Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skinowski who wrote (25575)	4/5/2013 2:35:38 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

>> The difference is not in the 93-95% of cases - it is in the last 5 or 6%. That's where you get your money's worth. But most of us will be part of that 5-6% at some time(s) during our lives. Rather than striving to create more doctors, who, like it or not, push the limits of great health care on a daily basis, we're saying, "Don't bother. You'll earn almost as much as a NP, and it will be a fraction of the hassle and expense to get through your education." This is 180 degrees from what we should be doing. There is a lot of criticism leveled at med schools and professional organizations about locking people out of the health care business. And some of that may be warranted. But there is something to be said for setting the most rigorous standards for admission to the health care profession. It is a system that has worked well over the years, particularly during my lifetime. 50 years ago, when I was taken to our family doctor, I got 2cc of penicillin whether I needed or not. This month, my wife will have her hearing restored by a great, young ear surgeon using techniques he created in the last 20 years. These kinds of surges in medical technology are a result, in significant part, of well-educated and battle-tested physicians who have a depth of understanding that just can't be picked up in five years of college. While we can say, "Well, the 5-6% should be treated by physicians", who knows whether half of those cases will be missed altogether? I'm pretty sure that often, the same 5-6% of cases are the ones that push the limits of medical technology and result in newer, better, cheaper solutions to difficult problems. If some portion of those cases fall through the cracks, I think we all will suffer as a result. At the very least, serious clinical trials should be undertaken to determine the effects of an expansion of NPs as primary care providers. IMO.