Should doctors in the US really be making up to a million a year??

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Originally posted by: bobcpg
Originally posted by: KB
Doctors have to get years of expensive schooling and deal with expensive insurance costs. This is a case of supply and demand where there is great demand for doctors but not a large supply. We can also ask should football players be paid so much?

Problem here is that I can choose to watch/buy-into football. I cant choose if I need life saving spine surgery.

But you can choose WHO does it. And that would be what drives their salaries. You could choose the guy who makes 200K a year because nobody wants to use his services, or you could choose the 1mill+ guy whose services are so sought after because of his success.
 

colossus

Lifer
Dec 2, 2000
10,873
0
71
I wasn't going to respond to this thread until I read one of the stupidest and most insulting comments I read in the last 3 months (thanks JS80). Please refer to my post here as SD for more info.


Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Please, malpractice insurance is as much of a scam on the doctors as health insurance is on us plebes. All docs need to do to protect themselves from those evil trial lawyers is not screw up.

No offense - but you don't really have a true feel for how bad it is to feel the pinch of malpractice. Without going into detail, one of the worst patients I ever had to deal with was a 96 year old man who I admitted who should have been put on hospice and I got "lucky" admitting him for 2 months to my hospital (BTW - I didn't make a single penny on the case since he was uninsured). The wife wanted to do everything basically because previous docs and staff didn't tell the wife how bad the husband was after having a debilitating stroke. I knew the day I admitted him I was probably going to have to deal with legal crap and maybe even a lawsuit. I walked on eggshells around the woman - who to this day the chaplain says was the hardest family member he ever dealt with. I spent over 1 hour each day talking to family - one day I spent 5 hours in a family conference. I stayed with her for 3.5 hours on my birthday and missed a surprise party for myself because I tried to plead with her to put her hubby on hospice. 2 years later I got the subpoena and the circus of calling my malpractice started. I was listed as a witness to the fact. I never had to go into court, and I got to charge $400/hr (much more than the $80-90/hr I make as a hospitalist physician) for the 1.5 hours of deposition - and I HATED every minute of it. I didn't do a single thing wrong in the case - in fact the plaintiff's side said they never saw documentation like mine (no shit - 5 hours days with the family - I had no wife or life for that matter at the time). Point is - from 30 seconds after seeing the patient I knew I was "in-trouble".

It may be easy to say as you say "just don't screw up". No shit. CYA - Cover your ass. The problem is not physicians making mistakes - hell over 20% of the choices most hospitalists make are mistakes - duh - hindsight tells you the Vancomycin didn't work on the MRSA (even though it's SUPPOSED to) so you switch to Dobra - is this considered a mistake? I see it as a mistake. It is a mistake. Only person who could have seen that coming is God (whatever one(s) you want). The problem is negligence and or fraud. Nobody needs to preach to me about them - I've already reported 7 docs to the state board and I've only been out for 4 years! The problem is lawyers like former presidential candidate Edwards who make a living out of convincing jurors that a medical mistake (whatever form it may be) was true negligence.

If you think you are more apt to survive a 60-mph collision (I assume one car is stationary) than an admission to the hospital then you don't know anything about trauma. Aortic rupture and/or hepatic laceration are always fun Yes I agree that 50K people dead from mistakes is 50K too many, but probably more than 1/2 of those are not because of the physician (you'd be surprised what the pharmacy and night-float nursing staff can do to you). If you want to single handedly cut that 50k down - push for EMR. Can't say you can't read doctor's handwriting or dosage if it's plain Courier 12 point. Can't have know fatal drug interaction if the computer prevents giving 2 meds.


Originally posted by: ohnoes
Originally posted by: thegimp03
I'd say yes. They put many more years and hard work into school than most other people so they deserve to get paid well. Med school isn't cheap, MCATs, ridiculous hours when on call, and always having the possibility of getting sued for malpractice - they deserve everything they can get.

Lawyers & bschool grads work just as hard, and generally don't get paid as much as Dr's. If school costs, bar/gmat exams, and long hours are the rationales for making $$$, then they should also be making $200K. But they're not...

Not from my personal experience. My sister is a lawyer and one of my best friends is business (NYC). I've spent enough time around both those groups of people. I never heard of either of those groups putting anywhere near the time a general surgery resident puts in. While some medical residencies are a joke and only need a 40hr week most of my legal/business friends have way more free time on their hand - and none of them wake up at 3AM for pages - just for babies. The starting pay for a physician is usually is higher when training is done, but the lowest training is 3 years and people like cardiothoracic typically have close to 10 years of training after medical school where they make between 30-75k. I made $33K W2 (including benefits) per year in SoCal working an average of 101 hr week (52 weeks) during my internship. I made less than an illegal farm hand :disgust: I have no problem with trained professionals making money if they put the time into training - but nobody short of NASA space cowboys have more training than physicians hence the higher starting pay. Note from the thread I linked above (my rant at SD) that my W2 after my 1st full year of incorporation was 30k! My break even point with EE/ME is about 55 years of age


Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: JS80
Doctors do indeed have a monopoly in practicing medicine in this country.

Lawyers have a monopoly on practicing law in this country. Are they a monopoly too?

There is no monopoly because doctors are individual entities. They are not some conglomerate that work out overall prices with one another.

There might be a monopoly in the way that the AMA runs med schools, but that's not doctors. Plus, you can always go for D.O. degree, which isn't granted via the AMA.

Law doesn't have pricing problem because they accept anyone who is willing to pay to become a lawyer. The AMA purposefully keeps the supply of doctors low to preserve their profession through their med school shenanigans. That's an effective monopoly. That is unconscionable for a profession that is supposed to save lives. They are not even pretending to try to keep up with population and demand. AMA = doctors.

And who the hell respects DOs?


Ahh, the post that made me respond. Well let me start off by saying I'm a DO. I think of myself better than the average MD and DO because I listen to my patients - not because I got 2 stupid letters in my title. Hell if I wanted letters I could take 1 more anthro class and double major, or 2 more physio classes and have a masters. After going to UCLA and seeing people go "wow" at a school that I thought was utter crap for undergrad I choose to pick the school that worked best for me - the DO school here in Pomona, CA even though I got more than enough interviews in good out-of-state MD schools. Your ignorance on this matter is disgusting. Care to see who's leads the care for military personel - and you know those IED wounds aren't like simple Stage I ulcers.

The fact you think medicine is a monopoly is laughable. I'll be honest with you - more than 1/2 of all docs wouldn't wish their kids to go to med school - some elite club huh? I guess lawyers have a monopoly too!?! Yes it was hard getting in, and yes there are a limited number of seats, but you give the AMA too much credit. BTW I think the AMA can pound sand - the way the whore themselves out to lobbyists is disgusting. You complain about not enough physicians and then you mock a group of physicians that has opened about 20 new schools in the last 12 years. How many new MD schools have you seen?

I trained in Southern California. I met some of the brightest future docs and some of the worst atrocities of admission (as we used to call them). It happens at every school. The worst medical student I ever met to this date came from UCLA (ahh, there's that school again). Now I recognize UCLA should probably be considered in the top 3 in the US (it's where the POTUS goes west of the Mississippi) but that asshole was an unethical bastard who avoided work. Brought a smile to my face when I failed him 10 days into his medicine rotation lol. Then there are the new batch of kids coming from my DO school who make Gump look like Plato. Consider a doc based on their training and their interaction with patients - not their title. For you information - my hospital's nurses respect and love me and voted my "Doc of the Year" in 2008. Not because of my title, but because I returned my pages on-time and didn't punt my paperwork onto them like the lazy older docs.


Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
they are worth whatever people will pay for their services. its really not that complicated.

Not a very helpful argument when there is an artificially limited supply of doctors.

The supply of physicians is not easy to explain. Well let's look at it going through the process (since I'm still sane enough to remember my last 10 years). Getting into med school used to be very hard - only the best and brightest supposedly. I know it to be true having sat on interview committees recently that med schools can't be as discriminating as they used to be since the applicant pool is down now. Assuming you make it through, you meet the 1st restriction - residency. This is controlled by Congress. It's not enough to just finish med school - pretty much every place that hires physicians to practice wants to see a formal residency nowadays - so that means 3-10 years of slave labor at teaching hospitals. There are a limited number of spots set up by Congress and they have failed to increase this number for over 10 years. Funny - here I was thinking maybe the baby boomers would need physicians. One of my biggest criticisms of the Obama plan is that is trying to provide access to people when there are no more providers available. Hell I'm in FP/IM - I live on the front lines. Most hospitals, BTW, actually make money off of residents. My hospital gets about $150k/yr for 21 spots and they pay the residents about $35k now. Malpractice group is about $10k per resident - so they're making about $2 million off the residency - only reason our hospital was able to stay afloat for so long after the local county (MLK) closed.

The reality is we don't need more dermatologists. We need primary care. This is why I bailed on anesthesia (even though I knew I could have a cushier life and make more $). Sadly I started regretting it as I discovered what primary care in this country has become and after seeing Obama's solution I'm losing my HOPE.

Now, would an increased supply decrease cost? I don't believe so, but I'm not an expert. I just know since most HMO/PPO are doing a fraction of Medicare reimbursement and since most of insured America is in a plan now (I HATE THIS) there is a set fee. The price won't really go up or down unless Medicare changes - and if you know anything about doc's pay you know the 5% Medicare keeps having to get pushed back by AMA/AOA every year. Pelosi says she won't stop it next yet. The only net effect of increasing # of docs would probably be face time you get to spend with the doc (which is a good thing). Hell I would be happy if the Kaiser docs spent more than 2.3 minutes with my parents per visit but they don't.


To give you an idea of where medicine is at - look at this example. An old nephrologist I work with said he made $10k/yr as in intern about 35 years ago. He said you could buy an above average house in SoCal for $20k. So with 2 years of intern/resident salary saved you could buy a house. The median SoCal home has gone up proportionately with that of the nation give or take 10%. That same $20k house in SoCal now costs about $600k. Mind you a $300k/yr salary is easier to save than a $10k/yr salary, but an intern would need to make about $250k/yr to buy a house in 2-3 years.

So what did I do - I married an older orthodontist Problem solved - got me a sugar momma. She straightens teeth and makes $200/hr sometimes. I code a person every week or so, do rectal exams and far worse procedures and make about $80-90/hr. Now for those of you about to pop your mouths open and say that I don't know what I'm doing - mind this fact. I posted a thread about 2 years ago when I was fed up with a cash patient. A 22 year old woman who was worried that her hospital admission was going to delay her trip to Vegas. She had $ to stay at the Bellagio but couldn't spend the $130 a month for basic health insurance - she was found to have cancer and died. I bitched about how little I made in that thread and how the cash patients (AKA uninsured/illegals) didn't pay and I got about 5 PMs and 10 replies that I suck as a business man and people told me to move my area of practice. These are fellow members of this board who told me to move! Both know repubs and dems! So much for altruism! So much for the nobililty instead of the pay!

I stuck it out 1 more year (doing free work for those uninsured and see all kinds of riff-raff - yeah I don't know what else to call the 2 pimps I hospitalized lol). Finally I gave up after too many threats of violence and lawsuits from those patients. It's amazing how Medical patients think I'm making money by seeing them and I'm keeping them there to get rich. Stupid state doesn't pay me! I'm seeing their entitled ass for free and putting my license on the line. Well I was young and stupid.

I now only cover other private docs and make less than $60k but am happy to not have to deal with the entitled culture of the Medical patient or the ungratefulness of the uninsured. I did not move since I work at a community hospital and still want to support the community but I refuse to see all the public sector garbage the County/State dumped on our little non-profit hospital that finally went bankrupt last month (burned through $100 million in endowment in 6 years due to bad management and insurance companies leeching us).

I know a lot of people who when into anesthesia/derm/optho for the $. I had the grades for it and matched. But I bailed because my parents raised me to want to help others. Having done that for 3 years and saying I can't handle it - I can't imagine what those less morally inclined (and there are a lot nowadays in medical school) will do to make money. Bill fake patient visits/procedures? Skip seeing patients but still write and bill for hospital visits (shady older docs do this all the time). Insurance scams?

I don't know - when regret sets in for all those recent grads like me - will we just quit or will transform into something more malicious? After all my friends from HS all have houses and kids. My life was set back 10 years and my body paid for it (you can't do a 36 hour shift 14 times in a month and not expect to get week).

Well that's my rant for now. I'm in the process of selling my first home as a realtor and I must it's a lot easier money than medicine - and a lot less stressful :frown:



Wanted to add on one more fallacy:
Originally posted by: bobcpg
Originally posted by: KB
Doctors have to get years of expensive schooling and deal with expensive insurance costs. This is a case of supply and demand where there is great demand for doctors but not a large supply. We can also ask should football players be paid so much?

Problem here is that I can choose to watch/buy-into football. I cant choose if I need life saving spine surgery.

By choosing to watch football you are making a choice between enjoyment and working/studying/volunteering etc. There are risks/benefits for that choice. Hell you could work-out at the gym and exercise you heart, but that has the risk of getting a community infection and getting into an easily survivable 60mph crash en-route.

You can always CHOOSE to have life saving surgery - and you can choose not to have it. Hell cancer patients choose all the time to not have chemo that would prolong life - perhaps even cure them. How do you know the surgery can't kill you!?! We had a 46 year old ER doc die on a table getting a breast biopsy because she was given a "free body CT scan" as a birthday present. NO SURGERY IS WITHOUT RISK!!! Hell nothing in medicine is without risk. Question is whether the risk outweighs the benefit. If the benefit is you having the rest of your life, then you ask yourself what is my life worth.

Don't people always say "well at least you have your health"? If some schmuck wants to do the back surgeries for $200k/yr he probably could - but in Mexico. I see them all the time. I can email you pictures of what some Mexican "doc" thought was a tummy tuck - it would be considered torture/disfigurement by LAPD lol.

If you want competency you have to pay. If you want lower prices you face the business climate of "I save $ if I skip this step". True you should be able to shop around, but if the back surgery is that important do you have time/capability? I guess that's the point of this thread. How much to pay for our governmentally deemed level of medically competent care? For me, I paid $3k for LASIK on my eyes (well my dad paid - I'm broke lol) instead of doing those eye-mills that advertise on the radio.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Colossus, you make good points, but you need to remember that to many here you are the enemy. You are greedy and need to be controlled. You should be doing this for any reason except money. In other words, many of these people ranting about you are inherently morally superior and therefore lack of knowledge regarding health care isn't a problem. Don't confuse them with facts, their minds are already made up. They've Ascended.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
The problem with anyone being judged using Salary = Competency is it isn't true. Take a famous actor making millions each year not because they are better than other actors but because they have the appearance they are better. There have been many doctors in places like Beverly Hills that earn tons of money but have malpractice suits and quack degrees from medical schools people have never heard of. I go to a local clinic here. There is doctors there that have been practicing for 30+ years. I pay $35 to see them and in the years I have , I have never had a complaint about them. I'll put them up against anyone making 100X that.
 

Athena

Golden Member
Apr 9, 2001
1,484
0
0
Originally posted by: spidey07
But you can choose WHO does it.
In most cases, people do not have much time to select specialists and their judgement is impaired by emotion at the time. Study after study shows that they place far more improtance on the judgement/recommendations of their doctors than on objective criteria.

I'm seeing this right now in the case of a relative who will be undergoing surgery in a week. I've recommended getting a second opinion and asked about the surgeon's track record but she isn't interested. I'm not a doctor and her doctor has recommended this person so...

And that would be what drives their salaries. You could choose the guy who makes 200K a year because nobody wants to use his services, or you could choose the 1mill+ guy whose services are so sought after because of his success.
Many of the most expensive specialists are not any more "successful" than those who charge less -- they are simply better known. A good example of that phenomenon was Bill Clinton's heart surgery 4 years ago: after being examined at a local hospital, he was trasferred to a regional medical center then referred to the chief of cardiac surgery at Columbia Presbyterian. According to data collected by the State of New York though, Columbia Presbyterian had the hightest death rate of hospitals doing bypass in the state and his surgeon was the worst of the 4 on staff there.
 

BriGy86

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2004
4,538
1
91
Originally posted by: Athena
Originally posted by: spidey07
But you can choose WHO does it.
In most cases, people do not have much time to select specialists and their judgement is impaired by emotion at the time. Study after study shows that they place far more improtance on the judgement/recommendations of their doctors than on objective criteria.

I'm seeing this right now in the case of a relative who will be undergoing surgery in a week. I've recommended getting a second opinion and asked about the surgeon's track record but she isn't interested. I'm not a doctor and her doctor has recommended this person so...

And that would be what drives their salaries. You could choose the guy who makes 200K a year because nobody wants to use his services, or you could choose the 1mill+ guy whose services are so sought after because of his success.
Many of the most expensive specialists are not any more "successful" than those who charge less -- they are simply better known. A good example of that phenomenon was Bill Clinton's heart surgery 4 years ago: after being examined at a local hospital, he was trasferred to a regional medical center then referred to the chief of cardiac surgery at Columbia Presbyterian. According to data collected by the State of New York though, Columbia Presbyterian had the hightest death rate of hospitals doing bypass in the state and his surgeon was the worst of the 4 on staff there.

Maybe Hilary had some influence on the decision :laugh:
 

Athena

Golden Member
Apr 9, 2001
1,484
0
0
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
To be licensed you have to pass a rigorous exam. One can increase the number of professionals by lowering the standards.

Or by incresing the number eligible to take the exam. Since one cannot apply for licensing unless he is a graduate of an accredited medical school -- where the number of slots is artifically restricted -- many who would in fact meet the standards are systematically excluded.

Contrast that with law: in many states, anyone who has "read" the law can take the bar exam ... and if successful be admitted to the bar.

IMHO, any true healthcare reform would address the artifical restrictions on the number of medical school and residency slots available. The Kaiser Health News has an an article today about that.

"The number of residency training positions for all doctors has been flat for years. That's because in a budget-cutting move in 1997, Congress froze the number of Medicare-funded medical residency positions. Since then, the U.S. population has increased by more than 30 million ? making the need for additional medical residents particularly acute, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. While some teaching hospitals have added residency positions using their own money, those slots have largely gone to train specialists who can improve the facilities' bottom line."

Even though we have a recognized shortage of primary care physicians, what we're getting is (a few) more specialists.
 

Athena

Golden Member
Apr 9, 2001
1,484
0
0
Originally posted by: LostUte
I'm really not convinced that more doctors would lower prices. In fact, areas with more physicians tend to have higher health expenditures. If more physicians per capita increases competition, shouldn't these areas (e.g. MA) have lower health costs that areas with fewer physicians per capita?
Research does indicate that the presence of more specialists in a particular area leads to overtreatment (and higher costs) rather than better care. A serious health reform package could address that though by offering varying levels of debt forgiveness to those who practice in underserved areas or specialities.
 

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
2
81
Lets see, doctors go through 4 years of college, then 4 years of medical school, then 7 years of slavery(residency). Why should we limit their salaries artificially?

Should we encourage the formation of more medical schools? Should we try to increase the supply of doctors the nation has? Yes! But should we put an artificial cap on the salaries of doctors? No.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,710
6,198
126
Originally posted by: Hacp
Lets see, doctors go through 4 years of college, then 4 years of medical school, then 7 years of slavery(residency). Why should we limit their salaries artificially?

For that reason exactly. The whole intent is to make sure there aren't enough doctors so they fees can be maintained artificially high. And when the idiots get through with all that they have the bed side manner of turds. The only people who make good doctors are the wise, who have empathy for other people and know that most disease is of the heart. It can't be trained in, but it sure can be screened out by absurd qualification standards.

What I always wanted was a doctor so in debt from education loans my liver looks like money.
 
Feb 19, 2001
20,158
20
81
Originally posted by: ohnoes
Originally posted by: thegimp03
I'd say yes. They put many more years and hard work into school than most other people so they deserve to get paid well. Med school isn't cheap, MCATs, ridiculous hours when on call, and always having the possibility of getting sued for malpractice - they deserve everything they can get.

Lawyers & bschool grads work just as hard, and generally don't get paid as much as Dr's. If school costs, bar/gmat exams, and long hours are the rationales for making $$$, then they should also be making $200K. But they're not...

LOL BSCHOOL? As engineers, a lot of the true engineers look down on those halfassed engineers who got a BS in engineering and went to biz school later. GMAT is NOT HARD. I've looked through the books. I took the GREs but based on how much work went into prep, I'd say prepping for the GMAT would be easier.

Now LSATs are harder by far, and law school is a whole level higher. It's trickier, and it takes a lot from the individual to make it through and do well. I remember people talking about the people making barely any money as an attorney in OT but most of my friends who did well went to Stanford or Harvard or Berkeley for law. Those top 10 schools you know? Yeah they came out making 160k/yr.

Doctors don't make THAT much more. When you come out you can make about 160-180k at Kaiser or so. Yes I have friends who slaved through school and went to the top schools like Johns hopkins or UCSF. Seriously, the amount of time you need to get everything done makes you 30 years old by then.

It's kinda sad an engineering major will come out at 22 and start raking in the money. Even an MS degree will only set them another year behind. Nothing like med school and the debt. I completely understand they deserve huge 6 figure salaries. As an engineer, I see many who also pursue PhDs. That pushes you above 6 figure and closer to 150k or so. It's still nothing compared to what medical doctors go through. 5 years of school vs 4 years medical school + specialty + intern + residency + crazy work? Yeah.

I think a lot (but not everyone) of AT comes out with BS degrees and thinks they are set for life. I see too many sysadmins here who think that they are some sort of engineer when really we group IT and engineering as two completely different entities. Being an engineer calls for far more education and similarly being a doctor calls for a lot of training and education. It's a respected field.

I have no problem with people making 200k+ when their decisions = lives.

They may not entertain millions at a time, but what do you want? A doctor making a decision so a robot can inject 300 million Americans simultaneously with the H1N1 vaccine? Come on. Doctors can only work so fast. Their salaries are market determined.

I have no problem with entertainers and athletes raking in millions, but if you want to complain about doctors, complain about the people who are least educated making the most money.
 

colossus

Lifer
Dec 2, 2000
10,873
0
71
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Hacp
Lets see, doctors go through 4 years of college, then 4 years of medical school, then 7 years of slavery(residency). Why should we limit their salaries artificially?

For that reason exactly. The whole intent is to make sure there aren't enough doctors so they fees can be maintained artificially high. And when the idiots get through with all that they have the bed side manner of turds. The only people who make good doctors are the wise, who have empathy for other people and know that most disease is of the heart. It can't be trained in, but it sure can be screened out by absurd qualification standards.

What I always wanted was a doctor so in debt from education loans my liver looks like money.


Moonbeam, I can't tell if that's your usual sarcasm or real sentiment coming through. Did you read any part of my post? The majority of my paying patients have only Medicare and so my fees are set by the government. I can bill $10K for one hospital day but Medicare still only pays me $80 for a 99233 code. The private coverage a patient may have is almost always based off of those DRG reimbursements. If Medicare doesn't pay, they won't (in the case of having supplemental insurance). So Medicare and Medical effectively set the pay scale for physicians. Ask any doc you know if this is true. All HMO plans like BC/BS/Aetna/Humana/United Health, etc all base their reimbursement on Medicare rates. They used to pay higher than Medicare, but for the last 2 years they've been trending down and now usually pay less.

So for example, if you go into the hospital for a 3 day stay for pneumonia (you have only Medicare part A & B). I will bill for an H&P on day 1, a follow-up visit on day 2, and discharge on day 3. Come out to about $140 + 80 + 81 for 3 days. If you happen to have supplemental insurance they would cover the 20% that Medicare doesn't cover, so assuming they pay me I would get the additional 20% from the insurer. I have never billed a single patient for the additional 20% if they don't have the supplemental - most physicians don't. If the patient was Medicare-Medical it's the same as having Medicare only since Medical/Medicaid almost never pay (google Medical or Maine Medicare and see they haven't paid for inpatient services for over 2 years). If the patient has PPO insurance I would usually make about 80% of the Medicare rate (sad huh). The Knox-keene act says if I accept the payment I can't bill the rest to the patient. So I actually make less nowadays with private insurance than with Medicare. My biller takes 7% cut of that - the rest is my companies'. Now explain to me how if we had 5 million more primary care physicians available this very minute that I would make less $. The only way it would go down is if Congress decide to drop reimbursement.

Now we come to a point. Congress has been dropping reimbursement for the specialist every year for about 25 years now. They have to work more for less pay each and every year. Since I didn't go into anesthesia it doesn't affect me - I'm primary care. Congress knows not to reduce the reimbursement for primary care. When was the last time you saw a family practice doc make over $200k? Here in SoCal we start at about 120 and max at 160 for about 55-60 hrs/wk - a pretty good income but again you won't catch up to an engineer until mid 50's.

You're assumption that the # of doctors (AKA a monopoly) is absurd - at least in terms o primary care. There's a certain point at which physicians will say it's not worth it for me to see patients. Just like nobody sells TVs for under $50. If you can get a 19" for $130, why not a 8" for $65 or so - the law of diminishing returns applies.

Primary care reimbursement is just flat out low. Most primary care physicians don't make money since they don't do procedures. Procedures is where the money is at. Anybody with a needle makes the $. Anesthesia, interventional radiology, Oncology (chemo), neurologists who do EMG/EEG, etc. It's a cat and mouse gave with Congress reducing reimbursement each year. Cardiologist get about $250 to do an angiography!!! That's where they stick a catheter into the arteries supplying your heart. If they mess up you can die on table! A roto-rooter for you sewer line takes less time and costs about $150-$200. Yes the plumber makes more than a cardiologist on a per minute basis - which do you think is more stressful and requires more concentration? But Medicare in their infinite wisdom decided to reimburse more for echocardiograms - about $500 since it's a quality indicator (supposedly they want to track America's health and see how well docs are doing - good luck with the implementation). Now you tell me why a echo which takes about 10 minutes to read and is essentially noninvasive pays double that of a very invasive angriography. As a primary care physician the closest I can get to doing a procedure is Botox or maybe a mole biopsy. Botox would get me $400 and would not be reimbursed by Medicare - but patients will gladly pay for it - ahh vanity medicine. A mole biopsy would be $120 or so for the same 15 minutes, but would raise my malpractice up another 10k since I'm not doing simple surgery and I would need about $2-5k extra a year to meet OSHA and hazardous waste handling/storage. You would need to do enough to break even.

Now if you to reduce costs - do as I said above. Allow RNP and PAs to do some of the work of physicians. I have no problem if a kid wants to go see a PA for a sprained or broken wrist. You don't need to be a physician to read an X-ray. PAs don't need as much schooling and get paid less - hence why Kaiser uses them. Only go to the orthpedist if it's a complicated fracture or pediatric case.

The problem is not with primary care physicians (well maybe the lack of enough primary care physicians) but the lack of enough primary care period. If the government really wanted to do something correctly - open urgent care offices. There's a DMV every 5 miles here in SoCal. Why can't they just pop open urgent care offices and staff them with nurses and PAs and maybe a few docs. Would cut down on all those stupid ER visits.

Having finished med-school I know that they do try to cut down on who passes - hello - there are idiots who get into med school. I know I had a few in my class who still made it out and I only pray they die or quit before hurting somebody. I can't speak for the intent of AMA - perhaps they do try to keep the numbers down, but being a DO I know that the number of DOs popping out has doubled in the last 10 years, now we're about 1/3 of all graduating physicians. Most DOs are supposed to do primary care, but sadly most of the kids finishing medicine nowadays know that primary care pays jack shit. They all want PM&R/anesthesia/derm for a cushy lifestyle or gastro/cardio/surgery if they're willing to work hard but want $. Too many specialists. Well if you pay primary care like crap that's what you get.

As far as empathy, well I don't know. I've generally had a bad experience with my own primary care docs at kaiser. In fact my whole family has had horrible/lazy primary care docs. The one doc that I love at Kaiser was my ortho surgeon who fixed my ankle.

If there were more primary care docs, then the offices wouldn't be packed like they are and perhaps docs would spend more than 1 minute with a patient. I know the experiences I have had with my own crappy Kaiser docs and that's why I actually spend time with my patients. My usual visit for in-patient follow-ups is about 30 minutes per patient - that's face time. Writing the note, checking labs/tests and talking to the nurse/clerk is another 15 minutes. So I spend about 45 minutes for $70.

The shitty hospital where I work let me lease my office for 1/2 day a week for $400/month. I was seeing about 3-5 patients a month for follow-up during my first 8 months (the first 3 months I didn't even know my contract started - the greedy administration back-billed me). So I lost about $2k total seeing those patients for 8 month period of my lease. The hospital CEO called me in to his office to cancel my lease since he said they weren't making enough money off me. I didn't protest since I know it's all politics. I gave my blood, sweat and tears to that shitty hospital for 3 years of residency. 3 years where they worked me between 80-130 hours/wk and paid me $35k/yr even though they got reimbursed $150k/yr by the previous admin of HCFA. So they made $300k off my training, had me work like a dog for free for their hospital group, and then can't do me the favor of giving me cheap lease while I try to build up my practice!?!

This is why there are no private physicians nowadays. The hospitals just don't help docs like they used. Unlike nurses who get paid by the hospital, I have to pay dues. The hospital is supposed to cater to me since I'm the one who can decide where to send my patients. I guess they do cater to the older docs who have clout. The new ones out of school like me get shit on. So after I lost my office I told patients who wanted to follow-up with me "sorry no office" since the hospital shafted me. How am I supposed to build up a private practice? Mind you this is in Downey, CA 90241. Of course I could move over 20 miles to Century City (where the president stays if visiting LA) and make bank doing Botox and Restulin shots on MILFs all day long - I would rather have a dog chew on my parts than do that - I didn't go to medical school to make people look like Angelina Jolie.

So tell me where my empathy should be when the doctor is getting shafted by the insurance company, Congress, his medical residency, local hospitals and MediCal patients who think they're entitled to high-quality care. I want to help people, but not at the expensive of my own health/sanity/well-being. I have my first baby coming in 1 month and my wife make about $150k doing orthodontics. I'm going to help her build up her practice and will most likely let medicine become the biggest mistake of my life. Not because I don't love, but because it doesn't love me. Sorry if that bursts all your idealogical bubbles - but that's what the newest crop of graduates is facing.
 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
^ If you think it sucks being a doctor then you should try being a patient without insurance.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Originally posted by: colossus
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Hacp
Lets see, doctors go through 4 years of college, then 4 years of medical school, then 7 years of slavery(residency). Why should we limit their salaries artificially?

For that reason exactly. The whole intent is to make sure there aren't enough doctors so they fees can be maintained artificially high. And when the idiots get through with all that they have the bed side manner of turds. The only people who make good doctors are the wise, who have empathy for other people and know that most disease is of the heart. It can't be trained in, but it sure can be screened out by absurd qualification standards.

What I always wanted was a doctor so in debt from education loans my liver looks like money.


Moonbeam, I can't tell if that's your usual sarcasm or real sentiment coming through. Did you read any part of my post? The majority of my paying patients have only Medicare and so my fees are set by the government. I can bill $10K for one hospital day but Medicare still only pays me $80 for a 99233 code. The private coverage a patient may have is almost always based off of those DRG reimbursements. If Medicare doesn't pay, they won't (in the case of having supplemental insurance). So Medicare and Medical effectively set the pay scale for physicians. Ask any doc you know if this is true. All HMO plans like BC/BS/Aetna/Humana/United Health, etc all base their reimbursement on Medicare rates. They used to pay higher than Medicare, but for the last 2 years they've been trending down and now usually pay less.

So for example, if you go into the hospital for a 3 day stay for pneumonia (you have only Medicare part A & B). I will bill for an H&P on day 1, a follow-up visit on day 2, and discharge on day 3. Come out to about $140 + 80 + 81 for 3 days. If you happen to have supplemental insurance they would cover the 20% that Medicare doesn't cover, so assuming they pay me I would get the additional 20% from the insurer. I have never billed a single patient for the additional 20% if they don't have the supplemental - most physicians don't. If the patient was Medicare-Medical it's the same as having Medicare only since Medical/Medicaid almost never pay (google Medical or Maine Medicare and see they haven't paid for inpatient services for over 2 years). If the patient has PPO insurance I would usually make about 80% of the Medicare rate (sad huh). The Knox-keene act says if I accept the payment I can't bill the rest to the patient. So I actually make less nowadays with private insurance than with Medicare. My biller takes 7% cut of that - the rest is my companies'. Now explain to me how if we had 5 million more primary care physicians available this very minute that I would make less $. The only way it would go down is if Congress decide to drop reimbursement.

Now we come to a point. Congress has been dropping reimbursement for the specialist every year for about 25 years now. They have to work more for less pay each and every year. Since I didn't go into anesthesia it doesn't affect me - I'm primary care. Congress knows not to reduce the reimbursement for primary care. When was the last time you saw a family practice doc make over $200k? Here in SoCal we start at about 120 and max at 160 for about 55-60 hrs/wk - a pretty good income but again you won't catch up to an engineer until mid 50's.

You're assumption that the # of doctors (AKA a monopoly) is absurd - at least in terms o primary care. There's a certain point at which physicians will say it's not worth it for me to see patients. Just like nobody sells TVs for under $50. If you can get a 19" for $130, why not a 8" for $65 or so - the law of diminishing returns applies.

Primary care reimbursement is just flat out low. Most primary care physicians don't make money since they don't do procedures. Procedures is where the money is at. Anybody with a needle makes the $. Anesthesia, interventional radiology, Oncology (chemo), neurologists who do EMG/EEG, etc. It's a cat and mouse gave with Congress reducing reimbursement each year. Cardiologist get about $250 to do an angiography!!! That's where they stick a catheter into the arteries supplying your heart. If they mess up you can die on table! A roto-rooter for you sewer line takes less time and costs about $150-$200. Yes the plumber makes more than a cardiologist on a per minute basis - which do you think is more stressful and requires more concentration? But Medicare in their infinite wisdom decided to reimburse more for echocardiograms - about $500 since it's a quality indicator (supposedly they want to track America's health and see how well docs are doing - good luck with the implementation). Now you tell me why a echo which takes about 10 minutes to read and is essentially noninvasive pays double that of a very invasive angriography. As a primary care physician the closest I can get to doing a procedure is Botox or maybe a mole biopsy. Botox would get me $400 and would not be reimbursed by Medicare - but patients will gladly pay for it - ahh vanity medicine. A mole biopsy would be $120 or so for the same 15 minutes, but would raise my malpractice up another 10k since I'm not doing simple surgery and I would need about $2-5k extra a year to meet OSHA and hazardous waste handling/storage. You would need to do enough to break even.

Now if you to reduce costs - do as I said above. Allow RNP and PAs to do some of the work of physicians. I have no problem if a kid wants to go see a PA for a sprained or broken wrist. You don't need to be a physician to read an X-ray. PAs don't need as much schooling and get paid less - hence why Kaiser uses them. Only go to the orthpedist if it's a complicated fracture or pediatric case.

The problem is not with primary care physicians (well maybe the lack of enough primary care physicians) but the lack of enough primary care period. If the government really wanted to do something correctly - open urgent care offices. There's a DMV every 5 miles here in SoCal. Why can't they just pop open urgent care offices and staff them with nurses and PAs and maybe a few docs. Would cut down on all those stupid ER visits.

Having finished med-school I know that they do try to cut down on who passes - hello - there are idiots who get into med school. I know I had a few in my class who still made it out and I only pray they die or quit before hurting somebody. I can't speak for the intent of AMA - perhaps they do try to keep the numbers down, but being a DO I know that the number of DOs popping out has doubled in the last 10 years, now we're about 1/3 of all graduating physicians. Most DOs are supposed to do primary care, but sadly most of the kids finishing medicine nowadays know that primary care pays jack shit. They all want PM&R/anesthesia/derm for a cushy lifestyle or gastro/cardio/surgery if they're willing to work hard but want $. Too many specialists. Well if you pay primary care like crap that's what you get.

As far as empathy, well I don't know. I've generally had a bad experience with my own primary care docs at kaiser. In fact my whole family has had horrible/lazy primary care docs. The one doc that I love at Kaiser was my ortho surgeon who fixed my ankle.

If there were more primary care docs, then the offices wouldn't be packed like they are and perhaps docs would spend more than 1 minute with a patient. I know the experiences I have had with my own crappy Kaiser docs and that's why I actually spend time with my patients. My usual visit for in-patient follow-ups is about 30 minutes per patient - that's face time. Writing the note, checking labs/tests and talking to the nurse/clerk is another 15 minutes. So I spend about 45 minutes for $70.

The shitty hospital where I work let me lease my office for 1/2 day a week for $400/month. I was seeing about 3-5 patients a month for follow-up during my first 8 months (the first 3 months I didn't even know my contract started - the greedy administration back-billed me). So I lost about $2k total seeing those patients for 8 month period of my lease. The hospital CEO called me in to his office to cancel my lease since he said they weren't making enough money off me. I didn't protest since I know it's all politics. I gave my blood, sweat and tears to that shitty hospital for 3 years of residency. 3 years where they worked me between 80-130 hours/wk and paid me $35k/yr even though they got reimbursed $150k/yr by the previous admin of HCFA. So they made $300k off my training, had me work like a dog for free for their hospital group, and then can't do me the favor of giving me cheap lease while I try to build up my practice!?!

This is why there are no private physicians nowadays. The hospitals just don't help docs like they used. Unlike nurses who get paid by the hospital, I have to pay dues. The hospital is supposed to cater to me since I'm the one who can decide where to send my patients. I guess they do cater to the older docs who have clout. The new ones out of school like me get shit on. So after I lost my office I told patients who wanted to follow-up with me "sorry no office" since the hospital shafted me. How am I supposed to build up a private practice? Mind you this is in Downey, CA 90241. Of course I could move over 20 miles to Century City (where the president stays if visiting LA) and make bank doing Botox and Restulin shots on MILFs all day long - I would rather have a dog chew on my parts than do that - I didn't go to medical school to make people look like Angelina Jolie.

So tell me where my empathy should be when the doctor is getting shafted by the insurance company, Congress, his medical residency, local hospitals and MediCal patients who think they're entitled to high-quality care. I want to help people, but not at the expensive of my own health/sanity/well-being. I have my first baby coming in 1 month and my wife make about $150k doing orthodontics. I'm going to help her build up her practice and will most likely let medicine become the biggest mistake of my life. Not because I don't love, but because it doesn't love me. Sorry if that bursts all your idealogical bubbles - but that's what the newest crop of graduates is facing.
Thanks for taking the time to share your perspective...very informative. My daughter is in her Senior year at Med school. She's just starting the interviewing process for her residency which will be several more years of personal sacrifice...long hours and extremely low pay. We talked to several doctors along the way when she was an undergraduate at Wash U and they all said the same thing...if you're in it for the money, don't do it. Fortunately...I think...she could care less about the money.

Her big thing was having some semblance of a reasonable life after residency that didn't involve being on call constantly or getting woke up randomly at 3 am in the morning. She's decided on going the emergency room route as this seems to be the best fit for lifestyle and interest. I think some here don't understand just how much work is involved, the years and years of study and personal sacrifice, the astronomical debt involved, the incredibly high costs of malpractice insurance, and the adverse impact of capitation reductions over the years.

It appears that this perception that doctors in general are making too much money is more a reflection of naiveté than reality. Again...thanks for taking the time to post.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Originally posted by: nobodyknows
^ If you think it sucks being a doctor then you should try being a patient without insurance.

You can start the underground movement. Since being a doctor is not all that, you can grab a few books and start providing low cost care!

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Originally posted by: Athena
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
To be licensed you have to pass a rigorous exam. One can increase the number of professionals by lowering the standards.

Or by incresing the number eligible to take the exam. Since one cannot apply for licensing unless he is a graduate of an accredited medical school -- where the number of slots is artifically restricted -- many who would in fact meet the standards are systematically excluded.

Contrast that with law: in many states, anyone who has "read" the law can take the bar exam ... and if successful be admitted to the bar.

IMHO, any true healthcare reform would address the artifical restrictions on the number of medical school and residency slots available. The Kaiser Health News has an an article today about that.

"The number of residency training positions for all doctors has been flat for years. That's because in a budget-cutting move in 1997, Congress froze the number of Medicare-funded medical residency positions. Since then, the U.S. population has increased by more than 30 million ? making the need for additional medical residents particularly acute, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. While some teaching hospitals have added residency positions using their own money, those slots have largely gone to train specialists who can improve the facilities' bottom line."

Even though we have a recognized shortage of primary care physicians, what we're getting is (a few) more specialists.

The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.
 

Fox5

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
5,957
7
81
Doctors make a lot because doctor school costs a lot, with little in the way of financial aid.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Originally posted by: Fox5
Doctors make a lot because doctor school costs a lot, with little in the way of financial aid.

Not only that but in almost every field, without exception your compensation is directly tied to the impact of your decisions. If your decisions potentially cost or save a company 10s of millions of dollars or that is the size of your cost center your compensation is pretty good. If you're a staff worker adding little to no value with not much impact or leeway to make decisions, then you're aren't paid a whole lot.

Now think about the impact of a doctors decisions where there is a monetary influence and also the much higher human quality of life. This whole jealousy thing is such an evil emotion and devoid of any logic.
 

Deeko

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
30,215
11
81
Originally posted by: ohnoes

you need to look into the % of people going to bschool to run a business. Its tiny. Most people go to bschool to become middle managers.

Your point just proves that you don't need an MBA to run a business. Dr's have the same potential to start up and run a business as someone who goes to or doesn't go to bschool. Hence, they have the same earnings potential as bschool students if they somehow strike it rich with an idea & start up their own company. In other words, if you have a brilliant motherf*cking idea or are extremely capable, your earnings potential is not defined by either your MD or MBA.

Of course, the argument here isn't about the brilliant 1% of the med school or bschool population. It's about the earnings potential for the remaining 99% of students. In which case, yes, starting salary matters quite a bit.

haha yea, all those people go to get an MBA because they want to become a middle manager. They might end up there, but not every med school student ends up being a top tier spine surgeon either.

You *HAVE* to have the degree to be a doctor. You're practically arguing against yourself in that 2nd paragraph.

Even for that remaining 99%, starting salary represents roughly what...1/40th of their career? 1/50th? I didn't go to school hoping to make my starting salary for the rest of my life. Earnings potential, even for the middle of the pack, extends far beyond starting salary.

I'm fairly certain you're just arguing with me for the sake of it, because it has nothing to do with the topic at hand, and you've yet to back anything up to that point.
 

Athena

Golden Member
Apr 9, 2001
1,484
0
0
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.
The comparison between medicine wasn't meant to imply that medicine should follow the same example -- it was an illustration of a vastly different approaches to licensing qualified practitioners. There has to be something better than the current policy that has kept the US doctor population flat over the past 25 years while the population has grown more than 25%.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.
Agreed. What though have you read in any of the proposed legislation that will address it? In trying to curry favor with the AMA, Congress and the White House seem to have done as little as possible work on increasing qualified physicians to meet the inevitable growth in demand.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Athena, I have not seen any legislation on the table that addresses the health care side of health care, including enabling the qualified to participate as providers. It's all a fog.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

The comparison between lawyers and physicians is that one can sit down and learn law from a book. Law is based on rules and precedents. Now, can you go into a body and from reading a book determine where the nerves are and what they look like so you don't cut one? Nope.

Now if someone wants to provide a means by which additional qualified people can gain proper training, then I haven't a problem with that. That means no dumbing down or lowering of standards.

I sure didn't wake up this morning thinking I'd be defending lawyers, but they do go through practice and training beyond just book larnin'. Just like there are lawyers that never set foot in a court room, there are doctors that never set foot in an OR. It's a fair comparison.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |