50 million new patients? Expect doc shortages, page 1

This topic is in the Medical Issues & Conspiracies discussion forum. (rss)

50 million new patients? Expect doc shortages

Topic started on 13-9-2009 @ 10:00 PM by jdub297
Revamped health care system to swamp primary care physicians Among the many hurdles facing President Barack Obama's plan to revamp the nation's health care system is a shortage of primary care physicians — those legions of overworked doctors who provide the front line of medical care for both the sick and those hoping to stay healthy. As Massachusetts' experience shows, extending health care to 50 million uninsured Americans will only further stress the system and could force many of those newly insured back into costly emergency rooms for routine care if they can't find a primary care doctor, health care observers said. www.msnbc.msn.com... To keep up with demand, the country will need to add 40,000 to the existing 100,000 doctors over the next decade or face a soaring backlog. "It's like giving everyone free bus passes, but there are only two buses," said Dr. Ted Epperly, president of the Kansas-based American Academy of Family Physicians. The need for more primary care doctors comes as the country's shortage of all doctors is expected to worsen, according to a study by the Association of American Medical Colleges, which found the rate of first-year enrollees in U.S. medical schools has declined steadily since 1980. Another chip in the facade of Obamacare? Chips in the Obamacare Facade: www.abovetopsecret.com... If current patterns persist, the study shows the country will have about 159,000 fewer doctors than it needs by 2025. jw [edit on 13-9-2009 by jdub297]
copyright & usage
Click here for more Medical Issues & Conspiracies topics Hot Topics \| Top Topics \| This Week \| Subscribe \| Home
reply posted on 13-9-2009 @ 10:27 PM by ghaleon12
The problem is that med schools are purposely limited in the number of student they can accept. They want to keep the supply of Dr.s low so that salaries stay high. So the monopoly that exists over licensing of schools controls everything and free market gets thrown out the window. [edit on 13-9-2009 by ghaleon12]
copyright & usage

reply posted on 13-9-2009 @ 10:55 PM by jdub297
reply to post by ghaleon12 Except that the schools have excess classroom space and teachers. Student enrollment has dropped steadily without any changes on the part of the schools' admission policies. They simply can't fill their classrooms. Check the big "teaching" hospitals, and the larger universities. You can see enrollment numbers for yourself. jw
copyright & usage

reply posted on 13-9-2009 @ 11:16 PM by ghaleon12
As far as med school, they have no "open spaces" as far as I've ever heard. The University of Minnesota has like 1000 apps and only about 50 get in. With that much excess, it's the schools that determine how many students they can take. What I was getting at is the AMA I thought I read awhile back, keeps the number of schools down to keep supply for Drs low. [edit on 13-9-2009 by ghaleon12]
copyright & usage
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
reply posted on 13-9-2009 @ 11:27 PM by jdub297
reply to post by ghaleon12 The AMA doesn't run schools or license doctors. States do. Private universities do. AMA is a professional organization you join AFTER you've become a doctor. You don't have to join at all. Trust me, the Univ. of TX medical system (several schools across the state) could take a LOT more studnets if they had QUALIFIED applicants. There is ALREADY a shortage of basic-care doctors. If we add "47 million unisured," who's gonna treat them? jw
copyright & usage

reply posted on 14-9-2009 @ 12:53 AM by ghaleon12
Originally posted by jdub297 reply to post by ghaleon12 The AMA doesn't run schools or license doctors. States do. Private universities do. AMA is a professional organization you join AFTER you've become a doctor. You don't have to join at all. Trust me, the Univ. of TX medical system (several schools across the state) could take a LOT more studnets if they had QUALIFIED applicants. There is ALREADY a shortage of basic-care doctors. If we add "47 million unisured," who's gonna treat them? Well there is a controlling bureaucracy, with self serving interests, that's my point which you aren't getting. This is from wikipedia basically saying what I already said: Critics of the American Medical Association, including economist Milton Friedman, have asserted that the organization acts as a guild and has attempted to increase physicians' wages and fees limit by influencing limitations on the supply of physicians and non-physician competition. In Free to Choose, Friedman said "The AMA has engaged in extensive litigation charging chiropractors and osteopaths with the unlicensed practice of medicine, in an attempt to restrict them to as narrow an area as possible." Profession and monopoly, a book published in 1975 is critical of the AMA for limiting the supply of physicians and inflating the cost of medical care in the United States. The book claims that physician supply is kept low by the AMA to ensure high pay for practicing physicians. It states that in the United States the number, curriculum, and size of medical schools are restricted by state licensing boards controlled by representatives of state medical societies associated with the AMA. The book is also critical of the ethical rules adopted by the AMA which restrict advertisement and other types of competition between professionals. It points out that advertising and bargaining can result in expulsion from the AMA and legal revocation of licenses. The book also states that before 1912 the AMA included uniform fees for specific medical procedures in its official code of ethics. The AMA's influence on hospital regulation was also criticized in the book.[19] The AMA and other industry groups predicted an over-supply of doctors, and worked to limit the number of new doctors. But recently, the AMA has changed its position, predicting a doctor shortage instead. [10] en.wikipedia.org... [edit on 14-9-2009 by ghaleon12]
copyright & usage

reply posted on 14-9-2009 @ 08:47 AM by jdub297
reply to post by ghaleon12 Wikipedia is a poor source. Even so, the article goes on to say: The AMA and other industry groups predicted an over-supply of doctors, and worked to limit the number of new doctors. But recently, the AMA has changed its position, predicting a doctor shortage instead. Even if I accept the wiki as fact, the relationship is tenuous, at best: (quoting from economist Friedman's book) the number, size and curriculum of MEDICAL SCHOOLS is restricted by state licensing boards controlled by representatives of state medical societies associated with the AMA. Nobody is saying there's a shortage of Medical Schools! And the best the Friedmans can do is say "boards" controlled by "societies" associated with a "trade organization" restrict operations in schools! The AMA does not control the number of new doctors, it is made up of people who choose to join who are ALREADY doctors.! States do. The AMA has no control over foreign (e.g., Canadian, British, French, Indian, Japanese, Chinese) doctors coming here to practice. How does the present supply of Doctors (which your source says is already a shortage) care for the increased load of new "insureds" seeking care? Explain, please: If 100,000 doctors is too few to take care of the current number of patients, how do they care for 30, 47, or 50 million MORE? Since you are happy with the Friedmans' book, you must endorse their premise: our freedom has been eroded and our affluence undermined through the explosion of laws, regulations, agencies and spending in Washington. books.google.com... Ooops. Sounds like your sources would oppose Obamacare, too, no? Deny ignorance. jw
copyright & usage