Comments about ‘What others say: Paying for results, not treatments’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Jan. 3 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Salt Lake City, UT

The result will be that physicians only take on patients with minor illnesses that have an assured outcome. "Sorry Ms. Jones, but you have a disease that responds only 50% of the time. Here, let me give you a list of doctors who are desperate for patients, they may take your problem on."

American Fork, UT

A single payer system, that puts health care of and for people as the priority of the system is the answer. Remove the impetus to view each patient strictly from an outcome or cashflow standpoint entirely.

USS Enterprise, UT

We already have the system that they are asking for. It is in the hospitals that are also owned by insurance companies. They are leading the way at cutting costs through making testing and everything connected through a person's healthcare needs.

Getting the government involved in the system will do nothing to cut costs. In fact it may make things better because in government systems you are praised on the number of things you do, and do not have to account for innefficiencies.

conservative scientist
Lindon, UT

The more doctors are pushed by medicare and others, the more many of them will simply stop seeing medicare patients. Be careful of unintended consequences. Many "solutions" actually end up making problems worse, especially in government.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments