@@Oatriumph If there are folks besides the Mises Institute pointing out that the problem with the medical industry is the monopolies, I'd love to hear it. From I think Tom Woods I've heard a little about a group that is opposed to certificate of need laws but not much else.
@@CarrotCakeMake Dr. Michel Accad is mises adjacent, but he had been speaking out against licensure for several years. I'm sure Rothbard eviscerates the argument if we search. In a different thread, I mentioned On Foxes and Hen Houses by Stanley Gross, which is from the 70s, although his conclusion is left wanting. In my own experience, concerning maintenance of certification, doctors almost unanimously oppose MOC in private and refuse to speak up. Of course, this is selected for in medical school admissions. Medical schools reject about 1800 qualified applicants per year per school. Students are literally begging for spots and most will say and do anything to get one. So to me it's really about courage, or rather, cowardice.
For a decade I've taken pain management meds. Since the opioid hysteria ramped up, my costs have gone up tremendously. My prescrption costs only $20 per month. But I have to pay a doctor $400 every month for a two minute "phone consultation". It's a complete racket. They are printing money at the patients expense with zero justification.
I hope you can find alternative sources of pain control. They were talking about scheduling fentanyl. The opioid hysteria is one of many problems, but I feel for you terribly. Edit: no pun intended
This is why Americans need to be proactive in their health care. Eat meat, fruit, vegetables, don’t over eat. Get out and walk do some type of exercise. Strength training is the best building muscle helps increase metabolism, don’t drink alcohol. Find health podcast to listen too. Our bodies are amazing at being able to stay healthy and repair itself, if provided what it needs! Learn what it needs and do it!
My best friend (nurse) refers to them as "The priests in white coats." I'm a nurse. The real scary part to me is we do need doctors, but their mismanagement of the system means we are probably gonna have to rediscover a lot of fundamentals.
The point is that the problem isn't "vultures in lab coats". They are just working in a monopolized industry. The problem is the monopolists who lobbied for the protectionism. You can't blame doctors for that or expect doctors to act against the resulting supply and demand problems. Although Ron Paul talks about how decades ago many doctors would still provide free care despite the monopoly problems created by the state. It is ridiculous to blame the problem on greedy lab coats. It is the state bartering in protectionism that caused this problem 100%.
@@CarrotCakeMake Can it be both? It's a feedback loop now. Medical schooling selects for people willing to embrace the system. But people willing to submit to that system are either doing so in spite of their moral repugnance to it or because of their attraction to it. Sorry we are having back and forth on every thread. We seem to be carrying the conversation!
@@Oatriumph A person can both be a doctor and support monopolists. But the problem is the monopolists, and I expect doctors are more inclined to want more medical freedom than the general public. As people are more inclined to want freedom for themselves than for others. And while I know that lawyers and teachers are selected for employment and licensure based on ideology, as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) but doctors (maybe therapists are an exception nowadays) are simply drenched in propaganda, but not really filtered for it. So while it would make sense to generalize about embracing a repugnant system for government teachers and lawyers, I'm not aware that the same can be said of doctors. You can't expect people to just stop being any kind of doctor just because the government has enslaved the industry.
@@CarrotCakeMake in my own medical school interview, they asked me when and how I was standing up for marginalized people and if they were persons of color. This was at the University of Oklahoma. And you can most definitely fault them for entering a profession that has all these problems. I chose to quit pursuing medicine explicitly because it is that corrupt. Most doctors do not want more medical freedom. They want more control. Or they want to be left alone (in a paid your dues sense), but they certainly don't advocate for medical freedom. I think you are missing the point of the video. It is both the monopolists and the complicit doctors who should be blamed. I certainly believe that complicity should be seen as a gradient in this respect, but I believe almost all are on the side of more power. Why? Because the doctor's who are doctors didn't only work hard. They bought into the bullshit. That is what qualifies them to get the license. Edit: when commissioned officers in the military are given orders they believe are wrong, they are expected to resign their commission, I've been told. I definitely think doctors should be expected. But you just got me fired up, so I should probably slow down.
Homeopaths had much more success in treating epidemics, this is one reason the allopaths wanted them gone. AMA/ allopaths couldn’t take the competition. Allopathy suppresses symptoms. Homeopathy observes symptoms and uses them to choose an individual patient’s best remedy (homeopathic medicine) Excellent presentation!
I work in academia in a professional discipline. I can't tell you how many times the words "rigor" "quality" etc are thrown around as justifications to exclude people.
It isn't about certification. It is merit vs aristocracy. The current system judges doctors based on whether they are members of a government group. If a doctor is taken to court it won't be over merit, but rather whether he was approved by the state.
@@CarrotCakeMake that is not entirely true. It is also about self-policing. So gross misconduct usually does get brought up, but only after it becomes better to cut that doctor loose rather than cover up. But then, it is also very difficult to truly judge a doctor's performance because the system of licensure freezes a doctor's identity to the standard of 1910. I guess I feel that your explanation is without nuance. We need a diverse price structure and division of labor within medicine so that services are priced justly. Certification will likely be a part of that system, but to say "we need certification" without further explanation is very supportive of the status quo.
@@CarrotCakeMake yes, it is another question whether the state is behaving justly, the certifications however, are still relevant. Maybe the state should improve or to establish a third independent certificator.
@@OatriumphNot sure how you define certifications, but due to the nature of the job, there has to be a body that regulates the practise, that he/she fulfils atleast the minimum requirements. Having just anyone being able to be a doctor is dangerous.
What is the first AMA report called? Not the flexner report, the first one they are saying they wont cite? Do we have that, or was it kept secret outside of their private mentions?
Much needed talk. Finally someone pointing the finger in the right direction, the monopoly.
Well, the fight against licensure is actually much older than Newman, but I agree.
@@Oatriumph If there are folks besides the Mises Institute pointing out that the problem with the medical industry is the monopolies, I'd love to hear it. From I think Tom Woods I've heard a little about a group that is opposed to certificate of need laws but not much else.
@@CarrotCakeMake Dr. Michel Accad is mises adjacent, but he had been speaking out against licensure for several years.
I'm sure Rothbard eviscerates the argument if we search.
In a different thread, I mentioned On Foxes and Hen Houses by Stanley Gross, which is from the 70s, although his conclusion is left wanting.
In my own experience, concerning maintenance of certification, doctors almost unanimously oppose MOC in private and refuse to speak up. Of course, this is selected for in medical school admissions. Medical schools reject about 1800 qualified applicants per year per school. Students are literally begging for spots and most will say and do anything to get one.
So to me it's really about courage, or rather, cowardice.
For a decade I've taken pain management meds. Since the opioid hysteria ramped up, my costs have gone up tremendously. My prescrption costs only $20 per month. But I have to pay a doctor $400 every month for a two minute "phone consultation". It's a complete racket. They are printing money at the patients expense with zero justification.
I hope you can find alternative sources of pain control. They were talking about scheduling fentanyl. The opioid hysteria is one of many problems, but I feel for you terribly.
Edit: no pun intended
This is why Americans need to be proactive in their health care. Eat meat, fruit, vegetables, don’t over eat. Get out and walk do some type of exercise. Strength training is the best building muscle helps increase metabolism, don’t drink alcohol. Find health podcast to listen too. Our bodies are amazing at being able to stay healthy and repair itself, if provided what it needs! Learn what it needs and do it!
What do I do with these Carter's Little Liver Pills then?
Everyone in the United States needs to watch this.
We've been dealing with these vultures in lab coats for a long, long time. Thanks for the timeline and explanations.
My best friend (nurse) refers to them as "The priests in white coats."
I'm a nurse. The real scary part to me is we do need doctors, but their mismanagement of the system means we are probably gonna have to rediscover a lot of fundamentals.
The point is that the problem isn't "vultures in lab coats". They are just working in a monopolized industry. The problem is the monopolists who lobbied for the protectionism. You can't blame doctors for that or expect doctors to act against the resulting supply and demand problems.
Although Ron Paul talks about how decades ago many doctors would still provide free care despite the monopoly problems created by the state.
It is ridiculous to blame the problem on greedy lab coats. It is the state bartering in protectionism that caused this problem 100%.
@@CarrotCakeMake Can it be both?
It's a feedback loop now. Medical schooling selects for people willing to embrace the system. But people willing to submit to that system are either doing so in spite of their moral repugnance to it or because of their attraction to it.
Sorry we are having back and forth on every thread. We seem to be carrying the conversation!
@@Oatriumph A person can both be a doctor and support monopolists. But the problem is the monopolists, and I expect doctors are more inclined to want more medical freedom than the general public. As people are more inclined to want freedom for themselves than for others.
And while I know that lawyers and teachers are selected for employment and licensure based on ideology, as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) but doctors (maybe therapists are an exception nowadays) are simply drenched in propaganda, but not really filtered for it.
So while it would make sense to generalize about embracing a repugnant system for government teachers and lawyers, I'm not aware that the same can be said of doctors. You can't expect people to just stop being any kind of doctor just because the government has enslaved the industry.
@@CarrotCakeMake in my own medical school interview, they asked me when and how I was standing up for marginalized people and if they were persons of color. This was at the University of Oklahoma.
And you can most definitely fault them for entering a profession that has all these problems. I chose to quit pursuing medicine explicitly because it is that corrupt.
Most doctors do not want more medical freedom. They want more control. Or they want to be left alone (in a paid your dues sense), but they certainly don't advocate for medical freedom.
I think you are missing the point of the video. It is both the monopolists and the complicit doctors who should be blamed. I certainly believe that complicity should be seen as a gradient in this respect, but I believe almost all are on the side of more power.
Why? Because the doctor's who are doctors didn't only work hard. They bought into the bullshit. That is what qualifies them to get the license.
Edit: when commissioned officers in the military are given orders they believe are wrong, they are expected to resign their commission, I've been told. I definitely think doctors should be expected. But you just got me fired up, so I should probably slow down.
Homeopaths had much more success in treating epidemics, this is one reason the allopaths wanted them gone. AMA/ allopaths couldn’t take the competition.
Allopathy suppresses symptoms.
Homeopathy observes symptoms and uses them to choose an individual patient’s best remedy (homeopathic medicine)
Excellent presentation!
I work in academia in a professional discipline. I can't tell you how many times the words "rigor" "quality" etc are thrown around as justifications to exclude people.
Good morning!
please add sources/bibliography...
Well it is a fact that doctors need to be filtered with certifications for example. But they should be filtered in a well meaning way.
Is it a fact? I think you are begging the question.
It isn't about certification. It is merit vs aristocracy. The current system judges doctors based on whether they are members of a government group. If a doctor is taken to court it won't be over merit, but rather whether he was approved by the state.
@@CarrotCakeMake that is not entirely true. It is also about self-policing. So gross misconduct usually does get brought up, but only after it becomes better to cut that doctor loose rather than cover up.
But then, it is also very difficult to truly judge a doctor's performance because the system of licensure freezes a doctor's identity to the standard of 1910.
I guess I feel that your explanation is without nuance. We need a diverse price structure and division of labor within medicine so that services are priced justly. Certification will likely be a part of that system, but to say "we need certification" without further explanation is very supportive of the status quo.
@@CarrotCakeMake yes, it is another question whether the state is behaving justly, the certifications however, are still relevant. Maybe the state should improve or to establish a third independent certificator.
@@OatriumphNot sure how you define certifications, but due to the nature of the job, there has to be a body that regulates the practise, that he/she fulfils atleast the minimum requirements. Having just anyone being able to be a doctor is dangerous.
Video too long; did not watch!
What is the first AMA report called? Not the flexner report, the first one they are saying they wont cite? Do we have that, or was it kept secret outside of their private mentions?