Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
subatomicdoc
2537 Followers
Thinking Serious
3233 Followers
adam jones
8206 Followers
MediaSight
13123 Followers
massiveProCreation
222 Followers
Jimmy Walker
2259 Followers
Nocturbulous
6618 Followers
subatomicdocDec 8, 2010Submitter
The video in the article is damning...which is why AKSM pulled it from the internet. Jump to 1:10
Now, urologists can 'control' prostate cancer patients' choices for personal financial return through a Medicare loophole. And you, the taxpayer, pay for it.
Closed AccountDec 8, 2010
You're idiotic and clearly didn't even read the story. This treatment is the safest and least invasive treatment for prostate cancer, these patients CHOOSE to have it done.
angrychadDec 8, 2010
Wait, you're saying doctors are greedy? Shocking.
arpadDec 8, 2010
No, what he's saying is that when the person receiving a service doesn't have to pay for it it's a wonderful day for everyone. Except for whoever it is who gets stuck with the bill. They're screwed.
angrychadDec 8, 2010
And doctors are initiating the screwing for personal gain so...
puppykicker16Dec 8, 2010
Chad, put away the tin foil hat bud.
angrychadDec 8, 2010
OMG people acting in their own self-interest. Conspiracy!
Closed AccountDec 8, 2010
-1 you can read my bury of the OP's comment for why.
caughtthinkingDec 8, 2010
WHAT?! Better kill all federal spending on medicine! The free market will solve this, just like it solved the finance industry in 2008! Thanks WSJ! Your independent and non-biased voice just helped me change my mind for the better!
Closed AccountDec 8, 2010
lol we had a free market in 2008? We've had an actual free market any time in the last 97 years? That a laugh.
I also guess you are forgetting that some guy may come up with a cancer cure in his garage. Except it wouldn't matter now as you have to go through insane regulations, pattening, testing, and multi million dollar trials just to get through current regulations. Not that you'd be granted any money either. So you won't be hearing from any inventors who have discovered cures.
You know, thats just silly, a guy inventing a cure for cancer in his garage or home lab? Hah!
Except.. 99% of all inventions were pretty much done by an individual at home, usually in their garage or home workshop... Including recent ones.
Ah who cares! It's not like terminally ill patents are going to miss out on a chance to live while we regulate the inventive individual creativity to oblivion right?
Thanks man! Your non biased voice makes me feel a lot better!
caughtthinkingDec 17, 2010
whoa buddy, guess you missed the invisible /s.
puppykicker16Dec 8, 2010
Speaking as a medical student who is going to go into Urology starting next year, I think there are some incorrect perceptions that this article brings up. There are certainly a few urology groups doing this, but it is not all urologists. The majority try to do what they feel is best for the patient, despite cost incentives.
There is currently no one proven best therapy for prostate cancer. Surgery, IMRT, and brachytherapy are all options, but there is no data to support one over the others. It's not like urologists are offering patients a sub-par treatment just for financial gain.
In a market where doctors salaries are being chipped at more and more frequently, I can understand why some gravitate towards more lucrative treatment options, so long as patient care is not being compromised.
People love to shoot off about how doctors are greedy. You realize it takes 10 years following college to become a board-certified urologist? Try 12 if you want to specialize in urologic cancers. I pay $45k a year in tuition to become a doctor. I will be highly specialized to do surgery of all kinds. I think doctors command a salary well above the national mean.
ncmusicDec 8, 2010
I agree with you, but referring someone to be treated at a clinic you own is not really a "salary".
subatomicdocDec 9, 2010Submitter
I see you point and agree that radiation is as effective as surgery for prostate cancer. But the real issue is what treatment options are presented to men with low risk prostate cancer -- who may not need any treatment?
It's the technical fees that are the issue. It's 4-5 what the doctor makes. Usually it goes to the hospital, rather than entrepreneurs. Financial incentives of technical fees may bias recommendations toward unnecessary treatment for prostate cancer. It may not be subpar treatment, but it's inferior medicine.
puppykicker16Dec 8, 2010
And yes, I realize the irony of a doctor with a username of puppykicker.
ogletreeDec 8, 2010
Theproblemis that they are giving this to anybody who asks for it even if they don't need it. You don't treat something that will kill you in 5 years if you have something else that will kill you in 3 years.
virginia1994Dec 8, 2010
Wow. This will make me think twice.
virginia1994Dec 8, 2010
Wow. This will make me think twice.