Who has driven up the cost of medicine more?

[Hubert Flottz]

How many of you have had someone in your family or someone that you know, either killed, crippled or lied to by a Quack? How many have been put on medicines that caused bad side effects, or that have made your condition worse? How many have had prescribed for you, the most expensive medications on the market, when there were far cheaper medicines available, which would have served the same purpose at a fraction of the cost? How many have been charged $3.00 for damned a cotton ball by a hospital? So you tell me, Is it the trial lawyers, or the Quacks, and the greedy health care providers, driving up the cost of medicine?

[mikehiggins]

1. Oh boy! I'm the first reply

Of course its the insurance companies, dude. That's why they give so much money to the pols. They know how to rig the game and they're giving it all they can.

[Rainbowreflect]

9. Also the cost of all the ads.

[DebJ]

2. the AMA, which refuses to allow the supply of doctors to increase

to meet demand. We could open up many, many more colleges to train doctors, but they refuse, so they can hold supply down low intentionally, as they have done since their inception.

Second, drug manufacturers, whose profits must rival those of banks.
No matter who else loses, they always win.

[Hubert Flottz]

4. Drug companies are the most at fault IMO!

With the insurance firms in a very close second place!

They should throw the lobbyists out of Washington instead of the lawyers, if they REALLY want the health care system to be affordable and to work best for the people, instead of the big corporations! Everything the GOP does is ALWAYS for the big corporations!

[BattyDem]

3. I voted for the insurance companies, but ...

the drug companies are just as bad. They sell the same drugs in other countries for much less than we pay for them! And why are they allowed to advertise on television? Prescription drugs are not available for over-the-counter sale, so why do they need to market them directly to the public? We're paying for their advertising costs! :mad:

[olebrowser]

5. Not enough boxes

There should be a box for "all of the above"

[newyawker99]

12. Hi olebrowser!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[clu]

6. good site

there is some interesting commentary here

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=281211

[Hubert Flottz]

8. Thanks I bookmarked it!

Some good ideas there!

Welcome to DU!

[BamaGirl]

7. It's a combination

of quacky doctors, greedy insurance companies, and uninformed consumers. If more people (repugs) would actually do a little research they would realize that 1, the insurance industry is making an insane profit. And 2, most medical liability suits are against a very small percentage of quacks who get sued over and over again. If the medical community did a better of job of getting rid of its own idiots, they'd be facing less lawsuits. If the insurance companies refused to insure doctors who get sued over and over again, we'd all be a lot safer.

My mother is a trial lawyer and it definitely ain't her fault. She makes good money, but she is not rich by any definition of the term. Everyone in her firm is pro-kerry except for her secretary. Talk about voting against your own self-interest!

Forgot to say, I pay higher co-pays for my daughters prescriptions than mine even though usually my prescriptions cost more. That's pure greed on the part of the pharmecuticals.

[DrWeird]

10. Research and Development.

Sure, I'm sure some corporate greed and advertising budgets have something to do with it. But I don't think many people realize just what it takes to R&D new drugs. Were talking billions of dollar and twenty years of work to bring up one new drug that might ultimately be unsafe for human consumption. And costs have skyrocketed even further in the past few years. The price of petroleum sure won't help.

[Solon]

15. Couldn't that be mitigate by spreading the costs?

Many drugs are researched in government labs, for various uses, one is for consumer consumption. But also the government subsidizes pharma companies for certian drugs also. Unless all that government funding has stopped with the Bush administration, I don't understand why drug costs are so much higher than they neccessarily have to be.

[lastliberalintexas]

31. I already pay for R & D, thank you very much

Pharma gets tons of tax write-offs for this R & D that we hear so much about whenever the cost of drugs is questioned. I already pay for the R & D with my taxdollar- I don't feel like I should have to pay for it again when I buy the darn medicine. Pharma's Big Lie.

[Dirty Hippie]

11. The explosion of medical technology

more than any other factor, has driven up costs. We have new surgical procedures, new diagnostic tests, many treatment choices that did not exist a few decades ago.

A heart patient sent home to die in the 60's can today receive treatments that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The advancements in medicine we all enjoy cost money.

[Hubert Flottz]

13. Jeb Bush's keeping the lady in Florida alive, is an example of...

crazy things that go on all over the country! Things like that drive up the cost for everyone! Jeb is doing that to win a few votes for Dumbya, from the right wing extremists and the GOPer's nutty evangelical base! Jeb really doesn't seem to factor in "God's Will"! Dumbya didn't seem to put nearly as much value on human life, when he was sending all those people on death row in Texas, to their final rewards! Everything these GOPers do is for show! Every move they make, every step they take, is totally for the political whammy! KKKarl is one sinister dude!

[Solon]

14. While that is true initially...

In the long term it doesn't neccessarily have to. New medical technologies are expensive, but over time the costs for them decreases, yet we have not benefitted from the increase in efficiently that technology provides. Also, many countries, particularly in Europe, have just as advanced, if not moreso, technologies, yet are able to control costs much better than us. Why is that?

[MsConduct]

16. Greed, plain and simple. n/t

[DuaneBidoux]

17. THERE IS ONE SINGLE AGREEMENT I HAVE WITH REPUGS

and that is on the need for some kind of tort reform. It is not right for someone to have a sponge left in them and becoming a zillionaire (if the actual damage is minor). On the other hand, Repugs want to DESTROY the ability of someone truly injured to be compensated justly.

I voted for trial lawyer with reservations. Actually the issue is quite complex. We have the singly most inefficient health care system in the world. Greedy insurance companies yes - but incompetent insurance companies too. The system is fraught with duplication, inefficiency. The national health care systems of Europe spend one half the amount per patient that Americans do and have as good as if not better health stats. It's a mess. But Dems do need to deal with these cases where there is true abuse of the tort system. It does exist.

[sandnsea]

20. Link please

Could you please provide a link to the case where somebody had a sponge left in them and whose final settlement was actually a zillion, or even a million dollars? I think you will find it isn't true. Most large settlements are greatly reduced by the judge.

Further, larger settlements usually come because either the doctor has made mistakes in the past, cost cutting took precedent over good medical care, or the damages were necessary to cover medical and living expenses for a lifetime and those expenses were exorbitant.

Reaganism. The spread of propaganda to make you blame yourself and your friends and family for everything, while CEO's and wealthy stockholders walk away with the store.

[DuaneBidoux]

22. In general I agree - I would certainly NEVER vote for

a Rethug based on anything to do with tort reform. I just believe it is an issue that the Democratic party should examine. I don't believe either party has a lock on truth or the right way to do things. I want to belong to a party that is willing to challenge its own articles of faith. In fact, I believe that is where Democrats are stronger in general. Everything in the world for us is not "faith based." My sponge and a "zillion" dollar thing was probably the wrong (and exaggerated) example- but I CAN tell you that there is a lot of abuse in the auto accident arena. Someone has a fender bender and sees "the right" doctor, and gets a very big settlement. If someone is really disabled or hurt, this is fair. But if not, it is simply dishonest.

And just to make clear where I stand, in Texas we just voted to cap punitive damages in medical malpractice at $250,000. I voted against that. I think that is bullshit! And that is my problem, repugs want to do things like this which can really threaten people who need help, and Dems don't even want to examine the issue and ask if there is a real problem. That's all I'm saying.

[gpandas]

23. answer the question

give me proof of the zillionaire-sponge thing, if you can. if not quit making wild-assed statwements. why would a doctor ever leave a sponge inside a patient in the first place? if that isn't malpractice, what is?

[DuaneBidoux]

25. I said it was a bad and exagerrated answer

I admit it, I was full of bullshit. I surrender, you win.

[gpandas]

26. nothing personal,friend. n/t

[sandnsea]

29. Just for kicks

What is the Kerry/Edwards plan to deal with rising costs of malpractice insurance? They do have one you know.

[lastliberalintexas]

32. Can you provide a cite to the abuse of the tort system?

I'm just wondering what you believe is an abuse?

Do you know that in Texas, a plaintiff in a med mal lawsuit has to find another doctor who is willing to testify against his brethren and say that the accused doctor violated the standard of care? Oftentimes, a plaintiff is required to obtain the expert opinion of a number of medical providers simply to prosecute his or her case. It usually costs a plaintiff's attorney $40,000 tp upwards of $100,000 to prosecute a med mal case, which is also usually done on a contingency basis. If the lawyer doesn't feel that s/he can win the case, s/he won't take it. Med mal claims are NOT the kind of cases the sterotypical ambulance chaser will file to recover nuisance value for (which usually runs about $1,000 to $5,000, btw).

Funny that your post also says nothing of the BMEs or the AMA who continue to protect the bad doctors. The majority of healthcare providers in this country are wonderful, and they should not have to put up with the 15% or so who account for about 70% of the lawsuits. If the doctors would do something about that 15% and stop acting as whores for the insurance industry, I'd start to feel a little more sympathy for them on the slow pay issues and the rate increases they're seeing.

[Bread and Circus]

18. The answer is: The availability of drug coverage on Ins. plans.

You can trace back the meteoric rise of drug prices to correlate w/ the rise of this benefit. It's been particularly rampant starting in the past 10 to 15 years. The drug companies will charge as much as they get paid and the advent of drug coverage allowed them to charge more and more. It has become a vicious cycle because the price of drugs further stimulates the need for more drug coverage.

Drug prices will come down if they were 100% not covered by any insurance because demand would drop (albeit at the expense of health) until the prices came down. Another way drug prices could come down would be to have the federal gov't use group buying power to get the price down. Ultimately, it's the physicians that control the prescriptions and you would get the most bang for your buck if you could influence them to prescribe cheaper drugs. That's what managed care tries to do. The problem is that they "control" the doctors through formularies but don't really give real incentive to use the most affordable drugs.

[sandnsea]

19. Always - I't s just Corporate America

Corporate hospitals and health care providers. Corporate insurance companies. Doctors more worried about their corporate stock portfolios than their patients.

Corporatism. Corporatism. Corporatism. That is what is wrong with every nook and cranny of America.

[Hubert Flottz]

21. The GOPers worship the corporation!

By the people and for the people is a thing of the past and just a distant old dream, if Bush wins! The haves and the have mores will own the entire pie!

[One_Life_To_Give]

24. Would have said Lipitor

Seems everyone is taking Cholesterol medications. Then another medication to couteract the side effects of the Cholesterol medication. Then when you get to your 40's many need Blood Pressure meds too. And who knows what else.

[drdtroit]

28. Maybe one day our busted health system will champion

wellness instead of the treatment and sustenance of symptoms.

Doubtful!

When is the last time you spoke to an MD who entered the field because of his/her sense of humanity?

In a culture that rates people on their accumulation of "stuff", we are fighting an uphill and unfortunately insurmountable battle to restore real values and ethics.

[Hubert Flottz]

36. "Lipitor"

I have some nice spots on my liver from 5 years on Lipitor! Not getting any worse since they found them about 18 months ago, but not going away either! That stuff will cure you or kill you!

[FlaGranny]

27. Other - I'm sorry, but you seem to have

forgotten the most important cause - CORPORATIZATION.

[Hubert Flottz]

30. I did forget corporatization Granny!

Between the drug companies and the hospital chains, healthcare has become almost like OPEC is with the oil! When the mass deregulation of the corporations started under Reagan, everything started on the downhill slide! The media, medicine, drugs, banks, investment firms, oil, natural gas, electricity, water, TV cable, insurance, pension plans, job, security and everything else that you can think of has rapidly gone to hell under corporate supervision! Corporations policing themselves, has proven to work about as well as trickle down economics has! The only thing trickling down is misery and pain! The economy is doing GREAT, if you're a CEO type or a big shareholder!

The only folks on welfare now, are the super wealthy corporatists!

[auburngrad82]

33. None of the above

The profit margins for the drug companies is through the roof. The profit margin (after all expenses including r&d) is about 23%. By comparison Intel's profit margin is about 9% and Wal-Mart's is about 3%. I got these figures from a Time Magazine article a couple months ago.

With profit margins as high as the drug companies have, the only explanation is they are gouging us.

[Hubert Flottz]

34. "gouging us"

Who isn't "gouging us"? Deregulation has us at the mercy of every kind of crook you can think of! From the price of gasoline to the gallon of milk for the kids, everyone is suffering but the haves and the have mores! What the GOPers have been letting the drug companies do to the old folks, is unforgivable! Compassion my a$$!

[Desertrose]

35. I agree- drug companies -as well as unregulated greedy....

healthcare providers and insurance...they're all in it together....and the people pick up the damn tab!

IT SUCKS!