Posted on 06/29/2012 11:17:00 AM PDT by roses of sharon
"I think it is good news. More people will learn about prevention strategies from clinicians with some affordable health coverage. Those with preexisting conditions will be able to get coverage and medical guidance. Hopefully, the suboptimal parts of the bill will be modified."—Dr Roger Blumenthal (Johns Hopkins University Medical Center, Baltimore, MD)
"I was stunned by the Supreme Court ruling. . . . While I think most Americans favor some form of healthcare reform to address the 30 million or so uninsured Americans and the underinsured, I believe there are ways to achieve this short of mandating insurance for all those who do not feel the government should intrude on a personal freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment to our Constitution. As a Department of Veterans Affairs physician, I see our integrated healthcare system. . . . as a possible model that could be potentially retrofitted (or expanded) in some way to accommodate the healthcare needs of uninsured Americans, most of whom cannot afford healthcare."—Dr William E Boden (Albany Medical Center, NY)
"I think this is good. The country can proceed with coverage for more people and move onto the real issue—how to make the healthcare system more cost-efficient. The switch away from fee for service to accountable-care organizations, where we try to decide how to most effectively and efficiently care for our patients—will be a huge change but one we need to take. I look forward to the challenges ahead and hope it all improves our healthcare system."—Dr Christopher Cannon (Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA)
"I am very pleased that the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act. We need universal health insurance for a whole host of reasons. Without it, people avoid getting the care they need or they can't access necessary healthcare. No one should have their financial security ruined if they don't have health insurance and develop serious health problems. However, it is also clear that the ACA may lead to an increase in healthcare costs, with more Americans able to access healthcare. We need to work to make healthcare more cost-effective as we expand coverage."—Dr Anne B Curtis (University at Buffalo, NY)
"I'm thrilled. I was worried it was going to go the wrong way. This could have an enormous impact on this excellent attempt to improve healthcare delivery in the US. I consider the primary responsibility of any government to be able to provide healthcare and education to its people, and I think it's about time the US faced up to their responsibility with regard to healthcare.—Dr Kenneth Dickstein, expat American (University of Bergen Stavanger, Rogaland, Norway)
"While medicine is an art, healthcare is a business. Although not perfect, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act starts us in the right direction by providing all Americans with affordable quality healthcare. Doing this comes at a cost—a cost that must be borne by all who participate in the benefits of a strong healthcare system. It requires a commitment on the part of the hospital and provider community to create a system that rewards value, not volume."—Dr Peter L Duffy (FirstHealth of the Carolinas, Pinehurst NC)
"The overarching problem remains that of our healthcare cost and its unsustainable rate of growth. It is incumbent upon the medical community, including its providers and representative organizations, to recognize the urgency of this matter and to collaborate with legislative and regulatory bodies to bend the cost of healthcare while promoting quality and innovation."—Dr Tony Farah (West Penn Allegheny Health System, Pittsburgh, PA)
"[Obama] won a Supreme Court decision and will lose reelection as a result. SCOTUS upheld what is essentially a form of taxation. Employers are opposed given the increase in costs of bringing on new employees, and this will stall any economic recovery. You will see a sector swing out of healthcare investment, and innovation will now been driven out of medicine. You can look forward to increased access to generic medicines and less access to innovation. Rather than being 'first-in-human,' the US can now look forward to being 'last-in-human.' "—Dr C Michael Gibson (Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA)
"I have been an enthusiastic supporter. . . . As a practitioner, I have seen too many people who evolved to advanced stages of illness because of their inability to access the healthcare system at earlier, more treatable stages of their disorder. In addition, I have seen too many people who became recidivists after successful treatment of acute problems because they were not able to access follow-up care or afford the medicines necessary to keep them well. In my view, implementation of the Affordable Care Act, by extending access to care to this large segment of the US population, will make a big difference in their health and quality of life."—Dr John Hirshfeld (University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA)
"I think the SCOTUS decision is a victory for our patients with heart disease and stroke. The ACA has focused on prevention so that 86 million Americans have already received at least one preventive screening/service in 2011 at no cost sharing for high cholesterol, nutrition, or smoking cessation. This is how we need to move forward. In addition, 61 000 Americans with preexisting medical conditions will continue to have insurance. I am thrilled!"—Dr Mariell Jessup (University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia)
"Overall, the Supreme Court decision upholding the Affordable Care Act leaves me full of hope that the millions of Americans now without insurance will have improved access to the healthcare they need. While I am disappointed that the full expansion of Medicaid was not supported, it is likely that this will still benefit countless Americans. The individual mandate is critical to allow the provision that preexisting conditions be covered."—Dr Rachel Lampert (Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT)
"I am thrilled that as Americans we are trying to fix the healthcare system. The Supreme Court decision is monumental and will affect all of us Americans (physicians and patients). Of course, as a physician who took the Hippocratic oath, I am dedicated to treat all patients, whether they pay or not. My main concern about this bill is the domino effect that such a decision will have on the funds that must go into this to support it and bring it to fruition. If the effect is less money for research, innovation, cutting-edge technology, and we become a nation with rationed healthcare, I will be most disappointed."—Dr Roxana Mehran (Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY)
"I think the ACA decision is a win for patients and in the long run a win for healthcare. We need to move toward a healthcare system that provides health insurance for all in this country. And we need to evolve away from fee-for-service payment and toward one that promotes longitudinal high-quality and efficient care. In the short run, this will create challenges for physicians, hospitals, and others to adapt to this new system, but it moves us in the right direction. The ACA decision is just the first step down the right road."—Dr Eric D Peterson (Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC)
"I think the decision was good, as it allows us to move ahead and continue to build the additional healthcare reform programs on the foundation laid by the ACA. I think it is especially important that health insurance be affordable if it is mandated coverage, and this means careful attention to promoting high-quality and high-value care and more initiatives and effort to reduce care with no net benefit."—Dr Rita Redberg (University of San Francisco, California)
"I think the real question for all of us, and not just in this country. . . . is the way we use healthcare and the volume at which we use it. We all, doctors and patients, with doctors providing some leadership, need to own up to how much of the care is really unproven and unnecessary and represents a form of waste that doesn't make anyone feel better or live longer. That's one piece we should all focus on in order to find the resources to provide the right care that works for everybody."—Dr Vikas Saini, expat Canadian (Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA)
"For cardiologists, the day-to-day practice of medicine goes on. We will continue to provide the best care possible to our patients regardless of their ability to pay. What we know from this ruling is that the government will play an ever-increasing role in how that care is provided. We are striving to develop a rational system of healthcare delivery that rewards excellent patient care, medical innovation, and hard work. Whether the Affordable Care Act brings us closer to that ideal remains to be seen."—Dr Thomas Tu (Louisville Cardiology Group, KY)
"Although the law has some imperfections, the decision is a good one for the people of Michigan. A half million are now eligible for insured healthcare. When we provide stopgap or safety-net care to the uninsured, we are providing neither the highest possible quality nor the least costly care—having the emergency room as your only physician is far short of having a doctor helping you both treat and prevent disease."—Dr W Douglas Weaver (Henry Ford Hospital Heart and Vascular Institute, Detroit MI)
"I am extremely pleased with the Supreme Court's decision, as this will help provide medical care for the millions without it."—Dr Douglas Zipes (Krannert Institute of Cardiology, Indianapolis, IN)
so now, the doors are wide open and these cardiologist can make a lot of money...especially the first few years because they'll be able to take in lots and lots of patients, order lots and lots of tests, and do lots and lots of consultations and charge big bucks BEFORE all the restraints and the controls come in....
its all about the money...
As long is it is good for their business, that’s all that matters.
Imagine how the ambulance chasing lawyers must feel right now. They are probably so giddy that they can’t stand being around themselves. They’ll all be in the big bucks now.
This may improve Americans' and illegal aliens' chances of reaching 65. Then their fate depends on the "death panels" so anything pricey is denied them. If they are rich they can pay for it--otherwise, out of luck.
Most doctors do not dare say anything critical, publicly, about their future paymaster.
These are ONLY the selected opinions of the cardiologists that “The Heart” chooses to include in their set of published quotes.
According to a study published in the “New England Journal of Medicine”, anywhere from 33 - 50% of all practicing doctors would leave their profession if Obama’s Health Care plan passed:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/up-to-half-of-doctors-will-quit-if-health-care-passes-poll-says#
This is a study that was announced in 2010, but does anyone honestly think these percentages have markedly decreased since then?
Therefore, this notion that most doctors are totally in love with President Obama’s health care plan is a crock. With fewer doctors available to render health care and more people going to hospitals and doctor’s offices, I am VERY, VERY happy to not have any children so that they have to witness what’s happening.
Sad to say, but it’s true — American health care will NEVER be as good as it is today!
Of course asking anyone to take a risk and fight a battle against the prevailing propaganda is a waste.
The MSM/Hollywood/DNC/Academia cabal has a way of destroying livelihoods and reputations.
No person who has genuine self esteem would be happy that they are being forced to become government slaves.
Talk about cherry picking! The comments come almost exclusively from university-affiliated research hospitals. Cardiologists make staggeringly high salaries and many of the commenters are noting that the patient pool will enlarge, meaning greater payments in the assumption that reimbursements will now be received for treating those patients who don’t currently pay.
Wait till the reimbursements are cut and older patients are excluded from approved treatment due to new gov’t rules. I can assure these physicians that a big issue with academic health care planners is reducing the costs associated with end-of-life care. Much of that care funds these cardiologists. They are definitely under watch by those who seek cost reduction in the health care system.
However, if you treat people who are popular with the politicians, you are likely to get lots of care in the future.
Not to mention that all doctors will be paid the same. I expect a severe shortage of neurosurgeons, etc.
Media falsely attribute doctor survey to New England Journal of Medicine
Even if the study wasn’t conducted by the “New England Journal of Medicine”, does it really matter? If it’s a valid survey, and the results are valid, the study could have been conducted by TMZ.com and it would still be the same outcome.
Also, I never did say the study was conducted by “The Journal” — just that it was published there.
The press carry on like I give a c**p about 30 million people without insurance....I don’t care, life is full of choices, these 30 million made their choice, why should the rest of us care and pay for it...####swear word###swear word###swear word. Don’t want to get banned....swear word
Conservative media figures and outlets have falsely claimed a New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) survey found that 46 percent of primary care physicians would consider leaving their profession if Democrats' health care reform bill passes. In fact, NEJM says that the 3-month-old email "survey" was not published in or conducted by NEJM.
Now that health care has been socialized, following socialist’s dogma, why should this doctor, a cardiologist, make more money than a working man who digs ditches? That laborer actually works for a living. I hope this guy ends up making $30,000 to $50,000 max a year under Obamacare. It would serve him right.
“Not to mention that all doctors will be paid the same. I expect a severe shortage of neurosurgeons, etc.”
That is a wise observation. And, let’s not forget that the health care decision makers are not going to reduce the liability costs for physicians. Although the neurosurgeon’s pay may be leveled with those of primary care doc’s, his/her liability risks and costs are not going to to be leveled. In the planned syste, the average citizen will receive most of his/her care from primary care doc’s—this has been a goal of health care planners for decades because it is believed that specialists are “over used” and “drive up health care costs”. In reality, specialists are often the only doc’s who have the knowledge to diagnose and treat a wide range of serious disorders. If there are insufficient specialists, patients will face seriously reduced quality and timeliness of care.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.