<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Malpractice laws on the ballot</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100</link>
	<description>Internal medicine, American health care, and especially medical education</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 15:15:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Old Bastard's Views</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4736</link>
		<dc:creator>The Old Bastard's Views</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2004 17:15:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4736</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Medical Errors&lt;/strong&gt;
 &quot;A Minnesota health insurer says it won&#039;t pay the bill when doctors make serious mistakes...&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Medical Errors</strong><br />
 &#8220;A Minnesota health insurer says it won&#8217;t pay the bill when doctors make serious mistakes&#8230;&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4723</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Oct 2004 23:50:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4723</guid>
		<description>In other words, your games and evasions are tiresome, and I&#039;ve moved on to the other malpractice discussions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In other words, your games and evasions are tiresome, and I&#8217;ve moved on to the other malpractice discussions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4695</link>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:43:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4695</guid>
		<description>In other words, you have no response, correct?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In other words, you have no response, correct?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4688</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:55:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4688</guid>
		<description>Chris, if you had the first clue what you were talking about, your comment might merit response.... Sheesh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris, if you had the first clue what you were talking about, your comment might merit response&#8230;. Sheesh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4684</link>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2004 06:52:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4684</guid>
		<description>In all seriousness though, I wouldn&#039;t point to those numbers as evidence.  Quite frankly, it just makes you look extremely gullible.  You&#039;d be much better off finding a source that looked at total compensation.  The figures reported on this site most likely do not include variable income, resulting in total income.  They only take into account yearly salary.  And, as we all know, PI lawyers thrive on percentage of jury awards, not salary.

So Aaron, I was trying to hear you out earlier, and assume that you&#039;d just overlooked a few arguments...but seriously pointing to those statistics has lead me to question your analytical capabilities.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In all seriousness though, I wouldn&#8217;t point to those numbers as evidence.  Quite frankly, it just makes you look extremely gullible.  You&#8217;d be much better off finding a source that looked at total compensation.  The figures reported on this site most likely do not include variable income, resulting in total income.  They only take into account yearly salary.  And, as we all know, PI lawyers thrive on percentage of jury awards, not salary.</p>
<p>So Aaron, I was trying to hear you out earlier, and assume that you&#8217;d just overlooked a few arguments&#8230;but seriously pointing to those statistics has lead me to question your analytical capabilities.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4683</link>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2004 06:35:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4683</guid>
		<description>HA! The money quotes were hilarious!  Yes, medmal lawyers only make 60k a year on average. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.  Well, who knows, maybe they&#039;re taking out statistically abnormal lawyers who make millions a year...*coughbullshitcough*</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HA! The money quotes were hilarious!  Yes, medmal lawyers only make 60k a year on average. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.  Well, who knows, maybe they&#8217;re taking out statistically abnormal lawyers who make millions a year&#8230;*coughbullshitcough*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pj</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4672</link>
		<dc:creator>pj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:57:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4672</guid>
		<description>very strange statement immediately above.
99% of charges are based on EM codes and negotiated by insurance companies.  if you don&#039;t mind can you tell me a bit more about your 450 dollar charge for 5 minute appointment.?

  typical reimbursements are about 150 dollars per hour.


the reason why salaries are larger is becuase most docs work very long work weeks averaging well above 60 hours/week.   also MD/DO training requires much more time and is much more costly than law training.  I would think that salaries /hour worked would be a bit higher.

common sense i think</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>very strange statement immediately above.<br />
99% of charges are based on EM codes and negotiated by insurance companies.  if you don&#8217;t mind can you tell me a bit more about your 450 dollar charge for 5 minute appointment.?</p>
<p>  typical reimbursements are about 150 dollars per hour.</p>
<p>the reason why salaries are larger is becuase most docs work very long work weeks averaging well above 60 hours/week.   also MD/DO training requires much more time and is much more costly than law training.  I would think that salaries /hour worked would be a bit higher.</p>
<p>common sense i think</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4670</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:12:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4670</guid>
		<description>CHenry, you know full well who pays the bill. Like any cost of business, the cost is passed to the consumer.

If &quot;unfettered tort liability&quot; means that 3% of the cost of medical care goes to litigation, and &quot;fully fettered tort liability&quot; reduces that figure to about 2.6% or at best 2.5% (using the projection of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=4968&amp;sequence=0&quot;&gt;Congressional Budget Office&lt;/a&gt;), I must say that it is quaint that you are up in arms about this issue, yet yawned at our host&#039;s assertion that we shouldn&#039;t worry about the 10-20% of medical costs which are wasted through unnecessary bureaucracy and inefficiency.

chris, you are quite obviously missing the boat. The point is not that all malpractice suits are meritorious (although reforms to date have rendered the truly frivolous suit a rarity) - the point is that present &quot;tort reform&quot; efforts are directed at the most meritorious cases with the most severe injuries. There really is no way to dispute that - at least with facts - which, I suppose, is why you didn&#039;t present any.

ratrace - I just saw a medical bill with a doctor&#039;s consultation billed at $450. That was for about five minutes of face time.

It is beyond dispute, ratrace, that on the whole &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/aid-113100&quot;&gt;doctors&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/aid-155367&quot;&gt;surgeons&lt;/a&gt; earn salaries significantly in excess of those of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/vid-18373/fid-6886&quot;&gt;lawyers&lt;/a&gt;. You&#039;re complaining?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CHenry, you know full well who pays the bill. Like any cost of business, the cost is passed to the consumer.</p>
<p>If &#8220;unfettered tort liability&#8221; means that 3% of the cost of medical care goes to litigation, and &#8220;fully fettered tort liability&#8221; reduces that figure to about 2.6% or at best 2.5% (using the projection of the <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=4968&#038;sequence=0">Congressional Budget Office</a>), I must say that it is quaint that you are up in arms about this issue, yet yawned at our host&#8217;s assertion that we shouldn&#8217;t worry about the 10-20% of medical costs which are wasted through unnecessary bureaucracy and inefficiency.</p>
<p>chris, you are quite obviously missing the boat. The point is not that all malpractice suits are meritorious (although reforms to date have rendered the truly frivolous suit a rarity) &#8211; the point is that present &#8220;tort reform&#8221; efforts are directed at the most meritorious cases with the most severe injuries. There really is no way to dispute that &#8211; at least with facts &#8211; which, I suppose, is why you didn&#8217;t present any.</p>
<p>ratrace &#8211; I just saw a medical bill with a doctor&#8217;s consultation billed at $450. That was for about five minutes of face time.</p>
<p>It is beyond dispute, ratrace, that on the whole <a href="http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/aid-113100">doctors</a> and <a href="http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/aid-155367">surgeons</a> earn salaries significantly in excess of those of <a href="http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/vid-18373/fid-6886">lawyers</a>. You&#8217;re complaining?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ratrace</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4669</link>
		<dc:creator>ratrace</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2004 05:03:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4669</guid>
		<description>a bit off the point.. but How did the medical profession allow itself to be under the thumb off for profit managed care plans and lawyers?

the managed care plans alter the economics to such a great degree that physicians alter all aspects of practice to reach economic viability.  in short, we shorten legth of visits, we use midlevels, we spend less time educating...

patients get angry, lawyers become happier (plaintiff and defense)

then malpractice claims rise, awards mushroom, disenfranchised doc&#039;s bend the truth as expert witnesses, welcome 21st century medicine.

then we see med mal practice premiums rise.  we then argue the evil is in the trial lawyers.  

yet all the time...the forces that shape our practices most fundamentally are ones that affect our economics.  Just imagine if doc&#039;s charged typical lawyer fees /hour of service (200-300/hr)   we could see far less patients and spend plenty of time with patients.  leave the office or Wards early enough to regularly practice in the free clinics (good Smaritan laws apply)

i would think lawsuit would decrease, our incomes would be the same, we would work at  less frenzied pace..and ulimately the patient is happier.   seems like www.simplecare.com has the right idea indeed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>a bit off the point.. but How did the medical profession allow itself to be under the thumb off for profit managed care plans and lawyers?</p>
<p>the managed care plans alter the economics to such a great degree that physicians alter all aspects of practice to reach economic viability.  in short, we shorten legth of visits, we use midlevels, we spend less time educating&#8230;</p>
<p>patients get angry, lawyers become happier (plaintiff and defense)</p>
<p>then malpractice claims rise, awards mushroom, disenfranchised doc&#8217;s bend the truth as expert witnesses, welcome 21st century medicine.</p>
<p>then we see med mal practice premiums rise.  we then argue the evil is in the trial lawyers.  </p>
<p>yet all the time&#8230;the forces that shape our practices most fundamentally are ones that affect our economics.  Just imagine if doc&#8217;s charged typical lawyer fees /hour of service (200-300/hr)   we could see far less patients and spend plenty of time with patients.  leave the office or Wards early enough to regularly practice in the free clinics (good Smaritan laws apply)</p>
<p>i would think lawsuit would decrease, our incomes would be the same, we would work at  less frenzied pace..and ulimately the patient is happier.   seems like <a href="http://www.simplecare.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.simplecare.com</a> has the right idea indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris</title>
		<link>http://www.medrants.com/archives/2100/comment-page-1#comment-4668</link>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2004 04:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://medrants.com/archives/2004/09/27/malpractice-laws-on-the-ballot/#comment-4668</guid>
		<description>** should read &quot;ads&quot; not &quot;adds&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>** should read &#8220;ads&#8221; not &#8220;adds&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

