*newly posted* 3Apr13 NYTimes: A Prescription for Frustration
http://nyti.ms/10pfUTi
In two new books, doctors write about the problems, and details, of American medicine today.
13Mar13 Why Doctors Can't Say 'No'
http://www.salon.com/2011/11/28/why_doctors_cant_say_no/singleton/?mobile.html
Supreme Court on Affordable Health Care Act
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/03/27/us/27scotus.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120327
Editorial on HC reform ideashttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/14/opinion/advice-from-dr-berwick-a-health-care-visionary.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211
Op-Ed on Women's Health Care at Risk
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/opinion/womens-health-care-at-risk.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211
Gains in Health System Seen as Lasting by Some
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/23/us/gains-in-health-system-seen-as-lasting-by-some.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120523
Treating You Better for Less
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/03/opinion/sunday/treating-you-better-for-less.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120603
Approaching Illness as a Team at the Cleveland Clinic
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/25/opinion/approaching-illness-as-a-team-at-the-cleveland-clinic.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121225
Researchers say Oregon’s lottery system for granting health insurance has made it the best place to study the costs and benefits of the federal health care law.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/23/health/oregon-study-reveals-benefits-and-costs-of-insuring-the-uninsured.html
posted 27Feb13
* Do smokers and the obese deserve insurance?
January 28, 2013 03:39 PM |
MARY ELIZABETH WILLIAMS
View full article at Salon.com
* Health care professionals beyond so much reliance on doctors
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/opinion/sunday/when-the-doctor-is-not-needed.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121216&_r=0
View full article at Salon.com
* Health care professionals beyond so much reliance on doctors
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/opinion/sunday/when-the-doctor-is-not-needed.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121216&_r=0
25Feb13 An article on how to get the incentives right in health care:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/business/overcoming-obstacles-to-better-health-care.html?ref=business&_r=0
I think that the author of this article has a few valid ideas about his way of reforming health care. I partly agree with the first point the author makes in that it can be a bad incentive to pay doctors based on the amount of tests or surgeries they perform because it can lead to unnecessary or even harmful outcomes. However, I do not fully agree with paying them for keeping their patients well. This is not something they can fully control in all cases; sometimes a patient will not improve or slowly deteriorate. This especially depends on the field of the doctor; This model of pay would work much better for a doctor dealing with patients who do not have life-threatening illnesses than one who is taking care of cancer patients. In addition, the term "well" and any variations would have to be defined to determine how much to pay the doctors.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the fact most nurse practitioners and PA's are underutilized to a great extent and not allowed to use their expertise very well. I think more team work would result in a better patient understanding of what they want and are looking for. Utilizing teamwork throughout any medical profession can be helpful. In allowing this to happen the physician of the patient can get to know him/her better and maybe help explain in more detail about the details of certain aspects whether it be surgery or the medication the doctor prescribes.
ReplyDeleteI think that the author makes some good points about way to reform health care. I think though that it's important for everyone to be on the same page as to what the "issues" are in health care and what constitutes "reform". Then, even after that, there is quite a lot of work that would need to be done in order to create the desired changes. It’s and issues that the vast majority of people, if not all, of them need to agree on. Articles like this however, are a good start.
ReplyDeleteI have a kind of extreme point of view, but I agree that there should be a benefit to not smoke and to try and and control your weight. Smoking and obesity kills thousands of people each year and not much is being done that actually makes a strive towards lowering the death rate. Soooo I do think that is fair to raise health insurance costs for those that are extremely obese and those that are chain smokers. Why is it fair for a person who has strived to live a healthy life to pay the same premium as a person who weighs 600lbs and smoke 3 packs of cigarets a day??? That 600lbs person most likely has a greater risk of death than a healthy person. It should be like car insurance, if you want to put yourself at risk and drive a sports car that goes 200mph then you have to pay higher insurance. If you chose to put yourself at risk by eating and smoking all day then you should have to pay more in insurance. America allows people to be lazy and to eat until they weigh 6...7...8.. hundred pounds. Drastic measures need to be taken to help stop smoking and obesity. Heart disease kills more people each year than anything and the two biggest risk factors are smoking and bed diet.... I think more needs to be done to solve this issue....
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the health insurance article I agree with Erik. Also just like people that drive sports cars pay higher insurance, they pay higher insurance because they are more of a risk. Is it necessarily true? There is always exceptions, in regards to obese and chain smokers, I believe they should pay a higher interest rate than someone who has good health and doesn't smoke. More needs to be done to get people to exercise more and eat better. More needs to be done to keep people from smoking as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Craig because those who choose to smoke are knowingly putting themselves at risk for lung cancer in the long run also driving fast sports cars is just asking for someone to pay a higher insurance premium. More fitness programs and family members need to try and influence those who smoke or those who are over weight to live healthier lifestyles and let them know that they are not alone. Moral support from friends and family is a strong motivator and gives people the courage to change their lives around for the better.
DeleteI think there should be a benefit to not smoking. Not smoking is good for losing weight, its good for your lungs and for the lungs of those around you. Second hand smoke is an issue when people smoke. Smoking kills so many people as well as causes weight problems. And these are big issues in today's society especially in America. We as a nation have become so fat its just ridiculous. So why not create a benefit for those who do not smoke? It might just motivate people to stop smoking and cause us to become a much healthier nation and in turn a healthier society. People who don't smoke should pay less for their insurance than those who smoke. More things need to be done to get people healthier and if dong this motivates people to stop smoking and be healthier, then by all means do it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of what Erik had to say. It should be like car insurance, if you are willing to risk your health for a habit then you should have to pay more. But not all obese people are overweight because they eat too much. Some of them are overweight because of genetics. Should we really hold that they were given bad genes over their head and make them pay more money? I so not think that would be fair. And then again, I am not saying that everyone who is obese has the genetics that make them obese. It is a gray area and would be hard to distinguish the people who should have to pay more and those who do not. Also, health care is there to help individuals. If we increase the prices just because someone is obese or smokes, they may be likely to not buy the insurance and not get the care that they need because they can not afford it. I do not think increasing the prices will motivate people to stop smoking or to eat less. If people wanted to quit they would, it has nothing to do with cost. Cigarettes cost a lot of money a month, and so does food. People with these addictions will likely not chose to spend their money on insurance over their habits. That is just my belief.
ReplyDeleteI think you are most certainly right in certain regards. If we were to do this people with these addictions are more likely to just do away with their health care entirely and then not have any for when they really need it. I also agree with what i said earlier in that maybe with could be enough motivation to push people to quit smoking and better their health in the long run. But its a double edged sword. For some people it could be enough motivation but for others, like you said, they will just do away with health care entirely. I guess it really boils down to the fact of will doing this do more good than harm in the long run?
DeleteKammi you make a valid point and i totally agree with you some people who are over weight cannot help their own size. We should not penalize them at all we should encourage them to exercise and help them increase their self-esteem this will allow them to have a better outlook on life. The amount of money people spend on cigarettes in ridiculous they could use this money for other essentials. However those who smoke are not going to care and spend their money on insurance. I have witnessed this first hand in my family I've tried to convince them that what they are doing is very harmful, but they never seem to want or even try for that matter to break their smoking habit its sad to say the least.
DeleteFor the most part I agree with what everyone has to say in regards to the health insurance article. Definitely for those who smoke should have a higher premium on health insurance because they are putting themselves at a higher risk for death and disease, they should not be rewarded with a "normal" premium that is equivalent to non-smokers. I would agree that the same is true for those who are obese. Even though some may be genetically obese, their premium should be based on their lifestyle; if they aren't trying to better their lives or themselves then yes they should pay more. No one can help the fact that they are born obese, but at the same time that isn't an excuse to live an unhealthy lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteIn the "Overcoming Obstacles to Better Health Care" article I partially agree with the first point. It is a bad incentive to pay doctors and hospitals for doing tests and surgeries, but they should not just get paid for keeping patients well. It is not fair for us to pay them less if they are having a slow day, since they are always ready to take care of us and even save our lives in an emergency. On the second point, I don't agree that there needs to be a scientific-based approach to everything, but there should be guidlines when using the expensive technology. This expensive technology may lead to other problems like finding benign tumors which leads to further expensive procedures, but there will always be cancerous tumors and it is better safe than sorry. I also agree with the third point about more midlevel health professionals because doctors will get more time with the patients that need it and the patients will not have to wait for somone to only check in for a few minutes. It will help the patients feel more at ease, because the healthcare professional will have more time to assess the patients needs. I also agree with the last point, health care professionals or trained individuals should talk to their patients about what they would want for their end of life care. Patients should not be obligated to complete a living will, but they should be informed so that they can choose what they want done if they ever end up on their death beds.
ReplyDeleteI agree that there should be incentive for keeping patients healthy. This isn't college, skimming by with a mediocre performance won't get you by, people die. Yes, some things are out of the control of the doctor and patients die, but if his problem with losing a patient is missing a bonus, he was a piece of shit and doesn't deserve it anyway.
ReplyDeleteThis is the folly of private healthcare. They are a business, they HAVE to turn a profit. Good will is not in their best interests if they want to stay afloat. They can't turn a profit if they help everybody, it's just not possible. The product they sell has a variable on how much it will cost to produce, which is risky to them.
In regards to why doctors saying no to patients. I was surprised that most doctors prescribed medications because they are in too much of a rush trying to see other patients. Doctors need to work on a better strategy for saying no during medical school courses on how to deal with patients and their obscene requests should be offered. I agree that more time needs to be allotted so that doctors have enough time to discuss the pros and cons of the patients request so that their visit is an enjoyable one.
ReplyDeleteTreating you better for less: This is great news reading this article that hospitals and doctors are trying to find ways and have found ways to reduce the costs of medical care. This is especially important because most of us our parents cover it right now but not so far into the future we will be paying for it ourselves and maybe have families of our own so it is definitely good knowing that costs are trying to be reduced. Any reduction in price helps and I hope they keep making strides to reduce the cost of care even more.
ReplyDelete