On 03/07/2012 5:56 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 7/3/12 7:30 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"Califbill" wrote in message
news

------------------------------------------
A lot of those tests are to cover the health care provider's butt.
With the
litigation sharks out there looking for anything to sue over, is much
more
protective of the doctor to order extra tests.

----------------------------------------

I thought so also for a long time but the statistics prove otherwise.
Malpractice
lawsuits certainly exist but they don't contribute to the overall health
care costs
as much as commonly thought.

It's more because most doctors are now associated with either hospitals
or health
care centers who are looking to generate as much revenue as they can get
away
with. A doctor friend of mine has told me about the pressures brought
on the
staff of doctors by these organizations to maximize insurance claims,
often for
needless or repetitive tests. You really don't need a CAT scan for a
sore throat
or a MRI for a sprained ankle.




My wife is on a professional panel and tells me about the horror stories
she hears every week of the difficulties people have getting their
health insurance companies to approve needed procedures or treatments or
medications, and also the challenges practitioners have handling all the
paperwork the insurance companies require, the difficulties in reaching
responsible, working brain people at insurance companies and the refusal
of insurance companies to open panels to admit more practitioners so six
month to a year waiting periods can be cut down.

We really need to find a way to get away from the for-profit insurance
company model. They are the biggest part of the medical delivery of
services challenge.

Don't be so damned quick to the Canadian model, people die waiting,
literally. Because some bureaucrat decided on a "quota".

Remember, part of why there is a paperwork mess is legislative. Laws so
complex, people suing each other for everything....

Real answer is to re-engineer the whole system without politicians
screwing things up. Need to keep the tax greedy out of the equation,
not just the profit greedy. But you do want some economic sense at the
table.

Get some people who have lived in and used multiple systems to look at
the best and the worse of each system. Unfettered by political greed
you could get more done.


--
Liberal-socialism is a great idea so long as the credit is good and
other people pay for it. When the credit runs out and those that pay
for it leave, they can all share having nothing but debt and discontentment.