3% of MY revenue in this enviroment. Well, if this passes, physicians have no once else to BLAME EXCEPT OUR COLLEAGUES WHO CHOOSE TO STAY IN CT. If this law passes, I don’t care how hard it is, or how it’s spun as doctors abandoning patients, or greedy doctors.

DOs/MDs need to protest and march out with their feet! No other industry I can think of would accept this communist approach, except cigarettes (and we know how well that industry is growing anyway), would accept that!!
Stop worrying what will happen if you leave. The state will finally gets it’s chance of seting up free care clinics and staff them all with care extenders.

Absolutly crininal to target the doctors.

And the entire greedy doctors argument, oh please spare me. If our nations top cardiologists choose to spend time doing bikini waxes, and not improving upon their skills, what does that imply. MDs as a group need to stop fearing what the press, or community will think about them. Care for your patients, devote to your patients, but seeing 30 patients a day for a 9 minute visit, and that will obviously have to increase by 3%, does less of a service than jsut leaving the practice altogether.

MDs as gatekeepers? Sure in an dream world. Read the post about the forced ER admission. What about the recent theology of defensive medicine? Is that just paranoia.

3#rd year med student. I’m just getting started in real life practice myself. I don’t think it’s really as bad as all the whineing we do, but I sympathize completely. But if in 5 years, I discover it is as bad as my colleagues state, I may just shut down my practice and find an alternative career. I’m hoping that by building my practice like an efficiently run business, not a charity, keep my overhead low, productivity moderately high (but not at expense of patient face time), and make smart decisions about which managed care plans I CHOOSE to join from teh begining (not be desparate to take everything just so I can pay my med schl debt), I hope to have a successful ideal practice.

We doctors whine really well, but we are terrible at actually spending the time necessary to fight for what we think is wrong. How many people are active in AMPAC, local county state med societies, even join your local chamber of commerce as a business, or even read fighintgdocs.org? Stop complaining and act. If not the previous “oh I remember how good it was” generation, then my generation.

OK fine. American doctors are a scourge on the health of the nation.

Paying them less (by taxing them more) is going to help the problem how?

you win . . . we have the best infant mortality (but we just don’t know it).

happy?

now does that change anything? the only reason i picked that quip to support the general assertion that our health care is not quite stellar as it should/could be was because Dr. Kevin had just referred to the article in a recent post.

there are many more measures. what about the other ones specifically addressed? what about the unacceptable rate of iatrogenic death? how about the fact that autopsy studies reveal a 40% of misdiagnosis in terminal patients (1/3 of which could have prevented death if corrected) and the fact that same error rate has not improved since 1938 (this study was done by doctors at harvard using their hospital records)?

please address my point.

here . . .i will spell sumething incorrectly and give you a ready-made basis for tangential obfuscation.

I see you are rehashing someone else’s weak argument about one of many stats.

To begin: I agree infant mortality would – alone as measured – be a silly proxy for overall quality of our healthcare. Seeing as I did not use it as such, your “zing” is rhetorically and analytically empty.

But while we are on that subject, I read the article whose point you regurgertated so eagerly to prove whatever, and there are some other problems with infant mortality as a metric. Namely that much of the real differences have nothing at all to do with contemporary medicine and everything to do with (a) sanitation, and (b) basic vaccination and antibiotics – advances that have been around for quite a while.

One could dramatically raise the infant mortality rate in a few countries without an MD in sight if one wanted.

Anyways . . .damn statistics.

So assuming you don’t have some quirky post-modern belief that no measure is really up to the task of comparing health outcomes, I’ll just ask point blank: do we really get our money’s worth off that 2 trillion or could things be better . . . could we knock out those preventable errors and wasteful practices or are things just peachy?

And please try to actually address a substantive point if you choose to quibble. . . refrain from sophmoric attempts at “gotcha,” doc. I am open to honest debate of fact and policy, but I have better things to do than pointing out the obvious to you.

Well I didn’t . . . but your righteous indignation says much.

Please note (that which should be obvious): in my greed selection scenario – by definition – a doctor already practicing (or planning to) would fall into one of two groups: (1) those who pack up shop and move elsewhere because of the tax and (2) those who don’t.

Neither is inherently morally superior. Just a predictable effect of said tax (which all the doc.s here seem to acknowledge).

So that being said . . . let us see why perhaps your argument is going to elicit little sympathy amongst anyone other than yourselves (tho’ realistically your “non-atruistic” threats may likely kill the tax).

First: you make nearly 2x what doctors elsewhere make and a lot more than your patients.

The average incomes of $274,000 for specialists and $173,000 for general practitioners are, respectively, 6.6 and 4.2 times those of the average patient. The rate in the other countries is 4 and 3.2.

Next: Student loans?

Compare median lifetime annual salary to median educational debt at graduation, and you will find that doctors do better than those in other professions requiring advanced degrees (lawyers, engineers, architects, etc).

Lastly: What do we get?

http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2007/03/policyquality_w.html

“Despite this high expenditure in the US, the 2005 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of sicker adults from six countries (Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, United Kingdom and US) found that ‘(t)he United States often stands out with high medical errors and inefficient care and has the worst performance for access/cost barriers and financial burdens.’ 4 The US lags behind many other countries in indices of quality of care. In 2006 the US ranked 43rd among the world’s nations in infant mortality, with 6.43 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, behind the top performing nations such as Singapore (2.29), Sweden (2.76), France (4.21), Canada (4.69) and United Kingdom (5.08), 5 and was 29th among developed countries in maternal mortality. 6 Schoen et al. (2006)7 found that the US lags behind other countries on indicators of mortality and healthy life expectancy, with the US performance relative to a benchmark of 100 being 51 for efficiency and 66 across all domains, the lowest for any comparable country. A 2006 survey of primary care physicians in Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States revealed ’striking differences in elements of practice systems that underpin quality and efficiency. ….. U.S. physicians were among the least likely to have extensive clinical information systems or incentives targeted on quality and the most likely to report that their patients have difficulty paying for care.’”

Now please stop acting like petulant children and please rationally respond to what will likely become a common policy debate in the near-future.

Here . . . I will start:

We do need to lower your administrative burdens (and thus costs).

Plus, I think that a completely protected/confidential “Morbidity and Mortality” national database/forum should be established so that doctors can discuss and learn from each other without the fear of this info coming back to hurt them. Setting the issue of malpractice aside, I think this would go a long way toward improving quality of care.

And yes . . . pharma/device mfrs/hospitals/ins/hmos all have contributed greatly to this mess as well.
But despite their economic encroachment on your autonomy – YOU ARE THE GATEKEEPERS – so you (collectively . . . as a profession) could do alot more than protecting your own pocket-book. I don’t mean that as an insult . . . it is a sincere request.

This either/or (us/them) mentality is neither descriptively accurate nor analytically helpful.