Re: Canadian doctors coming to the US
From: George Conklin (nilknoc_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 09/06/04
- Next message: Steve Marcus: "Re: Tachycardia Question"
- Previous message: Lictor: "Re: high blood pressure:"
- In reply to: dahmd: "Re: Canadian doctors coming to the US"
- Next in thread: George Conklin: "Re: Canadian doctors coming to the US"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 11:35:03 GMT
"dahmd" <dahmd@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:deO_c.16827$uN5.2066@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "George Conklin" <nilknoc@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:c1M_c.7373$Wv5.2280@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "dahmd" <dahmd@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:51H_c.15386$Of3.6663@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> > >
> > > "Founding Father" <ff@qwest.net> wrote in message
> > > news:BLo_c.28$0P5.5692@news.uswest.net...
> > > >
> > > > "dahmd" <dahmd@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:7iPWc.47629$4s6.35165@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > "George Conklin" <nilknoc@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:UdlWc.1231$Y%3.494@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Good. Would you support laws which allow pharmacists to
> > substitute
> > > > if
> > > > > > the patient wants a generic and that little box on the
> prescription
> > > pad
> > > > is
> > > > > > not checked?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > No problem.
> > > >
> > > > But I bet there WILL be a problem if the patient has a bad outcome
> with
> > > the
> > > > generic and sues the doctor - even if the problem isn't even
directly
> > > > related to the generic. If it is, he should, of course, sue the
> > > pharmacist,
> > > > but you know THAT won't happen - deep pockets and all that (just ask
> > John
> > > > Edwards).
> > > >
> > > > > To my knowledge that's how it's done in Florida.
> > > > > Alternatively, I receive faxes from insurers every day that
request
> > > > > substitution of a name-brand to a generic, or from one type of
> > > medication
> > > > to
> > > > > a similar, less expensive medication. I review these and, almost
> > > always,
> > > > > auathorize the change. Note that I receive no compensation for
this
> > > > > service, which does not benefit me in any way. Further, you might
> be
> > > > > interested to know that patients (not physicians) are the driving
> > force
> > > > > behing requests for name-brand prescriptions. Most patients want
> "the
> > > > very
> > > > > best" and are unhappy about receiving generics. Ask any
pharmacist.
> > > They
> > > > > want the name-brand, because they "are paying good money for
> > insurance."
> > > >
> > > > There's that damned insurance problem again. People always want the
> > most
> > > > expensive when someone else is paying for it.
> > >
> > > Absolutely. It's human nature. Very few of us are altruistic enough
to
> > > reject "the best" care for the second-tier care, even if it's almost
as
> > > good. If an x-ray can diagnose the problem 97% of the time but a CT
> scan,
> > > which is about 10 times more expensive, can make the diagnosis 98% of
> the
> > > time, people are going to want the CT scan.
> >
> > Such scans are pushed by the medical-industrial complex. Stop
blaming
> > the public if they bought into the propagana machine that 'we have the
> best
> > medicine in the world.' That mantra demands that people ask for 'the
> best,'
> > not second best. As for 'people.' Are you saying everyone? Or just
those
> > who think we get the best medical care in the world? I know we do NOT,
> and
> > do not ask for tests.
> >
>
> For certain medical therapies, such as pharmaceutical agents, I would
agree
> with you. However, who "pushes" CT scans?! Doctors get nothing out of
> ordering them. I can't recall ever seeing an ad for a CT scan, although
> there are a few ads out there for "open MRI" machines. It's possible that
> physicians in part are to blame for overstating our ability to diagnose
and
> cure illnesses, but I thought those days were gone. If anything,
physicians
> are so paranoid about lawsuits that they understate the potential for
cure,
> so that patients don't get their hopes falsely elevated. After all, if
you
> expect the procedure to have problems, and problems occur, you
theoretically
> are less likely to sue. I have not heard a physician say that a treatment
> is "a piece of cake" in many years. Rather, when I hear informed consent
> conversations, they usually involve a detailed discussion (in part) of all
> the bad things that could happen if you choose that therapy. I stand by
my
> original comments: one of the reasons we have costly health care is that
> patients are pseudo-consumers. They want the best available, regardless
of
> cost, but don't have to pay for it directly. When was the last time you
> went into a store and bought something without knowing how much it cost?
> Medical consumers frequently demand expensive tests or medications, and
> don't even know the cost differential between that therapy and less
> expensive ones.
>
> Ashley
>
>
Doctors do not discuss their costs. I never heard of it. When I asked
one doctor, he said, "Ask the nurse." When I asked the nurse, she said,
"What is the matter? Don't you have insurance?" I didn't go back.
- Next message: Steve Marcus: "Re: Tachycardia Question"
- Previous message: Lictor: "Re: high blood pressure:"
- In reply to: dahmd: "Re: Canadian doctors coming to the US"
- Next in thread: George Conklin: "Re: Canadian doctors coming to the US"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
