Comments on: Political Corruption That Could Kill You?

By: Jack Lohman

Jack Lohman — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 05:32:31 +0000

Damn, then I guess we have to believe the video, huh?

That was made by a special interest group that is funded by “physician owned” hospitals. By law all others have physicians running them.

You’d have to be pretty dense (or part of the industry) not to see what that video is up to.

Besides, physicians are terrible managers, and having a financial interest in the hospital makes them worse, not better.

But so be it. You take your family there if you wish. And once again, Bill, I am treated by my doctor, not bureaucrats. If you have an agenda and need to keep saying that, fine. But it is untrue.

By: Bill

Bill — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 05:16:33 +0000

I would tend to side with Doctors over bureaucrats when it comes to “more bang for the buck” in “health care”. Too many bureaucrats = “staff infection”. There are always going to be people wringing their hands over the problems with health care. I don’t want to say IGNORE them but it might not be a bad idea.

By: hoads

hoads — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 01:32:15 +0000

It says in the video, that studies of physician run hospitals show less hospital acquired infections, better outcomes and are less likely to die as compared to “big-box” hospitals.

I don’t know what it is based upon, but, assuming its true, the video explicitly demonstrates how health care decisions decided by politicians are not necessarily in the best interest of patients.

But, if you are basing your defense on “research” from Physicians for a National Health Plan, this is an agenda driven organization whose “research” is conducted by a handful of researchers affiliated with the blue-bloods from Harvard and the Canadian Medical Association. Half of the articles listed in their research are based upon outdated information (honestly–1987??????), several based conclusions on a “meta-analysis” of available data (always suspect) and are using “research” to support an agenda instead of researching to gain clarity and objectivity in understanding the problems with out health care system.

By: Jack Lohman

Jack Lohman — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 00:41:29 +0000

Where in the world does it say that physician-run hospitals have better outcomes? It has been shown that for-profit hospitals and HMOs have worse outcomes than non-profits, and physician-run hospitals turn down the uninsured an unprofitable patients! http://www.pnhp.org

By: hoads

hoads — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:34:21 +0000

All of you overlook the main point of this video—politicians pandering to one interest group over another with the end result being politicians deciding against the evidence presented that physician run hospitals have better patient outcomes in favor of the bigger and louder hospital lobby. You want single-payer government health care–this is how decisions will be made. Politicians will pick and choose who and what they will support in healthcare despite scientific evidence to the contrary. These are people without medical backgrounds who will determine the winners and losers based upon the efforts of lobbyists and special interests. The health care consumer will be the loser.

By: JohnKonop

JohnKonop — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:18:43 +0000

Bill

Great Video!

By: Bill

Bill — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:10:57 +0000

John
That’s a great video. And as a fan of “decentralization” and a supporter of the “free market” and “competition” who’s wary of “corporate consolidation” and “over regulation” I would definitely side with the Doctors and Physician run hospitals. Seems like another case of the “big guys” who can’t compete without a little help from their friends (in Congress)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EmOtWyjs8iU

By: Bill

Bill — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:03:22 +0000

Jack
re: “I would support some form of post review by an independent party. If a doctor is found to be over-ordering, he should be reprimanded.”

I agree but there are plenty of opportunities RIGHT NOW for some “muckraking Journalism” in this area with fraud and abuse by all parties involved.
(hint hint)

By: JohnKonop

JohnKonop — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:17:36 +0000

Jack

I am gald you like it !

By: Jack Lohman

Jack Lohman — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 18:16:02 +0000

I wholeheartedly agree, Doctor K. I think a reasonable fee-for-service arrangement is very workable, and sometimes an overpayment will simply offset things he doesn’t get paid for (like phone calls, discussions with colleagues, etc).

I would support some form of post review by an independent party. If a doctor is found to be over-ordering, he should be reprimanded. If the patient is found to be abusing the system, higher co-pays might resolve the problem. But nobody should step in to pre-approve tests.