating patients from the cost of their drugs, she said, “gives the drug companies a free ride to charge as much as they want.”

Still, Ms. Treat, a Democratic legislator in Maine, supported the bill in her state. And patient advocates say that while insurance is regulated, there is little they can do about drug prices.

Drug companies often help patients with their co-payments, but patient advocates say those programs do not solve the entire problem.

The Downside of Cohabiting Before Marriage



AT 32, one of my clients (I’ll call her Jennifer) had a lavish wine-country wedding. By then, Jennifer and her boyfriend had lived together for more than four years. The event was attended by the couple’s friends, families and two dogs. When Jennifer started therapy with me less than a year later, she was looking for a divorce lawyer. “I spent more time planning my wedding than I spent happily married,” she sobbed. Most disheartening to Jennifer was that she’d tried to do everything right. “My parents got married young so, of course, they got divorced. We lived together! How did this happen?”

Cohabitation in the United States has increased by more than 1,500 percent in the past half century. In 1960, about 450,000 unmarried couples lived together. Now the number is more than 7.5 million. The majority of young adults in their 20s will live with a romantic partner at least once, and more than half of all marriages will be preceded by cohabitation. This shift has been attributed to the sexual revolution and the availability of birth control, and in our current economy, sharing the bills makes cohabiting appealing. But when you talk to people in their 20s, you also hear about something else: cohabitation as prophylaxis.

In a nationwide survey conducted in 2001 by the National Marriage Project, then at Rutgers and now at the University of Virginia, nearly half of 20-somethings agreed with the statement, “You would only marry someone if he or she agreed to live together with you first, so that you could find out whether you really get along.” About two-thirds said they believed that moving in together before marriage was a good way to avoid divorce.

But that belief is contradicted by experience. Couples who cohabit before marriage (and especially before an engagement or an otherwise clear commitment) tend to be less satisfied with their marriages — and more likely to divorce — than couples who do not. These negative outcomes are called the cohabitation effect.

Researchers originally attributed the cohabitation effect to selection, or the idea that cohabitors were less conventional about marriage and thus more open to divorce. As cohabitation has become a norm, however, studies have shown that the effect is not entirely explained by individual characteristics like religion, education or politics. Research suggests that at least some of the risks may lie in cohabitation itself.

As Jennifer and I worked to answer her question, “How did this happen?” we talked about how she and her boyfriend went from dating to cohabiting. Her response was consistent with studies reporting that most couples say it “just happened.”

“We were sleeping over at each other’s places all the time,” she said. “We liked to be together, so it was cheaper and more convenient. It was a quick decision but if it didn’t work out there was a quick exit.”

She was talking about what researchers call “sliding, not deciding.” Moving from dating to sleeping over to sleeping over a lot to cohabitation can be a gradual slope, one not marked by rings or ceremonies or sometimes even a conversation. Couples bypass talking about why they want to live together and what it will mean.

WHEN researchers ask cohabitors these questions, partners often have different, unspoken — even unconscious — agendas. Women are more likely to view cohabitation as a step toward marriage, while men are more likely to see it as a way to test a relationship or postpone commitment, and this gender asymmetry is associated with negative interactions and lower levels of commitment even after the relationship progresses to marriage. One thing men and women do agree on, however, is that their standards for a live-in partner are lower than they are for a spouse.

Sliding into cohabitation wouldn’t be a problem if sliding out were as easy. But it isn’t. Too often, young adults enter into what they imagine will be low-cost, low-risk living situations only to find themselves unable to get out months, even years, later. It’s like signing up for a credit card with 0 percent interest. At the end of 12 months when the interest goes up to 23 percent you feel stuck because your balance is too high to pay off. In fact, cohabitation can be exactly like that. In behavioral economics, it’s called consumer lock-in.