4 ms·
Medicine is one of the most corrupt industries in the world. Patients are competely at the mercy of their doctors, who very often have a financial conflict of i
by ETH_start 3y ago
Medicine is one of the most corrupt industries in the world. Patients are competely at the mercy of their doctors, who very often have a financial conflict of interest in what they prescribe.
The deference shown to those in whose hands one's life, or the lives of their loved ones, sits, means there is even less effort to subject them to accountability than the paltry amount that there would otherwise be.
- ineedausername 3y ago[flagged]
- hef19898 3y agoLet's sum this comment up as strong opinion, but light on facts.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- rgbgraph 3y ago- Artificial restriction of class sizes in medical schools. - Egregious costs just to become any sort of practitioner (medical school, residency, etc.). - Insurance companies are basically always grifting you as a policy, unless you call them out on it (reasonable things will be denied and not covered, because most people won’t fight). - Hospitals are basically always grifting you, unless you call them out on it (bills are basically fraudulent). - Pharmaceutical companies are basically always grifting everyone (you, the FDA, the prescribers, the insurance companies, etc.). - Doctors are basically grifting themselves (going into medicine, and staying, almost always for the wrong reasons). This is just to name a few.
- nradov 3y agoMedical school class sizes are not artificially restricted. Schools limit class sizes to ensure that almost all graduates can find a residency program slot. There's no point in graduating more MDs if they're never allowed to practice medicine. Everyone should join the AMA in asking Congress for increased graduate medical education funding since that would be the quickest route to having more physicians. https://www.ama-assn.org/education/gme-funding/medical-students-show-leadership-call-more-gme-slots https://www.ama-assn.org/education/gme-funding/medical-stude...
- rgbgraph 3y ago> Medical school class sizes are not artificially restricted. Schools limit class sizes to ensure that almost all graduates can find a residency program slot. This is paradoxical. Class sizes are limited by the school, but not artificially limited? Medical school class sizes are artificially restricted by outsized requirements for admissions. For example, the requirement of an undergraduate degree in order to enter medical school is not something that exists in Europe. Or that the admissions and exam requirements are much less hyper-competitive in Europe, than the U.S. This is, of course, “to restrict the supply of residents, so each one can find a job.” It’s still artificial restriction, rather than a natural bottleneck. The same AMA that “Twenty years ago, the AMA lobbied for reducing the number of medical schools, capping federal funding for residencies, and cutting a quarter of all residency positions,”[0] is now asking for support in reversing its schemes? That’s rich. The same AMA that makes hundreds of millions in revenues, by speculating in securities[1]. Like an alma mater asking you to donate to its investment coffers after it’s shackled you with debt. [0] https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2022/03/15/ama-scope-of-practice-lobbying/ https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2022/03/15/ama-scope... [1] https://www.epsilontheory.com/ama-bitfd/ https://www.epsilontheory.com/ama-bitfd/
- pcrh 3y agoAre there any other professions where the school refuses to enroll students unless they are guaranteed a job afterwards?
- whatscooking 3y agoThe AMA lobbied against increasing residency positions, which in turn restricted medical school seats and keeps salaries high
- nradov 3y agoBullshit. Did you even read the link I posted above? The AMA has been lobbying for increasing residency positions for years.
- whatscooking 3y ago
- ETH_start 3y agoYes, entirely opinion based on my own personal anecdotal observations and deductions.
- hef19898 3y agoAt least you are aware of it.
- nine_zeros 3y agoOnly in America. In Asia, doctors are more abundant and humane.
- quantified 3y agoAnecdotally, they are also quicker to schedule and treat. This from colleagues who travel back to Taiwan. It doesn't sound like they are held in less regard than in the USA either.
- nine_zeros 3y agoAbsolutely. I've found doctors in multiple countries to be highly available. No such thing as an appointment 6 months later.
- ETH_start 3y agoNo, I've experienced it in at least one country in Asia, and it can be abusive beyond any comprehension. I think it's inherent to the leverage medical facilities have over their patients, and human nature being what it is. There are also great medical professionals in both Asia and the West. At their worst though, it's like some kind of dystopian horror film.
- some_random 3y agoI find that hard to believe, especially since you named an entire continent.
- nine_zeros 3y agoSpecifically Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and India.
- ebiester 3y agoThis is much more true in the American system than single payer systems. But absolutely, this is an industry where the incentives are misaligned and the patient suffers.
- ETH_start 3y agoIn the single payer system, the only difference is the taxpayer gets financially abused instead of the patient. The problem of the patient receiving sub-par care remains. The doctor that is the subject of this story was over-prescribing heart procedures for patients enrolled in a single payer program.
- hef19898 3y agoTax payers = patients. And by the way, not every single payer system is using tax money.
- ETH_start 3y agoWhat I mean is that the cost from a particular case of fraud is socialized across the population, at the point of taxation (or higher premiums for the mandatory insurance), instead falling on the patient at the point of use.
- hef19898 3y agoWhich is exactly howbinsurance works, spreading the risk over large enough a population to make insurance affordable for everyone. One of the things Bismarck put on place, that socialist.
- ETH_start 3y agoSpreading the cost of each instance across everyone doesn’t make it more affordable, since the reduction in magnitude of harm from each instance is offset by a directly proportional increase in the frequency of instances each individual pays for.