True Story - A 72 year old woman at an Arizona Pain Management Clinic.
“I couldn’t help notice that yellow Hummer in the parking lot,” she says to the physician after he injects medication into her back. “If you doctors didn’t insist on having such fancy cars, maybe healthcare wouldn’t be in the crapper.”
The doctor helps steady her as she limps toward her walker. She has been in pain for a long time. He leads her into his office - a space he shares with another physician and two nurse practitioners - and asks her to have a seat.
“More bad news?” she aks.
He nods and types several commands on the keyboard until Mrs. Smith’s file appears. “Can you see this?” he asks.
She leans her weight onto her forearms and peers through her reading glasses at the computer screen. “It says $48.47.”
“$48.47 is what I was paid to spend thirty minutes with you in this office and to provide an injection in your back. $48.47 is meant to cover the medicine I injected, the salary of my medical assistant, the rent on this building and the gas for my 1998 Volkswagen rusting out there in the parking lot.”
She leans back in her chair. “I had no idea.”
Most people don’t. The wealthy physician driving a Mercedes to the country club every Wednesday afternoon is a thing of the past, yet according to what I read and remarks from patients such as Mrs. Smith, many people still perceive physicians as overpaid components of our failing system.
But physicians are merely the public facade associated with the problems of healthcare. We are tangible beings in a world of nameless, faceless telephone voices. We are also the individuals who daily witness people struggling to make copays, opting against regular health screening and selecting which prescriptions they can afford to refill each month.
So why in this election year with phrases like Universal Healthcare and Single Payer System breathlessly bandied about by politicians, do physicians appear so reluctant to join in on the excitement?
Perhaps it’s because we’ve already worked closely with a single payer system: Medicare. And it’s sucking money like never before.
In Arizona where the Medicare population is immense, we are witnessing an alarming trend: medical providers are “opting out” and dropping their participation status in the Medicare system. It’s a big deal. Seniors living on fixed incomes are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain basic medical care in a state which prides itself on retirement opportunities.
The medical community cites poor reimbursement and unreasonable compliance standards as their reasons for exiting. The paperwork required for Medicare patient visits exceeds what other health insurers require and the penalties for non-compliance with these administrative demands are steep: up to $10,000 per violation.
Ten thousand little reasons to opt out.
And although the actual hands-on providers of medical care may be shaking their heads at the catastrophic failings of the current system, there is one group who is delighted with Medicare: Big Pharmaceutical.
The senior prescription drug plan, Medicare Part D, was designed in such a way that the federal government would not be permitted to negotiate prices of drugs with the drug companies.
Say What?
It’s true. The Pharmaceutical Industry has been able to maintain a healthy profit margin partly due to the fact that the Federal Government simply pays whatever the drug companies charge for their drugs. Where else is pricing competition so blatantly ignored?
Not at the VA. The Veterans Administration negotiates drug prices and on average, pays 58% less for drugs than Medicare Part D. For example, in 2007, Medicare paid $1483 for an annual supply of the cholesterol lowering drug Zocor while the VA paid $127 for the same tablets.
Senator Obama is already promising to repeal this loophole which enables the upper management teams of big Pharma to purchase more yacht fuel but I’m skeptical that he’ll enjoy any success against the high-powered pharmaceutical lobbyists. Do we really expect that any self-respecting corporation would give up a 17% profit margin without a fight?
Big Pharma insists that without a large profit margin, no new medications will be developed and cancer will never be cured. As it stands, only the wealthiest can afford to have cancer.
If the current Medicare system is a portent of what we can expect from current plans for Universal Healthcare, I’ll be waiting for a second opinion.


Salon.com
Comments
It is a pleasure discovering your essays (and those of Monsieur Docteur Parikh) and the opportunity for a glimpse into the oft-times frightening world on the other side of the operating table.
The only good news is doctors are an educated and still semi-powerful constituency for health care reform. But I admit: it will be hard to get right.
The Norman Rockwell image of the country doctor who will take a bushel of apples and a couple of chicken dinners in exchange for services appears to be coming back. Only this time, it's not sentimental American iconography, it's the continuing devaluation of skilled professionals in favor of corporations suffocating America with the help of their government puppets.
My GP has been crying the blues for years about making less than $60,000 per year after paying for general overhead.
The same was true for my GP in Australia 8 years ago -- she made the equivalent of $35,000 US in a country with nationalized medicine. She took a sabbatical -- not sure if she ever went back. It would have been a shame as she was the best GP I ever had...
So, Universal Health Care or not, the GP's struggle in my limited observation of the system...
I'm always entertained wtih pharma make the arguement that a free market system ensures innovation while simultaneously protecting the free market from real competition from Canada and other countries, from which we could import drugs and therefore which could help reduce drug prices
What we need is to know a lot more about how those other countries make these things work and still have highly trained and highly skilled doctors.
Ann, I really appreciate that you are not trying to claim to have all the answers or that you are not open to considering different solutions. I think that if more people had your attitude, we might be more likely to come up with a workable solution.
The doctor is just another front end employee who is told what he can expect to get paid for a procedure he's got to get approved.
I'm for single payer because it would eliminate all the crap that goes on now in doctor's offices, where depending on what insurance company you have, they have to get approval for various procedures or fill out various forms to get paid.
Oh, yeah, and insurance companies being profit making entities, they delay payment as long as they can to make more money on interest.
Let's also keep in mind that universal healthcare is NOT single payer.
You are required by law to have car insurance, right? But you've got hundreds of companies competing for your business.
The same thing has happened in Massachusetts, where everyone has to buy insurance and the poor get help paying for it.
But that is NOT single payer.
In 2006 United Healtcare Group Inc's CEO William McGuire drew $8 million a year in salary plus bonus, enjoying perks such as personal use of the company jet. At that time he had also amassed one of the largest stock-options fortunes of all time with unrealized gains on stock options totaling $1.6 billion in April 2006.
As Wall Street Journal reporter George Anders pointed out, "Dr. McGuire's story shows how an elite group of companies is getting rich from the nation's fraying health-care system. Many of them aren't discovering drugs or treating patients. They're middlemen who process the paperwork, fill the pill bottles and otherwise connect the pieces of a $2 trillion industry."
Trace McGuire's windfall to the increasing market dominaton of the U.S. health insurance market. A report from the American Medical Association documented the increasing consolidation of the US health insurance market, as reported by the Baltimore Sun, "in each of 43 states, a handful of top insurers have gained such a stronghold that their markets are considered 'highly concentrated' under US Department of Justice guidelines, often far exceeding the thresholds that trigger antitrust concerns. The study also shows that in 166 of 294 metropolitan areas, or 56 percent, a single insurer controls more than half the business in health maintenance organization and preferred provider networks underwriting.
My question is: does anyone forsee a day when it would again be possible for medical professionals to operate on their own?
Think of the movie "The Real Dirt on Farmer John"---a compelling story of how a guy who wore a Dr Suess hat while he plowed his fields---managed to flourish despite "Big Ag." Is there a Doctor Farmer John out there anywhere?