1) Every few weeks or so, there is an “ED overcrowding story” detailing the crisis and its associated horrors.

My take: The story never seems to change, and always seems worse than the last one.

This is indeed a serious problem. Overcrowding leads to rushed treatment and missed diagnoses, not to mention that care in the emergency venue is often the most expensive.

The obvious solution would be to maximize access to outpatient and primary care. Retail and minute clinics are capitalizing on this demand and seemingly are thriving (until they get hit with the first big malpractice suit).

Physician access is key. Not only do we need more primary care doctors, the current ones need to find ways to maximize their access. Open-access scheduling and the ability to see walk-in patients are options to be considered.

2) A Washington Post piece suggests that preventive medicine doesn’t necessarily save money.

My take: Whether saving money should be the primary goal of a health system is for another debate.

What is problematic is that the costs of the Clinton and Obama plans are said to be partially defrayed by the emphasis on preventive care. That isn’t going to happen.

The progressives will have to convince the electorate that their primary goal of universal coverage is going to raise taxes cost more money. Period. Stop trying to hide costs by playing a shell game with preventive care and electronic records.

For the first time ever on this blog, I give John Edwards credit. At least he’s honest about the need to raise taxes if you want universal coverage.

Health is expensive. The public needs to understand that. Michael Moore does a tremendous disservice whenever he trumpets “free” European health care.

3) Digital mammograms are leading to increased recall rates for additional imaging.

My take: Another example of how the latest technology may increase cost and patient anxiety by necessitating further testing.

The latest diagnostic studies, like digital mammograms and breast MRIs, increase sensitivity at the cost of more “false positive” results. Since every finding needs to be followed up by increasingly invasive tests, like a biopsy, the probability of patient worry and test complications rise.