Apollo- OT-
Why is Tunica an idiot?
I have a friend who is a physician who reports that the majority of docs he works with don't even know the order of magnitude of the costs of many of the tests they request. Gee, I wish I could operate on a "cost-is-no-concern" basis. As for your patient with emphysema, well I confess to being a bit grumpy about paying for everyone's lifestyle diseases, particularly when a coercive system is employed to raise the necessary revenue.
BTW, this same friend of mine found himself in a minority of one on a committee when he disagreed with a recommendation for a kidney transplant for a 56 year-old alcoholic. However, after a full discussion of the case, he prevailed and I believe the man was denied his transplant. Do you think I should have been obliged to help pay for his transplant, and if so, why?
I understand, to some extent at least, a physician's concern with doing the best for a patient. I'd probably want that for those near and dear to me. But while this matter is "profoundly OT" for this thread, the concerns Tunica raised are not trivial. Moreover, the "few select individuals" cited in the Journal's article are revealing of a system that appears to lend itself to potential conflicts of interest and the enriching of people with taxpayer money. How better to portray how the system works- or should the public simply not be told?
Larry |
