Spokane7
52°Quick links: 2012 graduating seniors • Summer camp guide • Jobs: The Road Ahead • Prep sports • News quiz
Good afternoon, Netizens…
David Horsey’s cartoon of this morning directly addresses the rising issue of socialized health care in this country, and originally I was going to try to speak to the pros and cons of socialized medicine. The deeper I looked into it, the worse the vision got. We in the United States are purportedly one of the most wealthy countries in the entire world, and yet we fall consistently behind when it comes to delivering affordable health care to middle and lower-income families. There are lots of reasons this is true, but perhaps the biggest of them all are lobbyists who have the powerful persuasion to steer our elected congressional members the direction they want them to go.
The single objection I envision when comparing the United States health care system to Germany, let’s say, is that most new breaking-edge medications, treatments and disciplines originate here in the United States, and nowhere else. We are the pill-packing, machine making autocratic physician to the world. Otherwise, why do the foreign countries of the world continue sending their children to the hospitals and specialists in the United States? That’s because they lack most of the innovation that we traditionally have had here in this country.
On the other hand, there are too many tales, including a few right here in Spokane, where indigent health care patients have lost their homes to the massive collection agencies that lurk behind the scenes at our hospitals and clinics. You don’t have any money and you are dying? Sure, come right on in and we’ll fix you right up. If you’ve got any assets that our people can find, we’ll make them our assets in exchange for treating you. That’s the way the system, at present, works, and it is wrong.
Besides, who are the pinhead administrators who organize and legitimize million dollar advertising campaigns for hospitals? Take the money the administrators would save and invest it in free/low-cost clinics for the indigent and low-income families.
I cannot help but wonder. Would socialized health care guarantee everyone, regardless of their income, quality medical care? If so, I’m for it. I’m a statistic: too sick for low-cost insurance and too broke to buy it.
Dave
999 W. Riverside, Spokane, WA 99201
P.O. Box 2160, Spokane, WA 99210
Main switchboard: (509) 459-5000 • (800) 338-8801
Newsroom: (509) 459-5400 • (800) 789-0029
Customer service: (800) 338-8801
© Copyright 2012, The Spokesman-Review
Terms of use • Privacy policy • Copyright policy
George_Sands on May 12 at 3:27 a.m.
If socialized health care is anything like the VA in Spokane, it would appear to be a death penalty rather than a cure to our ails.
I was on a mock jury whereas the admitting nurse/Dr. failed to check that the vein in a dislocated leg was not pinched when the leg was relocated. This of course was ok since the hospital doesnt have any SOP’s in violation of what is taught in our Nursing Schools. Everyone from the EMT to the on Duty Dr. failed and the leg had to be amputated since it had died from lack of blood after 15 hours.
Just recently Hospital Operating rooms have used checklists to insure that the proper operation is being performed on the proper patient. Only 50 years behind the time. Too much of the voodoo medicine being practiced in our hospitals are being hidden behind HIPPA. The Black Hole of Malpractice protection
spokelooneh on May 12 at 8:19 a.m.
While the VA system is much improved from days gone by, it still needs major work.
Overall, our current system is badly broken, enormously expensive, while failing to deliver the good outcomes that every other western democracy, and more than a few developing world countries have.
I don’t support a model where the government OWNS and operates the health care system and facilities. I support a universal single payer system where the government is the payer, instead of private insurance companies. Everybody in, nobody out. Doctors, clinics, hospital are still privately owned and operated as they are today. A majority of the population supports this. The transition will be difficult.
American companies cannot be competitive in the global economy with the huge burden of providing health care that they have now.
lewis8457 on May 12 at 10:34 a.m.
Many of us on basic health have insurance but it is not of the quality other insurance is, I mean I can go to a doctor for listed illnesses but if I need a specialist the insurance does not cover it. If I make a doctor appointment I will wait between 2 and 4 weeks for an appointment. I think this is like a socialized medicine.
America has the best health care in the world if you can afford it, and if not the health care available to the poor or unprivileged is limited at best.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on May 12 at 11:32 a.m.
if it is not available to all then it is NOT the best health care in the world.. right now the administrators with very very high “wall street” salaries siphon of 15-17 percent of the money that would otherwise go for actual care.
Medicare IS nationalized health care and it works just fine for most folks… and could easily be a model for payment that affords choice to the patients.
Evidence based medicine is not used in most settings.. and the baby boomers demand and get what they demand in the way of health care.. and are generally over treated and pampered by the system that is fee for service and happy to run any tests uneducated boomers think they need because of the internet..
If you take your “Basic Health” care from Group Health CoOp you will find a startlingly better way of getting your care that you really need… 97 percent of physician offices in the U.S. do not have computerized medical records.. we have had them at group health for 10 years.. and have done evidence based medicine as a matter of saving money to keep the costs down and the quality of care much higher than in the fee for service community. dr john
spokelooneh on May 12 at 11:38 a.m.
Why is it that “socialized medicine” is an evil communist plot right up until the day you turn 65 or 62, and then it’s just a fine a dandy thing for our senior citizens?
nslopeofw on May 14 at 10:48 p.m.
My only concern with nationalized health care is the hundreds of thousands of jobs that would be lost if insurance companies were no longer there.
Other than that, it would be great. Of course, with the demand of top quality care for the super rich, I suspect the best doctors would relocate to a place where they could charge outlandish fee’s to the Paris Hilton’s of the US.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on May 15 at 7:02 a.m.
They could relocate to the Cayman Islands where the corporate offices are…. gus
ChefGus/ John Olsen on May 15 at 7:08 a.m.
Oh…. the “nationalized medicine” we already have… Medicare…. does allow for a fair cash flow… Ophthalmologists are/were allowed to bill for 85 dollars a lash when removing trichiatic (turned in) eye lashes from the elderly…. that is per lash… do the math …. at Group Health medicare was billed 35 dollars for an office visit with me as an optometrist and I’d remove as many lashes as needed to be done…. many a multi million dollar practice is funded by medicare excess.. but it still is more efficient/cost effective than the fee for service medicine for baby boomers..
If fee for service ( payment for each visit for an ongoing chronic problem “check back” appts….) were eliminated cash flows would drop in a remarkable way… A friend here in town just had hundreds of dollars of “lab tests” for the Swine Flu without any real sign of any real/scary illness… five days for results that would be too late if you really had the disease.. good grief.. dr gus
spokelooneh on May 15 at 8:08 a.m.
There are numerous problems with US medicine. Health care is already rationed, mostly by for-profit insurance companies, whose first priority is the bottom line.
Gus points out a problem that exists under both Medicare and insurance plans, doctors unscrupulously ordering unneeded tests or procedures just to make more money. Sometimes its not unscrupulous however, as doctors are just doing CYA in order to prevent a malpractice lawsuit.
So the primary question becomes for this part of the system, is how authorization for treatment (and thus payment) is properly managed to control costs and stop the scammers. I don’t know the answer to this, but it’s being done in many other countries, with far better health care outcomes and patient satisfaction, and of course, far lower cost.
Worker productivity is hampered when people are inexorably tied to their jobs which provides their health care coverage. It also stifles entrepreneurship, as more people won’t branch out on their own, because it means they lose health care coverage.
ChefGus/ John Olsen on May 15 at 10:02 a.m.
great comments above… thanks.. the only piggy back here is the facts of the attorney’s that are law suit oriented do indeed drive up the cost of medical care horribly… Group Health “Self Insures” and often settles a suit that some form of malpractice has occurred… negotiation and not a lot of trials… Our malpractice rate is also lower because we have done “Evidence Based Medicine” for years and years… and so less “mistakes” are made in overlooking otherwise difficult diagnosis when winging it in a private practice… shared practices are common, very common and other providers also seeing your patients within a closed system with a computerized medical record and fully automated/computerized pharmacy for 25 years avoids those mistakes of over prescribing … over use of antibiotics, over use of pain meds, an interactions between combination of drugs with adverse reactions…. there IS a better way to practice medicine… paid medical staff with no benefit for “extra tests” but full freedom to order evidence based work ups… gus
Oh… off to the lake for the weekend.. have a fine time all of you g