Sunday, July 1, 2012

Why the President of the AMA Needs Her Breasts Cut Off

I'm thinking this will protect her from breast cancer, and I say this after studying marginal utility theory, business cycle theory, the Federal Reserve and monetary policy.

Obviously, my background gives me no background, zero,  to make any kind of medical recommendations to Ardis Hoven, the new president of the American Medical Association.

But, I believe this also works in reverse and that Hoven has no background in economics by which she could be justified in spouting off on national healthcare.

Hoven is an internal medicine and infectious disease specialist in Lexington, Ky. She received her undergraduate degree in microbiology and then her medical degree from the University of Kentucky, Lexington. She completed her internal medicine and infectious disease training at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Since then, she has been in active practice and currently is the medical director of the Bluegrass Care Clinic, an infectious disease and HIV/AIDS practice affiliated with the University of Kentucky College of Medicine.

Notice all the studying she has done in the field of economics? Yeah right.

Yet, she throws opinions about national healthcare around as if she was practicing bloodletting.

In a WaPo interview she says:
Our history is such that we have supported covering the uninsured along with an individual responsibility provision. This comes from the work we’re doing every day, seeing patients.
Is this nuts or what? What does seeing patients have to do with understanding the proper way to treat the uninsured? Has she, for example, studied Hans Hermann Hoppe on insurance and what can and can't be insured? Would she liked to debate Hoppe on the topic with her grand knowledge consisting of seeing sick patients?

She then displays that she is completely clueless about basic economics. She says that:
The good news is a lot of people are going to get health insurance and access to prevention and wellness programs. That means their quality of life will get better.
This indicates she doesn't understand the first thing about scarce resources and supply and demand. As Donald Trump put it:
Obamacare "purportedly covers millions more people without adding a single doctor."
As for quality of life, whenever central planning is involved, lines get long, the number providing services get fewer. Does Hoven have any clue what she is talking about? I think not.

She says:
  We want to work with our physicians, whatever practice their in, to manage a high volume of patients while also providing high quality.
Oh yeah, good luck with that, just what a physician wants: high volume cattle calls with massive paperwork for each new patient coming through. Does Hoven have any idea how many physicians are going to retire, if this cattle call is forced on them?

But bottom line, Hoven is all about protecting the turf of physicians. Here is how the WaPo interview ends:
WaPo: A lot of other medical professions, such as physician assistants and nurse practioners, have recently made pushes to expand their scope of practice without the supervision of a physician. What do you think of those efforts?
AH: It’s imperative that we collaborate. The patients need that. We think that care must be delivered in a physician-lead team. There are appropriate roles for other health care providers, like nurse pracitioners and physician assistants. They all have the ability to function to their highest level within a physician-lead team. 
WaPo: Why does it have to be a ‘physician-lead team,’ as you put it? Nurse practitioners make the case that they can provide equally good care without a doctor’s supervision, sometimes at a lower cost.
AH: The physician has the potential and capability to manage the unexpected, something that might not go as predicted. And that’s why you need a team. The physician is the highest trained, and the one who has to be in charge of the whole thing. I have worked with physician assistants and have a wonderful relationship. I’ve worked with nurse practitioners and we work collaboratively. But when there was an issue that needed something beyond the scope of the individual, I was the one managing that.
Amazing. While she is protecting the physicians' cartel from encroachment by nurses and physician assistants, she is totally clueless that the Obamacare program that she supports will likely destroy physician care as we know it to day and make being a physician a terrible life choice.

Yes, it may be shocking and uncalled for to call for Hoven's breasts to be cut off, but nothing at all bad compared to the evil in Hoven's support for centrally planned medicine (via insurance) that will ultimately result in early death for millions and painful lives for many millions more as the always creeping, bureaucracy of central planning eats away at the sector.


  1. "We want to work with our physicians, whatever practice their [sic] in, to manage a high volume of patients while also providing high quality."

    Ardis Hoven isn't much of an economist? She isn't much of a grammarian, either.

  2. “It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.” -Murray Rothbard

  3. Obamacare is driven by hospitals, big pharmas and equipment makers, insurance etc.. AMA is not much of driving force. Overall it is negative for physicians with increased volumes and decreased reimbursements. AMA is not a strong player in comparison with others special interests in any legislation. They get screwed all the time. This is no exception. See what will happen after ACA really implemented

    1. The federal regime-licensing of physicians was driven by the Rockefeller Foundation, which promised luxurious living to physicians who would be educated at AMA-certified universities which would receive "aid" from the pharmaceutical corporations (in which the Rockefellers were heavily invested) and the food corporations heavily subsidized by the federal regime.

      There are hardly any more physicians than in the 1920s. Even poor physicians make huge wages. The whole system is a gutter one, encouraging a physician shortage and most physicians are eager to prescribe dangerous pharmaceutical products. A perfect example of political pull used to protect a largely useless cartel.

  4. Wenzel, I think you're being a bit unfair, in asking her to cut off her breasts. You are using logic.

    That must be something they don't teach in medical school.

  5. Interesting how short a step it is from physician (something useful) to bureaucratic gutter rat. As usual one only need "follow the money" to see what makes this one tick. Her job is to protect the rice bowl with other people's money, and by God, she's gonna do it no matter who she has rob...