Words of Wellness

by Dr. Stacey Raya

The spine is typically curved to reduce shock and distribute weight evenly along the length of the back. However, in some people, the natural curves in the spine are overly pronounced. This can cause pain and spasms in the lower back muscles, leading to a lower quality of life. Called lordosis, or sway back, the condition most often occurs in the back’s lumbar region, but it can also appear in the cervical spine. While it’s often congenital, obesity, pregnancy, poor posture, and osteoporosis can also contribute. Seeing a skilled chiropractor is a good idea. Chiropractic care can help reduce or eliminate lower back pain caused by lordosis through chiropractic adjustments, or spinal manipulation may be utilized to restore normal functioning.

Maintaining proper body alignment, from head to toe, is important to overall health. For optimal musculoskeletal health, chiropractors help align not only the spine but the extremities as well. Many people visit a chiropractor because they are in pain, have poor posture, or are looking for injury prevention or pain relief. Our goal is to educate you on the benefits of the chiropractic adjustment, so you in turn can educate others.

To schedule an appointment, please call 860-621-2225 or visit us at 200 Queen St., Southington.

P.S. Lordosis can be common in children.

The answers you need. The Care you Deserve. Visit our website: RayaClinic.com

At the start of the meeting Tuesday, Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, the House co-chair, raised expectations for what negotiations will produce.

“I just want to comment for a moment, to impress upon all the committee members, just how consequential this bill is,” Steinberg said. “If you’re gonna go back to your constituents and say what did we accomplish the session, we have fulfilled, or we’re in the process of fulfilling, our obligation to hold the utilities accountable.”

Rep. Bill Buckbee, R-New Milford, the ranking House Republican, said legislators are driven by consumer frustration over electric costs, which are the highest in the continental U.S. “I think that the people of the state have come to us and said, ‘Enough is enough,’” he said.

Legislators passed the “Take Back Our Grid Act” in a special session after Tropical Storm Isaias in 2020. Among other things, it directed PURA to establish performance-based regulation that is tied to specific goals and metrics, not simply the cost of providing service.

Senate Bill 7 is a recognition that the 2020 bill has not been as transformative as lawmakers hoped.

“What it is is a very significant regulatory enhancement bill. It is Take Back Our Grid, Part Two,” Needleman said. “We are hoping that at the end of this we add some tools in the toolbox for our regulatory authority.”

The compromise bill offers a nod to Marissa P. Gillett, the PURA chair who dissented in the authority’s 21 vote to accept a $103 million settlement that Eversource negotiated with the Lamont administration in 2021 over its bungled response to Isaias.

She told lawmakers this year the settlement evinced a bad habit of relying on negotiated settlements rather than formal rate proceedings that would allow regulators a deeper dive into the utility’s inner workings and finances.

Needleman said the final version of the bill will set parameters for the use of settlements, but he offered little insight as to how.

“And that’s an ongoing conversation,” Needleman said. “I spoke to the attorney general, who’s speaking to his staff. I have not heard from the governor.”

Senate Bill 7 has elements of the Democrats’ Senate Bill 966 and the Republicans ’ Senate Bill 123.

Katie Dykes typically speaks for the Lamont administration on energy issues as the commissioner

“Connecticut consumers ultimately pay the price for anticompetitive actions by health care conglomerates, and the General Assembly gave those consumers access to the Connecticut court system,” stated Jamie Crooks, partner at Fairmark Partners LLP, one of the law firms representing the plaintiffs.

Hospitals in the hot seat

The move by the attorney general’s office comes in the midst of a legislative session where Gov. Ned Lamont has made hospital costs and competition a priority.

A pair of cost containment bills proposed by the governor include a proposed ban on what health care advocates call anticompetitive contract language in negotiating with insurance agencies, including “all-or-nothing contracts,” “anti-steering and anti-tiering” and gag clauses. Lawmakers considered a similar proposal last year.

The antitrust suit against Hartford HealthCare alleges that the company employed these tactics to stifle competition, which in turn drove up prices for patients.

In submitted written testimony, the Connecticut Hospital Association said that banning all-or-nothing contracts and anti-steering clauses could impact patient access and continuity of care.

“Hospitals and health systems are still facing the extreme aftershocks of a staggering once-in-a-century public health crisis, and this is not the time to consider the significant changes to the health care delivery system that are proposed in SB

983,” stated the testimony. Other measures proposed by the governor include a ban on outpatient facility fees that cost Connecticut consumers $400 million annually, a cap on out-of-network patient costs and a commitment to join a multi-state program that offers lower prices through the bulk purchase of generic drugs.

“The system is broken,” said Lamont at a press conference last month.

This story originally appeared on the website of The Connecticut Mirror, www.ctmirror.org.