Aa
Physicians Increasingly Support a Single-Payer National Health Insurance System
February 13, 2009
"US physicians increasingly support a single-payer national health insurance system, according to the results of a survey reported online January 29 in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.
“Many politicians may mistakenly believe that single-payer national health insurance lacks support among key stakeholders such as doctors,” lead author Danny McCormick, from Harvard Medical School and Cambridge Health Alliance (CHA), said in a news release. “Our finding that support for single-payer national health insurance now approaches that of tax-based incremental reforms suggests that a Medicare-for-all-type plan may be more politically viable than conventional wisdom suggests......”
"Of 3300 physicians sent the survey, 1675 (50.8%) responded; 49% prefer either tax incentives or penalties to promote the purchase of health insurance; 42% prefer a government-run, taxpayer-financed single-payer national health insurance program, which increased from 26% in a study 5 years previously; and only 9% prefer the current, employer-based financing system....."
See: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/588331?src=mp&spon=17&uac=39980BG
"US physicians increasingly support a single-payer national health insurance system, according to the results of a survey reported online January 29 in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.
“Many politicians may mistakenly believe that single-payer national health insurance lacks support among key stakeholders such as doctors,” lead author Danny McCormick, from Harvard Medical School and Cambridge Health Alliance (CHA), said in a news release. “Our finding that support for single-payer national health insurance now approaches that of tax-based incremental reforms suggests that a Medicare-for-all-type plan may be more politically viable than conventional wisdom suggests......”
"Of 3300 physicians sent the survey, 1675 (50.8%) responded; 49% prefer either tax incentives or penalties to promote the purchase of health insurance; 42% prefer a government-run, taxpayer-financed single-payer national health insurance program, which increased from 26% in a study 5 years previously; and only 9% prefer the current, employer-based financing system....."
See: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/588331?src=mp&spon=17&uac=39980BG
No, that is not the first step. I would like to see the basis upon which you base your opinion.
The article from which I posted the excerpt above contends that administrative costs is the primary issue.
"..... The administrative costs and lack of buying power that arise out of the existing multipayer system are at the root of the problem. The current system also directly contributes to the rising number of uninsured and underinsured Americans. This lack of insurance leads to poorer health outcomes, and a significant amount of money is lost into the system by paying for these complications. Experience from other countries suggests that tangible improvements can occur with conversion to a single-payer system. However, previous efforts at reform have stalled. There are many myths commonly held true by both patients and physicians. This inscrutability of the US healthcare system may be the major deterrent to its improvement. A discussion of these myths can lead to increased awareness of the inequality of our healthcare system and the possibilities for improvement...."
The article from which I posted the excerpt above contends that administrative costs is the primary issue.
"..... The administrative costs and lack of buying power that arise out of the existing multipayer system are at the root of the problem. The current system also directly contributes to the rising number of uninsured and underinsured Americans. This lack of insurance leads to poorer health outcomes, and a significant amount of money is lost into the system by paying for these complications. Experience from other countries suggests that tangible improvements can occur with conversion to a single-payer system. However, previous efforts at reform have stalled. There are many myths commonly held true by both patients and physicians. This inscrutability of the US healthcare system may be the major deterrent to its improvement. A discussion of these myths can lead to increased awareness of the inequality of our healthcare system and the possibilities for improvement...."
First healthcare needs reform but it needs to start with tort reform. People were for a while getting "sue happy". If anything went wrong during a Dr's visit or hospital stay or anything, people would sue the Dr's and hospitals. Now I will say some malpractice lawsuits are justified but a lot are not.
Now because of the lawsuits we have Dr's ordering every test to make sure they are not sued. What happens next...the bill goes to the Health Ins company who has to pay it. So Health Ins companies are now paying for tests that are not necessary. So the Health Ins company pays more money out and starts to lose money what is next...they raise the premiums for health coverage.
So if you want better health coverage and cheaper health coverage start with tort reform and work from there.
Now because of the lawsuits we have Dr's ordering every test to make sure they are not sued. What happens next...the bill goes to the Health Ins company who has to pay it. So Health Ins companies are now paying for tests that are not necessary. So the Health Ins company pays more money out and starts to lose money what is next...they raise the premiums for health coverage.
So if you want better health coverage and cheaper health coverage start with tort reform and work from there.
Thank you for posting this. The truth is depending on your income and who you work for, depends on your quality of healthcare. Employers offer good insurance and then as the years go by, they start changing what they offer. When my husband went to work 6 years ago, he had great coverage. We paid a co pay and everything else was covered. That is why he took the job. 2 years later the employer changed the policy, a year later, again. Now his coverage is 50 percent, and that is after we each pay 1500.00 deductable each year first. Pharmacy is less than that and he pays 87.50 per week for this, with his employer covering his. So, we pay every week and still cannot afford to go to the doctor. We are just giving them money "in case", something terrible happens and we are not stuck with nothing. Other people I know do not even have that. So, all in all, I guess it depends on who you work for and how much money you got, as the article above suggests. I do not think national healthcare is great either, but at least all people would be covered. They put everything else on taxes, why not share a tax for everyone to have quality healthcare? The only people I can see disagreeing are those who already have it and do not have to worry daily about the floor falling out from under. IMO.
Here is an excerpt from an article that some of you may find interesting - well, perhaps not. This is just a portion but the entire article is at MedScape at the site listed below.
Fact and Fiction: Debunking Myths in the US Healthcare System
Posted 06/06/2008 See: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/573877_1
This idea has been called the alpha myth because it is fundamentally the root of all other myths.[1] It is the straightforward belief that Americans have access to the highest quality healthcare available in the world. A different way to present this myth is to state that citizens in other countries experience long waits for healthcare, that they must rely on generalists, and that they suffer worse outcomes as a result.
This belief is widespread and well-entrenched in the American mindset. So it is perhaps surprising that in a 10-nation 1990 survey on the level of satisfaction with the national healthcare system, the United States ranked 10th.[2] These results were then reproduced a decade later.[3] Although Americans believe the US system is the best, clearly they are not as satisfied with the healthcare they receive as are citizens of other countries.
In fact, this disparity between perception and reality has been captured in several studies. In the year 2000, the World Health Organization (WHO) dedicated its annual World Health Report to a comparison of healthcare across the globe.[4] In this exhaustive analysis, American superiority was not borne out: the United States ranked 32nd for infant survival, 24th for life expectancy, and 54th for fairness. The fairness ranking was derived from a comparison of the individual financial contribution required with the quality of healthcare received. The current US system is known as a regressive system; that is, the poor pay relatively more for healthcare. In fact, the poorest fifth of Americans spend 18% of their income on healthcare, whereas the richest fifth of Americans spend about 3%.[5] In this type of regressive system, it is clear why about 50% of personal bankruptcies in the United States are related to medical bills.[6] Tragically, 75% of individuals declaring medical bankruptcy had medical insurance at the onset of their illness.[6] Overall, the WHO ranked the United States 37th in the world.
Similar results were found by the Commonwealth Fund in a recently released scorecard on the performance of the US health system.[7] Outcomes in the United States were compared against those achieved by top countries or the top 10% of US states, hospitals, or other providers. The scorecard evaluated multiple indicators of health outcomes, including mortality, life expectancy, and the prevalence of health conditions that limit the capacity of adults to work or children to learn. The average ratio score for the United States was a 69 out of a possible 100.[7] The United States ranked 15th out of 19 countries with respect to preventable deaths before the age of 75, with a death rate more than 40% higher than the benchmark countries of France, Japan, and Spain. The United States ranked last in infant mortality out of 23 industrialized countries, with rates more than double the benchmark countries of Iceland, Japan, and Finland. The United States tied for last on healthy life expectancy at age 60.[7]
Despite these mediocre results in objective parameters of health outcomes, the United States spends far more than any other country for its healthcare. In 2000 the United States spent 13% of its gross domestic product on national health expenditures.[8] The next highest spending countries were Germany at 10.6% and France at 9.5%. In a graph of life expectancy versus health spending per capita, the United States falls far off the curve, both spending more and gaining less than other countries.[4] Another example of this contradiction is seen in the outcome of patients on hemodialysis. Although there are more hemodialysis centers per capita in the United States,[9] when end-stage renal disease patients were matched for severity of disease in Canada and the United States, patients in the United States were less likely to receive a kidney transplant and also had a higher mortality rate while on hemodialysis.[10]
Fact and Fiction: Debunking Myths in the US Healthcare System
Posted 06/06/2008 See: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/573877_1
This idea has been called the alpha myth because it is fundamentally the root of all other myths.[1] It is the straightforward belief that Americans have access to the highest quality healthcare available in the world. A different way to present this myth is to state that citizens in other countries experience long waits for healthcare, that they must rely on generalists, and that they suffer worse outcomes as a result.
This belief is widespread and well-entrenched in the American mindset. So it is perhaps surprising that in a 10-nation 1990 survey on the level of satisfaction with the national healthcare system, the United States ranked 10th.[2] These results were then reproduced a decade later.[3] Although Americans believe the US system is the best, clearly they are not as satisfied with the healthcare they receive as are citizens of other countries.
In fact, this disparity between perception and reality has been captured in several studies. In the year 2000, the World Health Organization (WHO) dedicated its annual World Health Report to a comparison of healthcare across the globe.[4] In this exhaustive analysis, American superiority was not borne out: the United States ranked 32nd for infant survival, 24th for life expectancy, and 54th for fairness. The fairness ranking was derived from a comparison of the individual financial contribution required with the quality of healthcare received. The current US system is known as a regressive system; that is, the poor pay relatively more for healthcare. In fact, the poorest fifth of Americans spend 18% of their income on healthcare, whereas the richest fifth of Americans spend about 3%.[5] In this type of regressive system, it is clear why about 50% of personal bankruptcies in the United States are related to medical bills.[6] Tragically, 75% of individuals declaring medical bankruptcy had medical insurance at the onset of their illness.[6] Overall, the WHO ranked the United States 37th in the world.
Similar results were found by the Commonwealth Fund in a recently released scorecard on the performance of the US health system.[7] Outcomes in the United States were compared against those achieved by top countries or the top 10% of US states, hospitals, or other providers. The scorecard evaluated multiple indicators of health outcomes, including mortality, life expectancy, and the prevalence of health conditions that limit the capacity of adults to work or children to learn. The average ratio score for the United States was a 69 out of a possible 100.[7] The United States ranked 15th out of 19 countries with respect to preventable deaths before the age of 75, with a death rate more than 40% higher than the benchmark countries of France, Japan, and Spain. The United States ranked last in infant mortality out of 23 industrialized countries, with rates more than double the benchmark countries of Iceland, Japan, and Finland. The United States tied for last on healthy life expectancy at age 60.[7]
Despite these mediocre results in objective parameters of health outcomes, the United States spends far more than any other country for its healthcare. In 2000 the United States spent 13% of its gross domestic product on national health expenditures.[8] The next highest spending countries were Germany at 10.6% and France at 9.5%. In a graph of life expectancy versus health spending per capita, the United States falls far off the curve, both spending more and gaining less than other countries.[4] Another example of this contradiction is seen in the outcome of patients on hemodialysis. Although there are more hemodialysis centers per capita in the United States,[9] when end-stage renal disease patients were matched for severity of disease in Canada and the United States, patients in the United States were less likely to receive a kidney transplant and also had a higher mortality rate while on hemodialysis.[10]
I do not know how to fix the healthcare issue since I am not an expert in this matter, but I do not think that the Government should be in charge. I am mainly concerned about how patients will be treated if they do go Universal. Many people who need the meds they are on now that actually work may be forced to switch because the Government only will approve the use of one specific med for each condition or there will be too few meds to go around.
I totally agree that there are alot of great Doctors out there. There are also too many drug pushers and money being offer to those Doctors from the pharmaceutical companies. My doctor recently just did this. I was on effexor xr for postpartum (10 years ago) and I told him that it was making me worse so he of course suggested that I go off effexor but take the new drug Cymbalta. I agreed but then i went home and thought about it and weaned myself off the effexor and have been off of depression meds for 1 month. I feel sooooooo much better. They are legal drugpushers at least some of them.
I just wonder if we could not find a way to make it affordable by having less medical insurance companies or combine them and making the premiums and copays affordable to all americans and not to illegal immigrants. We have a problem when there are people who abuse the welfare system by having more and more children than they can handle and too many children at one time which eventually have mental disabilities and the families cannot afford it. I do not believe abortion is right either. Our precious children will one day pay the price for evey mistake that this country is making. Why do our children have to suffer because the system is broke.
I totally fear for this country and what it is becoming. We all live in this world under 1 God but that seems to be forgotten. I would think God knows best since he created us and the world. What we really need is to Love thy neighbors as thyself and then alot of problems would be solved.
Thanks for letting me vent.
I totally agree that there are alot of great Doctors out there. There are also too many drug pushers and money being offer to those Doctors from the pharmaceutical companies. My doctor recently just did this. I was on effexor xr for postpartum (10 years ago) and I told him that it was making me worse so he of course suggested that I go off effexor but take the new drug Cymbalta. I agreed but then i went home and thought about it and weaned myself off the effexor and have been off of depression meds for 1 month. I feel sooooooo much better. They are legal drugpushers at least some of them.
I just wonder if we could not find a way to make it affordable by having less medical insurance companies or combine them and making the premiums and copays affordable to all americans and not to illegal immigrants. We have a problem when there are people who abuse the welfare system by having more and more children than they can handle and too many children at one time which eventually have mental disabilities and the families cannot afford it. I do not believe abortion is right either. Our precious children will one day pay the price for evey mistake that this country is making. Why do our children have to suffer because the system is broke.
I totally fear for this country and what it is becoming. We all live in this world under 1 God but that seems to be forgotten. I would think God knows best since he created us and the world. What we really need is to Love thy neighbors as thyself and then alot of problems would be solved.
Thanks for letting me vent.
Tired. That's supposed to read "May I help you" which they do after checking your insurance cards (tell me if this is not the truth). The doctors I've spoken to are not happy with this system btw but its enforced on them.
You are reading content posted in the MedHelp Social Community
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
