HEALTHPLANUSA . NET |
QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER |
Community For Affordable Health Care |
Vol VI, No 3, October, 2007 |
Utilizing the $1.5 Trillion
Information Technology Industry
To Transform the $2 Trillion
HealthCare Industry into Affordable HealthCare
In This Issue:
1. Featured
Article: This Is
Your Brain on the Job. Will it Work in Health Care?
2. In the News:
Is the Health Care Solution Worse Than the Health Care Problem?
3. International
Medicine: 'Single
Payer' Health Care Is Hardly Free,
By Paul Hsieh
4. Medicare: Can Lean
Thinking Work in the Public Sector?
5. Lean HealthCare:
Doing More with Less
6. Medical
Myths: Health Care Is a Human Right
7. Overheard on Capital Hill: Our Crazy Health-Insurance System
8. US Health Care: Physicians Make Lousy
Advocates by David J. Gibson, MD
9. Health Plan USA: The Sorry State of Our
Health Care Plans Including Medicare
10. Restoring
Accountability in Medical Practice by Non Participation in Insurance and
* * * * *
1. Feature Article: Will We Be Able to
Identify the Next Business Leaders in Healthcare?
This
Is Your Brain on the Job By PHRED
DVORAK and JACLYNE BADAL, WSJ, September 20, 2007
Neuroscientists
Are Finding That Business Leaders Really May Think Differently
After he completes 500 such
scans, the
Mr. Balthazard says the first
50 scans, of local luminaries, suggest that visionary leaders use their brains
differently than others. In the past month, he added 20
"We're coming up with the
genome -- the brain map -- of the leader," says Mr. Balthazard from his
ASU office, one littered with brain diagrams, plastic models and a windup toy
brain with chattering teeth.
Mr. Balthazard is among a
growing number of researchers looking inside the brain for business insights.
The surge in interest among researchers is fueled by more powerful diagnostic
tools and an improved understanding of how the brain influences character,
personality and behavior.
Researchers have applied
neuroscience to areas like economics, finance and marketing. Academics from
Executive coaches and
researchers are increasingly tapping neuroscience tidbits to bolster pet
management theories. Scientists at Gallup Organization, for example, say brain
research helps managers understand why praise works: it boosts levels of
dopamine, a chemical linked to joy.
But as more nonspecialists jump
in, it becomes harder to separate science from hype. "A lot of this will
end up science-fiction," says Michael Gazzaniga, a neuroscientist at the
Advances in EEG technology make
it easier to "map" a brain's electrical activity. But it isn't clear
that leaders exhibit defined brain-wave patterns, or that changing such
patterns automatically alters behavior. Not all brains function the same way,
neuroscientists say. Nor do people with similar brain patterns necessarily act
in similar ways.
Some of Mr. Balthazard's
colleagues are wary, too. David Waldman, an
Mr. Balthazard, 47, is a tall,
chatty Canadian and systems-engineering specialist. In 2001, while studying
ways to measure managers' performance, he met Jeffrey Fannin, a psychologist
and former airline pilot who runs a clinic near the
Mr. Balthazard sought local
leaders to brain-map, including a former dean at
Mr. Thatcher says preliminary
analysis of 50 brain maps shows some big differences in activity between
managers who rate high on a psychological test of visionary leadership, and
those who rate low. The visionary leaders had more efficient left brains, which
deal with logic and reasoning, and better connected right brains, which are
responsible for social skills.
Mr. Thatcher hopes to find more
patterns as Mr. Fannin scans more brains. The patterns could indicate brain
activity associated with specific qualities like charisma, or something common
to all good leaders. The patterns could just reflect "faster brains --
more processing, more power," he says, adding that once the patterns are
found, "you can move people" to them.
Mr. Balthazard is getting
ready. He's seeking funding for hundreds more scans, and will brain-map
The school's marketing
department has supplied Mr. Balthazard with small, rubber brains emblazoned
with the
Write to Phred Dvorak at phred.dvorak@wsj.com
and Jaclyne Badal at jaclyne.badal@wsj.com.
To read the entire article, go to (subscription
required) http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB119024585835733168.html.
When
this gets perfected, whose leadership do you think will be eliminated in the
health care debate? Or will it make any difference?
* * * * *
2. In the News: Rising costs might cripple centrist health
reform, by Daniel Weintraub, Sacramento Bee, October 1,
2007
One of the biggest ironies in the debate over how to
expand access to health insurance in California is that the compromise plan —
or concept — with the greatest chance of success would do so little to solve
the problem at the heart of the matter, and might even make it worse.
The problem is that health insurance costs are rising
faster than wages and have been for some time. Those rising costs are prompting
most employers to ask employees to pay higher premiums, and some employers to
drop coverage altogether. The result is a shrinking share of the state's
population with private health insurance.
But short of a radical change in the way we get and
pay for health care, there is little government can do to slow those rising
costs. They are mostly a reflection of demographics (as the population ages, we
demand more health care), medical technology, which is both popular and
expensive, and labor costs, which have been rising fast in the health care
industry.
Since 2001, according to a study by the Kaiser Family
Foundation, health insurance premiums have risen by 78 percent nationally,
while general wages have grown by only 19 percent.
In
Among other things, the plan would probably require
insurance companies to issue policies to anyone who applies, regardless of
their pre-existing health conditions.
Such an agreement would guarantee access to
comprehensive coverage for poor people without children, who do not qualify for
subsidized care today, and to working poor families who earn too much to
qualify for assistance under current law. Under the governor's proposal, for
instance, anyone making less than about $50,000 a year for a family of four
would get full benefits and pay no more than 6 percent of their income for
premiums. The Democrats' plan would be even more generous.
But while both approaches seek to cap health care
costs for individuals, they can't, or don't, limit the real costs of that care.
Just to put the problem in perspective, consider that the
governor's plan represents a $12 billion commitment in new taxes, new federal
aid and a reordering of state spending priorities. But if health costs continue
to rise during the next six years as they have over the past six years, that
$12 billion price tag would grow to more than $21 billion, while the sources of
funding for the plan would almost certainly grow at a slower rate.
The gap that results would have to be covered by more
subsidies. In the Democrats' plan, that means a higher payroll tax than the 7.5
percent of wages the proposal now envisions. The governor's plan relies on a
mixture of payroll taxes and fees on hospitals and perhaps doctors. And as part
of a compromise, both sides are considering an increase in the state sales tax.
The scary thing is that the fixes being considered
might actually make the problem worse.
According to the California HealthCare Foundation, the
uninsured use about half the services they would if they were fully insured.
So by giving them coverage, the state might be adding
to the total cost as more services are delivered to those who lacked insurance
before.
And while both the governor and the Democrats are
calling for an expansion of preventive care, that, too, could drive costs
higher.
Prevention is great when it catches a health problem
early, potentially saving lives and money. But it is not necessarily
cost-effective. For every case of cancer found early, hundreds or thousands of
people might get a test that finds nothing. Even the positive results can lead
to expensive treatments.
So while these proposals might improve the quality of
life for many people, they will do little to slow the growth in health care
costs, which means the programs would almost certainly run short of money
within a few years. . .
Unfortunately, it's a solution that would face serious
new hurdles almost from the moment it is adopted.
To read the full Weintraub Commentary, go to www.sacbee.com/815/v-print/story/409486.html.
[Wintraub gives us good
arguments why government should get out of health care before the unintended
consequences of their meddling into our
personal lives destroy our health.]
* * * * *
3. International Medicine: 'Single
Payer' Health Care Is Hardly Free, By Paul Hsieh
Michael Moore’s latest movie “SiCKO” sings the praises
of the Canadian “single-payer” socialized medical system. Some Americans want a
similar system implemented in the
Defenders of the Canadian system frequently claim that
patients don’t have to worry about money when they’re sick — the health care is
free. But is this really true?
No.
First, it is ludicrous to think the system is free.
Each citizen is forced to pay for his neighbors’ medical care in the form of
high taxes. (As a percentage of GDP, total taxation is 28 percent higher in
Even worse, in the name of “equal access” the government
generally forbids patients from purchasing medical services outside of its
system. Canadian law makes it difficult or impossible for citizens to spend
their own honestly earned money on medically necessary care for themselves or
their loved ones, even when both the doctor and the patient are willing.
To control costs, the government restricts access to
crucial medical services via infamous waiting lists. This imposes a second,
hidden, cost on patients: their time.
According to the Vancouver-based Fraser Institute,
“Canadian doctors say patients wait almost twice as long for treatment than is
clinically reasonable, . . . almost 18
weeks between the time they see their family physician and the time they receive
treatment from a specialist.”
Because of the waiting lists, mortality rates for
treatable conditions such as breast cancer and prostate cancer are
significantly higher in
A Canadian woman who discovers a lump in her breast
might wait for months before she receives the surgery and chemotherapy she
needs, with the cancer cells multiplying rapidly as each week goes by. If she
lived in the
This tax on time is especially cruel because the burden
falls hardest on the sickest patients, i.e., those with the least time to
spare.
Consequently, Canadian patients routinely suffer and
die while waiting for their “free” health care. The
To guarantee “free” health care, a government must
force the individual to pay for everyone else’s medical care and limit his
freedom to pay voluntarily for his own.
With bureaucrats deciding who receives what, the
individual is therefore forbidden from spending his money according to his own
rational judgment (and the advice of his doctors) as to what’s best for his
health.
When a government forces people to act against their
own interests, it’s no surprise that the results are misery and death.
Fortunately, Canadians are starting to recognize the
problems inherent in “single-payer” health care and are taking very small steps
towards limited private medicine.
As P. J. O’Rourke said, “If you think health care is
expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it’s free.”
Paul
Hsieh, MD, is a practicing physician in the south Denver metro area
and a guest writer for the Ayn
Rand Institute in Irvine, CA. He is a founding member of the
www.theatlasphere.com/columns/070919-hsieh-single-payer.php
Canadian Medicare does not give timely access to
healthcare, it only gives access to a waiting list.
--Canada’s Supreme Court
* * * * *
4. Medicare: Can Lean
Thinking Work in the Public Sector?
Lean
Government, Kevin Meyer, Founder
& Editor, Superfactory, http://www.superfactory.com/
Current
budget constraints in the public sector require an innovative response from
executives, legislators, public administrators and government employees.
Legislators must set the course with directive policy, administrators must
develop the management plan and government employees must remain flexible and
committed to the personal transformation required to do public business in a
new leaner way.
Citizens
are demanding ethical and responsible government. Now, more than ever it is
extremely important that programs and services using public funds are
accountable and effective. Anything less is unacceptable. We need to ask those
who seek to lead our government some tough questions. How will government
become accountable and effective? How can we maintain some compassion without
encouraging unhealthy dependency? How can we as citizens know that our
government is not spending money on unnecessary items, staffing or projects
with little value to our citizens, communities and economy? Government
functions must be measured against standards, but what standards do we use?
There
are multiple ways to answer these questions. The most crucial factor is how we
determine the standards to measure our progress. Business and public
administration, statistics and accounting academic worlds can offer a myriad of
possible measurement tools. Six Sigma, Total Quality Management, World Class
Service, GASB, and Management by Objectives to just name a few. Many of these
tools have been proven in the private sector. One particular approach, called
lean thinking has been very successful in manufacturing and has in recent years
been successfully adapted for use in the public sector.
www.superfactory.com/topics/government.htm
Government is not the solution to our problems,
government is the problem.
- Ronald Reagan
* * * * *
5. Lean HealthCare: Doing More
with Less, Kevin Meyer, Founder & Editor, Superfactory
There's a lot of excitement today in the health care field
about the benefits that Lean practice can bring. This is especially critical in
an environment where patient care needs are climbing while the pool of skilled
resources and reimbursement for services shrink. Lean Advisors Inc. is working
in the healthcare industry to help them implement Lean in order to be able to
do more with less while doing it better. The key is to apply Lean methods in an
environment driven by the unique values that surround patient care.
As the population ages, healthcare must find new ways
to meet the demand for their services. Turnaround time becomes a primary
measurement that must improve whether it is in the hospital facilities or their
testing laboratories. Further, space is at a critical premium in running all
the functions within a hospital facility. Only Lean can provide a solution to
space issues without either downsizing staff or incurring large scale capital
building costs.
Healthcare has a tremendous opportunity to deploy Lean
Healthcare concepts to reduce internal/external costs, improve patient safety,
increase profits, reduce litigation and decrease the dependence on Government
and Insurance. To accomplish this monumental task, Healthcare providers will
need to turn the microscope inside and do what others,
As in other industries, the customer should come
first. In healthcare that customer is the patient, the regulatory bodies and
maybe even the Insurers. They all define and drive the definition of value
(i.e. what is not adding value to their needs). The product (Laboratory
results) or service (patient care) can make the difference between life and
death. The needs of the patient are paramount and give new meaning to Lean
Healthcare. This then makes Lean even more important in this industry over
manufacturing or other services.
Today healthcare is not designed to make the value
stream of care flow smoothly . As with manufacturing, healthcare services are
often “batch and queue”, with patients spending most of their time waiting
until the right process (skilled healthcare practitioner) is available.
As a result, the value added processes are disconnected leaving the patient and
the caregiver all disillusioned. The working environment is one driven by
shared values and passion in delivering top quality products and services to
the patient.
Without Lean, healthcare will continue to have
difficulty meeting the pressure to serve an increasing number of individuals at
less cost. As the population ages, healthcare must find new ways to meet the
demand for their services. Turnaround time (i.e. patient cycle time, service
Takt time) becomes a primary measurement that must improve whether it is in the
hospital facilities, post care facilities or laboratories. Further, space is at
a critical premium in running all the functions within a hospital facility.
Only Lean can provide a solution to all these concerns with minimal
expenditures but maximum benefits.
To learn more about Lean, browse at www.superfactory.com/topics/healthcare.htm.
* * * * *
6. Medical Myths: Health
Care Is a Human Right
Activists who
denounce any health care reform that is not single (government) payer, often
make the ludicrous claim that health care is a human right.
A human right
is neither endowed by government nor defined by activists. It is something we
are all born with, such as life, liberty and the pursuit (not guarantee) of
happiness. Human rights do not require the coerced efforts or labor of others
so that you may enjoy them. Health care for all is a noble aspiration, and
worthy of pursuit, but medical care is not even a universal need or desire, let
alone a human right.
While
millions voluntarily opt out of, or even avoid, medical care, who would argue
that food, water and shelter are not true human needs? These true needs are not
universally provided for by government. Would life be more utopian if they
were?
Health care is not a
human right by PATRICK J. MCNAMARA, Maratinez, SF Chronicle, Letters
www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/09/22/ED7HSAVOF.DTL&type=printable
* * * * *
7. Overheard on Capital
Hill: John Stossel’s Reply to
Health Insurance for All
What options do we have for improving
Our Crazy Health-Insurance System, By John Stossel, Sept 27, 2007
Almost daily, we’re bombarded with apocalyptic
warnings about the 47 million Americans who have no health insurance. Sen.
Hillary Clinton wants to require everyone to have it, big companies to
pay for it and government to buy it for the poor.
That is a move in the wrong direction.
You have to understand something right from the start.
We Americans got hooked on health insurance because the government did the
insurance companies a favor during World War II. Wartime wage controls prohibited
cash raises, so employers started giving noncash benefits, like health
insurance, to attract workers.
The tax code helped this along by treating
employer-based health insurance more favorably than coverage you buy yourself. And
state governments have made things worse by mandating coverage many people
would never buy for themselves.
Competition also pushed companies to offer ever-more
attractive policies, such as first-dollar coverage for routine ailments, like
ear infections and colds, and coverage for things that are not even illnesses,
like pregnancy. We came to expect insurance to cover everything.
That’s the root of our problem. No one wants to pay
for his own medical care. “Let the insurance company pay for it.” But if
companies pay, they will demand a say in what treatment is — and is not —
permitted. Who can blame them?
And who can blame people for feeling frustrated that
they aren’t in control of their medical care? Maybe we need to rethink how we
pay for less-than-catastrophic illnesses so people can regain control. The
system creates perverse incentives for everyone. Government mandates are good
at doing things like that.
Steering people to buy lots of health insurance is bad
policy. Insurance is a necessary evil. We need it to protect us from the big
risks — things most of us can’t afford to pay for, like a serious illness, a
major car accident, or a house fire.
But insurance is a lousy way to pay for things. Your
premiums go not just to pay for medical care but also for fraud, paperwork and
insurance-company employee salaries. This is bad for you and bad for doctors.
The average American doctor now spends 14 percent of
his income on insurance paperwork. A
The paperwork is part of insurance companies’ attempt
to protect themselves against fraud. That’s understandable. Many people do
cheat. They lie about their history or demand money for unnecessary care or
care that never even happened. . .
Imagine if your car insurance covered oil changes and
gasoline. You wouldn’t care how much gas you used, and you wouldn’t care what
it cost. Mechanics would sell you $100 oil changes. Prices would skyrocket.
That’s how it works in health care. Patients don’t ask
how much a test or treatment will cost. They ask if their insurance covers it.
They don’t compare prices from different doctors and hospitals. (Prices do
vary.) Why should they? They’re not paying. (Although they do in hidden,
indirect ways.)
In the end, we all pay more because no one seems to
pay anything. It’s why health insurance is not a good idea for anything
but serious illnesses and accidents that could bankrupt you. For the rest, we
should pay out of our savings.
www.theatlasphere.com/columns/070927-stossel-health-insurance.php
Next week, we’ll look at alternatives to this crazy
system.
John
Stossel is co-anchor of ABC News’ “20/20” and the author of Give
Me a Break: How I Exposed Hucksters, Cheats, and Scam Artists and Became the
Scourge of the Liberal Media (January 2005) as well as Myth,
Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel — Why Everything You Know Is
Wrong (May 2007), which is now available in paperback.
* * * * *
8. US Health Care: Physicians Make Lousy Advocates by David J. Gibson, MD
Catherine
Thomasson, MD, national president of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR)
was interviewed on Public Radio. A listener responded: “Where is it written that physicians have more
expertise than others in political and moral matters?” Dr. Harry Wang,
president of the
This article
brought considerable Editorial Committee response from “Take Aim at Terrorists,
not the
Physicians
Make Lousy Advocates by David J. Gibson, MD
ELSEWHERE IN
THIS ISSUE of SSV Medicine, www.ssvms.org/magazine/sep_oct_07.asp,
Dr Harry Wang president of Physicians for Social Responsibility in
Arguing the
negative is akin to opposing motherhood and apple pie. For the past decade, the
CMA [California Medical Association] has organized annual “Leadership
Academies.” Their purpose is to educate physicians about public policy issues.
One goal is to encourage attendees to stand for election to public office.
Furthermore, the two most sought after spokespersons by advertising and
activist groups are celebrities and physicians.
To clear the
table of non issues, I stipulate that Americans have the freedom to express
their opinion on any issue. No matter how tangential, you have the right to
express yourself – even if no one cares to listen to your point of view.
What’s more,
physician organizations and groups have a vital role to play in expressing
expert consensus on issues of the day. Dr. Wang references the AMA Board of
Trustees resolution in 1981 that “there is no adequate medical response to a
nuclear holocaust.” Few would argue this is not a credible addition to the
debate.
My major
problem is when individual physicians seek unearned credibility by attaching
their academic title to public statements. Mr. Wang does not have the same
credibility as Dr. Wang. In the public square, you defend your position based
on reason and facts. To short cut your progress to credibility by flashing the
MD degree will inevitably leads to defeat in the battle of ideas, with loss of
credibility for the profession as collateral damage.
Beyond this
central objection to exploiting the degree, physicians have a long and
undistinguished history of performing poorly on public policy issues. As Dr.
Wang points out, “almost half of registered German physicians were members of
the Nazi Party.” The ridiculous racial theories of the Nazis had their roots in
an international eugenics movement whose ‘principal supporters included
physicians and academics.
In June of
this year,
. . . English
intellectual Herbert Spencer articulated the lofty goal of eugenics by announcing
that “all imperfection must disappear.” Margaret Sanger called for forced
sterilization, concentration camps, and birth control for the” creation of a
new race.” The ideals of Planned Parenthood’s founder were partially realized
through the sterilization of nearly 70,000 people by various state governments,
including
When
physicians expand the scope and reach of science in medicine, our accomplishments
are unparalleled. When we step outside our area of competence and become
activists in the public arena, the results can be tragic. The following
admittedly selected list provides but a few infamous examples:
Karl Brandt
(1904-1948) – Nazi human experimentation.
Radovan
Karadzic (b. 1945) - ethnic cleansing in
François
(“Papa Doc”) Duvalier (1907-71) – President and later dictator of
Josef
Mengele (1911-1979) – the “Angel
of Death,” Nazi human experimentation.
Jack Kevorkian
(1923- ) – convicted of second-degree murder,
Shira Ishii –
head
Khalid Ahmed,
Bilal Talal Abdul Samad Abdulla, Muhammad Haneef, Mohammed Jamil Abdelqader
Asha – all physicians arrested for involvement in the failed car bombings in
Glasgow and London this year.
To read
further comments about “Physicians do not represent the norm in any society”
and “We advocate using government’s coercive power to influence fellow citizens
to make choices they would make themselves—if only they had our strength of
will and sharpness of mind” go to www.ssvms.org/articles/0709gibson.asp.
* * * * *
9. Health Plan
[In response to the staff room comments a few weeks
ago about Medicare not paying the doctors in Sacramento for five months who had
recently moved from an office building where the rent was increased by 80
percent, Lawrence Huntoon, MD, PhD, responded. We publish this response to
remind our readers that a government that can be this vindictive to the medical
profession would not have a kind ear for sick patients who are unable to fight
such a vengeful bureaucracy that harasses their physicians.]
Medicare did the same thing to me that they are
currently doing to you. Prior to opting
out of Medicare, I was always a Non-Par in Medicare.
When I moved and opened a new office, I notified
Medicare, via U.S. Mail, of my new address. They wanted me to fill out a 30
page form just to change my address!!
The form was basically an initial enrollment form in Medicare which contains
all sorts of things that I would not agree to and sign as a Non-Par
physician. I had been “enrolled” in
Medicare as a Non-Par physician for 18 years at that point.
I refused to fill out and sign their abusive 30-page
form.
Medicare retaliated by refusing to pay what they
owed (i.e. they force assignment on physicians who treat dual eligible patients
- Medicare + Medicaid). Medicare owed
me a substantial amount of money.
I stood firm, and would not fill out and sign (agree
to) their abusive “enrollment” form.
Within a few months, I opted out of Medicare under
Sec. 4507 of the BBA of 1997.
As a result of opting out of Medicare, Medicare was
forced to accept the change of address notification that I previously supplied
to them - no 30 page form had to be filled out.
After Medicare was forced to acknowledge and accept
my notification of change of address, they were then forced to send all the
money they owed me.
This is the “standard operating procedure” for this
highly abusive and coercive government bureaucracy. The bureaucracy seeks to punish those physicians who refuse to
“voluntarily” sign up with their abusive Medicare program which degrades and
devalues physicians on an ever increasing basis.
Lawrence
R. Huntoon, M.D., Ph.D. is a practicing neurologist and editor-in-chief of the Journal of
American Physicians and Surgeons, Contact: editor@jpands.org.For
Dr. Huntoon’s Neurology Practice website, please go to http://home.earthlink.net/~doctorlrhuntoon/.
To
read other articles by Dr. Huntoon, please go to the following links:
The
Psychology of Sham Peer Review, www.jpands.org/vol12no1/huntoon.pdf.
Conflicts
of Interest and Quality Care, www.jpands.org/vol12no3/huntoon.pdf.
I
Think, Therefore I’m Well: The Amazing Brain, www.jpands.org/vol12no2/huntoon.pdf.
* * * * *
* * * * *
Stay Tuned to the MedicalTuesday and the HealthPlanUSA
Networks and have your friends do the same.
Articles that appear in MedicalTuesday and
HPUSA may not reflect the opinion of the editorial staff. Sections 1-8 are
entirely attributable quotes in the interest of the health care debate.
Editorial comments are in brackets.
ALSO NOTE: MedicalTuesday receives no
government, foundation, or private funds. The entire cost of the website URLs,
website posting, distribution, managing editor, email editor, and the research
and writing is solely paid for and donated by the Founding Editor, while
continuing his Pulmonary Practice, as a service to his patients, his
profession, and in the public interest for his country.
Spammator
Note: MedicalTuesday and HPUSA use many standard medical terms considered
forbidden by many spammators. We are not always able to avoid appropriate
medical terminology in the abbreviated edition sent by e-newsletter. (The Web
Edition is always complete.) As readers use new spammators with an increasing
rejection rate, we are not always able to navigate around these palace guards.
If you miss some editions of our Newsletters, you may want to check your
spammator settings and make appropriate adjustments. To assure uninterrupted
delivery, subscribe directly from the website rather than personal
communication: www.medicaltuesday.net/newsletter.asp
* * * * *
Del Meyer
Del Meyer, MD, Editor & Founder
HealthPlanUSA, LLC
http://www.medicaltuesday.net/
Words
of Wisdom
Do Not Go Where the Path may
lead. Go instead where there is NO Path and Leave a Trail. –Ralph Waldo Emerson
Decision Making:
Start with what is right rather than what is acceptable. –Peter Drucker
Be not the slave of your own
past. Plunge into the sublime seas, dive deep and swim far, so you shall come
back with self-respect, with new power, with an advanced experience that shall
explain and overlook the old. –Ralph
Waldo Emerson,
Some
Recent/Relevant Postings
CLONING OF THE AMERICAN MIND - Eradicating Morality Through Education, by B. K. Eakman http://healthcarecom.net/bkrev_CloningOfTheAmericanMind.htm
THE GREATEST BENEFIT TO MANKIND - A Medical History of
Humanity, by Roy Porter, http://healthcarecom.net/greatest_benefit_to_mankind.htm
Physicians
Make Lousy Advocates by David Gibson,
www.healthplanusa.net/DGPhysicianAdvocate.htm
This
Month in History, October
Leif Erikson
allegedly landed his Viking explorer on the North American mainland in about
1000 A.D.
The first television broadcast by a President, Harry S.
Truman, from the White House in 1947.
Thanksgiving proclamations were given in 1789 by President
Washington in honor of the adoption of the Constitution and in 1863 by
President Lincoln designating the last Thursday in November as Thanksgiving
Day.
This
Month in Future Reality, October 10-13
Be
sure to attend the 64th Annual Meeting of the AAPS to be held this
week on October 10-13, 2007, in Philadelphia/Cherry Hill, NJ. Important Theme
is Collision Course: Medical Ethics and the Law by an illustrious faculty and
get 17 CME units credit. The AAPS is one of few remaining organizations
strictly dedicated to private practice issues. Most of our professional
organizations are now dedicated to enslaving physicians in government medicine.
For further information, go to http://www.aapsonline.org/2007am/.