What insurance companies have that the government does not is information. In today’s WSJ http://bit.ly/d2FHTo mentions that HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius wants the industry to provide estimates of cost and utilization increases. This is a question the government can not answer on their own, yet is confident that they know how to manage healthcare insurance better than those who have been doing it for decades.
Just let that noodle around a while, then ask yourself how confident you are that the government will do better in managing your care. It’s an answer upon which your life or that of someone you know may depend.

  • Share/Bookmark

What if health care “reform” makes things worse? Seems like a straight forward and honestly humble enough question; don’t you think it needs to be asked?

The problem in the financial crisis is that not enough peopled asked themselves (with the possible exception of Morgan Stanley), what if their assumptions are wrong?  What if we’re missing something?  What might be the effect, and is it something we can can survive?  Simple questions underlying rick management, and not being asked on behalf of this legislation.

This legislation could produce the same effect upon our economy as Smoot-Hawley Tariff act did in the summer of 1930 with a higher probability than anyone has yet discussed.

It is indeed possible to make things wore. Primum non nocere: Above all do no harm.

Tom

  • Share/Bookmark

From the perspective of a representative “playing their position” and looking out for their own constituents, Ben Nelson has done a wonderful job.  As for the rest of the US, we’re asked to pick up the entire Medicaid bill for an entire state, for eternity.  How wonderful is that?

What this means is that Nebraska will not have an incentive to mind the store as closely as they would had they had to participate in paying for it. Put another way, this is like going away to college with your parents credit card.  Perhaps of all states Nebraska poses the smallest financial risk exposure to the American taxpayer, they are after all a hard working lot, still should this go through, Medicaid spending for Nebraska will certainly outpace that of the other states.

If you doubt this, consider what would happen if you put two piles of firewood on your front lawn, on one a sign that says “$50.00 a cord, and the other put a sign that reads “Free”.

Which one will go first?

Tom

  • Share/Bookmark

As legend has it, while being arrested for his believes (based upon evidence) that the Sun, rather than the Earth, was the center of the universe; Nicholas Copernicus said of his captors:  “I cannot admire enough those who accepted the heliocentric (earth as the center of the universe) doctrine despite the evidence of their senses.”

The difference between this statement of 5 centuries ago and today is simply the issue to which it is applied, and the date.  For Copernicus it was aimed to those who held on to the notion that the Earth was the center of the universe, today the same could be applied to the notion that government ownership, specifically health care will produce efficiency.  If this past century has taught us anything, its that governments don’t do healthcare well, still despite the evidence of our senses, our congress seem committed to its treacherous course.

Based upon the evidence of your own senses, what remains true, self-evident, observable and non-controversial is that no one else but you does your healing for you, or your dying for you.  Only you live with the results of medical practice, good or not.  There is no outsourcing, no cost-shifting, or possible means by which you can personally enjoy the benefits of healthcare while pushing the risk of its individual consequences on to someone else. You own it.

This makes the current healthcare debate personal.  It would take a delusion of universal magnitude to believe for one minute, that a greater involvement of the government into our personal healthcare is in any way be an improvement.   Of course, you are free to believe that government healthcare is better, but that would be foolish and you would be wrong.  What is being proposed is about a few people feeling good about doing something they hope may be good, knowing in the end, they personally can no’t bear the full cost of any decisions they have made.

There are many more simple though less glamorous reforms that would be so much more effective, but they lack the flamboyant appeal of what is being proposed today.  Lowering the deduct-ability threshold for out-of-pocket healthcare expenses, interstate purchasing of healthcare insurance and personal savings accounts that roll forward and accumulate over time allowing individuals to claim higher deductibles, and in so doing enjoy lower insurance premiums.  But this is about theater, not reason.

Thomas A. Coss, RN


  • Share/Bookmark

Imagine that you do the same job year over year, and in each year you get paid less.  This is the condition in which most physicians find themselves.  It may be difficult for some to have sympathy  for physicians because many believe that they make lots of money, though some do.  Still, physicians spent most of their 20’s and some of their early 30’s getting the training to provide services for which they are now get paid less and less to provide.

A few weeks ago I had reason to visit an Orthopedic Surgeon for a wrist injury.  Upon making the appointment I learned that this practice has done something that I believe few physicians can do, but many more will; he quit taking insurance.  As one with a  strong free market bias, I had to learn more.  A few days after my initial visit I called just to discuss his decision and what it required of him and his practice.

He admitted that his income had initially fallen, but that it is slowly on the return. He reduce his office staff by one half, and restructure his practice.  Though he continues to provide orthopedic services, he expanded his scope of offerings to include services for which insurance companies will not pay, and patients would;  he add longevity services for older patients seeking to avoid disease.  These services are largely unsupported by insurance, still people willingly pay for services they believe to be valuable, and indeed this is.

Additionally, he freely admits that had he been younger with medical school debt and kids aiming for college, he wouldn’t have been able to make this move.  But with both of those behind him, he guided his business offerings to a new audience, and one who would pay cash he loves his work as  do his patients.

There is no better example of  free-market medicine than what has been going on in the area of Dermatology.  With the introduction of Botox to remove wrinkles, and a new host of dermal fillers and lasers, some dermatologists  have evolved their practice,  in part or completely, into cosmetic or aesthetic medicine for which it’s patients pay cash.

Cosmetic medicine, is an area of healthcare where third party players have little or no influence  because neither patient or practitioner expect a third party organization to pay for the services.  These are not life saving service, they are life enhancing services.  This is free market medicine at its finest, but it’s not new.  Dentists and most veterinarians have similar transaction relationships with their customers, neither are heavily influenced by insurance companies, and they seem to be doing just fine, even arguably better than classic medicine.

So what are we to make of this.

Have you ever tried picking up mercury with your fingers?  That’s precisely how the economy works; human beings are amazingly adept at improving their lot in life through new and innovative means.  In healthcare we are already seeing changes in the physician/patient relationship and its interaction.  Quickly disappearing is the paternalistic relationship that had dominated physician/patient relationships in the past.  The new relationship is more adult to adult; one in which the physician clearly directs care, but also one in which the patient is also part customer.  For healthcare, this is exceptionally healthy.  The patient rather than the payer or insurance company has a customer like relationship with the physician, or private medical services distributor.

For some physicians with whom I’ve shared this perspective, this is troubling until they realize that a more provider-customer relationship actually produces more revenue.  This we know: physicians are smart people and know how to do math, they will certainly evolve their care practices in creative ways from which we all will benefit.  Free market medicine will grow in the future, and some innovative companies have begun to figure it out

Thomas A. Coss, RN

  • Share/Bookmark