[FoRK] User-friendliness and fascism

Gregory Alan Bolcer greg at bolcer.org
Mon Apr 11 09:58:53 PDT 2011


I know of three medical company startups addressing these types of 
inefficiences, one in emergency room sourcing, one in in-home remote 
healthcare monitoring, one in practioner-multiplier and immediacy. 
They are all well funded and are pursuing the inherent dysfunctional 
bloat as commercial ventures.

As we learned in P2P, centralized does not always mean optimized, nor 
efficient.

I think it's funny your author is talking about a technology problem, 
but then instantly jumps to the political world.  Not everything is a 
political problem.

Greg

On 4/11/2011 9:35 AM, Damien Morton wrote:

> Like Microsoft operating systems, America's health-insurance system is
> incoherent, hard to understand, often dysfunctional and bloated by
> obsolete legacy systems. (Though unlike Windows machines, it's not
> cheap.) Different parts fail to operate properly with each other, and
> the whole thing is incomprehensible to most users, patients and
> doctors alike. But try to set up a central authority like MedPAC to
> make decisions about how to fix Medicare, or to mandate that policies
> cover a set of basic conditions, or to make end-of-life counseling
> available to seniors so they don't go through their final weeks in a
> blizzard of legal confusion—try to fix any of this stuff, and you'll
> be accusedof "taking the control of health care out of the hands of
> patients and their doctors." This rhetoric is often driven by vested
> commercial interests. Medical-industry groups don't want a panel of
> experts making decisions about Medicare because it reduces their
> ability to buy concessions through congressional lobbying.
>

-- 
greg at bolcer.org, http://bolcer.org, c: +1.714.928.5476


More information about the FoRK mailing list