Dismiss Notice

Interview Feedback: Visit Interview Feedback to view and submit interview information.

Interviewing Masterclass: Free masterclass on interviewing from SDN and Medical College of Georgia

Dismiss Notice
Hey Texans—join us for a DFW meetup! Click here to learn more.

Socialized VS. Non-Socialized Medicine

Discussion in 'Pre-Medical - MD' started by DMO, Apr 10, 2004.

  1. DMO

    DMO Diving Medical Officer
    10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    135
    Likes Received:
    0
    As many of you know, interviewers may ask you questions on ethics, scenarios, and current controversy. Here's one (just look at thread title).

    So, what are your views regarding this subject. Would you work for a socialized system in which the government takes care of most to all of the medical needs like New Zealand and Canada? Do you see socialized medicine as a next step for America? What's wrong with socialized medicine?

    MTFBWY - "May The Force Be With You"
     
  2. Note: SDN Members do not see this ad.

  3. Athomeonarock

    Athomeonarock Senior Member
    5+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    Personally, if socialized medicine would work it would be great. Honestly, if i ever do become a doctor i wouldent mind a significant decrease in salary. BUT,I do not think it is right to lower the average standard of care in the process. We need to do some serius fat trimming before we go socialized. I would like to see the end of for profit medicine( HMO's, Incorperated hospitals ect). but a shift to a socialized system may not yet be pratical. (there are a lot of problems in Canada and Sweden ect, just do a search of google, youll hear some horor stories)

    {god my spelling sucks}
     
  4. Mr. Rosewater

    Mr. Rosewater Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    i think anyone who wouldn't mind a drastic cut in salary is being pretty naive and or being disingenuous. earning a comfortable living is one of many motivating factors leading pple to enter into an arduous journey to a career which is extremely challenging itself. rather, eliminate frivolous lawsuits, and limit awards, thus bringing down the cost of healthcare drastically.
     
  5. TRUE

    TRUE slacker extraordinaire
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    776
    Likes Received:
    2
    Unfortunately, socialized healthcare doesn't work so the argument is somewhat moot. Canada's healthcare system, though well publicized for its cheap prescription drugs, falls well short on appointments, services, procedures, etc...

    I tend to agree with Mr. Rosewater, but I think that it's going to be a very difficult journey to get all that stuff done. You can't eliminate frivioulous lawsuits, for instance. What you can do is try to cap the % a lawyer can get from any one case. Also, probably more importantly, arbitration boards are sprouting up around the country and in reality, this may be the only solution to frivilous lawsuits. Who should decide if a baby's birth defect is genetic or cause by malpractice: 12 men and women who know ZERO about medicine or 3 board certified physicians?

    If I were the doctor in that case, my choice would be obvious.

    Anyway, I still think that the US has a very very good healthcare system with some major flaws such as the uninsured and high cost of drugs, but there is no perfect system in the world. I think we are the best, but by no means perfect.
     
  6. Alexander99

    Alexander99 Ghetto Fabulous
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm with you on that one. Getting an MD/DO is a huge investment of money and energy. I think it's only fair that we get paid well in the end. Is money my main motivation for entering medicine. No. If so, I would have entered a different career. Is it a factor. Yes, it is.

    I think anyone that can afford to get $100-200k in debt while spending years in school when they can't make money and says they wouldn't mind if they got paid moderately (less than $100k) must be excessively wealthy. I guess for those people, that's good for them cause they'll have a comfortable lifestyle no matter what. For average people like me, money is an issue.
     
  7. Mr. Rosewater

    Mr. Rosewater Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0

    you're right, and there's even more to it. when you consider the 4 years of med school and the up to 7 years of barely subsisting as a resident, the need for high compensation becomes clear. all of our other friends will be earning, and more importantly INVESTING in IRA's and 401k's during that time. since we're young, that $ may compound for up to 40 YEARS for those people. truly, it's a SEVEN FIGURE investment to become a doc, so i really don't wanna hear about how 100K/year is some astronomical number.
     
  8. JohnHolmes

    JohnHolmes Large Member
    10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2003
    Messages:
    3,207
    Likes Received:
    3
    I would mind......
     
  9. bruciebaby45

    bruciebaby45 Junior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    I, as well as numerous studies, disagree with the statement that the US has the worlds best healthcare system. While no system is perfect I believe the flaws of socialized healthcare, mainly inefficiency, are far the lesser of the two evils when compared to non-socialized healthcare. In which no insurance means no healthcare for a large chunk of the population. I am not trying to get into a debate about the US versus the rest of the world, and I do realize the US does have some of the best hospitals and doctors in the world, I just wonder if it is worth the cost. As those without insurance not only do not have access to these top-notch hospitals and doctors, they do not have access to healthcare at all. While it may be a biased one, being from Canada, that is my opinion.
    Bruciebaby
     
  10. Tokey

    Tokey Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2004
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    Status:
    Optometrist
    I'm just curious...what do you guys think that physicians are paid in Canada? From the sounds of it, you don't seem to think they make too much... Are the salary differences that great between Canada and US? Perhaps I'm the one being naive now.... :confused:
     
  11. JohnHolmes

    JohnHolmes Large Member
    10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2003
    Messages:
    3,207
    Likes Received:
    3
    I don't know for sure, but my guess is physicians make half in Canada of what they COULD make in the US with comparable training, specialization,etc. Even if they did make good money, the monetary tax blackhole that is the Canadian government would siphon 90% of it off as "transfer payments." Canada is a cool place to visit, but taxes there are steep comparatively.

    JH
     
  12. Tas

    Tas Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    1
    This isn't exactly correct, coming from an ambulance service in which we often get 911 calls for things such as toe pain and ear aches (yes, we go get them... They call us because they can't pay for a taxi)

    They actually do have access to healthcare, at least at our hospital no one can be turned away from ER. Also, as I've posted in other areas, we have a health clinic that accepts payments based on earnings.. (ie. if you don't earn, you don't pay) that is completely supported by volunteer doctors, nurses, techs and the community.

    What they do lack is a regular PCP and proactive medical care.
     
  13. indo

    indo Feed me a stray cat
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2002
    Messages:
    7,270
    Likes Received:
    12
    Status:
    Resident [Any Field]
    Another problem with socialized medicine is that people from neighboring countries will come in and use our medical resources then return home to pay their taxes. This is a huge factor in places in Europe because there are so many countries crammed into a tiny area.
     
  14. jedirampage

    jedirampage Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2003
    Messages:
    167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, a socialized program of sorts is what started us down this road to begin with: Medicaid. Before the insitution of this program almost all physicians donated a day or so per week to work in charity hospitals (which were run by religious organizations). No one was turned away from these hospitals, although some of the more complicated procedures may not have been available. However, once doctors were forced to accept whatever the government set as a pay rate for Medicaid during the other six days per week, they had no incentive to volunteer their time at the charity hospitals.
     
  15. jlee9531

    jlee9531 J,A,S
    10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,470
    Likes Received:
    8
    Status:
    Attending Physician
    eh...i dont think people who would accept a lower paycheck are considered naive or come from a wealthy background.

    i would prolly take a paycut if it meant that everyone who wasnt able to get access to healthcare now had access. for me at least, since ive never been around too many people that make that much money...100K is a lot.

    no im not naive. and no im not from wealth. supporting 3 people while on an income near the poverty line isnt really living it up.

    money is a factor for all of us, and i understand the huge monetary investment it is for people who go through the medical pathway...and i'm sure i will be complaining about it when the time comes...but when it comes to the bigger picture of why i am entering the field...money isnt one of the highest factors on my priority list.
     
  16. Athomeonarock

    Athomeonarock Senior Member
    5+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    naive... Maybe. Im not nessesarly for socialized medicine, but if it could work it would be great. The fear is that services will be sacrificed to make up those for those who cant pay, and we would all suffer

    As for the money, first of all in those commie countries it costs a lot less to go to medical school, and residents get paid a lot more. But your right the max pay range would be around 90-100.

    IF that is not enough(socialism aside) why are you applying to med school. You could have a much better portfolio if you worked at a lower paying job for the 12 years your in school / residency. or be a lawyer or MBA, its a lot easier to get in.

    http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2001/04/09/bica0409.htm
     
  17. TRUE

    TRUE slacker extraordinaire
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    776
    Likes Received:
    2
    I have some family friends from Canada who I talked to this about. About 6 or 7 years ago, I totally thought socialized healthcare was awesome. How can you go wrong? Everything is free!!! Woo hoo. Umm...not quite.

    To get non-urgent operations, you have to wait weeks. To meet with doctors, again you wait weeks. For our friends, this was so much to bear that they actually went to private doctors and paid for procedures instead of having to wait ridiuclous amounts of time for operations.

    Single payer systems in the U.K. are equally inefficent. Bash the United States for it's uninsured. This is a huge problem that needs to be fixed (and quite frankly I'm not sure if it ever will be). However, US medicine is the tops in the world in terms of healing people. As was pointed out, ER patients can never be refused service (and in some hospitals, such as bordering Mexico in Texas, this becomes quite a burden when many mexicans make the trek accross the border for medical care.)

    Anyway, I think it's a little naive to say that the Candian system is the best without taking a look at quality of service, availability of service, quality of facilities, etc...
     
  18. Mr. Rosewater

    Mr. Rosewater Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    don't trip off that high horse of yours, but where i live (NY) 100k is lower middle class. sorry if i don't plan on investing 10 years of my life in training for something that will leave me counting pennies and unable to save much for the education of my children or my own well earned retirement.

    as for the overused "go to B-school" argument, when did it become evil to want to make a nice living by helping those in need???? if that's greedy and evil, i hope everyone becomes that evil.
     
  19. JohnHolmes

    JohnHolmes Large Member
    10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2003
    Messages:
    3,207
    Likes Received:
    3
    Poor argument.
     
  20. Athomeonarock

    Athomeonarock Senior Member
    5+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow, did not mean to get everyone mad. I am definantly not saying doctors make to much money. It is a huge time commitment that deserves compensation.But, there are better ways to get rich
     
  21. Zweihander

    Zweihander Billygoat Gruff
    Gold Donor Classifieds Approved 15+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    19,458
    Likes Received:
    17,388
    Though I don't support socialized medicine, one big plus is that it could bring the costs of healthcare down. Right now, Americans pay more for their healthcare and get less services than do people in any other industrialized country, and costs continue to spiral out of control. Part of the problem is that there are dozens of beauracracies in healthcare, and we are hemorrhaging money through each of them. A single payer system (whether or not it was socialized), such as in Canada, would help cut costs in that regard.

    Also, the cost of prescription drugs should not be a point of contention here. As it stands, America subsidizes the cost of drugs for everybody else; this has to do with price controls and not the state of socialization per se.
     
  22. TRUE

    TRUE slacker extraordinaire
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    776
    Likes Received:
    2
    How do we get less services than people in other countries? A single payer system would certainly cut costs, but at the expense of service and care. See my previous post about Canada's system. Also, read up on the U.K.'s system. They cut costs simply by putting limits on people's care and on how much doctors and companies as a whole are able to charge for it. In other words, no one is going to buy a second MRI machine for a hospital when the government says they'll only pay you say 10 dollars to take an MRI of a patient vs. 300 they can charge here in the states. Because of this, hospitals simply don't upgrade their resources and in generally, these resources are very limited which is one of the reasons Canadians have to wait so long to get medical care.

    Simply put, medicine is expensive. New technology saves lives and yet it costs money. We have to deal with that. The US government and perhaps the American people are stuck in this rut that we shouldn't have to pay more for medicine than we did in say the 1970's. There have been monumental advances in medicine since then in so many different fields and while that has certainly raised prices, it has raised quality of care. As a society we need to adapt to the rising cost of medicine but deciding to spend more on our people's health than on other government projects such as our military for instance. The US bleeds too much money in stupid projects as well (check yesterday's new york times for the article about a pork project in Alaska...buliding two bridges at a cost of 2+ billion dollars).

    I'm not sure I agree here. While the US does pay through the roof for drugs, I'm not sure we're subsidizing anyone else costs. Canada's system of socialization comes into play here because they simply say to the drug companies: We're paying for everything, but if you want to have your drug as an option for our patients, you better be selling it cheap. There is competition among drug companies to get their medications onto the approved drugs for the healthcare system.

    What's a shame about all of this is that the American politicians are saying these drugs "aren't safe". They're just as safe as any drug you buy at your local drug store, but the pharm. companies aren't making a 100 dollars a pill on them. Gotta love special interest money ;)

    (and for those of you who think our drug prices aren't ridiuclously high, check the profit margins of the largest drug companies, which are calculated after R&D costs.)
     
  23. G_Eagle

    G_Eagle MS4 -> R1
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    345
    Likes Received:
    1
    Status:
    Resident [Any Field]
    It is also important to note that America is producing many of the top selling drugs in the world. I read an article recently (had to do a presentation on this in Economics of Healthcare) that the United States provided 8 of the top 10 selling drugs in the world and something like 60 of the top 100. What happens is that the rest of the countries use their governments to negotiate lower costs of the drugs, and Americans are left to foot the bill for R&D. Canada had four drugs approved for sale in their country that were never launched because the companies didn't like the economic model. Instead, they released them in the United States.

    What should we do about this....after researching for this project, I think we must bring in some regulation so world payments are not so disproportionate. What exactly? Well, there is great debate on this issue. Profit regulation sounds interesting to me (they do this in the United Kingdom). It is much better than arbitrary Reference-based Pricing (Germany) or Price Ceilings (Canada's PMPRB).
     
  24. TRUE

    TRUE slacker extraordinaire
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    776
    Likes Received:
    2
    I agree for the most part. However, while "Americans are left to foot the bill for R&D", note that drug companies are still making a pretty penny. R&D is only part of the equation. Vast profits need to be examined as well, as you suggested.
     
  25. Zweihander

    Zweihander Billygoat Gruff
    Gold Donor Classifieds Approved 15+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    19,458
    Likes Received:
    17,388
    What G Eagle said. :)
    Essentially, we are subsidizing costs because our government does not enforce price controls on drugs whereas other governments do, so drug companies, which are selling the selfsame drugs to Canada and Europe that they do here, need to make their profits on the American dollar.

    As for my other comment, read around. I was actually very surprised by this as well but it seems pretty universally accepted that as a society we pay more and get less by way of healthcare for our money than other countries do. Ask a public health professor or read a book on the U.S. healthcare system, it'll tell you the same thing. Appreciate that we spend around around $1.5 trillion a year now, and that cost is continuing to rise. One thing that makes socialization so attractive is the idea that not only can we extend healthcare to more people, but we can also control the costs. Again, I don't actually think this is the way to go, but it does have its pluses.
     
  26. personal jesus

    personal jesus Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    Messages:
    167
    Likes Received:
    0
    The fact that an ER can serve the uninsured is absolutely ridiculous. When patients come into the ER for minor problems that could be taken care of in a doctor's office two things happen. First the uninsured are forced to wait hours and hours. This not only is a terrible experience but it means that there is less resources for emergencies. Going through an ER also means that a different MD treats a patient every time. It is signifigantly less likely that a complex illness will be diagnosied or followed up on in the ER. Additionally, if one is a person making mininum wage and they have a serious problem but know that going to the ER will cost a day's wages then that person is not likely to go. In time their illness (orginially treatable at a low cost) can develop into a life threating disease that now costs many times more to treat.


    When thinking about improving the system I agree that tort reform is neccisary. I dont have the naive belief that Mr. Rosewater has that it is the lynchpin holding up high costs. One area that the government can start to consider is making preventative screenings free. Clearly one of the means of reducing long term costs by preventing minor problems escalating into serious (and expensive) illnesses.

    Oh yeah, final idea (never will go through) introduce a tax on fat and sugar. Junk food will have a tax on it with profits going to a fund to pay for people's healthcare costs later in life. I am tired of paying for other people to sit on their asses and eat twinkies while I eat right and excerise. In America you can do whatever you want, but if someone's laziness is costing the taxpayer's money then they should pay for it.
     
  27. Zweihander

    Zweihander Billygoat Gruff
    Gold Donor Classifieds Approved 15+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    19,458
    Likes Received:
    17,388
    Also, these "vast profits" are a tiny fracton of our total bill. If you actually were to make the pharmaceutical industry non-profit, you would have removed a grand total of 1% of our total healthcare cost; pretty insignificant in terms of controlling overall healthcare spending, if you ask me.
     
  28. bruciebaby45

    bruciebaby45 Junior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    I became acutely aware of the most telling difference between socialized and non-socialized health care while preparing for my interviews, both in Canada and the US. Everything I read about ethical questions for American schools included questions basically asking whether I would risk treating an uninsured patient. Obviously this did not come up with the Canadian schools. Now I may be naive, but no amount of money makes it OK with me to turn someone away that I have the skills to help. Maybe I am getting into this profession for the wrong reasons, or maybe just maybe all those whose first reaction is to question how things are going to affect the pay check are.
    Bruciebaby
    Again I realize both systems have the pros and cons, but I feel that insuring everyone has access to healthcare should come first and foremost.
     
  29. TRUE

    TRUE slacker extraordinaire
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    776
    Likes Received:
    2
    I would love to see some facts on this one. Do you have a link?

    Merck in 4th quater 2003 made 1.4 billion dollars in PROFIT, not revenue. That's only one company, and only 3 months.
     
  30. Zweihander

    Zweihander Billygoat Gruff
    Gold Donor Classifieds Approved 15+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    19,458
    Likes Received:
    17,388
    Sadly, I don't have a link because this is from paper (remember that stuff?? ;)) literature. If I find something I'll be sure to post it.

    Roughly, 10% of our healthcare bill goes to money spent on drugs, but only 1% of that expenditure represents actual profits for the drug companies. If you look at the figures you gave, 1.4 billion / 1.5 trillion = .001. So the profits for this company represent around 1/10 of a percent of our total healthcare costs. Also, I'm using a figure from a few years ago for total healthcare cost, the real figure is probably closer to 2 trillion now.
     
  31. IrishOarsman

    IrishOarsman My Rx: Guiness
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    Messages:
    331
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think that the current system v. socialized healthcare is a very false dichotomy. It is extremely unnerving that among such a well-informed group of pre-meds not a single other poster tried to give a 3rd or 4th alternative.

    There is another popular, if not as well understood, system: a two-tier, guaranteed-minimum care system. There are a lot of ways to do it, but the upside is that it makes the system more honest, logical, and efficient all at once (if done correctly).

    Here's a practical implementation: The government issues $xxxx vouchers for insurance, good -only- for insurance. Insurance companies bid for those vouchers with various plans, upgrades, etc but, in order to bid for them, must offer at least one plan at exactly $xxxx that includes a certain minimal care coverage (ER, 2wks hospitalization/quarter, many non-extrodinary (<$10k) surgeries, prenatal care, immunizations, maybe some basic prescriptions, and that's it.) The second tier comes in when employers and private individuals decide to pay more on top of that minimum to get more coverage.

    Even better, under this system you no longer need special programs for children and, as long as we are talking morals and not politics, the elderly, at least not on a federal level. No longer are there any uninsured. No longer must nurses and other hospital staff waste immense amounts of time double-checking insurance for 95% of the visits and proceedures done outside of hot research hospitals (to ensure that no one doesn't waste their voucher, the gov't or hospitals can enroll patients in programs if they need care but haven't signed up yet). Drugs are still market price, so research will continue at its current level. Iff this is implemented efficiently, tax changes will be unnecessary (reduction in state medicaid costs will roughly match the federal expense, certainly so if the elderly lose some of their priveledged status and share in this plan (after a period of phase in where people who paid into medicare as workers are compensated)). Doctors compensation will remain unchanged. Insurance companies will have even more business, and a hard bottom below which no competition will occur.

    The achilles heel of this proposal is that, seemingly, the first tier requirements will have to be legislated, that is they will have to be agreed upon by the majority of 435 Congressmen who will likely not see eye to eye on what should be included. If even half a dozen expensive but high profile diseases (like some childhood leukemia that has a wealthy interest group with lobbiers) are included, the plan loses both its moral transparency and its long term stability.

    This is the system of choice guys and girls. I haven't done it justice here, but read some of Tris Englehardt's writing on it or anyone else who sees how to blend moral and practical. Such a blend is neither impossible nor self-contradictory, as long as it is done honestly, clearly. The best of the American medical establishment (research, cutting-edge care) is preserved while those at most risk are protected.

    Ladies and gents, I really believe in this system.
     
  32. breski

    breski Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problems posed by socialized medicine pale in comparison to those posed by the US system. We spend more money than any other country in the world on health care; yet 40 million Americans go uninsured. Certainly governments have problems paying for their socialized health care systems, but so do the majority of public and private hospitals and insurance companies.
     
  33. TRUE

    TRUE slacker extraordinaire
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    776
    Likes Received:
    2
    I see your point, but you have to remember that my figure was for 3 months and for one company. There are many, many other companies out there that make billion dollar drugs. In addition, you also need to look at products like medicine-coated stents which also are jacked up in price. Sure, pharm companies generally are not responsible for these, but someone is making a pretty penny at a cost that filters straight down to us. You can rest assured the profits for such companies are sky high.

    Do you have any figures on what the government pays most for in the healthcare system?
     
  34. Zweihander

    Zweihander Billygoat Gruff
    Gold Donor Classifieds Approved 15+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    19,458
    Likes Received:
    17,388
    Well, the figures I'm giving are for society's expenses and not the government's, but I think the single biggest expense is physicians' salaries, at 30% of the total cost. I'll have to look through some of my old notes to get other values, but I'm pretty certain that this is true.
     
  35. jlee9531

    jlee9531 J,A,S
    10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,470
    Likes Received:
    8
    Status:
    Attending Physician
    as good as the plan may sound...the problem that you stated with this proposal is a pretty big barrier to overcome. rarely do you have anything fully supported by the entire congress...its always pretty closely split down the party lines...so there would be a significant amt of people who would be unhappy with the ends results.

    but then again...i guess it would leave us in the same position we are in right now.
     
  36. periodic

    periodic Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0

    Agreed...I've heard a pretty experienced health policy analyst comment that the countries with socialized medicine (or some kind of universal basic coverage like what IrishOarsman is talking about) got their systems in place before there a lot of the newer, highly expensive treatments had been developed (drugs, surgeries, devices, etc). Basically, we waited too long, and now it's nigh impossible to get something agreed to in Congress (her belief). You're going to have all of the groups with different agendas coming to demand the inclusion of treatments for their constituents/customers.

    The Medicare drug bill included a provision for a $500 million demo to pay for some new (and very expensive) oral and self-injectable drugs for conditions like MS, rheumatoid arthritis, chemo, etc -- you can bet Congress gets lobbied hard to direct that money one way or another.

    Also, over half (53%) of Medicare's spending is for hospital care (inpatient and outpatient), while about 20% goes to physicians.
    http://www.medpac.gov/publications/congressional_reports/Mar04_Ch1.pdf
    (page 8 of this pdf)

    If you're looking out the nation's spending on health overall, it looks like about 500 billion, or nearly 1/3, of the 1.67 trillion projected to be spent on healthcare in 2003 was on hospital care, while around 320 billion was on physician services.
    http://www.cms.hhs.gov/statistics/nhe/projections-2003/
     
  37. IrishOarsman

    IrishOarsman My Rx: Guiness
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    Messages:
    331
    Likes Received:
    0
    I overstated the problem a little- of course it's not a constitutional amendment needing more than a simple majority in congress... it's just that this bill, like some others, would be very vulnerable to amendments. Anyways, to reject my proposal (which admittedly could have been stated better) because congress would bawlk at it neither speaks to the matter at hand (what the best system would be) nor distinguishes it from any other kind of healthcare reform (ie, socialized medicine would be at least as ugly a pill to swallow, more so if my account is to believed).
     
  38. Athomeonarock

    Athomeonarock Senior Member
    5+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does anyone think a switch away from corperate medicine would help anything. By that i mean turning over hospitals and HMO's to non- profits. The best hospitals in the nation are already run by Universities and other such organisations. I dont think socialize med will work antime soon, but stopping public trading of health companies may lower costs and increse quality of care,or maybe not, perhaps the compition is good??????? Any coments
     
  39. Zweihander

    Zweihander Billygoat Gruff
    Gold Donor Classifieds Approved 15+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    19,458
    Likes Received:
    17,388
    The problem with non-profits is that they have less access to capital and so tend to be less competitive in terms of hiring the best people and offering the best technologies. Whether this problem is palpable for insurance providers is questionable, but still worth considering. Kaiser Permanente is (I believe) a non-profit, however, and it seems to be one of the better insurance providers in the country.

    I think the real problem is not the existence of a free market but who the insurance providers are competing to please. Currently that is employers who provide the insurance plans, and as long as insurance is cheap employers are happy. If insurance providers had to answer directly to customers (patients), they would need to care far more about how happy their members are.
     
  40. periodic

    periodic Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Kaiser is an interesting animal - almost all physicians and other staff who provide care to people with Kaiser coverage are employed solely by Kaiser and only take care of Kaiser enrollees. They operate in 8 (I think) markets around the country, and do well. However, I think they tried to expand into areas where they didn't own hospitals and found it to be pretty tough, pulling back. So, they have achieved a tight system by controlling all aspects of the delivery of care: the plan, the hospitals, and physicians. In some organizations, that could be a recipe for disaster, but they (from what I've seen and heard) are very patient and physician oriented. In order to prescribe a drug for a patient that's not on their formulary, their physicians simply have to check a box indicating they think it's medically necessary -- no arguing with a plan rep on the phone or changing the prescription when a patient gets to the pharmacy and it's not covered. Kaiser physicians do, though, get paid less than they could make working hard in private practice, but that's the tradeoff.

    I agree that the incentives of health plans in employer-based insurance are convoluted. One positive note, though, is that some major employers have started to band together for health care reform -- look at the Leapfrog Group -- a group of major employers who sponsor research and standards for assessing quality of healthcare. Why? So their employees can hopefully get better care for their (and their employer's) buck, lowering costs and allowing them to be more productive. I'm all for informing the public, but I think larger organizations might be better placed right now to pressure the system for change...they can threaten to switch $XXX in business to another plan/hospital/network of physicians.
     
  41. Zweihander

    Zweihander Billygoat Gruff
    Gold Donor Classifieds Approved 15+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    19,458
    Likes Received:
    17,388
    Nice post, dude.
    :thumbup:

    I think the system is in fact going to change, though managed care seems to be here to stay. HMOs gained ground because big business believed in their power to reduce healthcare costs. HMOs have failed in doing this, and as a result employers are less and less interested in shouldering the costs of healthcare, and are making employees more responsible. The bad part about this is obvious -- individual cost is rising. However, this will likely result in the patient also becoming the customer, giving him consumer power he never before had. One possiblity, though we haven't gotten there yet...
    :)
     
  42. Doctodd

    10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    Messages:
    3,036
    Likes Received:
    289
    any chance soclialized medicine is a means to an end by government?.....unless you are on the inside, do u really know what a progressive politician thinks?

    On the surface, kaiser and other HMOs are free-market based if govt isnt supporting it. But it isnt so simple im afraid, especially with big govt subsidizing the current health care reform plans.

    I stumbled upon this as a link in a signaure on a boating website.....very interesting...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLpem-AAs
     
  43. Lokhtar

    Lokhtar Dreaming about the lions
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    3,103
    Likes Received:
    11
    Status:
    Medical Student
    I am 100% in favor of socialized medicine. We'll get there eventually, hopefully it's sooner rather than later. And if asked in an interview, I won't be afraid to speak my mind even if it they may not like that answer. I do have lots of facts, figures, studies - showing everything from overall outcomes to cost to other stuff so I'll be able to defend my position, hopefully eloquently.
     
  44. Narmerguy

    Moderator Emeritus 10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,878
    Likes Received:
    1,295
    6 year old thread...
     
  45. Paladin7

    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    If your lucid writing is any indication of your speaking, I am sure you will be able to defend your position eloquently. However, eloquence doesn't necessarily imply perspicacity.
     
  46. NickNaylor

    NickNaylor Thank You for Smoking
    Physician Lifetime Donor Classifieds Approved 10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2008
    Messages:
    16,567
    Likes Received:
    7,155
    Status:
    Resident [Any Field]
  47. Lokhtar

    Lokhtar Dreaming about the lions
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    3,103
    Likes Received:
    11
    Status:
    Medical Student
    You're right of course. But, I'm personally aware of some comparative studies, have performed such an analysis myself in an academic setting, have lived in a country with socialized healthcare for >5 years (and have been a patient in both systems). So I feel I have a good grasp on the issues and hopefully that comes across. I'm actually one of the few people who has completely read the new healthcare bill (had to, for a class), so I think I can speak to it's benefits and downsides and point to exact sections as reference.
     
  48. Paladin7

    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    0
    While I don't agree with all your conclusions, I will say that your calm, respectful (and studied) approach to presenting your arguments serves you well.

    As you suggested in another thread, the disagreement between the proponents and opponents of socialism is often a very fundamental one, which makes arguing it all but pointless. Good luck to you.
     

Share This Page