It's Not So Pretty
Published on February 10, 2009 By Daiwa In Health & Medicine

I'm not a particular fan of the American Medical Association.  In my view, it is too enmeshed with currying favor with the federal government (also known as partnering) to be an effective advocate for either patients or physicians.  But occasionally the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) publishes some worthwhile reading.  The latest issue has a commentary about the collision of scientific principles with interest-group advocacy politics and an editorial about the futility of central or top-down micromanagement, which are very interesting and say a lot about the future of healthcare, in particular our ability (or lack thereof) to make informed decisions for ourselves, in our increasingly federalized system.

I can't republish the articles here but the references (links) for those interested are:

Science, Politics, and Values: The Politicization of Professional Practice Guidelines
Kraemer and Gostin
JAMA. 2009; 301: 665-667.


The Elusive Quest for Quality and Cost Savings in the Medicare Program
John Z. Ayanian, MD, MPP
JAMA. 2009; 301(6): 668-670.

 

EDIT 2-11-14:  Time to update the Title to more appropriately reflect reality.


Comments (Page 2)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Jul 14, 2010

Ah, but that quaint, trite 'goose, gander' thing.

on Jul 18, 2010

It ain't like anybody warned us this would happen or anything.

on Jul 18, 2010

It's certainly working out well in the Massachusetts test run (thanks Mitt!).

on Jul 27, 2010

Another wonderfully concise article by Thomas Sowell.  The money quote:

Elites may have more brilliance, but those who make decisions for society as a whole cannot possibly have as much experience as the millions of people whose decisions they preempt. The education and intellects of the elites may lead them to have more sweeping presumptions, but that just makes them more dangerous to the freedom, as well as the well-being, of the people as a whole.

on Jul 27, 2010

Thomas Sowell's error in logic is the first part - "May have more brilliance".  Einstein was recognized as a genius, yet he was an idiot when it came to economics.  Likewise, my Doctor is great in his treatment of me, but I would not let him touch my car or computer.

The truly brilliant people are those who know that they know not.

on Jul 27, 2010

He's not positing it as a given.  Hence the term 'may'.  And his whole point is that brilliance alone confers no guarantees of common sense or competence.

I had a partner at one time who was 'brilliant' by most people's definition - board certified in internal medicine and rheumatology.  One Monday (early '90's) she let us know how proud she was of the vehicle purchase she had made over the weekend.

She told us how she'd spent considerable time studying safety ratings of family vans as she had small kids & wanted the most highly rated one.  She was also frugal, so she wanted to purchase a used one in good condition.  After completing her research, she had decided on a Ford Windstar, so went to a local Ford dealer & asked to see his inventory of used vans.  She settled on one & bought it.

She wanted to show it off when we left the office for lunch that day so we accompanied her to do the courteous thing & Ooh/Ahh over her new/used Ford Windstar.  Only one problem: it was a Chevy Aerostar.

When we gently informed her of that fact, a shocked look of disbelief crossed her face and she said (I kid you not), "Wait a minute.  I bought it at a Ford Dealer.  How could he sell me a Chevy?"

The topper: She actually took it back to the dealer that evening & got a Windstar.  Not sure what explanation she gave, but I'd love to have been there to hear it.

 

on Jul 27, 2010

Not sure what explanation she gave, but I'd love to have been there to hear it.

hey!  the story was good enough!

on Jul 29, 2010

The answer to 'skyrocketing' healthcare costs has been right under their noses all along and is incredibly simple.  But why do that when we can spend a few trillion dollars trying to stuff a square peg in a round hole.

on Jul 30, 2010

The answer to 'skyrocketing' healthcare costs has been right under their noses all along and is incredibly simple.  But why do that when we can spend a few trillion dollars trying to stuff a square peg in a round hole.

The health care law does nothing to stop rising costs.  Indeed, it is designed to increase them.  The answer, as the article points out, is to simply stop going to doctors for hang nails.  But the current law will not stop that, it will exacerbate it.

on Mar 14, 2013

Time for a little more necrophilia.

The skyscraper in the corner:

Healthcare, Simplified

Is a printout of all (just) the regulations issued pursuant to the "Affordable" Care Act (Obamacare) as of late last week.  An additional 882 pages were released the following day.  The above printout does not include the 2000 or so pages of the law itself.  Many regulations authorized have yet to be promulgated in print, so there's who knows how many more pages to come.

I know I look forward to the simplification of healthcare embodied in that pile.  /sarc

on Aug 09, 2013

Another (as if more are needed) example of Obamacare's (and Obama's) intent - from the gitgo:

link

on Oct 29, 2013

But there will be no problem here.  This is America.  /sarc

 

on Oct 29, 2013

Then there's this tasty little delicacy.

on Oct 30, 2013

It is NBC - I would be surprised if they had any ethics or competence.

on Nov 01, 2013


Then there's this tasty little delicacy.

That is actually pretty terrible and I can see why they redacted it. If you are pro Obama-care and paying attention, this overrides one of the key elements that sold you on it, and would make you very angry.

I'd blame it more on the power of lobbyists though.

4 Pages1 2 3 4