Re: The New Generation of Physicians are Frauds!



A

Al Hephy

Guest
tintinet <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] (N-H-P) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > WARNING! That physician examining you may now legally be a fraud
> > totally unqualified to diagnose. :(
> >
> > Losing the Touch
> > http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2848-2003Jun16?language=printer
> > "As Technology and Medical Education Change, Doctors May Lose the
> > Ability to Perform Physical Exams
> >
> > By Jennifer Obel
> > Special to The Washington Post
> > Tuesday, June 17, 2003; Page HE01
> >
> > It is 2 o'clock in the morning. So far six patients have been admitted
> > during my overnight shift. As the resident on call, I am expected to
> > take a history, perform a physical exam and review lab results and
> > imaging to diagnose and manage these patients' illnesses. One patient,
> > a 45-year-old man, complains of sharp abdominal pain. The CT scan of
> > his abdomen that was done in the emergency room was, as we say in
> > medicine, "unremarkable."
> >
> > I am debating whether to perform a complete physical. What more will I
> > learn from examining his abdomen that the CT has not already gleaned?
> > While I know that he expects a full exam -- the physician's trademark
> > -- I am already running behind. Nurses are paging me with medication
> > requests for the three other patients I have yet to evaluate. I am
> > swamped, so I do the bare minimum: a cursory physical exam.
> >
> > Like many of my fellow residents, I am little trained in the "art" of
> > medicine. We embarked on our medical careers during an era of dizzying
> > advances in technology. Unlike our more seasoned attending physicians,
> > we grew up in the shadow of modern medicine, where imaging has
> > supplanted clinical skills. An echocardiogram (not the swishing sound
> > we hear through a stethoscope when the heart's valves close) tells us
> > whether a patient has a heart murmur. An MRI (not our neurologic exam)
> > tells us a patient suffered a stroke. Lab tests (not the patient's
> > swollen, warm fingers) tell us that she has rheumatoid arthritis."
>
> A bit harsh, here, John. While I agree medicine ought to focus more on
> draining the swamps, those in the best position to effectively provide
> preventive medicine are parents, educators, and individuals practicing
> upon themselves. Most physicians are left to try to battle the
> alligators of fully developed disease.

Actually not harsh enough. Those of us who are old enough observed
the gradual change in the way medicine is practiced. The most abrupt
change was abandoning the 'house call'. Never mind why, it is a milestone
in the change of attitude and emphasis in medicine to eventually reach
the point where we are now, with a primary goal of maximizing the
flow of patients through the doctor's office and the trend toward
depersonalization.

I get more personal attention when getting my car repaired!

It's NOT reasonable to expect 'everyone' in the population to learn
'preventive medicine'. When 'everyone' is responsible, then no one
is responsible.

Al
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Doug Brooks <[email protected]> wrote:
>N-H-P wrote:
>>
>> We are lead to believe from the assembly line mentality of Modern
>> Medicine that there is a shortage of doctors, when if anything there
>> are clearly too many hospitals and too many physicians in the major
>> metropolitan areas of the US. And, that these wonderfully greedy
>> people are so desperate for money, eh ... help, that medical residents
>> routinely work 80 hours weeks. And, that patients should be grateful
>> for being treated by a sleep deprived person totally unqualified to
>> diagnose because formerly they were working 120 hour work weeks!
>
>The plain and simple economic truth is that there IS a shortage of
>doctors. The AMA has a de facto monopoly over the supply of doctors,
>and it is a field with high barriers to entry. It takes a great
>personal investment in both time and money to become a doctor. The
>supply is small, and the demand is high, so doctors can charge top dollar.

The most bizarre thing is that not long ago they wanted medical schools
to graduate less doctors claiming a glut. This alone seems like a violation
of the oath. When medical care is suffering through lack of doctors, to
try to tighten the supply even more is simply unethical.

--
Be a counter terrorist perpetrate random senseless acts of kindness
Rave: Immanentization of the Eschaton in a Temporary Autonomous Zone.
We are nothing but sunlight detours, in the road between fusion and eternity.
 
Doug Brooks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> N-H-P wrote:
> >
> > We are lead to believe from the assembly line mentality of Modern
> > Medicine that there is a shortage of doctors, when if anything there
> > are clearly too many hospitals and too many physicians in the major
> > metropolitan areas of the US. And, that these wonderfully greedy
> > people are so desperate for money, eh ... help, that medical residents
> > routinely work 80 hours weeks. And, that patients should be grateful
> > for being treated by a sleep deprived person totally unqualified to
> > diagnose because formerly they were working 120 hour work weeks!
>
> The plain and simple economic truth is that there IS a shortage of
> doctors. The AMA has a de facto monopoly over the supply of doctors,
> and it is a field with high barriers to entry. It takes a great
> personal investment in both time and money to become a doctor. The
> supply is small, and the demand is high, so doctors can charge top dollar.
>
> In fact, these days, they have to charge top dollar as the costs of
> running an office, with sky-high malpractice insurance on top of
> secretaries, nurses, PA's, and highly specialized equipment is enormous.
> The assembly-line nature of the business is so that you can actually
> afford to get in and see a doctor when you need to.
>

Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?
Al
 
Al Hephy wrote:
> Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?
> Al
>

I would say the tort system is the biggest factor.
 
"Al Hephy" <[email protected]> wrote

> Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?

Transplanting organs where the blood type does not match.

Operating on the wrong patient.

Surgeons carving initials on the bellies of female patients.

Leaving sponges and other tools inside obese patients after an
operation.

Hospital staff needlessly giving elderly patients pneumonia by
intentionally exposing them to too much air conditioning and other
drafts.

Cutting off the wrong leg, on the correct patient.

Giving a patient the WRONG medication, or the wrong dosage.

Entering the wrong coordinates in the CT scanner.

And, let us not forget physicians making the WRONG diagnoses.
--
John Gohde,
Achieving good Nutrition is an Art, NOT a Science!

Get started on improving your personal health and fitness, today.
http://www.Tutorials.NaturalHealthPerspective.com/
Offering 14 easy to understand lessons that will change your life.
 
"N-H-P" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Al Hephy" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> > Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?
>
> Transplanting organs where the blood type does not match.
>
> Operating on the wrong patient.
>
> Surgeons carving initials on the bellies of female patients.
>
> Leaving sponges and other tools inside obese patients after an
> operation.
>
> Hospital staff needlessly giving elderly patients pneumonia by
> intentionally exposing them to too much air conditioning and other
> drafts.
>
> Cutting off the wrong leg, on the correct patient.
>
> Giving a patient the WRONG medication, or the wrong dosage.
>
> Entering the wrong coordinates in the CT scanner.
>
> And, let us not forget physicians making the WRONG diagnoses.
> --

What's your point? Anyone who reads the newspaper could produce a far longer
list than that. But what you need to do is prove your assertion that these
mistakes are more common now than in the past and how that translates to
higher malpractice awards and therefore higher premiums. You can't just rail
against medical "buffoons" without backing up your claims or you just look
stupid.

HMc
 
"Mike Leake" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> These days people will sue at the drop of a hat. I recall reading
> stats awhile back on lawyers per capita in developed nations. The US
> led the pack by a longshot. Whoever was in second place had something
> like one-tenth the US percentage, and whichever country was in third
> place was very far back of the one in second. Many lawyers per capita
> means there's a lot of legal business out there being created, and
> some of that is naturally geared toward medical malpractice suits.

Those figures are somewhat inflated by the fact that the US is one of the
few countries that doesn't make a distinction between barristers and
solicitors. If you just look at admissions to the bar, you'll get a
misleading picture because in most countries those who practice transaction
law rather than trial law (e.g. most corporate lawyers) aren't admitted to
the bar.
 
"Howard McCollister" <[email protected]> wrote
---------
> "N-H-P" <[email protected]> wrote
---------
> > "Al Hephy" <[email protected]> wrote
---------
> > > Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?
> >
> > Transplanting organs where the blood type does not match.
> >
> > Operating on the wrong patient.

> What's your point?

I responded to Hephy's question.

> Anyone who reads the newspaper could produce a far longer
> list than that.

Yeah, the list of physician stupidity goes on for ever.

> But what you need to do is prove your assertion that these
> mistakes are more common now than in the past and how that translates to
> higher malpractice awards and therefore higher premiums.

That is what the Medical profession needs to do. :)

> You can't just rail against medical "buffoons" without backing
> up your claims or you just look stupid.

Your mind control tricks don't work on me. :)

Of course the real reason for the sharp rise in the cost of
malpractice awards is the ever increasing depersonalized medical
experience.

When you have to pay top dollar the public wont tolerate *any*
mistakes. They certainly wont put up with the really really stupid
mistakes caused by depersonalized medicine. :)
--
John Gohde,
Achieving good Health is an Art, NOT a Science!
http://NaturalHealthPerspective.com/
The ONLY Frauds in Health are those who couldn't care less about
prevention.
 
Doug Brooks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Al Hephy wrote:
> > Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?
> > Al
> >
>
> I would say the tort system is the biggest factor.

And you would be right, of course, but would not explain
the great disparity between medical lawsuits and all
other liability cases combined. Just the numbers are a
clue for any thinking person. Clearly not enough is being
done to weed out incompetents and too much is being
done to cover up for them.

Very strong 'union' at work.

Al
 
Al Hephy wrote:
>
> Doug Brooks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > Al Hephy wrote:
> > > Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?
> > > Al
> > >
> >
> > I would say the tort system is the biggest factor.
>
> And you would be right, of course, but would not explain
> the great disparity between medical lawsuits and all
> other liability cases combined. Just the numbers are a
> clue for any thinking person. Clearly not enough is being
> done to weed out incompetents and too much is being
> done to cover up for them.
>
> Very strong 'union' at work.
>
> Al

Are doctors raising patients' expectations regarding the benefits of
screening, drugs, surgery, other medical procedures unrealistically? Do
patients believe that they will become virtually immortal and somehow
die in perfect health when they do finally die if they do everything the
doctor says?

Ob-gyns are among the most often sued physicians even though the numbers
of bad outcomes haven't increased significantly over the last 50 years.
Why do prospective parents believe they will have a "perfect" outcome?
Because they have been convinced by those same doctors that obstetric
medicine is far more reliable/scientific than it actually is and that if
you follow all of the doctor's instructions and do exactly as you are
told, your baby will be perfect? So when the result is less than perfect
you figure someone must have done something wrong and it wasn't you so
it must have been the doctor?
 
Misdiagnosis is not medical malpractice. It may be bad practice but not
malpractice. There is no negligence, just a practicioner doing his job
poorly.

"N-H-P" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Howard McCollister" <[email protected]> wrote
> ---------
> > "N-H-P" <[email protected]> wrote
> ---------
> > > "Al Hephy" <[email protected]> wrote
> ---------
> > > > Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?
> > >
> > > Transplanting organs where the blood type does not match.
> > >
> > > Operating on the wrong patient.
>
> > What's your point?
>
> I responded to Hephy's question.
>
> > Anyone who reads the newspaper could produce a far longer
> > list than that.
>
> Yeah, the list of physician stupidity goes on for ever.
>
> > But what you need to do is prove your assertion that these
> > mistakes are more common now than in the past and how that translates to
> > higher malpractice awards and therefore higher premiums.
>
> That is what the Medical profession needs to do. :)
>
> > You can't just rail against medical "buffoons" without backing
> > up your claims or you just look stupid.
>
> Your mind control tricks don't work on me. :)
>
> Of course the real reason for the sharp rise in the cost of
> malpractice awards is the ever increasing depersonalized medical
> experience.
>
> When you have to pay top dollar the public wont tolerate *any*
> mistakes. They certainly wont put up with the really really stupid
> mistakes caused by depersonalized medicine. :)
> --
> John Gohde,
> Achieving good Health is an Art, NOT a Science!
> http://NaturalHealthPerspective.com/
> The ONLY Frauds in Health are those who couldn't care less about
> prevention.
 
"Terri" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Ob-gyns are among the most often sued physicians even though the numbers
> of bad outcomes haven't increased significantly over the last 50 years.
> Why do prospective parents believe they will have a "perfect" outcome?
> Because they have been convinced by those same doctors that obstetric
> medicine is far more reliable/scientific than it actually is and that if
> you follow all of the doctor's instructions and do exactly as you are
> told, your baby will be perfect? So when the result is less than perfect
> you figure someone must have done something wrong and it wasn't you so
> it must have been the doctor?

Lawyer TV ads help promote the perception that the doctor is
the cause of anything going wrong. We get those ads a lot here in my area of
the midatlantic states.
 
Terri wrote:

> Al Hephy wrote:
> >
> > Doug Brooks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > > Al Hephy wrote:
> > > > Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?
> > > > Al
> > > >
> > >
> > > I would say the tort system is the biggest factor.
> >
> > And you would be right, of course, but would not explain
> > the great disparity between medical lawsuits and all
> > other liability cases combined. Just the numbers are a
> > clue for any thinking person. Clearly not enough is being
> > done to weed out incompetents and too much is being
> > done to cover up for them.
> >
> > Very strong 'union' at work.
> >
> > Al
>
> Are doctors raising patients' expectations regarding the benefits of
> screening, drugs, surgery, other medical procedures unrealistically? Do
> patients believe that they will become virtually immortal and somehow
> die in perfect health when they do finally die if they do everything the
> doctor says?
>
> Ob-gyns are among the most often sued physicians even though the numbers
> of bad outcomes haven't increased significantly over the last 50 years.
> Why do prospective parents believe they will have a "perfect" outcome?
> Because they have been convinced by those same doctors that obstetric
> medicine is far more reliably scientific than it actually is and that if
> you follow all of the doctor's instructions and do exactly as you are
> told, your body will be perfect? So when the result is less than perfect
> you figure someone must have done something wrong and it wasn't you; so
> it must have been the doctor?

Hi again: I have also noted that there is a small portion of society that
Spends much of their lives SUEING anyone that crosses their paths for one
phoney reason or another. Some ARE lejitimate...but MANY are NOT!

Admittedly, there is a large portion of medical mal-practices. I have run across
TWO such individuals and groups. Kaiser Permanente went out of BIZ
because they were very careless as a general rule. They even caused me major
stroke in the 1960's that still hangs on in the form of partial partial paralysis
brought by a STROKE caused by :liquid DYE used in the veins allegedly to
"SEE" the blood better..SAY WHAT??? What a goofy idea!

The NEWER generations just graduating SEEM to be MUCH better due the
histrionics involved over the last 20 years or more.. Prices are higher as well!
Where will it END?? Quien Sabe' Blessings! Trebor M
--
Worlds’ largest producer of Lin Xhi (Kombucha) Synergisms
Homogenizing milk KILLS! Over 1 million Autopsies do not lie...
 
Doug Brooks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> The plain and simple economic truth is that there IS a shortage of
> doctors. The AMA has a de facto monopoly over the supply of doctors,
> and it is a field with high barriers to entry. It takes a great
> personal investment in both time and money to become a doctor. The
> supply is small, and the demand is high, so doctors can charge top dollar.
>
> In fact, these days, they have to charge top dollar as the costs of
> running an office, with sky-high malpractice insurance on top of
> secretaries, nurses, PA's, and highly specialized equipment is enormous.
> The assembly-line nature of the business is so that you can actually
> afford to get in and see a doctor when you need to.


Yes, there's a shortage of doctors and yes, it's due to the AMA.

If it wasn't the case, then doctors would be like many scientists and
engineers, underemployed, facing constant age discrimination, and
declining wages. This is the reason why I'm in medical school today. I
have a BS/MS in chemical engineering and have left both the
engineering and computer fields for a stable career where I can earn
$100K/yr up until retirement. Many of my former colleagues are better
at organic chemistry and applied mathematics than 90%+ of all MDs but
unlike their medical counterparts, they have fewer if any
opportunities esp after the age of forty. In fact, many are currently
unemployed.
 
Terri <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Al Hephy wrote:
> >
> > Doug Brooks <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > > Al Hephy wrote:
> > > > Want to have a go at WHY malpractice insurance is sky-high?
> > > > Al
> > > >
> > >
> > > I would say the tort system is the biggest factor.
> >
> > And you would be right, of course, but would not explain
> > the great disparity between medical lawsuits and all
> > other liability cases combined. Just the numbers are a
> > clue for any thinking person. Clearly not enough is being
> > done to weed out incompetents and too much is being
> > done to cover up for them.
> >
> > Very strong 'union' at work.
> >
> > Al
>
> Are doctors raising patients' expectations regarding the benefits of
> screening, drugs, surgery, other medical procedures unrealistically? Do
> patients believe that they will become virtually immortal and somehow
> die in perfect health when they do finally die if they do everything the
> doctor says?
>
> Ob-gyns are among the most often sued physicians even though the numbers
> of bad outcomes haven't increased significantly over the last 50 years.
> Why do prospective parents believe they will have a "perfect" outcome?
> Because they have been convinced by those same doctors that obstetric
> medicine is far more reliable/scientific than it actually is and that if
> you follow all of the doctor's instructions and do exactly as you are
> told, your baby will be perfect? So when the result is less than perfect
> you figure someone must have done something wrong and it wasn't you so
> it must have been the doctor?

Surely we have the right to expect a physician to be as competent
as a mid-wife! Sometimes juries decide they are not.

A curious point that tort reformers don't seem to want to discuss
is that the record shows that more than 90% of malpractice cases
never go to court -- they're settled by negotiation. Why is that?
It almost seems like pleading guilty, doesn't it.

Al
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back