Comments on: Single-payer: Read the fine print http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/05/single-payer-read-fine-print.html Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:18:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: nshttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/05/single-payer-read-fine-print.html#comment-75330 ns Tue, 22 May 2007 15:11:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/05/single-payer-read-the-fine-print.html#comment-75330 Of course it is impossible that a serious deficiency of primary care could coexist with a glut of unnecessary high-tech interventions of dubious medical value! That would be having it "both ways!"<br/><br/>And while we're at it, insurance company bureaucrats don't currently make vital decisions about what care you can have (sometimes retroactively)! If it happens behind the closed doors of corporate board rooms, it must not really happen. Of course it is impossible that a serious deficiency of primary care could coexist with a glut of unnecessary high-tech interventions of dubious medical value! That would be having it “both ways!”

And while we’re at it, insurance company bureaucrats don’t currently make vital decisions about what care you can have (sometimes retroactively)! If it happens behind the closed doors of corporate board rooms, it must not really happen.

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/05/single-payer-read-fine-print.html#comment-75324 Anonymous Tue, 22 May 2007 13:07:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/05/single-payer-read-the-fine-print.html#comment-75324 Ironically, Eric, Kevin, and numerous other physicians make the exact opposite arguments when advocating for health courts.<br/><br/>They say a "panel of experts" will be good for health care, and that these courts will increase care, but at the same time that much of the care is unnecessary. Basically, we'll have an unelected bureacracy given complete authority over the value of a patient's claim, which will allegedly do a better job, free from susceptibility to money and the efforts of aggressive lobbyists. Ironically, Eric, Kevin, and numerous other physicians make the exact opposite arguments when advocating for health courts.

They say a “panel of experts” will be good for health care, and that these courts will increase care, but at the same time that much of the care is unnecessary. Basically, we’ll have an unelected bureacracy given complete authority over the value of a patient’s claim, which will allegedly do a better job, free from susceptibility to money and the efforts of aggressive lobbyists.

]]>