« Dissatisfaction With Health Care System Doubles Since 1998| Main | "Time for a Wake-Up Call" on Health Care Reform»

Oct
30
2006

For many patients with chronic diseases, it would be cheaper to provide free preventive care than to absorb the high cost of repeated emergencies, reports the New York Times. Would such a coordinated approach work in Oregon? Is it possible to care for the 600,000 uninsured Oregonians in this way without bankrupting hospitals and providers? Read the full article.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341fd8ea53ef00d834f679ef69e2

Join the dialogue here

Oct 31, 2006 9:55:48 AM
sweet lou says

It's sad that it's come to this...but it seems the cost of doing the right thing is finally less than the cost of doing nothing. Basically hospitals and other healthcare systems are being forced to respond to the looming crisis by simply doing a cost analysis; it's cheaper to provide low level care to everyone than it is to provide high level care to an increasingly large percentage of uninsured who wait too long to seek assistance. I wonder when the voting public is going to demand that this issue be taken seriously. Certainly won't happen if Saxton is our governor. He's already shown his mettle on this issue, waving the magic GOP wand of the "free market" as if competition and streamlining efficiencies will magically meet the rising tide of need. Odd that the free market paradigm is never really applied to big business like the airline industry or agri-business. They get massive welfare checks, massive bailouts from the government who disingenuously talk about how the free market is the only way to solve issues. "But these industries are crucial to our way of life," they cry...

As if good health isn't.

May 20, 2009 7:01:06 AM
driverseducation says

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A Rite of Passage: Working towards a Driving Permit... :

Add your voice

blogbeat


ganalytics


Subscribe to this Rx for Health Care feed.
-->