The Argus Leader newspaper of Sioux Falls apparently loves new medical gadgets. Big, expensive medical gadgets. But they don't seem to get around to discussing duplication of services, overuse, overtesting and overtreatment issues.
Earlier this year two local hospitals were offering $50 heart scans. So an Argus Leader reporter couldn't resist the bargain, had a scan and then endorsed the scans.
"Health care reform is going to be very difficult to achieve in this country if we continue to set unrealistic expectations in the minds of the public, feed the worried well, drive up demand for unproven technologies, and promote technologies outside the boundaries of evidence-based recommendations. On this scorecard, this story failed Sioux Falls readers horribly."
Well, they've done it again. In fact, the same reporter has done it again.
This time two local businesses opened new "open, upright" MRI scanning facilities - less claustrophic is the big selling point. They sold the Argus Leader at least. Excerpt:
"The two businesses are competitors with nearly identical names, each using a gigantic piece of equipment from Fonar in Melville, N.Y. The manufacturer has placed only about 130 such units across the country, and two of them ended up in Sioux Falls four miles apart on the same day.
"There's room for two in Sioux Falls," said Darin Krempges, marketing director for Sioux Falls Open Upright MRI."
The reporter was so close to a story he must have been able to smell it. Two machines just happen to come to Sioux Falls four miles apart on the same day. Did that raise any questions? Did it remind him of two local hospitals competing and offering "cheap" heart CT scans just 3 months ago? Did any hint of journalistic scrutiny arise? Any skepticism? Any itty bitty inclination to follow the money?
Who says there's room for two in Sioux Falls? A marketing man.
How many MRI machines are there now in Sioux Falls?
How many are needed?
Who pays?
Who pays when they are used? And who pays when they're not used? And is that why the marketing guy can say there's room for both companies in town - because they'll be sure they're put to use ALL the time.
Sioux Falls must be a magical place - like Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory - filled with big new medical technologies where none of these questions apply. Except, as with Willy Wonka, some key principles did apply in the end.
What's that about health care reform? Oh, that's just rationing - socialized medicine - big government health care.
We really NEED our two new upright MRIs in town.
We're Americans. We can't let claustrophobia get in the way of our need for more MRIs in our endless search for weapons of mass destruction inside of all of us.
We want an oompa loompa now!
Not everyone in Sioux Falls is enamored with the excesses! In like
manner many are leary of a federal big brother single payor (controller}
resolution to the current status. The current discussion of healthcare
needs to be much more vigorous and far reaching. Examples-could we
ultimately arrive at a better system if we did a state based universal
healthcare system and the states benchmarking of one another to evolve
to a system meeting diverse needs but much commonality? Everyone wants
access to treatment and is right on the frontline when this is the topic
of discussion-however when you begin to discuss how to pay for care--
just like in the military --they do not want to drafted and be part of
the solution but feel there must be a pool of volunters out there who will pay. I would submit if all are to have access to treatment all
should pay! This could be achieved by a payroll tax on earned income
and a like tax on unearned income (interest, dividends, capital gains).
Any "death" tax should be for funding Medicare-being a senior citizen
I am appalled at rhe burden we are putting on our working children
and grandchildren! Look forward to other comments.