HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan)
Subject: Re: health care industry woes
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 01:32:41 GMT

In article <By6q3M.MCC@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu
 (Herman Rubin) writes:

>The last few statements are, each and every one of them, wrong.  There is not
>a need for licensing, but for information.  It is unfortunately NOT the case

If you believe this then why do you say the following:

>needed; physicians need to be evaluated as to judgment, ability to handle
>routine cases, surgical expertise, and knowing what to do when they do not
>know enough.  Right now, we have no expert diagnosticians, nor are we likely

Do we need to eliminate licensing, or do we neeed to increase
regulation of doctors?  Effectively these are mutually
exclusive.  

And while it is true that reform of phyician credentialing
is needed, do you really believe that we have ** NO ** 
expert diagnosticians?!?!?!  Let's not exaggerate the
situation.

>As to drugs, if one is willing to believe that there is such a
>thing as a safe effective drug, one is either ignorant or stupid.  

Of course there is no 100% safe or 100% effective drug.  
In fact, nothing in life is 100% safe or 100% effective.
Who said anything is?  The goal of our medical system,
as a whole, is to assist patients in properly assessing
risks vs. benefits for any potential treatment. 
-- 
Richard Kaplan M.D.           Medical Software Exchange BBS
806 2nd St. SW # 104          (507) 281-1989 14,400 HST
Rochester, MN  55902          (507) 281-1689 Voice
PP-ASEL-IA     N4VRB          rkaplan@mayo.edu|netcom.netcom.com  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan)
Subject: Re: health care industry woes
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 01:30:18 GMT

In article <Bxx9qy.9FE@max.physics.sunysb.edu> sbpress@csws20
 (The Stony Brook Press) writes:

>	I also think, that the AMA's monopoly on health care should be
>stoped.
>
> Let other organiztions provide liseneses and training also.
>


The AMA does not issue medical licenses and does not sponsor
any residency training programs.  State medical boards license
physicians and teaching hospitals train physicians.  Many
physicians are not even members of the AMA.

-- 
Richard Kaplan M.D.           Medical Software Exchange BBS
806 2nd St. SW # 104          (507) 281-1989 14,400 HST
Rochester, MN  55902          (507) 281-1689 Voice
PP-ASEL-IA     N4VRB          rkaplan@mayo.edu|netcom.netcom.com  
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: choy@skorpio.usask.ca (I am a terminator.)
Subject: What's the state of the art in computer simulation?
Organization: University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:28:02 GMT

Can computer simulations reduce the amount of testing medical
procedures, drug usage, etc. on live subjects? There must be
difficulties in convincing the general public that a computer
can replace testing altogether, let along in getting such a
computer to run, but testing is expensive, time consuming, and
arduous. Computers might be used to decrease the testing
workload.

Henry Choy
choy@cs.usask.ca
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
Subject: Orphan Drug Bill Status
Date: 17 Nov 92 22:00:24 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Does anyone know the current status or the future standing of
any orphan drug measures or bills pending in the Senate or
Congress.

Having a mild form of Tourettes Syndrome, it has become
something I am more and more interested in, especially in
light of the rising costs of drug manufacturing, research,
FDA approval times, and the changes coming both on Capital
Hill and at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Congress has a hard enough time remembering why we sent them
there in the first place let alone concentrate on needed
drugs and treatments for what is sometime a small number of
individuals.

But we all VOTE !


-- 
David De Trolio - (detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu)
--------------------------------------------------
Reagan-Bush 1980-1988 + Bush-Quayle 1988-1992
Twelve Years of Strong American Leadership
From: roth@math.washington.edu (John Roth)
Subject: I am the AMA
Organization: "University of Washington, Mathematics, Seattle"
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 20:05:38 GMT

I think a good portion of the authors here are misinformed about the nature
of the AMA.  So let's here it: WHAT IS THE AMA?

My answer, right or wrong:  

The AMA is a professional organization of physicians, something of a union.  
It has no specific authority, but has widespread influence in setting standards
of medical practice and education.  It also advocates the interests of its 
members.  Compare the similar ABA, or Nat'l Assosciation for the Advancement 
of Science.

As such, it is impossible to "regulate" the AMA, any more than it is possible
to regulate the National Education Assosciation, Teamsters Union, or even
the American Mathematical Society.  Statements that it is a monopoly are
nonsensical, because it exists by consensus of its members and for no other
reason.  It is an assosciation; as such it can not be abolished or regulated. 
One can only say the AMA should do this/that.  It is solely up to them, 
in the end.

In fact, it is not the only medical organization, right?  Just the largest by
far.

So, inform me and/or be informed.

John Roth
roth@math.washington.edu

P.S. I'm not an AMA (or NRA) member.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: health care industry woes
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:35:35 GMT

amichiel@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Allen J Michielsen) writes:

> A friends sister is covered by the Canadian plan.  Her family has a
>history of breast cancer, (mother died, sister died, granmother
>died...) and she has a good history of religious Mammograms on a 6
>month interval.  Her Canadian health care provider either did not
>read the films, or misread the films as clean while they were not, 3
>times in a row.  Finally the problem was caught on the 4th set (still
>unknown to her) and she was informed.  However, the Canadian system
>went back and has disallowed all coverage for treatment. The cancer
>was so big, she is being punished for not getting earlier treatment.
>The hospital says they told her about the 3 earlier lumps, but there
>is no mention of it in her files, just a reference to the films being
>taken, and followup call to patient.  Nobody in Toronto wants to treat
>her, the government won't pay, and she doesn't have other insurance...

One last note ... other than the fact that this takes place in Toronto
this story sounds otherwise like all the stories that I hear down here
in the U.S. ...

As I had mentioned, this is a story that Canadian journalists would
give their left ... um, uh ... you know! ... for; universal health
insurance is probably the most sacred thing for Canadians, moreso
than the French or the Germans because they don't know what private
insurance problems are like in America and with larger populations
can sustain more specialized types of private practicioners.  Any
time there is a problem, often billing screwups where someone gets
a bill in the mail that should have gone to the insurance fund, it
gets on the local news.  I'm serious ... every year, they have one
story like that on every local news show of every city I've lived
in (Winnipeg, Calgary, Toronto, Montreal).

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare				Jesus Saves!
> gld@cunixd.cc.columbia.EDU 		Gretzky gets the rebound -
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			he shoots, he scores!
From: jason@ab20.larc.nasa.gov (Jason Austin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
Subject: Re: Health Care Costs
Date: 18 Nov 92 08:43:16
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: Jason C. Austin <j.c.austin@larc.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ab20.larc.nasa.gov
In-reply-to: cmriggin@iastate.edu's message of Wed, 18 Nov 1992 02:56:16 GMT

In article <Bxw5Ht.B54@news.iastate.edu> cmriggin@iastate.edu (Christin M Riggins) writes:

->    I am doing a research paper on health care costs in the United States and
-> ways to improve our current system.  I would REALLY be grateful and truely
-> appreciate any and all responses to my survey.  Please email responses to
-> 
-> cmriggin@iastate.edu
->         or
-> TYAU7@isuvax.iastate.edu
-> 
-> Like I said, any and all responses would be greatly appreciated.
-> 
-> Thanks,
-> 
-> C. Marie Riggins
-> Iowa State University
-> 
-> 
-> 1.  Do you feel that the current U.S. health care system is effective? (Y/N)

	Yes.  Sick people from around the world come here for treatment. 

-> 
-> 2.  Do you feel health care in the U.S. would be improved to switching to a
->     universal health care system similar to Canadas? (Y/N)

	No.

-> 3.  Do you think that Bill Clinton's proposed health care revisions will
->     improve
->       a) availability of health care? (Y/N)
	
	Maybe.

->       b) quality of health care? (Y/N)

	It will reduce the quality.

->       c) cost of health care? (Y/N)

	It will not change the cost.

-> 4.  Would you be willing to pay higher taxes in order to improve the health
->     care system? (Y/N)

	No, it does not need government based improvement.

-> 5.  What do you think is the number one problem with health care in the U.S.
->     today?

	Legal action and excessive settlements against doctors.  A
doctor's largest expense is liability insurance, and that cost is
passed on to the consumer.

-> Thanks again for your help.  Results of the survey should be available around
-> the middle of December if anyone is interested.
->
From: sbpress@engws3 (The Stony Brook Press)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
Subject: Re: Repealing medical licensure laws
Date: 22 Nov 92 22:03:23 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The State University of New York at Stony Brook
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan) writes:
: In article <1992Nov21.123250.29506@genie.slhs.udel.edu>
:  starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
: 
: 
: I am NOT saying that MDs know all the answers and that homeopathy
: and other non-traditional techniques do not have something to
: offer.  But those who wish to introduce newer techniques must
: back them up with some data to show their efficacy and all
: medical treatment should be subject to licensure of some sort. 

I think that part of the problem is that the orthodox medicine does
not acknowledge the fact that there is data to support alternative
therapies, and go against some traditional therapies like chemotherapy.

for more information read books by Gary Null.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: health care industry woes
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 07:05:13 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.202402.5747@news.columbia.edu> gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) writes:
}starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
}>This is quite strange to me.  It's like saying that the University of
}>California is private, when its a creature of the State, pure and simple.
}
}I hate to nitpick here, but isn't the University of California at
}least autonomous?  It is run by the Regents of U of C and collects
}some pretty heft tuition with a lower in-state residents rate that
}is subsidized publicly.

It's owned by the State.  The Regents are appointed by the State.  The tuition
for in-state residents is paid by the State.  California residents only have
to pay "fees" on top of tuition.

}I do see the point that you're trying to make ... if just one penny;
}but, that makes Columbia a "creature of the State" since we get cash
}grants/funds/etc. outright and annually from New York State.

Incidentally, this is the rationale for control of curriculum by State and
Federal government here in the USA: this breach of their autonomy is a string
tied to the receipt of public funds.  The only college I know of that refuses
to accept the money with these conditions is Hillsdale.

So, who owns Canadian public hospitals?  Who appoints those who run them?

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: hack@arabia.uucp (Edmund Hack)
Subject: Re: health care industry woes
Organization: Lockheed ESC, Houston
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 21:09:22 GMT

In article <Bxx9qy.9FE@max.physics.sunysb.edu> sbpress@csws20 (The Stony Brook Press) writes:
>	I also think, that the AMA's monopoly on health care should be
>stoped.

I can't let this bit of folklore go unchallenged.  The American Medical
Assn. has no direct control of medical licencing, medical education or
any other aspect of medical practice. Licences in the US are granted by
the states, via their own laws and procedures.  In most states, a
licence is granted via passing one of two exams: the FLEX or the
National Boards.  The FLEX is a two day long test, given once each year
in June.  The Boards are given in chunks as you pass through medical
school.  Some states (such as Texas, my home) do not honor the Boards,
only the FLEX.  There is a persistent myth that the AMA somehow controls
medicine in the US.  This is not so.

Many, if not most doctors (MD & DO) are not members of the AMA.  My wife
was, but no longer is.  She is a member of the local and state society,
and the state and national specialty associations, only.  The AMA has
little or no direct power over how a doctor practices.  In fact, the
standards set by specialty associations are more influential.  This was
not true in the past - membership in the local medical society was
usually a requirement for admission to a hospital staff and the local
required state membership and the state, national.  This was held to be
an antitrust violation back in the 60s as a result of several lawsuits.
In fact, there is little any medical society can do to police the
actions of its members.  That is strictly a function of the state
boards, which can suspend or revoke a licence.

However, the AMA _has_ a strong lobbying group, has excellent educational
programs and publishes some good journals.  It is quite effective in
monitoring the actions of HCFA, HHS, etc. and crying foul when they
break promises (which seems to be about once a week, but that is another
story.)
>
> Let other organiztions provide liseneses and training also.
>
As I stated above, the licencing of doctors is a state matter. For that
metter, so is medical education, with most medical schools run by state
university systems.  There are only a handful of private medicals
schools left: Harvard, Stanford, Yale, Baylor, U/Chicago are among the
most prominent and even they get heavy subsidy from the Federal govt.

>This will resuce the cost of health care.

Yeah, right.......
-- 
Edmund Hack - Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. - Houston, TX
hack@aio.jsc.nasa.gov - I speak only for myself, unless blah, blah..
"You know, I think we're all Bozos on this bus."
"Detail Dress Circuits" "Belt: Above A, Below B" "Close B ClothesMode"
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 09:40:34 EST
From: <DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
Subject: Re: Health Care & Malpractice
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Nov18.175202.25356@vexcel.com>, dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
says:
>
>Are there any statistics that actually show whether malpractice is a
>significant part of medical expense in the U.S?  It would interesting to
>know just how much money is awarded for malpractice suits, whether
>througf awards or settlements and also how much is paid for the
>insurance.  I have read that health care costs $800 billion in the U.S.
>What percentage is actually spent on legal-related expenses?

The typical physician practice, according to the AMA spends about 10 to
15 percent of their total costs (15-30,000) on malpractice premiums.
That average varies widely by specialty and geographic location.  In
recent years malpractice premiums have actually fallen by 5-10% per year.
One reason malpractice premiums are high is that physician grossly over-
estimate (by a factor of 3 to 4) the probability of being sued.

Estimates by the AMA, GAO, and other sources put the total cost of our
litigation system, including defensive medicine, at 20-25 billion dollars.


Dennis G. Shea, Penn State
<<DISCLAIMER>>
Ain't nobody's bizness but my own. I'll be happy to accept all
the credit for anything I've written.  It's funny, however, how
employers only acknowledge the profitable ideas.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine,sci.med,alt.activism,misc.headlines
From: ndallen@r-node.gts.org (Nigel Allen)
Subject: OSHA Statistics Show U.S. Workplace Far from Safe, Says AFL-CIO
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 07:07:42 GMT

Here is a press release from the AFL-CIO.

 OSHA Statistics Show U.S. Workplace Far from Safe, Says AFL-CIO
 To: National Desk, Labor Writer
 Contact: Rex Hardesty of the AFL-CIO, 202-637-5010

   WASHINGTON, Nov. 18 -- AFL-CIO Job Safety and Health Director 
Peg Seminario made the following comment on today's new OSHA data:

   The 1991 occupational injury and illness statistics released today
by the Department of Labor show that America's workplaces are far
from safe.
   In some of the most hazardous industries, including meatpacking
and auto production, the injury and illness rate increased
substantially.  The health services sector and hospitals also
experienced significant increases in injuries and illnesses, with
539,000 workplace injuries reported for health services, including
308,000 in hospitals.
   Cumulative trauma disorders continue to skyrocket and now account
for more than 60 percent of all reported occupational illnesses.
More than 220,000 workers were afflicted with new cases of carpal
tunnel syndrome and other cumulative trauma disorders in 1991.
   While an overall decrease in the rate of reported injuries and
illnesses is good news, the fact is such injury and illness rates
historically have fallen during recessions.  We saw a similar drop in
the injury and illness rate during the recessions of 1974-75 and
1981-82.  The fact remains that more than 6 million workers were
injured or made ill by hazardous working conditions in 1991.
   Today's statistics demonstrate that the Clinton Administration
faces a mighty task in putting the nation's job safety program back
on track.  The AFL-CIO stands ready to work with the new
Administration on legislation, regulations, and other measures to
help fulfill the law's promise of a safe job for every American
worker.
 -30-
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: health care industry woes
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 05:36:07 GMT


>When Medicare insists on paying all doctors in the area the
>same fee for a given service, a tremendously inefficient
>economic market is created, regardless of whether the fee
>itself is too high or too low.  And most doctors I know
>(myself included) are FAR, FAR more upset with the 
>BUREACRACY required in dealing with Medicare than with
>the actual dollar amounts involved.

Oh, I see what Americans think when the word "public" is added to
"health insurance" ... up north, there is no huge bureaucracy for any
of the provincial insurance plans, they number in the dozens in each
province and a handful at the federal level.  Half of them tender
bills from the private practices and hospitals, the other half (and
all the feds) work on non-health stuff for their Health Minister whose
real job (the position takes up one cabinet post, necessary for our
regional political score-carding games) is usually in another area ...
federal Health Minister Benoit Bouchard's real job since January was
the recent Constitutional deal.  His only Health function was axing
Quebec's proposal for $5-20 token deductibles in their insurance plan
(the guidelines are federal).  The guy before him was working on the
US-Canada free trade agreement most of the time.  It's all autopilot.

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare				Jesus Saves!
> gld@cunixd.cc.columbia.EDU 		Gretzky gets the rebound -
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			he shoots, he scores!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: Truth in Labeling and Herbal Remedies
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 20:01:46 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.140413.2956@cbfsb.cb.att.com> bill@ixcim.att.com (Bill Duncan) writes:
>
>In article <1992Nov17.071925.4102@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, dalton@spot.Colorado.EDU (lizard man) writes:
>|> 
>|> 
>|> So what's the scoop? Are traditional medicines, herbal remedies,
>|> megavitamins, Sleepytime (tm) Tea and nutritional supplements 
>|> still legal to use in America? How long do we have?
>
>I'd like to hear what's happening on this also.
>
>How far are they going to take it? I mean even things like
>prunes and traditional spices and herbs have medicinal qualities.
>
>Bill

I don't think the law passed yet.  And I think its mainly a labeling
law.  Prunes don't usually come with labels.
>-- 
>+----------------------------------------------------+
>| Bill Duncan                        AT&T Bell Labs  |
>| bill@ixcim.att.com                 Naperville IL   |
>+----------------------------------------------------+


-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: health care industry woes
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 10:45:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.033925.14890@netcom.com> rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan) writes:
}In article <1992Nov19.104730.24485@genie.slhs.udel.edu>
} starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
}
}>The best thing to do to the AMA would be to repeal medical licensure laws,
}>opening up this cartel to competition.
}
}Liberalization of licensure laws will create many pseudo-scientific
}practitioners who will want a piece of the Medicaid/Medicare
}budget.  It will in no way reduce medical prices or improve
}quality of care.

I see no reason why the State should be any better at determining the
quality of medical practitioners than the private sector, and plenty of
reasons why it should be worse.  A medical license is no guarantee against
pseudo-science.  Why shouldn't opening up the market for this form of
highly skilled labor induce competition (assuming the absence of State
financing) which would reduce prices and improve quality?

We agree thus far about medical liability.

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire