Anesthesiologist shortage 12k by 2033

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Medicare is pretty bad for the surgeon fees often too, but the facility fees are nuts.

A family friend recently had an inguinal hernia surgery under Medicare. Anesthesia fee paid was about $200, surgeon fee about $500, facility fee was about $20,000.

I've been saying this over and over on SDN. Who do you think lobbies for this sort of arrangement? Physician fees are always being cut. Facility fees are always going up.

Hospital and insurance companies collude to destroy medical practices. If you are directly employed by a hospital you are working for an entity that wants to see you fail, and that wants to make you dependent on them to survive.

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: 8 users
I've been saying this over and over on SDN. Who do you think lobbies for this sort of arrangement? Physician fees are always being cut. Facility fees are always going up.

Hospital and insurance companies collude to destroy medical practices. If you are directly employed by a hospital you are working for an entity that wants to see you fail, and that wants to make you dependent on them to survive.
There is a reason Obamacare included clauses no more physician owned hospitals.


They claim “stark law” anti kick backs with docs self referral

Yet you can’t help but laugh when hospital own physician practices and kick back referrals to themselves. Just different lipstick on the same referral tactics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
There is a reason Obamacare included clauses no more physician owned hospitals.


They claim “stark law” anti kick backs with docs self referral

Yet you can’t help but laugh when hospital own physician practices and kick back referrals to themselves. Just different lipstick on the same referral tactics.

Physicians refer to themselves? Jail time and millions in fines. Hospitals refer to themselves? Good time and millions in bonuses
 
  • Like
Reactions: 16 users
Members don't see this ad :)
I've been saying this over and over on SDN. Who do you think lobbies for this sort of arrangement? Physician fees are always being cut. Facility fees are always going up.

Hospital and insurance companies collude to destroy medical practices. If you are directly employed by a hospital you are working for an entity that wants to see you fail, and that wants to make you dependent on them to survive.
I did a SIJ neurotomy when I was doing pain
Back in 2016
I was a salaried pain doc

My Medicare patient brought the bill

Facility fee 12k for a 25 minute procedure

The patient tells me doc: I never made than 50k a year in my life

It really broke my heart. He didn’t have to pay that himself but he looked at me in bewilderment
 
  • Sad
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 2 users
The most important part of the hospital gets a 100% subsidy funded by part of the facility fee- administration.
 
100%.
Stipends are essentially for "being available on call" (when no units are produced) and matching market comp for anesthesiologists/CRNAs.
That's it. Its a double edged sword because the higher the stipend, the more vulnerable the PP group becomes. Its one way of hospital slowly getting leverage over anesthesiology groups.
This is why I was surprised when one of the partners from a local group told me, we are really re-evaluating the whole "exclusive contract" deal - because they just don't want that obligation for the money paid to them.
It's not necessarily "slowly getting leverage" but can result in a much more instantaneous response of hospital kicking out the group the moment they ask for a stipend. I know because it happened in another hospital across town. Group asked for a stipend last year to stay competitive with surging market pay rates that were resulting in them not being able to recruit as their billing collections were not enough to offer competitive salaries vs the market. Hospital laughed and said "if we are going to pay you we might as well employ you". They then refused contract renewal with the group and sought to employ their own anesthesiologists. Their jaws about hit the floor when they couldn't recruit a single person either and they scrambled to bring in locums staffing for $400/hr. They ended up bleeding themselves dry paying locums to try and keep the ORs running and to this day are staffing with locums and cannot hire an anesthesiologist to save their life. If they had not been so arrogant and out of touch with the market they could have kept the private group offering superior coverage for far less money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
It's not necessarily "slowly getting leverage" but can result in a much more instantaneous response of hospital kicking out the group the moment they ask for a stipend. I know because it happened in another hospital across town. Group asked for a stipend last year to stay competitive with surging market pay rates that were resulting in them not being able to recruit as their billing collections were not enough to offer competitive salaries vs the market. Hospital laughed and said "if we are going to pay you we might as well employ you". They then refused contract renewal with the group and sought to employ their own anesthesiologists. Their jaws about hit the floor when they couldn't recruit a single person either and they scrambled to bring in locums staffing for $400/hr. They ended up bleeding themselves dry paying locums to try and keep the ORs running and to this day are staffing with locums and cannot hire an anesthesiologist to save their life. If they had not been so arrogant and out of touch with the market they could have kept the private group offering superior coverage for far less money.
It's kind of funny/sad that this has happened so often that I feel like I know this hospital, but it could also be one of many similar situations across the nation. Is this the one with Sound?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
It's kind of funny/sad that this has happened so often that I feel like I know this hospital, but it could also be one of many similar situations across the nation. Is this the one with Sound?

Nah it was a local private group. I'm sure a lot of groups could retell a similar story though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Where did the members of that group go?

The group dissolved (it was a small group and this was the main hospital they were contracted with) and the members scattered to a bunch of other practices in the city. A few stayed on as per diem at the hospital they previously had the contract (though most refused out of principle) and ended up making far more money than if the hospital had just given them the stipend they asked for. Pretty funny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
It's not necessarily "slowly getting leverage" but can result in a much more instantaneous response of hospital kicking out the group the moment they ask for a stipend. I know because it happened in another hospital across town. Group asked for a stipend last year to stay competitive with surging market pay rates that were resulting in them not being able to recruit as their billing collections were not enough to offer competitive salaries vs the market. Hospital laughed and said "if we are going to pay you we might as well employ you". They then refused contract renewal with the group and sought to employ their own anesthesiologists. Their jaws about hit the floor when they couldn't recruit a single person either and they scrambled to bring in locums staffing for $400/hr. They ended up bleeding themselves dry paying locums to try and keep the ORs running and to this day are staffing with locums and cannot hire an anesthesiologist to save their life. If they had not been so arrogant and out of touch with the market they could have kept the private group offering superior coverage for far less money.
Its because the locums pay comes from a different pool.
When hospitals decide whether to engage in long term increased salaries/stipends (salaries for regular nursing staff etc), they will always pick locums or short term staffing because they're not "stuck" with a commitment.
In this case, yes, sure, let them bleed.

I currently know a place where they pay $150K below market comp for their regular full time anesthesiologists, but rather bleed 700k a year in locums that do not do call...

whatever
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It's not necessarily "slowly getting leverage" but can result in a much more instantaneous response of hospital kicking out the group the moment they ask for a stipend. I know because it happened in another hospital across town. Group asked for a stipend last year to stay competitive with surging market pay rates that were resulting in them not being able to recruit as their billing collections were not enough to offer competitive salaries vs the market. Hospital laughed and said "if we are going to pay you we might as well employ you". They then refused contract renewal with the group and sought to employ their own anesthesiologists. Their jaws about hit the floor when they couldn't recruit a single person either and they scrambled to bring in locums staffing for $400/hr. They ended up bleeding themselves dry paying locums to try and keep the ORs running and to this day are staffing with locums and cannot hire an anesthesiologist to save their life. If they had not been so arrogant and out of touch with the market they could have kept the private group offering superior coverage for far less money.

I wonder if we are thinking of the same place. Is this in chicagoland?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks for the article. I was surprised that otherwise well educated reporters had no idea that there's fewer residency spots than eligible physicians. Overall it was sympathetic to physicians which is a refreshing change.
The number of anesthesiology residency slots has doubled in over 20-25 years. It used to be around 1000 slots. Now it’s 2000 slots.

The last lcme usa med schools I think university of south Florida in 1976 and Mercer medical school in 1982.

Than no new lcme med schools for the next 2 decades. So a large gap.

But we have so many new med schools popping up these days. I can’t keep up. With different corporation commercial naming rights which further confuses me. Maybe one day a new med school will be named Red Bull racing visa cash app medical school of the ozarks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 4 users
The number of anesthesiology residency slots has doubled in over 20-25 years. It used to be around 1000 slots. Now it’s 2000 slots.

The last lcme usa med schools I think university of south Florida in 1976 and Mercer medical school in 1982.

Than no new lcme med schools for the next 2 decades. So a large gap.

But we have so many new med schools popping up these days. I can’t keep up. With different corporation commercial naming rights which further confuses me. Maybe one day a new med school will be named Red Bull racing visa cash app medical school of the ozarks.


In California alone there are 4 new LCME schools, Kaiser, CUSM (Prem Reddy), Charles R Drew, and California Northstate. And there are many new osteopathic schools nationwide.


Looks like there are 4 newer schools in Florida too.

Here’s the official list:

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
In California alone there are 4 new LCME schools, Kaiser, CUSM (Prem Reddy), Charles R Drew, and California Northstate. And there are many new osteopathic schools nationwide.


Looks like there are 4 newer schools in Florida too.

Here’s the official list:

Yeah some young lady went to one of those California new med schools who tried to TikTok her way in to plastic surgeon residency and didn’t match. Feel bad for
Her. But sometimes residency programs will take someone from a more established med school over the newer ones.
 
I mean after "They were lucky to be invited to work at your surgery center. "...... I wish this dude to never get staffed ever........ that's the type of attitude they are eating now .....
 
The number of new anesthesia grads has increased by over 90-% last 20 years (from 1000 to 1900)
Isn’t part of the increase just getting back to baseline of the early 90’s of around 1300-1400? The huge fall off the cliff portion of 1996 had a lead up in 1995 and a very slow recovery that took about 6-7 years before getting back to baseline. It was after that when we saw very gradual increases in residency positions accomplished by expansion of existing programs and creation of new programs. So, if the current number is around 1900, it is still an increase but I would say the increase is above the 1300-1400 older early 1990s baseline and not the 1000 baseline you discussed, which was likely still in the long recovery process from when the bottom fell out in 1996. In 1995, the number of US grads that chose anesthesiology in the NRMP dropped to around 600, from almost 1400 the year before. There were 43 US grads matched in anesthesiology through the NRMP in 1996- many spots eventually filled through scramble; the numbers ~doubled for the next three years to ~85 in 1997–> ~160 in 1998 –> ~350 in 1999. I believe it took about 7 years to really recover completely.
I would be interested to hear your thoughts on these numbers that I recall from when it was happening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Isn’t part of the increase just getting back to baseline of the early 90’s of around 1300-1400? The huge fall off the cliff portion of 1996 had a lead up in 1995 and a very slow recovery that took about 6-7 years before getting back to baseline. It was after that when we saw very gradual increases in residency positions accomplished by expansion of existing programs and creation of new programs. So, if the current number is around 1900, it is still an increase but I would say the increase is above the 1300-1400 older early 1990s baseline and not the 1000 baseline you discussed, which was likely still in the long recovery process from when the bottom fell out in 1996. In 1995, the number of US grads that chose anesthesiology in the NRMP dropped to around 600, from almost 1400 the year before. There were 43 US grads matched in anesthesiology through the NRMP in 1996- many spots eventually filled through scramble; the numbers ~doubled for the next three years to ~85 in 1997–> ~160 in 1998 –> ~350 in 1999. I believe it took about 7 years to really recover completely.
I would be interested to hear your thoughts on these numbers that I recall from when it was happening.
I graduated early 90s. The market was **** for new grads starting 93-94. I mean it absolutely hit a wall. Word got back to the med students, so they stopped going into the field. Remember, at this time there were a few thousand more residency slots than US grads. So there were alternatives to anesthesia. Programs that historically matched 30 med students a year had ZERO matches. Those residents did a ton of work. Suddenly, there were ads for 20-30 MDs or CRNAs in the journals for a single academic hospital system. Under employed fresh grads and recent grads took thee jobs for a few years till the excess was burned off circa 2000. Suddenly no excess of bodies and no residents in the pipeline. The early-mid 00s were very good years.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
We have “good” years right now. I wonder if it will get worse in a few years for W2 folks. PE will likely bow out and then we will all be left to deal with hospital systems and their corporate nonsense. I don’t see them keeping salaries high and work hours low if they have complete control.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We have “good” years right now. I wonder if it will get worse in a few years for W2 folks. PE will likely bow out and then we will all be left to deal with hospital systems and their corporate nonsense. I don’t see them keeping salaries high and work hours low if they have complete control.
No one is going to keep salaries high and work hours low out of the goodness of their heart. Both of these things are a constant push/pull based on market dynamics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
No one is going to keep salaries high and work hours low out of the goodness of their heart. Both of these things are a constant push/pull based on market dynamics.
Yes. But will this drive people out of anesthesia residency and we then end up having a shortage of docs working more? I don’t expect salaries to remain high but fear us being worked more and more. Thus I live frugal for years. Can’t get time back. Don’t get how old guys think working 50+ per week is normal. Or worse when they did 60-70
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Yes. But will this drive people out of anesthesia residency and we then end up having a shortage of docs working more? I don’t expect salaries to remain high but fear us being worked more and more. Thus I live frugal for years. Can’t get time back. Don’t get how old guys think working 50+ per week is normal. Or worse when they did 60-70


Easy to say now. Not that long ago, the difference between working 40hrs/week and 50+ hours/week was 350-400k vs 500k+.
 
All of the private practice or former private practice guys I know who worked 50+ hours a week were making $1.2 million or more 10-15 years ago. You can justify those hours when it pays for your Ferrari collection, McMansion, and ski house while still being able to save for retirement. Nowadays the difference in lifestyle between 400k and 500k does not justify killing yourself with nights, weekends, and 50+ hour workweeks.

Despite all the talk about how much locums are getting paid now, it is still a lot less than those private practice guys 10-15 years ago when accounting for inflation and approximate hourly pay of those private practice guys at the peak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 14 users
All of the private practice or former private practice guys I know who worked 50+ hours a week were making $1.2 million or more 10-15 years ago. You can justify those hours when it pays for your Ferrari collection, McMansion, and ski house while still being able to save for retirement. Nowadays the difference in lifestyle between 400k and 500k does not justify killing yourself with nights, weekends, and 50+ hour workweeks.

Despite all the talk about how much locums are getting paid now, it is still a lot less than those private practice guys 10-15 years ago when accounting for inflation and approximate hourly pay of those private practice guys at the peak.
It was not that good. Maybe I didn't get out enough, but, The only people I know who made that type of money were lucky enough to be in an area with an excellent payor mix or were exploiting senior partners or supervised more than four rooms or did pain in their own facility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
It was not that good. Maybe I didn't get out enough, but, The only people I know who made that type of money were lucky enough to be in an area with an excellent payor mix or were exploiting senior partners or supervised more than four rooms or did pain in their own facility.

Not only were they making that kind money, but they also got big paydays when they sold out to the NAPAs and Sheridans at any hint of turmoil ahead. You are right, some of that income was inflated by double billing CRNA cases, higher supervision ratios, and figuring out that they can pay a bunch of junior suckers anesthesiolgists a lot less than they actually billed for. But my point is that even the high locums rates currently still don’t match what private practice anesthesiologists were making at their peak. All these stupid posts about how the “youngins” don’t want to work like the older generations are a little disingenuous and not really telling the full story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Not only were they making that kind money, but they also got big paydays when they sold out to the NAPAs and Sheridans at any hint of turmoil ahead. You are right, some of that income was inflated by double billing CRNA cases, higher supervision ratios, and figuring out that they can pay a bunch of junior suckers anesthesiolgists a lot less than they actually billed for. But my point is that even the high locums rates currently still don’t match what private practice anesthesiologists were making at their peak. All these stupid posts about how the “youngins” don’t want to work like the older generations are a little disingenuous and not really telling the full story.
A lot of private practices lack transparency. It comes down to what am I getting per hour. And for the youngins, it’s about personal time and work doesn’t define them. I just don’t think hospital systems care about the well being in the long run. It’s probably still slightly better than an AMC which is like a devilish senior partner hiding the books.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Yes. But will this drive people out of anesthesia residency and we then end up having a shortage of docs working more? I don’t expect salaries to remain high but fear us being worked more and more. Thus I live frugal for years. Can’t get time back. Don’t get how old guys think working 50+ per week is normal. Or worse when they did 60-70

how can anyone force you to work more. “No” is a complete sentence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
A lot of private practices lack transparency. It comes down to what am I getting per hour. And for the youngins, it’s about personal time and work doesn’t define them. I just don’t think hospital systems care about the well being in the long run. It’s probably still slightly better than an AMC which is like a devilish senior partner hiding the books.

The whole “personal time and work doesn’t define them” is probably partially true, but is still a narrative. The pure fact is that younger anesthesiologists are working more for less money even at current “crazy” locums rates.

I, for one, don’t think locums rates are that crazy. I think salaries were falsely depressed by super partners and private equity shenanigans for so long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 13 users
The whole “personal time and work doesn’t define them” is probably partially true, but is still a narrative. The pure fact is that younger anesthesiologists are working more for less money even at current “crazy” locums rates.

I, for one, don’t think locums rates are that crazy. I think salaries were falsely depressed by super partners and private equity shenanigans for so long.
I tend to agree although 1.2m seems a stretch in a group where everyone was equal. I knew of some groups 2005-2015 making 650ish (not inflation adjusted) working 55ish. Good hospital stipend. Fair groups. Sold out.

That’s 850k or so in today’s dollars. Makes me realize how little I make comparatively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The whole “personal time and work doesn’t define them” is probably partially true, but is still a narrative. The pure fact is that younger anesthesiologists are working more for less money even at current “crazy” locums rates.

I, for one, don’t think locums rates are that crazy. I think salaries were falsely depressed by super partners and private equity shenanigans for so long.
Agree it’s partially true. They will work if the rate is worth it for 50-60h weekly. Others want to work with flexibility. Either way, the sacrifice has to be worth it beyond just being a doctor.
 
The whole “personal time and work doesn’t define them” is probably partially true, but is still a narrative. The pure fact is that younger anesthesiologists are working more for less money even at current “crazy” locums rates.

I, for one, don’t think locums rates are that crazy. I think salaries were falsely depressed by super partners and private equity shenanigans for so long.

What the “right” level of our salary is depends greatly on where you sit.
 
The whole “personal time and work doesn’t define them” is probably partially true, but is still a narrative. The pure fact is that younger anesthesiologists are working more for less money even at current “crazy” locums rates.

I, for one, don’t think locums rates are that crazy. I think salaries were falsely depressed by super partners and private equity shenanigans for so long.
5-10 years ago CRNAs were blamed for wages not raising as quickly as other MDs. I guess the last 5 years their rising wages have also helped raise ours.

Superpartners were definitely a problem too though - from 2015-2019 I think I collected about 100-200k more than I was paid each year, and received none of the group’s subsidies. Timing has never been my strong suit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
All depends on how your call is. There are plenty of community hospitals out there where call is chill and you get a decent amount of sleep and get post call day off. 50-55 hour work weeks with 16-24 hours being a chill call shift can actually be a much easier week than a 40-45 hour no call week. And you get paid more. A lot of those call hours you aren’t actually working. Reading, watching TV, etc.

I’d take 50-55 hour weeks with easy calls and more pay any day over 5 day work week no call with day time work slammed. Particularly if it’s a come in at 4pm type call and not a 24 hour call.

The irony is many of these community hospitals are in suburbs with higher payer mixes than your busier larger hospitals. If you were a private group with a few of these type facilities it was great. Yeah 50/55 hour weeks but lots of days off because of post call and high pay.

CRNAs salaries were 50% less. Plenty of these places used to get close to or hit 7 figures without super partner structures
 
A few years ago I remember reading median work hours for anesthesiologists were about 58-59 hours. Nowadays similar surveys report 50-51 hours. That definitely contributes to the shortage.
We are younger and we aren't all about $$$$.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Very few gen surgeons make over 1 million. Most make 400-550k range.

A few of my friends are general surgeons. They struggle with office overheads. And finally cave in and work for the hospital

Most of the profitable general surgeons do bariatric surgery.
One will always be in demand with Bariatric Surgery in this country.
 
I did a SIJ neurotomy when I was doing pain
Back in 2016
I was a salaried pain doc

My Medicare patient brought the bill

Facility fee 12k for a 25 minute procedure

The patient tells me doc: I never made than 50k a year in my life

It really broke my heart. He didn’t have to pay that himself but he looked at me in bewilderment
What did the insurance pay? This country's healthcare needs an overhaul.
 
One will always be in demand with Bariatric Surgery in this country.

One will always be in demand with Bariatric Surgery in this country.
Bariatric surgery only boomed when it got approved by Medicare that was. In mid 2000s.

Than private insurers started approved more. And obviously advances in surgery especially with gastric sleeve becoming more and more popular where it dominant type of weight loss surgery over the original gastric bypass.

I would never use the word “always” though

like open heart and valve surgeries were booming up to the early 2000s. Than it went down even with patient population grew. Because cardiologist started doing more invasive procedures that drove down many open heart procedures. Now most cv surgeons are hospital employed because revenue stream is so uneven. Before most were private.

With fda just now approving weight loss wegovy for cholesterol control this week. This likely will blow up the door to force private insurers to cover those drugs. Those drugs will likely become the standard weight loss vs invasive surgeries. There are non fda. Approved GI procedures that my friend had in Mexico.


It’s very effective. She lost 50 pounds in 9 months. Flew back to get it removed. On ozempic and lost another 40 pounds. So she went from 215 down to 125 without invasive gastric sleeve which most have been doing
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Bariatric surgery only boomed when it got approved by Medicare that was. In mid 2000s.

Than private insurers started approved more. And obviously advances in surgery especially with gastric sleeve becoming more and more popular where it dominant type of weight loss surgery over the original gastric bypass.

I would never use the word “always” though

like open heart and valve surgeries were booming up to the early 2000s. Than it went down even with patient population grew. Because cardiologist started doing more invasive procedures that drove down many open heart procedures. Now most cv surgeons are hospital employed because revenue stream is so uneven. Before most were private.

With fda just now approving weight loss wegovy for cholesterol control this week. This likely will blow up the door to force private insurers to cover those drugs. Those drugs will likely become the standard weight loss vs invasive surgeries. There are non fda. Approved GI procedures that my friend had in Mexico.


It’s very effective. She lost 50 pounds in 9 months. Flew back to get it removed. On ozempic and lost another 40 pounds. So she went from 215 down to 125 without invasive gastric sleeve which most have been doing


Allurion’s gastric balloon looks interesting as well, as it deflates over time without need for removal or anesthesia at placement. I believe it’s in phase 3 studies now but not sure

Only mention because a patient last week had one in place , after side effects and terrible nausea from his GLP med last year.
 
Allurion’s gastric balloon looks interesting as well, as it deflates over time without need for removal or anesthesia at placement. I believe it’s in phase 3 studies now but not sure

Only mention because a patient last week had one in place , after side effects and terrible nausea from his GLP med last year.
Ballon from
Mexico can cause severe nausea. My friend had it and couldn’t eat anything for 10
Days. Felt horrible.

No crnas down in Mexico. Just MD. Across
From the border down in California. Very safe.

But people should just wait for USA medicine in case of complications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
“Right now, Medicaid spends a relatively modest amount — roughly $3 billion — on these treatments because federal government health insurance plans generally cover them only for those with Type 2 diabetes. But the government may have a hard time limiting access, given how beneficial they may be for a broader set of people. The savings generated from treating obesity sooner generate a host of health benefits, including reducing the likelihood of someone suffering deadly conditions like heart failure, coronary artery disease and stroke. Restricting the usage of GLP-1s will become extremely difficult to defend because that is not in the public interest.

We have estimated the costs and savings for state public insurance programs, health insurance exchange subsidies and U.S. taxpayers from making this class of drugs more broadly available. Under reasonable assumptions and at current prices, making this class of drugs available to all obese Americans could eventually cost over $1 trillion per year. That exceeds the savings to the government from reduced diabetes incidence and other health care costs from excess weight by $800 billion annually.

This is a staggering sum. It is almost as much as the government spends on the entireMedicare program and almost one-fifth of the entire amount America spends on health care.“

 
“Right now, Medicaid spends a relatively modest amount — roughly $3 billion — on these treatments because federal government health insurance plans generally cover them only for those with Type 2 diabetes. But the government may have a hard time limiting access, given how beneficial they may be for a broader set of people. The savings generated from treating obesity sooner generate a host of health benefits, including reducing the likelihood of someone suffering deadly conditions like heart failure, coronary artery disease and stroke. Restricting the usage of GLP-1s will become extremely difficult to defend because that is not in the public interest.

We have estimated the costs and savings for state public insurance programs, health insurance exchange subsidies and U.S. taxpayers from making this class of drugs more broadly available. Under reasonable assumptions and at current prices, making this class of drugs available to all obese Americans could eventually cost over $1 trillion per year. That exceeds the savings to the government from reduced diabetes incidence and other health care costs from excess weight by $800 billion annually.

This is a staggering sum. It is almost as much as the government spends on the entireMedicare program and almost one-fifth of the entire amount America spends on health care.“

Why don't we just give Lily and Novo Nordisk one of these:
Unknown-1.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Seems to me that continuing "current prices" is not a "reasonable assumption".
Indeed. We use a compounding pharmacy to get a 3 month supply at full strength semaglutide for $250 for patients right now. Even those that have insurance coverage can't get it because the starter doses aren't being made because of their inability to keep up with supply yet they go after the compounding pharmacies to choke that supply as well. Totally ridiculous situation --cms should negotiate a reasonable price ( eg 300/month) and be done with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Indeed. We use a compounding pharmacy to get a 3 month supply at full strength semaglutide for $250 for patients right now. Even those that have insurance coverage can't get it because the starter doses aren't being made because of their inability to keep up with supply yet they go after the compounding pharmacies to choke that supply as well. Totally ridiculous situation --cms should negotiate a reasonable price ( eg 300/month) and be done with it.
Just split the 4mg ozempic pen dose into 8 weeks.
18 clicks is 0.25mg
36 clicks 0.5mg
54 clicks .75 mg
72 clicks 1mg

Most people trying to lose weight don’t need to go above 0.5mg

Use a coupon to get it around $500. That’s 2 month supply. With one ozempic 4mg pen

Or buy online pharmacy

U can buy the insulin /ozempic pen needles for $8 for 100 needles on Amazon.

No need for these compounding pharmacy clinics. Then prey on dumb public and take the cash. Can’t blame them. But the Public can get the real drug for the same price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Just split the 4mg ozempic pen dose into 8 weeks.
18 clicks is 0.25mg
36 clicks 0.5mg
54 clicks .75 mg
72 clicks 1mg

Most people trying to lose weight don’t need to go above 0.5mg

Use a coupon to get it around $500. That’s 2 month supply. With one ozempic 4mg pen

Or buy online pharmacy

U can buy the insulin /ozempic pen needles for $8 for 100 needles on Amazon.

No need for these compounding pharmacy clinics. Then prey on dumb public and take the cash. Can’t blame them. But the Public can get the real drug for the same price.
250/3 months is 85/month via a compounding pharmacy, that's really damn cheap at a full 2.4 mg dose weekly.

Also using off label full dose pens gets rejected by insurance on new starts and runs the risk of being mis dosed because it isnt labeled for that use and they can miscount.

Finally medicare patients arent legally allowed to use coupons and the coupons only work if the insurance kicks in something so it actually has to be approved.
 
Last edited:
Top