War on Legal Drugs Ensnares Doctors Instead of Dealers
Jasbird
National Campaign to Cooperate with DEA
6/26/03 5:22:00 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: National Desk
Contact: Kathryn Serkes, 202-333-3855, for the Association of American
Physicians & Surgeons; E-mail: kase...@att.net Web:
http://www.aapsonline.org
TUCSON, Ariz., June 26 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Arizona medical
community was shocked by the recent indictment of Tucson physician
Jeri Hassman, M.D., on charges stemming from her prescribing of legal
pain relief for her patients.
On the eve of her July trial date and prison term up to 28 years if
convicted, a national physicians' group announced its support for Dr.
Hassman, explaining that this is a national disgrace -- doctors
throughout the country are being targeted by egregious law enforcement
for helping patients manage crippling pain with controlled, legal
drugs.
Speaking at a news conference at Dr. Hassman's Tucson offices, Jane M.
Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American
Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), explaining why AAPS has decided toe
support Dr. Hassman and kicked off a national campaign to work with
law enforcement. "Throughout the United States, physicians are being
threatened, impoverished, delicensed, and imprisoned for prescribing
in good faith with the intention of relieving pain," said Dr. Orient,
who was joined by more than a dozen of Dr. Hassman's patients and
several other physicians who took time away from their practices to
show their support.
"The 'War on Drugs' has come to mean a war on lawful drugs also -- and
against the doctors who prescribe them and the patients who take them.
Prosecutors make careers out of high-publicity cases involving the hot
'drug du jour' such as OxyContin," said Dr. Orient. "But this war is
causing enormous collateral damage and deaths from 'friendly fire.'
Physicians have been drummed out of practice, sent to jail, and even
been driven to suicide in the face of these 21st century witch hunts.
"These doctors are actually heroes who are treating patients at great
personal risk. If this continues, not one doctor will be willing to
prescribe the drugs that patients so desperately need," warned Dr.
Orient.
The real problem is not drugs, but drug misuse. All physicians are
against drug abuse. Drugs are dangerous and must be treated with
respect. Yet to many patients, drugs are life-saving. To stop the
misuse of prescribed drugs-without depriving patients of life-saving
medication-requires cooperation between law enforcement and
physicians, not persecutions and prosecutions.
Even though her prosecution is unwarranted, Dr. Hassman hasn't been
content to play the victim, and instead worked with AAPS to develop a
national campaign to help solve the problems. "In the past, the agents
of the DEA and the doctors who treat those with chronic pain have
worked at cross purposes," explained Dr. Hassman. "Instead of this
antagonistic arrangement between the DEA and the doctors; the DEA and
the doctors need to work TOGETHER. There needs to be open
COMMUNICATION and 100 percent COOPERATION between these two groups."
Dr. Orient unveiled the AAPS three-point "Communicate and Cooperate"
campaign, as well as specific recommendations for prosecutors to halt
the destructive pattern of prosecutions. "Law enforcement agents are
using deceitful tactics employed to snare doctors, and prosecutors'
manipulate the legal system to frighten doctors and patients who might
be willing to testify on behalf of the wrongfully accused doctors,"
said Dr. Orient. For example, she explained that law enforcement send
undercover actors to doctors to feign pain and beg for drugs.
Several of the patients spoke about the debilitating pain they suffer,
and problems finding doctors to treat them now than Dr. Hassman's
license to write prescriptions has been suspended, while the
physicians confirmed the atmosphere of fear and intimidation in which
they now practice.
"Physicians and pharmacies report potential 'drug-seeking' patients to
law enforcement, yet are never advised by law enforcement which
patients it believes are 'drug seekers' trying to take advantage of
physicians or pharmacies," said Dr. Hassman. "Currently, communication
is only flowing in one direction."
Dr. Orient also pointed out that law enforcement uses outmoded norms
for assessing "excessive" prescribing. "Investigators frequently look
at the volume and duration of drug use as the primary trigger for an
indictment. This is no longer appropriate, as accepted treatment has
changed, and leads to indictments of pain specialists simply due to
the volume of their prescriptions."
She added, "In the art of medicine, investigators must be able to
distinguish between a difference of opinion in what is proper
treatment, and specific criminal intent. We're willing to help them
review possible case."
"The DEA could pull the plug on most drug diversion by working with
doctors, instead of against them. We hope this is a start," concluded
Dr. Orient.
"PROJECT: COMMUNICATE & COOPERATE"
-- Work together to track and report potential drug abusers.
-- Joint medical/legal reviews of potential cases before charges are
filed.
-- Mutual training to advise law enforcement of current trends and
cutting edge treatments.
(Details of the "Communicate and Cooperate" 3-point plan and
recommendations for legal reforms are posted on the AAPS website at
http://www.aapsonline.org.)
NOTE: The Association of American Physicians & Surgeons is a
non-partisan professional association of physicians in all
specialties, dedicated since 1943 to protection of the
patient-physician relationship. AAPS is dues supported, and accepts no
government funding, or pharmaceutical or other corporate underwriting.
Š 2003 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770
Andy Katz
<jasbird#deletethis#@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>War on Legal Drugs Ensnares Doctors Instead of Dealers; AAPS Announces
>National Campaign to Cooperate with DEA
Who knows ... maybe as the current crop of drug war hotspurs ages and
starts to develop life-threatening and terminal conditions they'll see
things from the other side. 'Course by then it'll be too late.
Andy Katz
____________________________________
I sentence you to kiss my ass!
The Simpsons
a...@interport.net
Andre...@aol.com
Bastard Nation
http://www.bastards.org
Peter H. Proctor
<jasbird#deletethis#@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>War on Legal Drugs Ensnares Doctors Instead of Dealers; AAPS Announces
>National Campaign to Cooperate with DEA
.
The local drug warriers went after the head of the pain clinic
at MD Anderson, arguably the worlds foremost cancer hospital. And
my alma mater for my PhD. If they have the hubris to do this,
nobody is safe.
The subsequent outrage caused the Texas legislature to pass a
law specifically allowing physicians to use whatever is
medically-indicated to control cancer pain. My mom benefited from
this in her final days.... Sometimes all we docs have to offer is
palliation.
The head of the Anderson pain clinic subsequently offered to
send a couple of his assistants to educate the local DEA on new
developments in pain control. In return, the local agent in charge
offered to send _his_ agents to tell the MD Anderson docs how it
should be done.
This sitiuation remionds me of the relationship between the
KGB and the scientific community in Stalinist Russia. Solzhitsin
talks about the kick a secret policeman right off the farm got from
being able to bully the pointy-headed academic types.... Power is a
drug too.
Dr P
Guido Marx
> War on Legal Drugs Ensnares Doctors Instead of Dealers; AAPS Announces
> National Campaign to Cooperate with DEA
>
> 6/26/03 5:22:00 PM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To: National Desk
>
> Contact: Kathryn Serkes, 202-333-3855, for the Association of American
> Physicians & Surgeons; E-mail: kase...@att.net Web:
> http://www.aapsonline.org
>
> TUCSON, Ariz., June 26 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Arizona medical
> community was shocked by the recent indictment of Tucson physician
> Jeri Hassman, M.D., on charges stemming from her prescribing of legal
> pain relief for her patients.
> Even though her prosecution is unwarranted, Dr. Hassman hasn't been
> content to play the victim, and instead worked with AAPS to develop a
> national campaign to help solve the problems. "In the past, the agents
> of the DEA and the doctors who treat those with chronic pain have
> worked at cross purposes," explained Dr. Hassman. "Instead of this
> antagonistic arrangement between the DEA and the doctors; the DEA and
> the doctors need to work TOGETHER. There needs to be open
> COMMUNICATION and 100 percent COOPERATION between these two groups."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA... Well - I feel sorry for Dr. Hassman. She appears
to be a compassionate physician who is woefully naive. I suspect that
this naivete will be her undoing. The guys at the DEA are not
interested in working with physicians. They are interested in
arresting and prosecuting as many people as possible. Dr. Hassman
needs to realize that NOBODY at the DEA has ever been promoted for
"working with doctors who treat those with chronic pain". However,
lots and lots of people have been promoted for making high-profile
arrests, and sending people to jail. The actual guilt or innoncence
of those people is irrelevant.
She appears to be operating under the delusion that people working for
the DEA have a sliver of compassion and a shred of decency in them.
No doubt she will shortly be disabused of these quaint notions.
Guido
Eric Johnson
"Andy Katz" <amk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 02:02:29 GMT, Jasbird
> <jasbird#deletethis#@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>> War on Legal Drugs Ensnares Doctors Instead of Dealers; AAPS Announces
>> National Campaign to Cooperate with DEA
>
> Who knows ... maybe as the current crop of drug war hotspurs ages and
> starts to develop life-threatening and terminal conditions they'll see
> things from the other side. 'Course by then it'll be too late.
>
> Andy Katz
David Crosby is about as bad as you can get, except for Hugh Heffner. What
is the problem. Crosby looks a lot like Wilford Brimley to me.
EJ
George Conklin
"Peter H. Proctor" <d...@drproctor.com> wrote in message
news:9okofv0uaqilae3se...@4ax.com...
You reminded us of this earlier, and it was and is a disgrace. Police are
after power, but then so are physicians. In the end, if the AMA were really
interested in patients and not mostly in promoting higher costs, then the
cops could be put in their place.
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> You reminded us of this earlier, and it was and is a disgrace. Police are
> after power, but then so are physicians. In the end, if the AMA were really
> interested in patients and not mostly in promoting higher costs, then the
> cops could be put in their place.
As usual, George, in your unreasoning hatred of the medical profession
and looking for any reason to blame it for bad things, you vastly
overestimate the power of the AMA, to which less than 30% of U.S.
physicians belong. The cops have far more power than physicians, and,
indeed, going after a high profile physician is a great way for a
prosecutor to make a splash and advance his career.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
Peter H. Proctor
<george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> You reminded us of this earlier, and it was and is a disgrace. Police are
>after power, but then so are physicians. In the end, if the AMA were really
>interested in patients and not mostly in promoting higher costs, then the
>cops could be put in their place.
The difference is that the cops get their power from the
delegated authority use deadly force. We docs must use more subtile
means<G>.
The AMA is basically toothless. In fact, a surprising
number of docs are out there fighting for the right of their patients
to recieve appropriate pain meds. Similarly, a lot of docs put
their own butts at risk from the DA's and federal attorenys out to
get promoted by purposfully- pandering to people's irrational
prejudices. Braver than I am, anyway.
Dr P
>
Howard McCollister
"Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
news:orac-9D636E.2...@rcache2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> As usual, George, in your unreasoning hatred of the medical profession
> and looking for any reason to blame it for bad things, you vastly
> overestimate the power of the AMA, to which less than 30% of U.S.
> physicians belong. The cops have far more power than physicians, and,
> indeed, going after a high profile physician is a great way for a
> prosecutor to make a splash and advance his career.
> --
I always find it interesting that unknowledgeable people looking to target
physicians always love to focus in on the AMA as if it were the fountainhead
of the medical profession. I suppose people like George need a target for
their rage, but the AMA is so non-representative of the medical profession
that their whole range of arguments are pretty silly, really...
HMc
The_rig...@truth.com
wrote:
>On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 23:06:11 GMT, "George Conklin"
><george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> You reminded us of this earlier, and it was and is a disgrace. Police are
>>after power, but then so are physicians. In the end, if the AMA were really
>>interested in patients and not mostly in promoting higher costs, then the
>>cops could be put in their place.
>
> The difference is that the cops get their power from the
>delegated authority use deadly force. We docs must use more subtile
>means<G>.
I won't touch that opening no matter how wide it is. <G>
Trimmed
>Dr P
>>
Jasbird
Indicted pain doc attacks charges
She calls on federal law enforcers instead to work with doctors to
keep narcotic prescription drugs out of the hands of addicts and
abusers.
ANNE T. DENOGEAN
Tucson Citizen
June 27, 2003
A Tucson doctor indicted in March on federal charges of
overprescribing narcotic painkillers says the Drug Enforcement
Administration should ease up on physicians doing their best to help
Americans who live with debilitating pain.
It's important to prevent opioid drugs from getting into the hands of
those who abuse them, acknowledged Dr. Jeri Hassman. But, she said at
a news conference yesterday, "You cannot ignore there are millions of
people who suffer severe and chronic pain."
Instead of targeting doctors, the DEA should work with them to
identify "drug-seeking" and "doctor-shopping" patients, she said.
Tony Ryan, spokesman for the DEA in Tucson, said the agency would not
comment on an open investigation.
Hassman, a pain-management specialist, faces 66 charges alleging she
prescribed painkillers to six patients without a legitimate medical
reason. The drugs included morphine, methadone, Vicodin and OxyContin,
schedule II narcotics that have addictive properties and can be
abused.
Hassman also is charged with scheming to defraud TRICARE, a managed
health-care program for retired members of the U.S. military and their
dependents.
Yesterday's news conference was organized by the Association of
American Physicians & Surgeons, a professional association headed by
Dr. Jane Orient of Tucson that is supporting Hassman.
Among others who attended to support Hassman were the immediate past
president of the Arizona Medical Association, Dr. Richard Dale;
another Tucson pain-management specialist who will be an expert
witness for Hassman, Dr. Jennifer Schneider; and several other
doctors.
"She may be very empathetic or even naive, but I think she took good
care of her patients," Dale said.
About a dozen patients in attendance passionately defended Hassman,
describing her as caring and conscientious.
Don Hayden, 48, said his chronic pain from a shattered ankle and a
subsequent infection was so great that he was bedridden most of the
time and contemplated suicide. Three years ago, he found Hassman.
"She prescribed the proper pain medication to make me a functioning
member of this society," Hayden said.
Several of the patients complained they've had difficulty getting the
medications they need from other doctors since Hassman's certificate
to prescribe controlled substances was suspended.
Orient said her association got behind Hassman because it believes the
DEA has turned the war on drugs "into a war on doctors." She provided
a list of 32 doctors from around the country who have been indicted or
convicted on charges related to their prescribing of pain medications.
Some victims of chronic pain need prescription narcotic painkillers
for the long term to be able to function. But Orient said doctors all
over, including her colleagues in Tucson, are becoming more reluctant
to prescribe the painkillers, because of fear of prosecution.
"If this continues, if you or a loved one develops chronic pain, you
may not be able to find anyone who is willing to prescribe these
lifesaving medications for you," she said.
Orient and Hassman said the DEA could work cooperatively with doctors
to prevent people who abuse prescription drugs or sell them on the
street from obtaining those drugs. Law enforcement should set up a
notification process to advise physicians of suspicious behavior by
patients, such as using more than one pharmacy or having contact with
known dealers or addicts, they suggested.
Doctors could provide training on cutting-edge treatments so law
enforcement better understands changing attitudes in medicine toward
pain treatment, they said. What wasn't considered appropriate a few
years ago in terms of volume and duration of pain-drug use has
changed.
They also said there should be joint reviews of potential cases
against doctors before charges are filed so that doctors aren't ruined
by the charges.
Hassman said she has spent more than $100,000 defending herself and
expects the final cost to be about $500,000. She said her employees
have taken pay cuts to keep her practice going.
She is being investigated by the Arizona Medical Board, and two
malpractice suits were filed against her after the indictment. She
said she is confident the malpractice suits will be resolved in her
favor.
flick
> <http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/local/6_27_03doc_charged.html>
<snipped>
> Hassman also is charged with scheming to defraud TRICARE, a managed
> health-care program for retired members of the U.S. military and their
> dependents.
whoops, this is the charge that's going to hang her, is my guess.
flick 100785
George Conklin
You always have an answer for every medical problem: blame the public,
blame the police, blame George, blame someone, but you yourself and your
business friends avoid all responsibility for almost everything. The simple
fact is that organized medicine has accepted the drug czars of this country
at face value, and use about 10% of the narcotics after surgery as they do
in Europe. So patients suffer; cancer patients suffer and so forth and so
on.
Organized medicine through the AMA set up the economic structure of
medical care in the USA, and I quoted from Starr's book a week or so ago,
which everyone ignored, because you know an authority when you see it. The
structure of medical care is fixed by the AMA, and its membership is totally
irrelevant to the structure. Physicians and the police are both into the
power business and the patients are the ones who are hurt.
George Conklin
"Howard McCollister" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:3efcec0f$0$1278$45be...@newscene.com...
economic ones. They are fixed in law, and enforced. To say that only 30%
of physicians are members of the AMA is irrelevant. All function within
that economic and political framework.
George Conklin
of the medical/industrial complex. In other nations, governments sets the
economic parameters, but then we have the situation where that does not
happen. In the case you cited, yes, patients were the victims of police
drug actions, victimized by attacking their physician. But that is only
because the AMA has accepted the police actions and stayed out of the fight,
preserving their energy for capitalist and economic issues.
Johnny
"flick" <fl...@starband.net> wrote in message
news:QLdLa.657$V%3.200...@twister1.starband.net...
be a trumped up charge to strengthen the chances of a conviction. Especially
if the other "evidence" is flimsy. That's the trouble when judgement and due
process are clouded by vindictive hate fuelled law enforcement officials,
it's difficult to get at the truth. I fail to see how a competent doctor
prescribing pain medication can ever, in a rational world, be a criminal law
enforcement issue. Fraud however is a real crime.
George Conklin
"Guido Marx" <guidosj...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3d9f92bf.03062...@posting.google.com...
One individual cannot take on a whole bureaucracy. It takes one whole
group to take on another whole group. So who cares if the AMA has 30%
membership? The other 70% get the benefits without paying the dues. The
whole concept that physicians are individuals billing individuals for
individual services, with charity, government and someone else supplying all
the capital gratis leads to the silly idea that one doctor can take on the
Federal government as if it were a private patient. The fact that Dr.
Hassman has to defend herself personally shows that the whole structure of
medicine in the USA accepts the DEA and stays away from helping patients,
except on an individual level. It is one good reason why it is such a lie
to say, "We have the best medical care in the world." We have the most
expensive, period, with cowards for AMA leadership except for one thing:
more money.
Jasbird
I doubt it. Don't these fraud trials last for years? I was also under
the impression that evidence needed to be presented by the
prosecution. To send someone down on a drugs charge all that's
required is the slanderous testamony of a DEA agent out to make a
career for themselves by locking up people.
George Conklin
"Jasbird" <jasbird#deletethis#@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:dklqfvgnqda3fa4e3...@4ax.com...
> <http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/local/6_27_03doc_charged.html>
>
>
> subsequent infection was so great that he was bedridden most of the
> time and contemplated suicide. Three years ago, he found Hassman.
> "She prescribed the proper pain medication to make me a functioning
> member of this society," Hayden said.
>
> Several of the patients complained they've had difficulty getting the
> medications they need from other doctors since Hassman's certificate
> to prescribe controlled substances was suspended.
>
> Orient said her association got behind Hassman because it believes the
> DEA has turned the war on drugs "into a war on doctors."
Actually it is a war on PATIENTS. Notice the AMA itself has been silent
on this issue because it does not affect the income of the business as a
whole.
Jasbird
A war on doctors and patients - otherwise known as the 'american
public'.
Howard McCollister
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:rYeLa.16411.
> So who cares if the AMA has 30%
> membership? The other 70% get the benefits without paying the dues.
Benefits? The reason that the vast majority of doctors don't belong to the
AMA is that they are OPPOSED to the direction that group has tried to steer
medicine over the years. As a physician, the AMA has done me far more harm
than good. But you should be glad about the AMA hanging in there, George.
You definitely wouldn't like the organization that the other 70% of US
physicians would replace it with.
The only power the AMA has is as a lobbying organization. And any power it
has in that arena is only because politicians are too stupid to realize that
the AMA represents only itself, not the majority of US physicians, and
because of the leadership vacuum that exists within the medical
infrastructure. The federal government and third party payors have been
taking advantage of that leadership vacuum for years, and have been having
quite a bit more success as the AMA becomes progressively more toothless and
irrelevant.
HMc
flick
> I doubt it. Don't these fraud trials last for years? I was also under
> the impression that evidence needed to be presented by the
> prosecution.
They probably have evidence, or they wouldn't have charged her with fraud.
Fraud trials don't necessarily take years, either. Just as an example, if
the fraud is that she charged the ins. co. for visits and services that she
didn't perform, that'd be pretty cut and dried.
To send someone down on a drugs charge all that's
> required is the slanderous testamony of a DEA agent out to make a
> career for themselves by locking up people.
Federal drug trials require a lot more proof than one DEA agent's testimony.
flick 100785
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> news:orac-9D636E.2...@rcache2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > As usual, George, in your unreasoning hatred of the medical profession
> > and looking for any reason to blame it for bad things, you vastly
> > overestimate the power of the AMA, to which less than 30% of U.S.
> > physicians belong. The cops have far more power than physicians, and,
> > indeed, going after a high profile physician is a great way for a
> > prosecutor to make a splash and advance his career.
>
> You always have an answer for every medical problem: blame the public,
> blame the police, blame George, blame someone, but you yourself and your
> business friends avoid all responsibility for almost everything.
Really? Want me to cite examples posts I've made in the past that prove
you wrong on this?
>The simple
> fact is that organized medicine has accepted the drug czars of this country
> at face value, and use about 10% of the narcotics after surgery as they do
> in Europe.
Please cite evidence for this assertion that surgeons in this country
use only 10% of the narcotics after surgery as they do in Europe.
Otherwise, we have to take your assertion for what it is: an unsupported
assertion from someone with a serious axe to grind.
>So patients suffer; cancer patients suffer and so forth and so
> on.
Perhaps you are aware of something called "Pain: The Fifth Vital Sign."
Look it up, and you'll see what's being done by doctors at every
JCAHO-accredite hospital to decrease patient suffering.
> Organized medicine through the AMA set up the economic structure of
> medical care in the USA, and I quoted from Starr's book a week or so ago,
> which everyone ignored, because you know an authority when you see it. The
> structure of medical care is fixed by the AMA, and its membership is totally
> irrelevant to the structure. Physicians and the police are both into the
> power business and the patients are the ones who are hurt.
More paranoid conspiracy theory ramblings from George...
Orac
"Howard McCollister" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
Indeed. However, I should warn you that, by saying this, you have now
made yourself a target of George's unreasoning hatred of the AMA. You
have joined the ranks of us AMA "toadies" and "lackies." ;-)
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Peter H. Proctor" <d...@drproctor.com> wrote in message
> news:h0qpfvcu8qo5tu5qm...@4ax.com...
> > On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 23:06:11 GMT, "George Conklin"
> > <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > You reminded us of this earlier, and it was and is a disgrace. Police
> are
> > >after power, but then so are physicians. In the end, if the AMA were
> really
> > >interested in patients and not mostly in promoting higher costs, then the
> > >cops could be put in their place.
> >
> > The difference is that the cops get their power from the
> > delegated authority use deadly force. We docs must use more subtile
> > means<G>.
> >
> > The AMA is basically toothless. In fact, a surprising
> > number of docs are out there fighting for the right of their patients
> > to recieve appropriate pain meds. Similarly, a lot of docs put
> > their own butts at risk from the DA's and federal attorenys out to
> > get promoted by purposfully- pandering to people's irrational
> > prejudices. Braver than I am, anyway.
> >
> > Dr P
> > >
> >
> The AMA is not toothless. It sets the economic and profession parameters
> of the medical/industrial complex.
Please produce evidence to support this assertion.
>In other nations, governments sets the
> economic parameters, but then we have the situation where that does not
> happen.
The government in the U.S. does not set the economic parameters of
medicine? You must be either kidding or completely deluded. Do you even
realize what complete and utter nonsense that statement is? The Federal
government DOES set nearly all reimbursement rates through Medicare and
Medicaid, and private insurance companies use these reimbursement rates
AS DETERMINED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR MEDICARE REIMBURSEMENT as
the basis for negotiating their reimbursement rates with providers.
Typically reimbursement rates for services are negotiated as a
percentage based on the Medicare reimbursement rates set by the federal
government. If the ability to set reimbursement rates that serve as the
de facto basis for all reimbursement of physicians, whether by Medicare
or by private insurers, is not "setting the economic parameters" of
medicine, I don't know what is.
The prices are fixed, and it is the federal government that does the
vast majority of the fixing.
>In the case you cited, yes, patients were the victims of police
> drug actions, victimized by attacking their physician. But that is only
> because the AMA has accepted the police actions and stayed out of the fight,
> preserving their energy for capitalist and economic issues.
You mistakenly assume that the AMA has the power to prevent their
prosecution.
Peter H. Proctor
>In article <YTeLa.16409$C83.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "George Conklin"
>>In the case you cited, yes, patients were the victims of police
>> drug actions, victimized by attacking their physician. But that is only
>> because the AMA has accepted the police actions and stayed out of the fight,
>> preserving their energy for capitalist and economic issues.
>
>You mistakenly assume that the AMA has the power to prevent their
>prosecution.
In fact, the AMA was the only institution to oppose the Feds
making cannabis-possession a crime in the 1930's.
Completely-unsuccessfully, I might add. There is nothing more
unstoppable than a politician intent on pandering to people's
irrational fears... No amount of mere professional expertise will be
effective.
Dr P
George Conklin
"Orac" <or...@wlsfanmail.com> wrote in message
news:orac-95AEA3.1...@host9.newsfeeds.com...
Were the AMA interested in patients and not mostly in income for people
like Oreck, then they would have paid attention to the issues on drugs. But
they have accepted the police presence on the subject, and do nothing to
help individual physicians. It is a classic case of saving your fire power
for what counts: more money.
George Conklin
The AMA, as I quoted, made it unprofessional conduct for someone to
benefit directly from the labor of a doctor. That is now law in all states.
All the Feds can do is fiddle with fees. What other industry exepts 100%
of its capital improvements to be supplied gratis by the public?
George Conklin
universal health care quite successfully....why? It is an economic issue.
As for patient issues, they are silent for 80 years, as you note.
George Conklin
>
> "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:rYeLa.16411.
>
> > So who cares if the AMA has 30%
> > membership? The other 70% get the benefits without paying the dues.
>
>
> Benefits? The reason that the vast majority of doctors don't belong to the
> AMA is that they are OPPOSED to the direction that group has tried to
steer
> medicine over the years. As a physician, the AMA has done me far more harm
> than good. But you should be glad about the AMA hanging in there, George.
> You definitely wouldn't like the organization that the other 70% of US
> physicians would replace it with.
If large-scale organizations like Ford, GM or Wal-Mart could hire
doctors just like they hire clerks, then there would be a similar situation.
Wal-Mart has stores in rural areas. That would solve the physician
distribution issue right there.
George Conklin
"Johnny" <repr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bdju4k$u8qo6$1...@ID-169595.news.dfncis.de...
pain killers at the same rate as is done in Europe (say following surgery),
the cops could come after all of them. We ought to have half our medical
graduates trained in Europe for some new ideas.
George Conklin
As long as organized medicine is silent on the issue, the public will
listen to the group that is larger: the cops. If organized medicine were
to get involved in this, then the whole issue would go away. To do so the
AMA would have to cite the use of pain killers in Europe as a model, but
they cannot do this, because it would suggest that someone, somewhere else,
practiced good medicine (and at half the price). They are too arrogant for
this. So you have two arrogant groups both of which are out of line.
Hempman
Let's look at this closely. Let's pretend that driving while intoxicated was
not involved and it was only her use of Ecstasy that made the guy appear in
the windshield. I would say you have a clear position.
Now, let's say the her Ecstasy use was the only drug involved in her DWI.
Again, a clear case.
However, the entire issue is complicated by both her history of alcoholism
and the many charges she anticipated from DWI, and the Drug War crapola. You
simply have no clear case.
Bang on it all you want, it proves nothing.
--
Dance, monkey! Jerk those knees while I tug on your marionette strings.
Entertain the people with your meaningless gyrations. Dance, wooden monkey,
dance!
Howard McCollister
> Were the AMA interested in patients and not mostly in income for people
> like Oreck, then they would have paid attention to the issues on drugs.
But
> they have accepted the police presence on the subject, and do nothing to
> help individual physicians. It is a classic case of saving your fire
power
> for what counts: more money.
>
>
The AMA doesn't represent the interests of the vast majority of physicians.
All it is is a lobbying organization, and they have failed miserably at that
task. They aren't interested in Orac, they are interested in the AMA. I can
assure you that the AMA has COST Orac money.
70% of US physicians have rejected the AMA agenda. The reason the AMA
continues to exist at all is momentum from simple tradition (which is
obviously becoming less and less relevant), and the leadership vacuum in the
medical profession.You can rail against the AMA all you want. 70% of doctors
in America will agree with you, but for different reasons.
HMc
The_rig...@truth.com
wrote:
The 1930's position on cannabis was but a bit more than three decades
removed from the battle of the turn-of-century nostrums and schools of
medicine, vis-a-vis the osteopaths and the medical doctors.
Herman Rubin
George Conklin <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"Peter H. Proctor" <d...@drproctor.com> wrote in message
>news:9okofv0uaqilae3se...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 02:02:29 GMT, Jasbird
>> <jasbird#deletethis#@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>> The head of the Anderson pain clinic subsequently offered to
>> send a couple of his assistants to educate the local DEA on new
>> developments in pain control. In return, the local agent in charge
>> offered to send _his_ agents to tell the MD Anderson docs how it
>> should be done.
>> This sitiuation remionds me of the relationship between the
>> KGB and the scientific community in Stalinist Russia. Solzhitsin
>> talks about the kick a secret policeman right off the farm got from
>> being able to bully the pointy-headed academic types.... Power is a
>> drug too.
>> Dr P
> You reminded us of this earlier, and it was and is a disgrace. Police are
>after power, but then so are physicians. In the end, if the AMA were really
>interested in patients and not mostly in promoting higher costs, then the
>cops could be put in their place.
This is, unfortunately, not the case. The moralists would
accuse physicians of promoting addiction (they already
have), and the paranoids in law enforcement, prosecution,
etc., seem to have nothing standing in their way.
It is only if those paranoids are risking their livelihoods
that anything can be done. It is next to impossible to do
anything to them for their major violations of rights.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
Herman Rubin
Not really. Look at the large number of people falsely
accused by ONE agent in Texas, who served many years.
In this case, the agent is likely to go to prison, but
this will not compensate the victims.
What is needed is that all unjustified accusations by law
enforcement people and prosecutors have massive financial
penalties. Those are the real criminals.
Herman Rubin
George Conklin <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"Johnny" <repr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:bdju4k$u8qo6$1...@ID-169595.news.dfncis.de...
>> "flick" <fl...@starband.net> wrote in message
>> news:QLdLa.657$V%3.200...@twister1.starband.net...
>> > "Jasbird" <jasbird#deletethis#@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
>> > news:dklqfvgnqda3fa4e3...@4ax.com...
>> > > <http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/local/6_27_03doc_charged.html>
.................
> It has been pointed out many times that if USA-style physicians gave out
>pain killers at the same rate as is done in Europe (say following surgery),
>the cops could come after all of them. We ought to have half our medical
>graduates trained in Europe for some new ideas.
No, we need to remove the cops. The present physicians can
then use judgment, and learn without fear.
Peter H. Proctor
<george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> As long as organized medicine is silent on the issue, the public will
>listen to the group that is larger: the cops. If organized medicine were
>to get involved in this, then the whole issue would go away.
Nonsense. E.g., the head of the Pain clinic at MD Anderson
runs a decriminalization weekly cable TV show in collaboration with
the retired Chairman of the Pharmacology Dept. at UT Medical School
Houston. They similarly are very active in drug legalization
issues. often testify, etc. These guys are about as expert as you
can get in this area. But nobody seems to be listening...
Dr P
Peter H. Proctor
>> In fact, the AMA was the only institution to oppose the Feds
>>making cannabis-possession a crime in the 1930's.
>>Completely-unsuccessfully, I might add. There is nothing more
>>unstoppable than a politician intent on pandering to people's
>>irrational fears... No amount of mere professional expertise will be
>>effective.
>The 1930's position on cannabis was but a bit more than three decades
>removed from the battle of the turn-of-century nostrums and schools of
>medicine, vis-a-vis the osteopaths and the medical doctors.
The DO's are as much physicians as we MD's. So I'm not sure
what you mean..... And, in retrospect, the AMA was
rightfully-concerned about the law preventing the development of new
therapeutic uses for cannabis...
BTW, the speaker of the house asked the sponsor of the bill
whether the AMA had signed onto it. The sponsor flatly lied and said
the AMA supported it, when in fact they opposed it. So the bill was
passed essentially without any debate. Just one more example of
the long trail of mendacity surrounding these laws.
Dr P
George Conklin
represent the structure of modern American medicine. They have successfully
opposed universal health care coverage, and continue to do so successfully.
If the AMA came out in favor of comon sense drug usage for cancer patients
like in Europe do you think any politician, right or left wing, would dare
say anything? If the AMA came out in favor of universal health care, it
would be passed in the next session of congress. The AMA has not cost Oreck
a penny. It has made him rich by making sure that the overheads of the
medical system are paid for by government or charity, while Oreck just sends
out his bills.
George Conklin
"Hempman" <DHem...@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:SflLa.27865$Kg7....@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
for helping cancer patients with doses common already in Europe?
You must be high.
George Conklin
<The_rig...@truth.com> wrote in message
news:a6qrfvs6g3n3s22q2...@4ax.com...
Correct. In fact, no one remembered to ban pot for about 30 years, as
you note. It was a forgotten drug.
George Conklin
"Peter H. Proctor" <d...@drproctor.com> wrote in message
news:3l4sfvkj0u9l3hot6...@4ax.com...
So does this justify organized medicine saying nothing for the next 80
years? It has had a lot to say about making sure medicine is a privilege
and not a right and organized medicine has made sure we have the most
expensive medical care in the world.
George Conklin
"Herman Rubin" <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:bdkt2p$37...@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
individual have the right to do anything he/she wants? Especially if they
are dying of cancer?
George Conklin
enforcement officer.
George Conklin
Anderson. They sure have heard of the AMA. These are local physicians
acting with silence from their major lobbing group. The AMA has
successfully seen to it we do not have universal health care. That is far
harder to do than to let the dying have some pain relief.
George Conklin
> In article <z6lLa.69223$Io.64...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> George Conklin <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >"Johnny" <repr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:bdju4k$u8qo6$1...@ID-169595.news.dfncis.de...
>
> >> "flick" <fl...@starband.net> wrote in message
> >> news:QLdLa.657$V%3.200...@twister1.starband.net...
> >> > "Jasbird" <jasbird#deletethis#@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:dklqfvgnqda3fa4e3...@4ax.com...
> >> > > <http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/local/6_27_03doc_charged.html>
>
> .................
>
>
> > It has been pointed out many times that if USA-style physicians gave
out
> >pain killers at the same rate as is done in Europe (say following
surgery),
> >the cops could come after all of them. We ought to have half our medical
> >graduates trained in Europe for some new ideas.
>
>
> No, we need to remove the cops. The present physicians can
> then use judgment, and learn without fear.
>
> --
Contradiction Herman. You keep telling us how much better education is in
Europe than here. I was agreeing with you. Yes, get rid of the cops, for
sure, but that will not overcome the professional ignorance taught in our
med schools.
Hempman
Darned if I know how this answer to another post got onto this one. I think
I had too many windows open and this got sent by mistake.
Sorry.
BTW, why resort to personal attacks, Are you an asshole like this all the
time, or just occasionally?
Steve Harris
...
> You reminded us of this earlier, and it was and is a
disgrace. Police are
> after power, but then so are physicians. In the end, if
the AMA were really
> interested in patients and not mostly in promoting higher
costs, then the
> cops could be put in their place.
ROFL. What makes you think the AMA has some special power
over cops and legislatures? Laws in democracies are made by
representatives of the pepul. Which is to say, your
neighbors. Which is to say, the uneducated paranoid boobs
next door to you. Get it? They're not really smart about
addictive drugs. All they know is that they're against them.
Except when they themselves need them. Which isn't that
often.
Why fix the roof when it's not raining? Why fund cancer
research when you don't have cancer?
The drug laws won't be fixed until more than 50% of people
have a close family member in jail for some drug-related
offence. Since (even with the highest incarceration rate in
the world) we're not nearly to that point yet, we'll
continue to suffer more of the same. It's dumb, but that's
democracy.
SBH
Peter H. Proctor
<george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Contradiction Herman. You keep telling us how much better education is in
>Europe than here. I was agreeing with you. Yes, get rid of the cops, for
>sure, but that will not overcome the professional ignorance taught in our
>med schools.
It wasn't taught in Medical schools, but by examples like the
following. Try to find relief from cancer pain in Western Virginia
these days.
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/195.html#prescription
Prescription for Prosecution: Feds Go After Oxy Docs in Southwestern
Virginia
Federal prosecutors waging war on Oxycontin have won pill-pushing
convictions against two Southwest Virginia doctors in the past month
and a third has been raided and awaits possible indictment. In the
past two years, three other physicians have also been convicted of
dispensing powerful pain relief medications without proper medical
reason in Southwest Virginia, now in the midst of what local
authorities refer to as "an epidemic" of Oxycontin abuse. The trio of
doctors recently convicted or under official suspicion all prescribed
Oxycontin to large numbers of pain patients, some of whom have said in
sworn testimony that they were drug abusers.
On June 22, a federal jury convicted Grundy, Virginia, physician
Franklin J. Sutherland, 46, on 427 counts of writing prescriptions for
no legitimate medical purpose. A month later, another federal jury
convicted Dr. Lowell Clark, 43, of nearby Bland, Virginia of 266
counts on similar charges. Clark faces 15 years in prison, and
Sutherland over 100 years, plus millions of dollars in fines. Both
were prosecuted by Assistant US Attorney Randy Ramseyer, who has been
working with a federal task force, including the FBI and DEA, as well
as local police agencies in Virginia, West Virginia and Tennessee,
investigating diverted drugs and health insurance fraud in the region.
Meanwhile, Roanoke, Virginia, Dr. Cecil Knox waits to see if he too
will face the weight of the federal government. Federal agents raided
his practice on June 27 looking for evidence that he prescribed
Oxycontin and other pain relief drugs to drug dealers or abusers.
According to the Roanoke Times, an affidavit filed in support of the
search warrant said Knox was being investigated for prescribing drugs
for no legitimate medical reason and defrauding medical insurance
programs. The affidavit noted that Knox was the second largest
prescriber of Oxycontin for Trigon Blue Cross Blue Shield, Virginia's
largest managed health care company.
The next day, Dr. Knox was back at work at the Southwest Virginia
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation clinic, which provides physical
therapy and pain management for chronic pain patients. "He takes his
Hippocratic oath very seriously," attorney Debbie Caldwell-Bono told
the Times. "He may be a leading prescriber of this type of pain
medication. But at the same time, you have to realize that he is a
leading caregiver of chronic pain sufferers in this area. He
emphatically denies any wrongdoing by himself or his staff,"
Caldwell-Bono added.
As federal and state investigators sift through thousands of pages of
medical records searching for indictable offenses, Dr. Knox continues
to practice without further public comment.
This assault on pain doctors as scrip-happy Dr. Feelgoods comes amidst
a local level of concern over Oxycontin abuse that approaches a
classical moral panic. With police and prosecutors hyping the threat
of Oxycontin abuse and local newspapers faithfully parroting what they
hear from law enforcement officials, local juries are quick to convict
and local authorities are quick to conjure up new solutions to the
latest drug menace.
In Pulaski, Virginia, police have provided fingerprint kits to six
local pharmacies, to be used for customers filling Oxycontin
prescriptions, the Roanoke Times reported. According to the Times, the
kits' manufacturer said this was the first time the fingerprint kits
had been used in pharmacies. They are typically used at check-cashing
businesses. According to the same article, police in Pulaski logged a
whopping 1,800 drug cases in the first six months of this year. The
town has a population of just under 10,000.
A Virginia lawyer, Strother Smith of Abingdon, has also gotten in on
the fun, filing a $5.2 billion state lawsuit against Oxycontin's
manufacturer, Purdue Pharma of Connecticut, on behalf of five
individuals who claim to have become addicted to the drug. Smith has
referred to Purdue Pharma as "corporate drug dealers." One of Smith's
clients claims to have become addicted to the drug after taking one
dose.
In the cases of Drs. Sutherland and Clark, federal prosecutors told
jurors the physicians prescribed Oxycontin to people they knew or
should have known were abusing the drug and presented witnesses who
testified they were abusing drugs while receiving prescriptions.
In Sutherland's trial, Brian Elswick, a former deputy sheriff and
professed addict, told the court he persuaded Sutherland to phone in
prescriptions in the names of the deputy's former fiancee and father.
He testified that he told Sutherland he had pain in his back, elbow,
or leg, and the doctor would phone in a prescription.
US Assistant Attorney Ramseyer also called the deputy's fiancee,
Summer Chambers, who testified that: "I knew that [Sutherland] had to
know there was a problem." She did not explain precisely how she knew
this.
Testifying in his own defense, Sutherland admitted filling 11
prescriptions to Elswick's father and fiancee without examining them.
"I trusted Brian completely," he testified. "I made a terrible
mistake." He told the jury many of his patients suffered from severe,
chronic pain and that the medications he prescribed helped them lead
more normal lives. "I just tried to do the best job I could with the
patients, to treat them as best as I know how," he testified.
But the jury was not in a mood to buy it. After three days of
deliberations, they convicted him of hundreds of counts of improper
prescribing. He will be sentenced on September 10.
The jury didn't swing Dr. Freeman Clark's way this week either, in a
trial strikingly reminiscent of Sutherland's. Testifying for the
prosecution was another professed former drug abuser, Elizabeth Diane
Ritchie, who told the court Clark prescribed her pain pills after
other doctors refused to do so. "I was still in pain, and my family
said [Clark] would write narcotics," she testified. I told him I was
snorting the pills. It just seemed like it worked faster," said the
former fast-food worker who had undergone three surgeries to her back
and neck. Still, said Ritchie, she did not think Clark had done
anything wrong. "He was a good doctor," she testified, "he took time
with you."
Another prosecution witness, former minister and drug abuser Harold
Underwood, also testified that he abused the drugs prescribed him for
back and neck pain. But he, too, testified that Clark was unaware of
his drug abuse problem. "He had no way of knowing that," said
Underwood. "I never got to the point where I was completely out of it.
He always examined me, it was never just ask for medicine and get it."
Yet another patient, Connie Hatfield, testified that she began seeing
Clark because no other doctors would take her as a patient. "I had
called several doctors' offices, but as soon as I told them I had
chronic pain, they said they weren't taking any more patients." Clark
prescribed Oxycontin, she told the court, and she continues to use it
for back pain. "I can't function without my pain medication," she
said, adding that she was not a drug abuser.
Clark's cause was damaged by his admission in court that he had
suffered from depression and prescription drug abuse before
establishing his practice in the area. He said he last tested positive
for drugs in 1999 and since then he had passed 88 consecutive random
drug screenings. He also testified that as a doctor new to the area,
he had to take patients no one else wanted: the poor, those with
multiple medical problems and chronic pain sufferers. "I actually
inherited a lot of patients no one else wanted to see," he told the
jury. "I didn't care. This was the first time in my life that I had a
practice I could call my own."
And the last time, unless his conviction is overturned on appeal.
In both cases, local internist Dr. Adam Steinberg, apparently building
a nascent career as a professional witness, testified that hundreds of
prescriptions were unwarranted. But in Dr. Steinberg's opinion, no one
with a drug problem should be given opioids for pain. "It's not a
legitimate medical purpose to issue a narcotic for a known drug
abuser," he testified.
Steinberg did not say what such people who are in pain should do, and
his views are sharply at variance with those who specialize in pain
treatment. The intersection of chronic pain and chemical dependency is
a complex medical issue, but a consensus exists among pain treatment
leaders that such patients should receive adequate treatment for their
pain, even if it is narcotics
(http://www.ampainsoc.org/pub/bulletin/mar99/president.htm).
Assistant US Attorney Ramseyer, in a post-conviction press conference,
called the verdict a message to doctors. "With pills, it's not like
cocaine or marijuana. They can't get onto the street unless doctors
are prescribing them," he said. "So many people are affected by [the
abuse of] these pills in Southwest Virginia. It's hurting people who
have a legitimate need for these medications." Ramseyer did not
explain how sending doctors to prison for dozens of years in an area
where physicians are increasingly loathe to prescribe strong pain
medications would help those people.
>
>
CBI
> This may your your own personal opinion, but it is not factual. The
AMA
> represent the structure of modern American medicine. They have
successfully
> opposed universal health care coverage, and continue to do so
successfully.
> If the AMA came out in favor of comon sense drug usage for cancer patients
> like in Europe do you think any politician, right or left wing, would dare
> say anything? If the AMA came out in favor of universal health care, it
> would be passed in the next session of congress. The AMA has not cost
Oreck
> a penny. It has made him rich by making sure that the overheads of the
> medical system are paid for by government or charity, while Oreck just
sends
> out his bills.
How long did it take you to accumulate this much ignorance? You must work
very hard at it.
--
CBI, MD
flick
> Look at Texas where half a town was sent to jail on the lies of a law
> enforcement officer.
Half a town?
i thought they just let out about 12 people. There were 25 people in this
town?
And anyway, there are LOTS of people given sentences every year on drug
charges. The fact that there was a grievous errors made in 12 cases is
hardly an indication that every cop or every DEA agent behaves like that bad
one in Tulia did.
flick 100785
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Orac" <or...@wlsfanmail.com> wrote in message
> news:orac-336020.1...@host9.newsfeeds.com...
> > In article <YTeLa.16409$C83.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> > "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "Peter H. Proctor" <d...@drproctor.com> wrote in message
> > > news:h0qpfvcu8qo5tu5qm...@4ax.com...
> > > > On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 23:06:11 GMT, "George Conklin"
> > > > <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > You reminded us of this earlier, and it was and is a disgrace.
> Police
> > > are
> > > > >after power, but then so are physicians. In the end, if the AMA were
> > > really
> > > > >interested in patients and not mostly in promoting higher costs, then
> the
> > > > >cops could be put in their place.
> > > >
> > > > The difference is that the cops get their power from the
> > > > delegated authority use deadly force. We docs must use more subtile
> > > > means<G>.
> > > >
> > > > The AMA is basically toothless. In fact, a surprising
> > > > number of docs are out there fighting for the right of their patients
> > > > to recieve appropriate pain meds. Similarly, a lot of docs put
> > > > their own butts at risk from the DA's and federal attorenys out to
> > > > get promoted by purposfully- pandering to people's irrational
> > > > prejudices. Braver than I am, anyway.
> > > >
> > > > Dr P
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > The AMA is not toothless. It sets the economic and profession
> parameters
> > > of the medical/industrial complex.
> >
> > Please produce evidence to support this assertion.
> >
> >
> > >In other nations, governments sets the
> > > economic parameters, but then we have the situation where that does not
> > > happen.
> >
> > The government in the U.S. does not set the economic parameters of
> > medicine?
>
> The AMA, as I quoted, made it unprofessional conduct for someone to
> benefit directly from the labor of a doctor. That is now law in all states.
State the specific law, or provide a link to it.
> All the Feds can do is fiddle with fees.
What the hell do you think "fiddling with fees" is? Its SETTING THE
ECONOMIC PARAMETERS OF MEDICINE--exactly what you just claimed the
government does not do in the U.S.. And the government does far more
than "fiddle" with fees. It SETS them for Medicare and nearly all health
insurers, HMOs, and managed care organizations use Medicare fees as the
basis for negotiating reimbursement rates with providers.
>What other industry exepts 100%
> of its capital improvements to be supplied gratis by the public?
I don't know what "exepts" means, but I'm assuming you meant "expects."
In any case, please support your assertion above.
In any case, you ignored nearly all of what I said, which was:
The government in the U.S. does not set the economic parameters of
medicine? You must be either kidding or completely deluded. Do you even
realize what complete and utter nonsense that statement is? The Federal
government DOES set nearly all reimbursement rates through Medicare and
Medicaid, and private insurance companies use these reimbursement rates
AS DETERMINED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR MEDICARE REIMBURSEMENT as
the basis for negotiating their reimbursement rates with providers.
Typically reimbursement rates for services are negotiated as a
percentage based on the Medicare reimbursement rates set by the federal
government. If the ability to set reimbursement rates that serve as the
de facto basis for all reimbursement of physicians, whether by Medicare
or by private insurers, is not "setting the economic parameters" of
medicine, I don't know what is.
The prices are fixed, and it is the federal government that does the
vast majority of the fixing.
Stop dodging and answer my point, George, and tell us how you can say
that the U.S. Government does not set the economic parameters of
medicine, even though the government sets Medicare reimbursement rates
for physician and hospital services, and these Medicare rates serve as
the basis upon which nearly all contracts between providers and managed
care, HMO's, and health insurers are negotiated.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
Steve Harris
t...
> So does this justify organized medicine saying nothing
for the next 80
> years? It has had a lot to say about making sure medicine
is a privilege
> and not a right and organized medicine has made sure we
have the most
> expensive medical care in the world.
Most of the expense isn't in drugs, but in hospital
treatment that is labor intensive, and in expensive scanning
machinery, surgery, and blood tests. In the US we spend
about 10% of our health care budget on drugs, but it's up to
20% of healthcare in countries that really love drugs, like
France and Italy. Those places typically spend 9-11% of
their GDP on healthcare, whereas in the US it's about 13%,
but that still leaves them with about the same drug budget
as the US, in terms of GDP.
http://www.oecd.org/EN/document/0,,EN-document-0-nodirectora
te-no-12-42365-0,00.html
Bottom line: Germany and France spend as much on drugs as we
do in the US, and that isn't the largest part of healthcare
in any of these places. Nor do doctors get much of this
money, either in the US OR in Germany or France. So where is
your argument?
SBH
Orac
"Hempman" <DHem...@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote:
> "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:OjpLa.17007$C83.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > What does this have to do with physicans at MD Anderson being
> persecuted
> > for helping cancer patients with doses common already in Europe?
> > You must be high.
> >
>
> Darned if I know how this answer to another post got onto this one. I think
> I had too many windows open and this got sent by mistake.
>
> Sorry.
>
> BTW, why resort to personal attacks, Are you an asshole like this all the
> time, or just occasionally?
George only gets nasty and personal like that when you disagree with him
or if you say anything that defends the medical profession against his
attacks. Then he can be quite vicious.
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> It has been pointed out many times that if USA-style physicians gave out
> pain killers at the same rate as is done in Europe (say following surgery),
> the cops could come after all of them. We ought to have half our medical
> graduates trained in Europe for some new ideas.
You have yet to post supporting evidence to back up your assertion that
surgeons in the U.S. give only 10% of the pain medicine that European
surgeons give postop patients. Please do so. I'll keep reminding you
until you do.
While you're at it, please post supporting evidence for your assertion
above.
Hempman
--
Dance, monkey! Jerk those knees while I tug on your marionette strings.
Entertain the people with your meaningless gyrations. Dance, wooden monkey,
dance!
"flick" <fl...@starband.net> wrote in message
news:XCrLa.1020$Ss1.25...@twister1.starband.net...
> "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:UopLa.17013$C83.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> > Look at Texas where half a town was sent to jail on the lies of a
law
> > enforcement officer.
>
> Half a town?
>
> i thought they just let out about 12 people. There were 25 people in this
> town?
12 were released THIS TIME. After a nuimber were released a few months ago.
And, there are still a number in prison waiting for the DA to decide if they
will be re-prosecuted. Altogether, there were 45 arrests.
In total, Tulia itself has about 5,000 residents. The "town" to which George
refers is the black sub-culture that lived in the particular community where
all the arrests took place. The arrest represented the removal of half the
adult males from the black community.
>
> And anyway, there are LOTS of people given sentences every year on drug
> charges. The fact that there was a grievous errors made in 12 cases is
It was 45 in a single commuinity. Half the adult males in the black
community.
> hardly an indication that every cop or every DEA agent behaves like that
bad
> one in Tulia did.
This bad DEA agent, Tom Coleman , has lied in a slew of drug cases. He had
already lost many cases due to his lies. You act like he is an isolated
problem. The fact is. cops lying in drug cases is epidemic. In Philadelphia,
all of the arrests over several years had to be dismissed because of police
misconduct in several precints there.
It is well established that drug cops have to deal in testilying to ensure
arrest and prosecution. I attend almost every drug prosecution case in my
community. Every month, hundreds of cases are dismissed when the judge
catches the drug cops lying about probable cause or permission to search. I
am proud and happy to say, I helped a lot of these people. I distribute tape
recorders for free in my community, wiith instructions on how to use them
and get the tapse to the ACLU and the poor victims lawyers. They tape the
confrontation with the lying cops. The cop asks for permission to search and
the victim says, "No, you do not have permission to search" When the cop
dose not immediately release them but carries out the illegal search anyway,
the judges invarriably throws both the "evidence" and the cases out. It
probably helps that we demand jury trials whenever we can.
That is only the cases of simple arrest. The brutality of cops killing
innocent victims is also becoming epidemic.Ther was Mr Mario Paz, a 65 year
old grandfather,. shot dead in his bed by invading cops who were in the
wrong house. His name joins Pedro Oregon Navarro, a Mexican immigrant killed
by Houston police in a botched and illegal raid; Amadou Diallo, killed in a
hail of official-issue bullets on a New York City street; and Donald Scott,
a millionaire gunned down by agents from the Los Angeles Sheriff's
Department and five federal law-enforcement agencies. Add Nelson Robles to
the list; he survived his encounter with confused DEA agents who raided his
home.
This horrifying trend is a result of frustration over the ineffectual war on
drugs. American officialdom's frenzy to enforce drug prohibition had led
Congress to loosen traditional restrictions on the use of military resources
by civilian police departments. The result has been a flood of training and
materiel that is increasingly transforming peace officers into occupation
troops on America's streets.
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> If the AMA came out in favor of universal health care, it
> would be passed in the next session of congress.
Now I know you're deluded if you honestly think that the AMA could get
Congress to pass universal health care in the next two years if it just
put its mind to it, especially in this political climate. Your hatred of
the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
judgment.
Howard McCollister
"Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
news:orac-B6C8C1.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> Your hatred of
> the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
> judgment.
Not to mention his credibility. All he does is rant, not argue. Pathetic.
HMc
Peter H. Proctor
>"George Conklin" .
>Half a town?
>
>i thought they just let out about 12 people. There were 25 people in this
>town?
IIRC, it was about 40 or so that were charged. LIkely, not a one
did the crime.
>
>And anyway, there are LOTS of people given sentences every year on drug
>charges. The fact that there was a grievous errors made in 12 cases is
>hardly an indication that every cop or every DEA agent behaves like that bad
>one in Tulia did.
.
Don't know about elswhere, but here in Texas, there seem
to be a real problem with police misconduct in drug cases.. There
is a concurrenct scandal in Dallas involving powdered sheetrock being
used as evidence in drug cases. Most interestingly, some of the
sample actually had a little cocaine in them. Wonder what happened to
the rest that was signed into the evidence room.<G>...
And then there is the crime lab scadal here in Houston.
Been watching this one go down for years....
Dr P
Orac
"Howard McCollister" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
It's more sad than anything else, because George does appear to be a
reasonably intelligent person in other areas. However, anyone who can
claim that, in this present political climate, the AMA could get
Congress to pass universal health care if it wanted to (as George has
claimed) is clearly out of touch with reality.
CBI
> In article <3efe57f8$0$88185$45be...@newscene.com>,
> "Howard McCollister" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:orac-B6C8C1.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> >
> >
> > > Your hatred of
> > > the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
> > > judgment.
> >
> > Not to mention his credibility. All he does is rant, not argue.
Pathetic.
>
> It's more sad than anything else, because George does appear to be a
> reasonably intelligent person in other areas. However, anyone who can
> claim that, in this present political climate, the AMA could get
> Congress to pass universal health care if it wanted to (as George has
> claimed) is clearly out of touch with reality.
If the AMA had 1/10th that much clout the Medicare reimbursements would not
be going DOWN. Or is it his position that the AMA believes doctors are
making too much money and they should give some back?
--
CBI, MD
DWood78828
>From: "George Conklin"
> Were the AMA interested in patients and not mostly in income for people
>like Oreck, then they would have paid attention to the issues on drugs. But
>they have accepted the police presence on the subject, and do nothing to
>help individual physicians. It is a
>classic case of saving your fire power
>for what counts: more money.
Do you have any idea of how much of an ASS you sound like George. I suffer
from chronic pain. And I've had to deal with different doctors concerning the
issue of pain medications. They don't underprescribe because of some pie in
the sky AMA guideline. Then underprescribe because until recently, most never
received an adquate education regarding pain.
So, shut up. As usual, you are piping off about something you have very
little accurate information or knowledge.
Denise
DWood78828
>From: "George Conklin"
> You always have an answer for every medical problem: blame the public,
>blame the police, blame George, blame someone, but you yourself and your
>business friends avoid all responsibility for almost everything.
George, do the world a favor, SELL YOUR COMPUTER.
Denise
The_rig...@truth.com
wrote:
>On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 12:16:56 -0700, The_rig...@truth.com wrote:
>
>>> In fact, the AMA was the only institution to oppose the Feds
>>>making cannabis-possession a crime in the 1930's.
>>>Completely-unsuccessfully, I might add. There is nothing more
>>>unstoppable than a politician intent on pandering to people's
>>>irrational fears... No amount of mere professional expertise will be
>>>effective.
>
>>The 1930's position on cannabis was but a bit more than three decades
>>removed from the battle of the turn-of-century nostrums and schools of
>>medicine, vis-a-vis the osteopaths and the medical doctors.
>
> The DO's are as much physicians as we MD's. So I'm not sure
>what you mean..... And, in retrospect, the AMA was
>rightfully-concerned about the law preventing the development of new
>therapeutic uses for cannabis...
>
> BTW, the speaker of the house asked the sponsor of the bill
>whether the AMA had signed onto it. The sponsor flatly lied and said
>the AMA supported it, when in fact they opposed it. So the bill was
>passed essentially without any debate. Just one more example of
>the long trail of mendacity surrounding these laws.
>
>Dr P
Doc, you seem a bit short on your history of medicine if what you say is
what you know. D.O's were finally recognized by the AMA in the 1960's
after many years of both disciplines carping at each other. In California,
there is still a school that specifically schools D.O.'s. In other states,
there are still a few remaining medical schools that cater to the D.O.
philosophy. And even with the mutual admiration - not - of the
disciplines, there is ever the undercurrent of feelings by the M.D.'s, that
D.O.'s are not equal. Get a D.O. and an M.D. in a close encounter and see
what happens.
Howard McCollister
<The_rig...@truth.com> wrote in message
news:0utsfv805uf9lmsj8...@4ax.com...
I have those close encounters every day. I have two partners that are
osteopaths, and my brother-in-law is just finishing his second year of
osteopathic medicine. The DOs in our group are excellent physicians, well
trained, and certified by the ABIM and AAFP. One of them (the internist)
also has a Ph.D in naturopathic medicine. They are both highly regarded by
our patients, and by their partners.
As to history, one shouldn't forgo current events either. No medical schools
cater to the philosophy of osteopathic medicine. Osteopaths are all trained
in schools that are entirely devoted to osteopathic medicine (there are 20
of them). The course of study is every bit as rigorous and complete as
allopathic medical schools.
HMc
Eric Johnson
"Peter H. Proctor" <d...@drproctor.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 18:30:33 GMT, "George Conklin"
> <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> As long as organized medicine is silent on the issue, the public will
>> listen to the group that is larger: the cops. If organized medicine were
>> to get involved in this, then the whole issue would go away.
>
> Nonsense. E.g., the head of the Pain clinic at MD Anderson
> runs a decriminalization weekly cable TV show in collaboration with
> the retired Chairman of the Pharmacology Dept. at UT Medical School
> Houston. They similarly are very active in drug legalization
> issues. often testify, etc. These guys are about as expert as you
> can get in this area. But nobody seems to be listening...
>
> Dr P
Wow. I thought is was just me they wouldn't listen to, and that because I
was too young.
EJ
Jasbird
It wasn't just one agent. It included the D.A. who prosecuted without
any real evidence of guilt, the judge who allowed the trials to go
ahead when they should have been thrown out of court, the Sheriff who
suppressed evidence against the witness' reliability.
The entire criminal justice system.
George Conklin
"CBI" <00...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:bdlg97$1ng$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
If the AMA came out in favor of universal health care, insted of
opposing it in order to maximize income for its members, we would not have
what WHO has shown to be the system ranked #37 in results and #1 in costs.
George Conklin
> "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > If the AMA came out in favor of universal health care, it
> > would be passed in the next session of congress.
>
> Now I know you're deluded if you honestly think that the AMA could get
> Congress to pass universal health care in the next two years if it just
> put its mind to it, especially in this political climate. Your hatred of
> the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
> judgment.
The AMA has always opposed universal health care in the USA, and has been
very successful. I noticed when I posted a long piece from Starr's book you
shut up for a week or so. I'll have to get the book next to the computer
again and you can slander him.
I note that you never stick to the subject and the fact that the AMA did
NOT defend the arrested doctor. I also note you defend the HRT fiasco.
George Conklin
"Howard McCollister" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:3efe57f8$0$88185$45be...@newscene.com...
pass in the next session of congress. The AMA looks out after the financial
interests of its members, not the health of the nation, or I note, did it
defend the arrested doctor. Why should it? It is uses government to
maximize the income of its members, not the better medicine or help
patients. As WHO has proved, we have a system with #37 in results and #1 in
costs.
George Conklin
> In article <3efe57f8$0$88185$45be...@newscene.com>,
> "Howard McCollister" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> > "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:orac-B6C8C1.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> >
> >
> > > Your hatred of
> > > the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
> > > judgment.
> >
> > Not to mention his credibility. All he does is rant, not argue.
Pathetic.
>
> It's more sad than anything else, because George does appear to be a
> reasonably intelligent person in other areas. However, anyone who can
> claim that, in this present political climate, the AMA could get
> Congress to pass universal health care if it wanted to (as George has
> claimed) is clearly out of touch with reality.
>
in doing so. Look at what they did to Hillary Clinton. By lying about the
AMA's success, you think you can cover up its lobbying efforts in favor of
costs #1, results #37.
George Conklin
The AMA is concerned with the structure of medicine, not with
reimbursements. The issue is reimbursements....the wrong approach. You
should be receiving a SALARY, not reinbursements, and should be working for
a corporation like Wal-Mart or within the National Health Service.
George Conklin
"DWood78828" <dwood...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030629014922...@mb-m01.aol.com...
You just proved my point. Thank you.
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> news:orac-B6C8C1.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > In article <eipLa.17003$C83.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> > "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > If the AMA came out in favor of universal health care, it
> > > would be passed in the next session of congress.
> >
> > Now I know you're deluded if you honestly think that the AMA could get
> > Congress to pass universal health care in the next two years if it just
> > put its mind to it, especially in this political climate. Your hatred of
> > the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
> > judgment.
>
> The AMA has always opposed universal health care in the USA, and has been
> very successful.
Your assertion was that the AMA could get universal health care passed
in the next session of Congress, which, given the current administration
and political climate, is patently ridiculous.
>I noticed when I posted a long piece from Starr's book you
> shut up for a week or so.
Actually, I don't recall ever having seen it or read it. It must not
have made the terrifying impression on me that you think it did. Also, I
do disappear from Usenet for other reasons, namely getting too busy to
amuse myself with folks like you who like to attack me for my
profession. Feel free to repost it if it makes you happy.
>I'll have to get the book next to the computer
> again and you can slander him.
>
> I note that you never stick to the subject and the fact that the AMA did
> NOT defend the arrested doctor. I also note you defend the HRT fiasco.
Not an entirely accurate description of my posts, George, but that's par
for the course with you.
DWood78828
>From: "George Conklin"
>> George, do the world a favor, SELL YOUR COMPUTER.
>>
>> Denise
> You just proved my point. Thank you.
>
And which point is that, you have so many asine ones.
Denise
BrianM's Phat Pharm
>unstoppable than a politician intent on pandering to people's
>irrational fears.
Democracy is a steam roller.
Peter H. Proctor
<george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
.
> The AMA has always opposed universal health care and has been successful
Presumably, you mean Hillary's health care debacle in '94. What
really nailed the Dems was the gun thing, particularly the assault
weapons ban. Most people were only dimly aware of the details of
Hillary's plan. Hell, I'm a doc and I barely understood it.
Dr P
BrianM's Phat Pharm
>rightfully-concerned about the law preventing the development of new
>therapeutic uses for cannabis.
From the AMA's web site:
<quote>
"The AMA adopted a policy in 1969 declaring that marijuana is 'a
dangerous drug and as such is a public health concern'," said AMA
Immediate Past President Richard F. Corlin, MD. "Although much has
changed in American culture and in medical research since we made that
statement 33 years ago, the AMA's view on marijuana use remains
exactly the same -- it is mind-altering, it can be addictive and it
can lead to destructive behavior."
Marijuana use has serious and far-reaching health consequences that go
far beyond the short-term high. It can cause mental health problems,
such as increased anxiety, panic attacks, depression and lung damage.
In addition, marijuana can lead to impaired judgement and, as a
result, risky behaviors such as dangerous driving, unprotected sex and
increased delinquent behavior.
"We need to send the message to our children that it is a drug with
serious consequences, and its use will not be tolerated," said Dr.
Corlin. "This new national campaign is a bold first step in that
direction, and the AMA and its member physicians are willing to do
whatever it takes to help spread this important message."
</quote>
-- http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/2403-6719.html
BrianM's Phat Pharm
>
>And, in retrospect, the AMA was
>rightfully-concerned about the law preventing the development of new
>therapeutic uses for cannabis.
Here's the UPI newswire on what the AMA decided about medical cannabis
in 2001:
<quote>
The American Medical Association's House of Delegates Tuesday rejected
a committee report that would have urged the organization to consider
compassionate use of medical marijuana for cancer patients and others.
...
"There just is no scientific evidence to establish the effectiveness
of marijuana," said Dr. Herman Abromowitz, a family physician in
Dayton, Ohio, and a member of the AMA's Board of Trustees.
...
"While the AMA delegates rejected the compassionate access
recommendation of their own Council on Scientific Affairs, at least
they rescinded their former position, which explicitly opposed
compassionate access. Now the AMA is neutral on the issue."
Dr. Roy Altman, a Miami, Fla., rheumatologist, and another CSA member,
said that compassionate use of marijuana does not help doctors
evaluate whether the drug is useful because it is not done in the
context of a controlled clinical trial. Any suggestion of improvement
in patients under these conditions is considered anecdotal and
virtually worthless as scientific evidence.
</quote>
-- http://www.mpp.org/news/upi061901.html
Peter H. Proctor
<george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> The AMA is concerned with the structure of medicine, not with
>reimbursements. The issue is reimbursements....the wrong approach. You
>should be receiving a SALARY, not reinbursements, and should be working for
>a corporation like Wal-Mart or within the National Health Service.
At most, reimbursments to physicians are about 25% of
medical care costs. Even if if you enslaved all docs and made them
work for free, it would only cut health care costs by a quarter,
not counting the necessary costs of overseerers, slave cabins,
etc<G>.
Dr P
.
Peter H. Proctor
>On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 17:20:14 -0500, Peter H. Proctor <d...@drproctor.com>
>wrote:
.
>> The DO's are as much physicians as we MD's. So I'm not sure
>>what you mean..... And, in retrospect, the AMA was
>>rightfully-concerned about the law preventing the development of new
>>therapeutic uses for cannabis...
.
>Doc, you seem a bit short on your history of medicine if what you say is
>what you know. D.O's were finally recognized by the AMA in the 1960's
>after many years of both disciplines carping at each other. In California,
>there is still a school that specifically schools D.O.'s. In other states,
>there are still a few remaining medical schools that cater to the D.O.
>philosophy. And even with the mutual admiration - not - of the
>disciplines, there is ever the undercurrent of feelings by the M.D.'s, that
>D.O.'s are not equal. Get a D.O. and an M.D. in a close encounter and see
>what happens.
Utter and complete bullsh!t. The two types of
physicians are completely integrated, doing residencies at each
others institutions, sitting on the same medical boards, practicing
side-by-side. When my father had a heart attack, he was cared for
at a nominally- DO hospital by both DO's and MD's.
It is true that the DO's tend to be a little more holistic
than us MD's and a little more oriented to primary care. Also, an MD
Pain doc friend swears that OMT ( osteopathic manipulative threapy )
is often useful in intractable musculoskeletal pain and often refers
patients for it.
In fact, several years ago, California DO's were offered the
opportuity to exchange thier DO's for MD degrees. Many turned it
down.
Dr P
BrianM's Phat Pharm
>
>The AMA looks out after the financial
>interests of its members, not the health of the nation, or I note, did it
>defend the arrested doctor.
I don't doubt any of this. Most institutions exist to serve their
members.
Peter H. Proctor
wrote:
>On 6/29/03 12:11 AM, in article 2a4sfv0em3g6jkscp...@4ax.com,
>"Peter H. Proctor" <d...@drproctor.com> wrote:
.
>> Nonsense. E.g., the head of the Pain clinic at MD Anderson
>> runs a decriminalization weekly cable TV show in collaboration with
>> the retired Chairman of the Pharmacology Dept. at UT Medical School
>> Houston. They similarly are very active in drug legalization
>> issues. often testify, etc. These guys are about as expert as you
>> can get in this area. But nobody seems to be listening...
.
>Wow. I thought is was just me they wouldn't listen to, and that because I
>was too young.
.
When evidence-based expert knowledge conflicts with
strongly-held personal belief, personal belief wins every time. The
exception being when you reallly need the services of the expert.
Then watch how fast the tune changes<G>...
BTW, this is a general case. A trueism in science is that
a new scientific theory doesn't win because of its merit, but
because the people opposing it eventually die out<G>...
Dr P
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> news:orac-A980C0.0...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > In article <3efe57f8$0$88185$45be...@newscene.com>,
> > "Howard McCollister" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:orac-B6C8C1.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > > Your hatred of
> > > > the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
> > > > judgment.
> > >
> > > Not to mention his credibility. All he does is rant, not argue.
> Pathetic.
> >
> > It's more sad than anything else, because George does appear to be a
> > reasonably intelligent person in other areas. However, anyone who can
> > claim that, in this present political climate, the AMA could get
> > Congress to pass universal health care if it wanted to (as George has
> > claimed) is clearly out of touch with reality.
> >
> The AMA has always opposed universal health care and has been successful
> in doing so. Look at what they did to Hillary Clinton.
Oh, please. It was far more than the AMA that did in Hillary & Bill's
health care plan, although no doubt it did play a part. But so did the
insurance companies. So did the pharmaceutical companies. And so did
Bill and Hillary's mis-steps and arrogance. It was definitely a
multifactorial failure, and I doubt the AMA was even the most important
reason the plan failed.
>By lying about the
> AMA's success, you think you can cover up its lobbying efforts in favor of
> costs #1, results #37.
You claim that the AMA represents the economic interests of doctors.
Certainly it does to some extent. However, your assessment of its
ability to influence the government is completely out of tune with
anything resembling reality. Let's take a recent example of the AMA
trying to protect the economic interest of its members. Earlier this
year, Congress passed a Medicare appropriations bill that would have cut
Medicare reimbursements to physicians by 4.4%, which was to be an
additional cut on top of a 5.4% cut that took effect on January 1, 2002.
(Odd that, if the AMA were as all-powerful when it comes to lobbying
Congress to protect the economic interests of its members as you
constantly complain that it is, Congress would have cut physician
reimbursements by 5.4% last year--with the AMA unable to stop or reverse
the cut--and then follow up that cut with a serious consideration of an
additional 4.4% this year.) It took every bit of effort the AMA could
muster to prevent this second cut from taking place, and perhaps the
only reason it was modified to be less draconian is because supporters
were able to tack it on to the Medicare Prescription Drug and
Modernization Act of 2003, which is the bill that recently passed to
provide prescription drug coverage to seniors. If that bill hadn't been
in the pipeline, I'm betting physicians would have had little chance of
reversing that 4.4% cut.
So much for the all-encompassing political power of the AMA. They're a
toothless tiger and can't even effectively protect Medicare
reimbursements--quite contrary to your picture of a hulking behemoth
that could, if it decided to, bend Congress to its will and make it pass
a universal health care bill. Your paranoid delusions that the AMA is
this all-powerful organization are just that--delusions.
Orac
"CBI" <00...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> news:orac-A980C0.0...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > In article <3efe57f8$0$88185$45be...@newscene.com>,
> > "Howard McCollister" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:orac-B6C8C1.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > >
> > >
> > > > Your hatred of
> > > > the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
> > > > judgment.
> > >
> > > Not to mention his credibility. All he does is rant, not argue.
> Pathetic.
> >
> > It's more sad than anything else, because George does appear to be a
> > reasonably intelligent person in other areas. However, anyone who can
> > claim that, in this present political climate, the AMA could get
> > Congress to pass universal health care if it wanted to (as George has
> > claimed) is clearly out of touch with reality.
>
> If the AMA had 1/10th that much clout the Medicare reimbursements would not
> be going DOWN. Or is it his position that the AMA believes doctors are
> making too much money and they should give some back?
My point exactly. Medicare reimbursements were cut 5.4% effective
January 1, 2002, and the original Medicare bill passed earlier this year
contained an additional 4.4% cut. IMHO, the 4.4% cut was probably only
reversed because supporters of the reversal were clever enough to get a
section reversing it into the Medicare Prescription Drug and
Modernization Act of 2003, which is the Medicare prescription drug
coverage bill that's been the object of a lot of hoopla over the last
few months. George can't explain why, if, as he claims, the AMA is
powerful enough to get universal healthcare passed during the next
session of Congress, the AMA can't even keep Congress from constantly
proposing more and more cuts in Medicare reimbursements to physicians
and can only barely manage to stop one of them--and then only with the
help of many other lobbying groups. George's vastly inflated concept of
the power of the AMA is completely out of touch with the the actual
power of the AMA.
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> The AMA is concerned with the structure of medicine, not with
> reimbursements. The issue is reimbursements....the wrong approach. You
> should be receiving a SALARY, not reinbursements, and should be working for
> a corporation like Wal-Mart or within the National Health Service.
Then you ought to like me, George, because that's exactly how I'm paid.
I'm work on salary for a state university and health care institution.
Of course, I've told you this many, many times in the past, and you
still constantly make your nasty little comments about my "sending out
bills" or "collecting my fees." I do neither of the above. Of course,
acknowledging that would remove one of your favorite attack tactics.
Orac
The_rig...@truth.com wrote:
> And even with the mutual admiration - not - of the
> disciplines, there is ever the undercurrent of feelings by the M.D.'s, that
> D.O.'s are not equal. Get a D.O. and an M.D. in a close encounter and see
> what happens.
Bullshit.
I've worked with a number of DO's from my residency until now and never
saw anything of the sort. The head of the Surgical ICU at one of the
hospitals we rotated at was a DO, and he was the one of the finest
critical care docs I've ever encountered, if not THE finest. The
associate director of the facility where I work is also a DO.
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Jasbird" <jasbird#deletethis#@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
> news:041rfvc3usa9m9ar6...@4ax.com...
> > A war on doctors and patients - otherwise known as the 'american
> > public'.
> >
> >
>
> As long as organized medicine is silent on the issue, the public will
> listen to the group that is larger: the cops. If organized medicine were
> to get involved in this, then the whole issue would go away.
George, this is such utter bullshit that it's hard to know where to
begin to refute it. You don't honestly think that organized medicine
could stop the anti-drug juggernaut that has resulted in so many
low-level drug users to be incarcerated over the last 25-30 years, do
you?
>To do so the
> AMA would have to cite the use of pain killers in Europe as a model, but
> they cannot do this, because it would suggest that someone, somewhere else,
> practiced good medicine (and at half the price). They are too arrogant for
> this. So you have two arrogant groups both of which are out of line.
Actually, as posted elsewhere in this threat, it is not "half the price"
in Europe. It is cheaper but nowhere near half as cheap. And even so the
price in Europe for health care is rapidly rising.
Orac
hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote:
> In article <z6lLa.69223$Io.64...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> George Conklin <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > It has been pointed out many times that if USA-style physicians gave out
> >pain killers at the same rate as is done in Europe (say following surgery),
> >the cops could come after all of them. We ought to have half our medical
> >graduates trained in Europe for some new ideas.
>
>
> No, we need to remove the cops. The present physicians can
> then use judgment, and learn without fear.
And George needs to provide citations to back up his earlier contention
that surgeons in the U.S. use only 10% of the amount of narcotics and
pain relievers in postop patients that European surgeons do. He has
ignored my repeated requests for him to back up his earlier assertion,
no doubt because he can't back it up.
George Conklin
"Peter H. Proctor" <d...@drproctor.com> wrote in message
news:hkstfvkovh3o173tr...@4ax.com...
Physicians in Europe are not enslaved. They do not live in slave cabins.
What is wrong with you anyway? I am glad you admit that the AMA has stopped
univeral health care coverage in the USA. It is a disgrace, but then the
concern is about wages, not values, of which it has zero. The rest of the
world lives as an employee, and so should YOU.
George Conklin
"Orac" <or...@wlsfanmail.com> wrote in message
news:orac-38C886.1...@host9.newsfeeds.com...
> In article <mlALa.70389$Io.65...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > The AMA is concerned with the structure of medicine, not with
> > reimbursements. The issue is reimbursements....the wrong approach. You
> > should be receiving a SALARY, not reinbursements, and should be working
for
> > a corporation like Wal-Mart or within the National Health Service.
>
> Then you ought to like me, George, because that's exactly how I'm paid.
> I'm work on salary for a state university and health care institution.
> Of course, I've told you this many, many times in the past, and you
> still constantly make your nasty little comments about my "sending out
> bills" or "collecting my fees." I do neither of the above. Of course,
> acknowledging that would remove one of your favorite attack tactics.
> --
>
Duke pays its MDs a guaranteed salary all right--a few thousand a year.
The rest is all from fees collected by the university and then paid out as
'profits.' That is all fee-for-service.
George Conklin
> In article <bdlsv1$62r$1...@slb3.atl.mindspring.net>,
> "CBI" <00...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:orac-A980C0.0...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > > In article <3efe57f8$0$88185$45be...@newscene.com>,
> > > "Howard McCollister" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:orac-B6C8C1.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Your hatred of
> > > > > the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
> > > > > judgment.
> > > >
> > > > Not to mention his credibility. All he does is rant, not argue.
> > Pathetic.
> > >
> > > It's more sad than anything else, because George does appear to be a
> > > reasonably intelligent person in other areas. However, anyone who can
> > > claim that, in this present political climate, the AMA could get
> > > Congress to pass universal health care if it wanted to (as George has
> > > claimed) is clearly out of touch with reality.
> >
> > If the AMA had 1/10th that much clout the Medicare reimbursements would
not
> > be going DOWN. Or is it his position that the AMA believes doctors are
> > making too much money and they should give some back?
>
> My point exactly. Medicare reimbursements were cut 5.4% effective
> January 1, 2002,
You just posted you get a SALARY, but the truth is most of your money
comes from fee-for-service if you are seeing patients. That is the problem:
100% of your income should be a salary.
George Conklin
"BrianM's Phat Pharm" <Bri...@phat.pharm> wrote in message
news:3efef4dd...@news.newsguy.com...
fee-for-service brings in.
George Conklin
> In article <zgALa.70380$Io.65...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > "Orac" <or...@wabcmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:orac-B6C8C1.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> > > In article <eipLa.17003$C83.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> > > "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > If the AMA came out in favor of universal health care, it
> > > > would be passed in the next session of congress.
> > >
> > > Now I know you're deluded if you honestly think that the AMA could get
> > > Congress to pass universal health care in the next two years if it
just
> > > put its mind to it, especially in this political climate. Your hatred
of
> > > the AMA and the medical profession has completely destroyed your
> > > judgment.
> >
> > The AMA has always opposed universal health care in the USA, and has
been
> > very successful.
>
> Your assertion was that the AMA could get universal health care passed
> in the next session of Congress, which, given the current administration
> and political climate, is patently ridiculous.
>
>
>
Universal health care would pass in a minute if the millions spent by
the AMA were turned in favor of health care for all. But organized medicine
could care less about health care for all. The only thing that matters to
organized medicine is how much can you pay.
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
A nonsequitir and a false premise. That's an impressive double logical
fallacy, even for you, George.
The rest of the world doesn't live as employees, George. There are small
business owners, farmers, etc., etc. (your false premise). Also, just
because you are an employee (or even if it were true that "everyone
else" were an employee), it does not follow that everyone else should be
an employee or even that physicians should be an employee (your
nonsequitir).
Try again.
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Orac" <or...@wlsfanmail.com> wrote in message
> news:orac-38C886.1...@host9.newsfeeds.com...
> > In article <mlALa.70389$Io.65...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> > "George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > The AMA is concerned with the structure of medicine, not with
> > > reimbursements. The issue is reimbursements....the wrong approach. You
> > > should be receiving a SALARY, not reinbursements, and should be working
> for
> > > a corporation like Wal-Mart or within the National Health Service.
> >
> > Then you ought to like me, George, because that's exactly how I'm paid.
> > I'm work on salary for a state university and health care institution.
> > Of course, I've told you this many, many times in the past, and you
> > still constantly make your nasty little comments about my "sending out
> > bills" or "collecting my fees." I do neither of the above. Of course,
> > acknowledging that would remove one of your favorite attack tactics.
>
>
> Duke pays its MDs a guaranteed salary all right--a few thousand a year.
> The rest is all from fees collected by the university and then paid out as
> 'profits.' That is all fee-for-service.
Irrelevant to my point. I'm not paid the way Duke pays its physicians
(assuming you're even correct about how they are paid, which, given your
track record, is a dubious assumption). Again, George, I'm paid a
salary. Period. Why is that so hard for you to believe? Could it be
because if you acknowledged that you wouldn't be able to attack me for
"sending out bills" or "collecting fees"?
Orac
"George Conklin" <george...@earthlink.net> wrote:
No, that is not the truth, George.
>That is the problem:
> 100% of your income should be a salary.
100% of my income IS a salary, George. The University contributes most
of it, and the medical group contributes a small part of it. The salary
is fixed, except for cost of living increases and rank-based increases
that I'll get if I manage to get an academic promotion in two or three
years. Just as if I worked for a corporation, except that I don't get
the performance-based incentives that most corporations offer their
employees (I'm a state employee). I don't get more money if I see more
patients or do more operations. You should like me, George, as I'm paid
nearly ideally according to your standards--on a fixed salary by the
state. I could make nearly twice as much as I do now by going into
private practice, but I choose not to. And, between research and patient
care I work as hard as any private practice doc, if not harder.
You can attack my beliefs as you like, but your attempts to discredit me
by attacking how I'm paid sound rather ridiculous, given that, of any
physician who regularly posts here, I'm probably the one who's closest
to being paid the way you think physicians should be paid.
flick
> In article <oNDLa.17800$C83.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> Irrelevant to my point. I'm not paid the way Duke pays its physicians
> (assuming you're even correct about how they are paid, which, given your
> track record, is a dubious assumption). Again, George, I'm paid a
> salary. Period. Why is that so hard for you to believe? Could it be
> because if you acknowledged that you wouldn't be able to attack me for
> "sending out bills" or "collecting fees"?
Heck, there was an ad in the paper here for a doc to work at a nearby
prison, $120k a year, plus housing. Perhaps not the equal of a
well-established doc with a huge practice, but hardly a pittance.
flick 100785