September 17, 2009
About Carter Mackley

I am a business transactions lawyer, not a health care expert, although I do have two years of post-graduate training in health economics as a National Institutes of Health Fellow at U.C. Berkeley. I also have deep personal experience in the health care system. My wife, an insulin-dependent diabetic from the age of 11, would probably not be alive today but for the tremendous technology and resources available in our current system. She owes her current health status to the over-the-top efforts of her endocrinologist who, by the way, is now with Qliance Medical Group, the group mentioned by Goldhill in his Atlantic Monthly article as an example of the new concierge-style practices that operate outside of the insurance system.

My posts to Soundpolitics.com will mostly be about health care. I believe there is little hope for improving our current system until the public at large comes to the realization that, no matter what system of financing is used, our health care expenses eventually come from our own pockets, and that the best system will make us face health cost and benefit decisions squarely with our personal doctors at the point we receive health care services.

Posted by Carter Mackley at September 17, 2009 10:48 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Definitely agree with the last sentence.

Posted by: Michele on September 17, 2009 11:15 AM
2. Just a couple of weeks ago an announcement was broadcast on national news(of all places) about an eight pound belt developed at, I believe USC that will free some diabetics from routine time spent hooked to a fixed machine at a clinic. As a friend of a severe diabetic I can see the the day when this may greatly increase his daily productivity. I propose this is just another example of our superior advancement of medicine. Sure there are problems with our system that need addressing, but an introspective, methodical, slow approach would serve best. And after all this is about humans, for humans and as such will always have shortfalls.

Posted by: Paul on September 17, 2009 11:36 AM
3. I think that's why the health care exchange -- which is pretty much the cornerstone of all the bills so far -- is so vitally important. Eventually, that framework must be extended to all Americans and the concept of employer-provided insurance must go away.

But without the framework of an exchange and without the expectation of universal coverage, you cannot end that system and you cannot expect people to have skin in the game.

Posted by: John Jensen on September 17, 2009 12:46 PM
4. Welcome to the team, Carter!

Posted by: Mark Griswold on September 17, 2009 02:56 PM
5. Shall we cheer on the fact that our superior medical system invented insulin in the first place?

Oh, wait.

Posted by: demo kid on September 17, 2009 08:19 PM
6. Welcome to SoundPolitics.com, Carter! And thank you in advance for your thoughtful commentary.

Posted by: Irene on September 17, 2009 08:44 PM
7. I should have said welcome. I am looking forward to your posts more than any other blogger's. I love health care discussions!

Posted by: John Jensen on September 17, 2009 09:34 PM
8. "Shall we cheer on the fact that our superior medical system invented insulin in the first place? "

Silly union educated Demo Kid, insulin wasn't invented, it was DISCOVERED.

You can thank our superior medical system for:

MRI
Cat Scans
Polio Vaccine
Cortisone
Anesthesia
Discoveries in the role of chromosomes in heredity
Discovery of DNA

to name just a few

Posted by: Demon Kid on September 17, 2009 11:45 PM
9. ...you cannot end that system and you cannot expect people to have skin in the game. ~ John Jensen

Like the president, John? How about any public option be across the board? That way, the politicians pushing for a "public option" actually have some skin in the game. Short of that, they're just encouraging us to get in a system they've eschewed for themselves and their families, and where I come from, that's called a "hypocrite". Besides, why overhaul a system that 80% of Americans are happy with? Reform may be necessary, but it shouldn't include dumping those currently happy with their employer-based coverage into an inferior and low quality of care gub'mint system.

The president was asked by a physician if he would place in family in the 'public option' and like the unctuous, snake oil salesman he is, Obama avoided the question altogether and instead rambled on about his grandma. Video can be seen here. Until you get some skin in the game, Mr. President, Talk to the hand.

Posted by: Rick D. on September 18, 2009 05:59 AM
10. @8: Call it the use of animal insulin in humans if you like... insulin treatment was pioneered in Canada, not in the United States.

With respect to the rest, not all of those were exclusively American inventions. MRIs and CAT scans, for example, were pioneered in Britain as well as the United States. All those inventions, though, have much, MUCH more to do with public funding of universities and medical research than the insurance that people have.

Posted by: demo kid on September 18, 2009 11:19 AM
11. Yes, that's true, demo kid. I believe that was before nationalized health care became established in Canada.

Posted by: PeggyU on September 18, 2009 11:24 AM
12. @11: And how exactly is privatized versus nationalized healthcare relevant when a large portion of the medical advances we make (and are referenced in @8) are from government-funded research?

Posted by: demo kid on September 18, 2009 11:35 AM
13. Carter - Would you send me your emial address, please? I like to have all the email addresses for the other SP contributors, since sometimes I need to contact all of you.

Posted by: Jim Miller on September 21, 2009 03:27 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?