Behold the “cosmetic surgery conceirge”. “Lewis is not a physician, but has worked for plastic surgeons and regularly attends international medical conferences. She doesn’t receive fees from doctors; instead she charges clients $350 for an hour’s consultation, or a $1,000 for the full package.”

Comments

Anonymous
“$350 for an hour consultation”
Why do I think she is earning on both sides of the deal?
Her clients deserve it.
Anonymous
The point is there is money to be made in customer service–something which most doctors think beneathe them. A vanity they can indulge because they control the supply of doctors . . . .
Anonymous
” The point is there is money to be made in customer service–something which most doctors think beneathe them.”
The first part of your statement is true. I’m not so sure about the second. Seems like more of a snarky bias to me.
Oh, the vanity . . .
The Medicine Man
Just what the world is screaming out for: more middlemen!
As for the second anonymous comment, I would suggest that of all physicians, those practicing cosmetic surgery are the MOST attuned to “customer service” issues.
As an aside, I found the recommendation by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons president that “the patient also needs to check the credentials of the consultant” intriguing. I see a definite market opportunity here: Cosmetic Surgery Consultant Consultants.
John
Anonymous
anon 2.02–where to you practice medicine? Hours waiting to see a doctor, snide receptionists to whom you must discuss personal medical issues–and if you so unfortunate to have to go into a hospital, then the fun begins.
if medicine were a normal business (not a doctor monopoly protected by layers of regulation and insurance), it could never treat its customers as it does.
snarky bias? don’t think so
Anonymous
“if medicine were a normal business (not a doctor monopoly protected by layers of regulation and insurance).
Then you could pay–probably cash, since insurance is usually discounted and not at all an assurance of compensation–for all the fine service and accommodatios you would want. My guess is that you don’t want to actually do the paying, though.
Anonymous
Nor, for that matter, do you want to actually have to collect from individuals.
Anonymous
Anon. 2:45, you probably get as good as you give.
Anonymous
some of you people are clueless. If doctors are a “monopoly” because they have regulations to enter the profession, then so are the following:
1) lawyers
2) dentists
3) accountants
4) engineers
So please spare us that simpleton logic. Every profession has entry barriers.
As for “monopoly” you seem to forget that the USA takes more foreign doctors than all other naitons COMBINED. 35% of all doctors in the US are foreigners. Concurrently, we have one of the HIGHEST doctor/patient ratios in the world.
If anything, the US has a doctor glut, not a shortage. I’m not even including people like NPs and PAs that are allowed to do most things that a doctor can do.
Yeah thats a real tight “monopoly” isnt it? Midlevels like PAs and NPs everywhere, not to mention a huge foreign influx.
Anonymous
Hey clueless anon 11.59–it’s hardly controversial that the barriers to entry that the medical profession creates give doctors market power to engage in supracompetitive pricing and/or lowered output.
As Milton Friedmen said, When these effects are taken into account, I am myself persuaded that licensure has reduced both the quantity and quality of medical practice; that is has reduced the opportunities available to people who would like to be physicians, forcing them to pursue occupations they regard as less attractive; that it has forced the public to pay more for less satisfactory medical service, and that it has retarded technological development both in medicine itself and in the organization of medical practice.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0194e.asp
But, hey, he only won a Nobel Pricde in economics–what does Friedman know compared to an MD?
Anonymous
To Anon 10:45
Linus Pauling was a Nobel prize winner and was wrong about Vitamin C.
Dr. Friedman wrote that article in 1962. Since then, doctors and scientists have cured a lot of diseases and the life span is now longer by a several years.He assumes that the quality suffers because of the restriction on the quantity. What actually happened is that the quality of care is much improved. The very loose definition of monopoly would apply to veterinarians (try getting into Vet School),the NFL, the NBA,NHL, MBL,PGA,Dentists, Lawyers,and not just doctors. Should they not be restrictive in the NFL so we have more choices and better quality of players? I would rather have been a NBA player than a doctor if they would have let me and my friends in.
Anonymous
OK–I declare victory when doctors are reduced to saying Milton Friedman got his economics wrong. You know, maybe YOU have your economics wrong.
Anonymous
No, when Mlton Friedman is cited as having an opinion about the economics of medicine that flies straight in the face of the facts and history of the field, then he is to be questioned.
He isn’t the only Nobel in economics, and he didn’t get the prize for Medicine.
Anonymous
“Milton Friedman got his economics wrong”
He certainly got it wrong in 1962. He may want to revise it to fit the realities of this century.
Because if he was right, I’d be a touring Pro in the PGA along with millions of others and the quality of the PGA tour would have been much better.
The article is ancient and no longer apropos to modern day practice of medicine.

More in Uncategorized

Comments

Site

Channels

Subscribe

More in Uncategorized

Comments

Site

Channels