WHY
There is a need…
Academic medical centers, medical schools and the medical profession are currently strongly dominated by a form of thinking which is diffuse and reactionary and largely advocates the slowing of government sponsored changes which are themselves considered inevitable. While some members of the academic community have notably dissented from these views, the larger body of academic medical leaders, clinician-scientists and practicing clinicians assume that the largest issues facing the profession are unable to be solved and that the government will eventually dictate how physicians discover new knowledge, educate newer physicians, and ultimately, practice their craft and care for their patients.
An effective counter to this mindset entails reordering priorities within the medical system to place a premium on the value of the individual physician, and re-distribute the decision making and policy development activities of the medical profession from the government back to physicians. We are strongly in favor of restoring the recognition of the importance of these norms among physicians, academic clinicians, and physician-educators. In working to achieve these goals, we aspire to create a physician based intellectual network that extends to all levels of the medical infrastructure.
THANKS FOR SPEAKING UP. IWONDERED IF ANY DOCTORS REALLY CARED ABOUT WHAT’S GOING ON IN THE GOVT. REGARDING THESE HEALTH CARE ISSUES. I HEARD ABOUT YOUR WEB SITE ON SRN NEWS. MY SON HAS CVID AND WOULDN’T GET HIS TREATMENT IVIG IF HE WAS ON A GOVT. RUN HEALTHCARE PLAN. PLEASE KEEP FIGHTING, THIS OBAMA PLAN . I WISH ALL DOCTORS WOULD RALLY AGAINST THE OBAMA PLAN I LIKE MY INSURANCE AND NEED TO HAVE CHOICES FOR MY SON TO SEE EDUCATED DOCTORS ON HIS DISEASE.
Kim,
Your words are so very encouraging to us. One of the things we believe most strongly in is that we need to always work to let our patients know that, first and foremost, we speak for them. Your appreciation of these efforts is very reqarding for us. Thank you for reading and sharing about your son. Jason and Marco.
You write: “We believe that medicine is a profession best governed, implemented and practiced by medical professionals. We seek to preserve the independence of the medical profession, and emphatically believe that it is the province and duty of the medical profession to say what medicine is and how it should be practiced. We want both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through our posts on this journal.”
You imply that the current landscape is just fine (we seek to PRESERVE the independence of the medical profession), yet the current landscape has nearly every insured American’s care dictated wholly or in part by insurance company bureaucrats…who are accountable only to their shareholders. The current landscape denies care by the score for pre-existing conditions, and includes pharmaceutical companies who are fleecing the American consumer by charging in many cases significantly more here than they charge for the same medication elsewhere.
And you’re okay with this? Sure sounds like it.
Music Lover:
We like your passion– we sense some fire behind those words! But, you are asking us something and also making a point and we don not see the two as related. You write:
“You imply that the current landscape is just fine (we seek to PRESERVE the independence of the medical profession), yet the current landscape has nearly every insured American’s care dictated wholly or in part by insurance company bureaucrats…who are accountable only to their shareholders.”
You got us here. Independence means what exactly if much of practice is dictated by non physicians. Good point, great insight.
But, you also continue:
“The current landscape denies care by the score for pre-existing conditions, and includes pharmaceutical companies who are fleecing the American consumer by charging in many cases significantly more here than they charge for the same medication elsewhere.”
You then ask us if we are okay with this but you seem to infer that we are okay with it and answer for us.
Nothing in our mission philosophy about preserving the role of doctors should suggest to you are stance on the above question. The role of insurers and pharma companies in patients is something that we rarely question but on any deeper inspection, is just absurd. We have always, however, taken great effort to point out to our readers that such a situation has origin in actions (or lack there of) on both sides. How did this situation come to pass? To express outrage that insurers deny coverage for pre-existing conditions sounds great if you are running for office, but misses a key point. Why should I sell you homeowners insurance after the fire starts or after the roof is damaged by the tree? Why should anyone sell me insurance to cover consequences of my diabetes or heart problem AFTER i develop those diseases? Your passion is rewarding to see, but the problems that seem to incite that passion in you are complicated and are the fault of many, including the average citizen and the average doctor.
Thanks for reading and keep the comments coming!
good post
Leave your response!
Recent Posts
Take Action
Voices of Reason
White Papers and Resources
Most Emailed
Most Commented
Most Viewed