Actually, Romneycare has increased patient wait times to 1.5 months.

[Anarchist420]

Contrary to pop belief, W Romneycare is neither harmless nor efficient. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2011/May/09/mass-wait-times.aspx

Why did so many people think it was efficient when that obviously ain't the case?

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Damn those poor people for taking up doctor's appointments. Clearly, something needs to be done or non-urgent medical visits for the rich won't be handled urgently. The horror!

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Mass. has also had a physician shortage that predates Romneycare by years.

The following is from the 2005 Mass. med. Physician Workforce Study.

http://www.massmed.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=11585

The Society said the shortages are widespread across the state and are especially acute at community hospitals: 62 percent of physician practices, 60 percent of teaching hospitals, and 87 percent of community hospitals say they are finding it hard to fill vacancies.

One of the principal causes of the shortages continues to be the unusually large number of residents and fellows who leave the state after completion of their training. For 2003-2004, 46 percent of residents and 60 percent of fellows left the state after training. That translates, just for residents, to a migration of more than 2,100 physicians for that academic year.

For each of the last six (6) academic years, in fact, at least 46 percent of residents and 51 percent of fellows have left Massachusetts.

 

[PokerGuy]

Mass. has also had a physician shortage that predates Romneycare by years.

The following is from the 2005 Mass. med. Physician Workforce Study.

http://www.massmed.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=11585

That's the whole point: the US as a whole also has a physician shortage now. Imagine how wonderful that will be when you add millions of new patients without doing anything to increase the supply of doctors. Yep, you guessed it, you get extremely long wait times, more people going to urgent care and the ER for things that don't currently require urgent or ER care because it's the only way they'll be able to see a doctor. In other words, you get exactly what we've seen in MA.

It will also be a lot more expensive, and the care will be of a lower standard because the doctors will be overworked. Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.

Thanks once again dims for your dose of stupidity.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Contrary to pop belief, W Romneycare is neither harmless nor efficient. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2011/May/09/mass-wait-times.aspx

Why did so many people think it was efficient when that obviously ain't the case?

are these wait times for removal of a benign mole or do urgent cancer cases face the same wait?

 

[senseamp]

That's the whole point: the US as a whole also has a physician shortage now. Imagine how wonderful that will be when you add millions of new patients without doing anything to increase the supply of doctors. Yep, you guessed it, you get extremely long wait times, more people going to urgent care and the ER for things that don't currently require urgent or ER care because it's the only way they'll be able to see a doctor. In other words, you get exactly what we've seen in MA.

It will also be a lot more expensive, and the care will be of a lower standard because the doctors will be overworked. Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.

Thanks once again dims for your dose of stupidity.

Nominated for asinine comment of the week.

 

[PokerGuy]

are these wait times for removal of a benign mole or do urgent cancer cases face the same wait?

I haven't seen a specific breakdown for MA, but I know from personal experience with a close family friend from NZ who was in Canada that he ended up having to wait 6 weeks before they could even see him to evaluate the cancer. He came here to the US, paid his own way and according to his doctor had he waited 6 weeks he would have had a much smaller chance at successful recovery. He's in remission now.

The problem is that it's not always apparent what is a "minor" issue and what isn't. That mole that didn't seem like a big deal could end up being a life threatening problem if not treated in time, or it could end up being nothing.

Also "elective" procedures end up taking just about forever, but again, the problem is that what is defined as "elective" can be something completely cosmetic, or it can be something that is a MAJOR impact to one's quality of life, like a hip replacement or knee joint replacement etc. With socialist health care you're going to end up waiting a long time for both.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Yeah I'm glad that the UK and Canada has socialized medicine. The world needs less of them and socialized medicine is helping to reduce their numbers, so I don't have to worry that we will be invaded by them anymore!

 

[First]

That's the whole point: the US as a whole also has a physician shortage now. Imagine how wonderful that will be when you add millions of new patients without doing anything to increase the supply of doctors. Yep, you guessed it, you get extremely long wait times, more people going to urgent care and the ER for things that don't currently require urgent or ER care because it's the only way they'll be able to see a doctor. In other words, you get exactly what we've seen in MA.

It will also be a lot more expensive, and the care will be of a lower standard because the doctors will be overworked. Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.

Thanks once again dims for your dose of stupidity.

Right, so clearly the solution is to not cover these people and let them go without healthcare so that we can improve wait times a few days/weeks. Fucking tard.

 

[dmcowen674]

Actually, Romneycare has increased patient wait times to 1.5 months

Contrary to pop belief, W Romneycare is neither harmless nor efficient. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2011/May/09/mass-wait-times.aspx

Why did so many people think it was efficient when that obviously ain't the case?

Republicans are thrilled, many sick that would drain on the coffers will die in the wait.

All by design

This is America's Logans Run

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Right, so clearly the solution is to not cover these people and let them go without healthcare so that we can improve wait times a few days/weeks. Fucking tard.

No, dumbass. The solution is to give smart people more incentive to become doctors. As it is, being a doctor requires a huge payment in time and money that you don't get back for decades. All the fear of malpractice lawsuits increases costs as well.

 

[First]

No, dumbass. The solution is to give smart people more incentive to become doctors. As it is, being a doctor requires a huge payment in time and money that you don't get back for decades. All the fear of malpractice lawsuits increases costs as well.

For one, malpractice suits have nothing to do with doctor shortages, this is well documented. So that's a canard. Secondly, there is no silver bullet to increase the amount of doctors in circulation, so to say it's hard to become a doctor means nothing as it solves nothing. How about a solution that doesn't involve voluntarily not covering millions of Americans. If wait times and slightly less good service is the result, is that an inferior outcome to no healthcare service for tens of millions? You'd be a dirty lair if you think there's an alternative in the doctor supply discussion that doesn't involve longer wait times. That's the sacrifice to cover people.

 

[senseamp]

You are just wasting your time. There are some things rightwingers believe like a religion, even if they have been thoroughly debunked. Malpractice reform is one of those things, right next to trickle down economics and drill baby drill and deregulation. There is no shortage of people wanting to become doctors, just look at the low acceptance rates at our medical schools.

 

[werepossum]

One guaranteed effect of universal health care is to increase wait times and make scarce health care resources more scarce. Anyone who tells you differently is selling snake oil.

However, that doesn't mean that Romneycare is a failure, as its intention is to provide coverage for all at the least increase in cost and wait times. This recognizes that while short wait times are desirable both for increased medical success and convenience, health care coverage for all is arguably more desirable. My own preference would be fifty versions of Romneycare, competing to be the best design, with each state free to choose the best plan for its citizens. And of course the federal government providing health care for D.C. so that we don't forget what we dodged.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

I haven't seen a specific breakdown for MA, but I know from personal experience with a close family friend from NZ who was in Canada that he ended up having to wait 6 weeks before they could even see him to evaluate the cancer. He came here to the US, paid his own way and according to his doctor had he waited 6 weeks he would have had a much smaller chance at successful recovery. He's in remission now.

The problem is that it's not always apparent what is a "minor" issue and what isn't. That mole that didn't seem like a big deal could end up being a life threatening problem if not treated in time, or it could end up being nothing.

Also "elective" procedures end up taking just about forever, but again, the problem is that what is defined as "elective" can be something completely cosmetic, or it can be something that is a MAJOR impact to one's quality of life, like a hip replacement or knee joint replacement etc. With socialist health care you're going to end up waiting a long time for both.

As a Canadian who has had several friends and family members require varying levels of medical attention due to cancer matters in te last 5 years, some terminal, I have yet to have one suffer any kind of delay. My own cancer scare was addressed tested and resolved in a matter of a two weeks.

Guess how many of them went bankrupt due to their treatments or had to worry if they could afford to be treated at all? The fact remains preventable deaths are highest in the US due to the lack of access and affordability of everything from treatment right down to medications for chronic conditions.

 

[Bowfinger]

are these wait times for removal of a benign mole or do urgent cancer cases face the same wait?

According to the article (both the OP, and the original from the Massachusetts Medical Society), they surveyed "wait times for new patients getting non-emergency appointments with a physician."


I'll also point out that the title of the OP is (not surprisingly) misleading. There is nothing in the article concluding increasing wait times are due to "Romenycare," nor any data at all about wait times before it passed. The one thing the article does mention is a chronic shortage of doctors in MA.

 

[sMiLeYz]

^ My grandmother was treated for Emergency care in Canada when we went to Toronto. Absolutely no wait time, it's bs rightwingers in the US tell themselves to feel better about about our absolutely shitty system.

44,000 thousand die a year from lack of health insurance in the USA

^Socialized medicine is more efficient than this bs

 

[Bowfinger]

^ My grandmother was treated for Emergency care in Canada when we went to Toronto. Absolutely no wait time, it's bs rightwingers in the US tell themselves to feel better about about our absolutely shitty system.

44,000 thousand die a year from lack of health insurance in the USA

^Socialized medicine is more efficient than this bs

As Reagan himself said, "The trouble with our ... [right-wing] friends is ... just that they know so much that isn't so."

 

[Vette73]

You are just wasting your time. There are some things rightwingers believe like a religion, even if they have been thoroughly debunked. Malpractice reform is one of those things, right next to trickle down economics and drill baby drill and deregulation. There is no shortage of people wanting to become doctors, just look at the low acceptance rates at our medical schools.

This. The AMA does not want there to be a lot of doctors. They want the shortage to keep rates high.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Nominated for asinine comment of the week.

Of course. He's right and anything negative which is true must not be allowed. Call Thinkpol!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This. The AMA does not want there to be a lot of doctors. They want the shortage to keep rates high.

Eleven years+ of higher education and that's not including becoming a specialist. We may be looking four or more years for that depending on particulars. Only a tiny percentage of people have the intellectual ability, tenacity and emotional fortitude to do the job well at all. During the long process they lose income they might have made elsewhere, accumulate debt, and have to wait until 1/3 or so of their lives is past until they can practice. Just how cheap will they come?

 

[Bowfinger]

Of course. He's right and anything negative which is true must not be allowed. Call Thinkpol!

No, it is asinine because it presumes that increasing demand will not be met with an increased supply of medical personnel (much of which could be done simply by allowing others like nurses to treat issues that don't truly require a doctor). It is asinine because it insinuates that "Dims" are somehow responsible for the AMA constraining the supply of doctors. It is asinine because it ignores the fact that people without insurance already place a heavy, expensive burden on the medical system by relying on ERs for care. It is asinine because he ignores the fact the every other first-world country already does it successfully, and most of them do it better than we do. And perhaps most of all, it is asinine because of his, "I've already got mine, so screw the rest of you." attitude.

 

[matt0611]

This. The AMA does not want there to be a lot of doctors. They want the shortage to keep rates high.

This is a very important point and what I have been saying for a long time as to one of the many reason why our healthcare costs are so high.

What can we do about it?

 

[werepossum]

This. The AMA does not want there to be a lot of doctors. They want the shortage to keep rates high.

The point of most professional organizations is to make that profession as respected and as profitable as possible.

 

[BoberFett]

Nominated for asinine comment of the week.

... says the guy who likes using illegal immigrants as slave labor so he can save $0.02 on his lettuce.