Big Medicine driving up prices?

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/01/b...nd-for-doctors-nationwide.html?pagewanted=all

the city’s largest hospital, St. Luke’s Health System, began rapidly buying physician practices all over town, from general practitioners to cardiologists to orthopedic surgeons.

Today, Boise is a medical battleground.

A little over half of the 1,400 doctors in southwestern Idaho are employed by St. Luke’s or its smaller competitor, St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center.

Many of the independent doctors complain that both hospitals, but especially St. Luke’s, have too much power over every aspect of the medical pipeline, dictating which tests and procedures to perform, how much to charge and which patients to admit.

In interviews, they said their referrals from doctors now employed by St. Luke’s had dropped sharply, while patients, in many cases, were paying more there for the same level of treatment.

Boise’s experience reflects a growing national trend toward consolidation. Across the country, doctors who sold their practices and signed on as employees have similar criticisms. In lawsuits and interviews, they describe growing pressure to meet the financial goals of their new employers — often by performing unnecessary tests and procedures or by admitting patients who do not need a hospital stay.

In Boise, just a few weeks ago, even the hospitals were at war. St. Alphonsus went to court seeking an injunction to stop St. Luke’s from buying another physician practice group, arguing that the hospital’s dominance in the market was enabling it to drive up prices and to demand exclusive or preferential agreements with insurers. The price of a colonoscopy has quadrupled in some instances, and in other cases St. Luke’s charges nearly three times as much for laboratory work as nearby facilities, according to the St. Alphonsus complaint.

Federal and state officials have also joined the fray. In one of a handful of similar cases, the Federal Trade Commission and the Idaho attorney general are investigating whether St. Luke’s has become too powerful in Boise, using its newfound leverage to stifle competition.




Yep. The same tactics that has conglomerated American businesses into near monopolies is now coming to a doctor near you.

Sadly, the "free market" apologists will be out in force telling us they are only getting bigger and taking over markets so they can lower prices and give better services.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
If you pray to your flying spaghetti monster of health care all will be well.
 

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,861
3
76
Government, Lawyers, and Insurance Companies...

Never mind business and the individual.

-John
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
as long as we dont have any price transparency, this is going to happen.

I guess it was too much to ask to put such a simple reform into ACA....
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
The Republicons love reaming Americans on drug prices that why they have consistently blocked all Legislation to negotiate drug prices for Medicare which would save BILLIONS of dollars.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
The Republicons love reaming Americans on drug prices that why they have consistently blocked all Legislation to negotiate drug prices for Medicare which would save BILLIONS of dollars.


The democrats could have fixed that in the healthcare bill if they weren't in the pockets of the pharmaceutical companies themselves.
 

Slew Foot

Lifer
Sep 22, 2005
12,379
96
86
This has really ramped up in recent years. With all of the new regulations coming down the pipeline, many private physicians arent going to be able to afford or keep up with all of them. As a result, many large hospitals see this as an opportunity to buy out all the local physicians offices and try to monopolize an area, which in turn they hope, will give them greater influence with the insurance companies when it comes to negotiating rates.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
I'd rather have a public health care system and no regulations nor subsidies on the private sector than have this fascist shit like Obamacare, licensure, and public-private partnerships everywhere.

The problem with having a public health care system is that taxes would go up and then the govt would be trying to compete with the market. So a wall between State and medicine would be nice but it's not going to happen in America since Dr. Paul didn't become President and since his son isn't a libertarian.
 
Last edited:

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
The Republicons love reaming Americans on drug prices that why they have consistently blocked all Legislation to negotiate drug prices for Medicare which would save BILLIONS of dollars.

I agree, but I also don't give Dems a pass on incompetence and willful ignorance of the topic they are legislating on. There should have been a lot of work done by those who have a clue before one reg was written.
 

Xecuter

Golden Member
Aug 17, 2004
1,596
0
76
So wait. The problem isn't with health insurance companies after all?

:confused::confused::confused:

The healthcare issue is multifaceted; but please continue on how you think the rising cost of healthcare is to be attributed solely to single mothers.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,739
8,320
136
The democrats could have fixed that in the healthcare bill if they weren't in the pockets of the pharmaceutical companies themselves.

Ummm, I guess you're specifically referring to the DINO Blue Dog Dems from Repub controlled states? And I'm logically assuming you're also referring to what the Dems had to give up in the spirit of "compromise" to what the Repubs vehemently insisted upon that you're now blaming the Dems for?
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
I'd rather have a public health care system and no regulations nor subsidies on the private sector than have this fascist shit like Obamacare, licensure, and public-private partnerships everywhere.

The problem with having a public health care system is that taxes would go up and then the govt would be trying to compete with the market. So a wall between State and medicine would be nice but it's not going to happen in America since Dr. Paul didn't become President and since his son isn't a libertarian.

This, we wouldn't have this problem if we had Ron Paul, OP you really need to educate yourself since you claim to be upset by this yet you vote for a party that supports this
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
Ummm, I guess you're specifically referring to the DINO Blue Dog Dems from Repub controlled states? And I'm logically assuming you're also referring to what the Dems had to give up in the spirit of "compromise" to what the Repubs vehemently insisted upon that you're now blaming the Dems for?

Oh it was "compromise" all right but the compromise was between the actual Obama administration and big Pharma......

But who cares about facts right? Just throw the blue dogs under the bus and throw a little blame at the group that didn't vote for it and were never ever going to vote for it at the same time. Awesome.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
The healthcare issue is multifaceted; but please continue on how you think the rising cost of healthcare is to be attributed solely to single mothers.

Single mothers do not drive up healthcare costs. They drive up government spending on healthcare.
 

DAGTA

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
8,172
1
0
This with all the abortions that cost taxpayers money along with the welfare

I would be curious to see actual numbers on costs of gov't provided healthcare in the following categories:

- abortions
- elderly
- illegals

I'd bet the illegals expense is magnitudes more expensive than abortions and probably more expensive than elderly. Many illegals use the ER for every healthcare need and leave without paying the bill.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
I would be curious to see actual numbers on costs of gov't provided healthcare in the following categories:

- abortions
- elderly
- illegals

I'd bet the illegals expense is magnitudes more expensive than abortions and probably more expensive than elderly. Many illegals use the ER for every healthcare need and leave without paying the bill.

I didn't think that the .gov covered abortions and I guarantee you that the elderly are by far the highest cost of governments healthcare spending. Specifically, end of life treatment.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
I didn't think that the .gov covered abortions and I guarantee you that the elderly are by far the highest cost of governments healthcare spending. Specifically, end of life treatment.

You're thinking outside the party lines. Stop that. :p
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
This with all the abortions that cost taxpayers money along with the welfare

Google says that the high end of abortion cost $500 and .gov statistics said there were 1.2M abortions in 2007. I don't know how many the .gov paid for but I guarantee it wasn't anywhere close to all. However, if it DID pay for every last one of them that would be $600M so I have to figure we could possibly save somewhere south of $100M. Unfortunately, if the .gov is picking up some or all of the bill it means the person is very likely poor. Since poor AND a child automatically qualifies both the child and parent for medicaid I don't see how it would reduce federal healthcare costs.

Just my .02. I am not trying to argue the morality, simply the numbers.