Marketplace![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.semissourian.com/images/nameplate.gif)
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (12)
Share link
Facebook
Twitter
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Reddit
GoogleHere are excerpts from a letter sent July 11 to U.S. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson regarding health care reform:
Please. I beg you and your fellow representatives to take your time and give due diligence with respect to proposed health-care reform legislation. The decisions you make will have the potential to bankrupt the country and forever change the political landscape. A public option (son of Medicare) would have enormous consequences, not to mention the cost to taxpayers and the country. I fear many providers (physicians) might retire, productivity would drop and work satisfaction might be negatively affected. Make sure the cure is not worse than the disease.
What is really meant by "reform"? Is it the need to insure every American? The need to cut the per-capita expenditure for health care? Both? The 42 million to 50 million uninsured includes about 8 million illegal aliens. Some proposals do not cover this group. These individuals get care through the emergency medical system where they cannot be turned away.
I get the impression that emphasis is put on the coverage of all Americans and we'll worry about costs later. In reality, cost is the real problem.
If the government creates a Medicare clone, I fear it would eventually force private-sector companies out of business. There are more than 1,500 insurance plans available nationwide. Should we overhaul the system for the 15 percent who do not have health insurance, or is this a ruse so that eventually the U.S. moves to a national health-care system monitored and paid for by taxpayers?
The private sector competing with the government is like playing football and the opposing team is both player and referee. Government subsidies and tax credits will allow negotiation with suppliers not available to the private sector.
The government is great at hiding the true cost of running a business. The public option will not have to make a profit to stay in business, similar to the U.S. Postal Service or Amtrak.
Will our elected representatives and senators require the legislative, judicial and executive branches, as well as all federal employees, to use the public option before it is forced on the people they represent?
Medicine has never been a free-market enterprise. If you participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, balance billing is forbidden. What most people do not know is that the difference between the billed charges and the amount Medicare pays is the Medicare adjustment or write-off, not a loss or tax deduction for the physician. When I entered the field gastroenterology, the physician fee for a diagnostic upper endoscopy was reimbursed about $340 from Medicare. Today that same procedure is reimbursed at around $110. In my 20-plus years of medical practice my cost of keeping a clinic open has increased yearly, yet payment for services has not increased proportionately or in some cases has not increased at all due to contractual arrangements.
Cost is probably the meat on the chopping block. It is true that the U.S. spends more per capita on health care than any other country. With innovation and research come new medicines, new treatment guidelines and new equipment or devices. These improvements result in a longer life span, the ability to work and less pain and, in many cases, avoid surgery or allow for a less invasive form of surgery. Several nemeses play a significant role in medical cost, such as chronic illnesses for which there is no cure but improved treatment, the noncompliant patient and one's responsibility for self. A significant portion of health-care dollars are confined to four chronic conditions: diabetes, obesity, cancer and cardiovascular disease. How will reform address patient responsibility?
The current administration would like for you to believe there is significant waste within the health-care system. The operational nature of our current system accounts for a significant amount of U.S. health-care cost. The largest area for spending appears to be administration. Hospital care is also a significant expense. Technology can be a blessing or a problem. Technologies in some cases outpace our ability to evaluate them. Coverage for using these technologies normally is based on evidence that they work, not on cost-effectiveness criteria.
Ultimately, the goal is to spend less per capita, and I fear that one way this can occur is to ration care, control access and decrease availability of care. The other method is flat-out cost control across the board, or caps on total costs.
You cannot expand care for 40 million people plus improve quality and rein in costs. All Americans must remember one thing: The government that can give you everything is the government that can take everything -- and, with government-run health care, even your life.
H.L. Schneider Jr. is a Cape Girardeau gastroenterologist who has served on the Blue Cross Blue Shield adviser board for best practices and was a reviewer for the Texas Medical Foundation.
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please 
Finally! A local physician speaks up regarding this important issue!
It is guaranteed that Private Insurers will be pushed out of business. On page 16 of the bill, there is a requirement that businesses allow no new enrollees on their plans after the effective date of the legislations. Bye Bye private insurance.
"served on the Blue Cross Blue Shield adviser board"
read: industry shill
FriendO,
I just read a quote taken from your boy Biden's speech that he gave to some AARP fossils on 7/16 regarding SuperPrez' SuperHellCarePlan...
"Now, people when I say that look at me and say, 'What are you talking about, Joe? You're telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?'" Biden said. "The answer is yes, that's what I'm telling you."
Idiots! There are a bunch of idiots running this country! And you want to give the idiots even more power.
What does that make you?
I am not in favor of national heathcare, but I certainly do not want to listen to someone who is part of the problem. I am wondering if the good doctor would agree to the following reforms:
1. Completely do away with this cash cow we call Medicare and Medicaid. Not completely as I feel we have to fulfill the promises we made to our elderly years ago.
2. Force hospitals and doctors office to have posted a price list of what they charge for supplies, procedures, lab work, tests. etc. so that the patient can comparison shop. The politicians scream for a free market except when it comes to health care.
3. Tort reform. I read once where 50% of the malpractice cases come from 5% of the doctors. The solution is easy---get rid of that 5%. Also, if a doctor is found guilty of gross negligence---they dont get to be a doctor anymore. I realize this might put some lawyers out of work, but oh well.
4. Give incentives to doctors who keep costs low for preventive types of medical care.
5. Generics for ALL drugs. Prohibit drug reps from giving perks to doctors for writing scripts for their drugs. Doctors should be doctoring on their time not being entertained and courted by drug reps.
6. Streamline insurance so that they are required to write policies on all who seek to be insured ---you could have a LOW MEDIUM and HIGH RISK rates.
7. Allow consumers to buy health insurance ala carte----as a 45 yr old male I will never have to have maternity benefits BUT I believe federal law requires it.
8. Give incentives (tax breaks) or rewards to health care providers who are willing to work with low income patients--treating them at lower rates or perhaps even pro bono.
9. Require health care providers to be held accountable for poor service.
10. Allow Americans to set up their own health care savings accounts using money from their employers that now go to HMOS and other insurance companies.
11. Allow Americans to be on the same health insurance policy that its federal workers are on.
12. Force health care providers to
accept good faith payments from low income patients in leiu of civil action,
Somehow I do not think the good doctor would be in favor of these reforms.
I am on board with the two ideas, the one suggested by the President Obama: Based on a new report that details how much waste and inefficiency there is in medicare, how best practices are not always used, how many billions of dollars could be saved, the independent groups of doctors and medical experts to oversee long-term cost saving measures every year force congress to make sure that they are acting on these recommendations to bend the cost curve each and every year.
The other idea echoed by New York Times;
"Meanwhile, it will be important to get some guaranteed fast savings from the health care industries by cutting and reallocating hundreds of billions of dollars from projected spending on Medicare and Medicaid...Just to be sure, Congress ought to establish a fail-safe mechanism that could impose additional cuts after a few years if savings are less than projected."
I agree that In the near-term, this type of accountability will ensure that health reform legislation is fiscally responsible and fully financed. In the long-term, it will make certain that our health system, especially Medicare, is sustainable for generations to come. Please visit http://www.newamerica.net/blog/new-healt... for further details.
Thank You !
You know the common saying about gastroenterologists? They turn sh*t into gold. Until doctors like this one stop getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars more than primary care physicians, prices of health care will never go down. And quality of care will never go up, since primary care is really what we need most of all.
This article epitomizes the smugness and indifference of American medical specialists, who are OVERUSED and OVERPAID. This country cannot afford rich doctors. France has what the World Health Organization ranks as the best health-care system in the world (the US ranked 36th out of 40 countries), yet France spends half what we do per capita. French doctors are nicely paid but they do not die rich, and the low-income patient sees the same specialist that a wealthy patient sees. Medicine in American has become a business, not a profession, and Dr. Schneider sounds like a spokesman for the health-insurance industry.
I read this article and can not believe it! These are not the types of comments that no one would have expected from a Physician in the twenty first century. His comments were not only insensitive but also cruel. I thought a doctor was supposed to be someone compassionate and caring about others. How can be anyone feeling this way especially when 46 millions of Americans not having health coverage. At least one member in every American family does not have health insurance including mine. Mr. Schneider clearly positioned himself as an advocate for the big drug corporations and insurance companies. I can understand why Mr. Schneider is so concerned about the health care reform. The problem is; he is afraid of loosing the Status Quo. Let's call him Mr. Schneider instead of Dr. Schneider because he lacks the qualities of being a good doctor. That's simply not true that if the Congress passing a health care bill, it will bankrupt America. Quite the opposite, it will greatly reduce cost and overall improve the economy.
I read this article and can not believe it! These are not the types of comments that no one would have expected from a Physician in the twenty first century. His comments were not only insensitive but also cruel. I thought a doctor was supposed to be someone compassionate and caring about others. How can be anyone feeling this way especially when 46 millions of Americans not having health coverage. At least one member in every American family does not have health insurance including mine. Mr. Schneider clearly positioned himself as an advocate for the big drug corporations and insurance companies. I can understand why Mr. Schneider is so concerned about the health care reform. The problem is; he is afraid of loosing the Status Quo. Let's call him Mr. Schneider instead of Dr. Schneider because he lacks the qualities of being a good doctor. That's simply not true that if the Congress passing a health care bill, it will bankrupt America. Quite the opposite, it will greatly reduce cost and overall improve the economy.
-The private sector competing with the government is like playing football and the opposing team is both player and referee. -
Referee should be recipients,I think.
Insurers say they fear they will be driven out of the business, unable to compete with the government's market power to demand lower prices. The truth is a public plan will give people more choices, not less, and will give insurance companies real competition in place of price fixing.
That makes a lot of sense, because sixty-nine percent of voters say Americans should have the option of government-run health insurance plan, but only 28 percent say they want to be covered by it, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released, and the provision of employer mandate in the revised HELP BILL might make the bill more favorable to them, who have said the plan would drive that segment of the insurance market into the ground.
As a matter of fact, private insurers have coexisted profitably with Medicare and Medicaid for many years.
I think they are tasked with tireless innovations and 'fair', reasonable prices.
Thanks !
Wisdomseeker: "3. Tort reform. I read once where 50% of the malpractice cases come from 5% of the doctors. The solution is easy---get rid of that 5%."
You obvious need to go seek some more wisdom out if you are making a statement that ridiculously ignorant. Those 5% of doctors that get sued for malpractice are all the best surgeons & obstetricians. The higher volume of births an obstetrician does and the more procedures a surgeon does the more often they will get sued. By contrast even the most incompetent family doctor or general internist will never come anywhere close to facing the malpractice rate of the average OB.
Even if you were to adjust for specialty the top doctors within each specialty would still have higher malpractice rates simply because the best surgeons are the ones that deal with the most complicated cases. The top cardiac surgeon at the Mayo Clinic or John Hopkins will get sued a lot more than an average cardiac surgeon at Southeast Hospital or St. Francis just because of the patients they deal with.