Your health care is in the 2024 election
Dr. Irving Kent Loh
This column has been called Second Opinion since I started writing it regularly around 2000. It naturally focuses on health care issues, and obviously represents my perspective and therefore my thoughts on these topics.
The First Opinion is the reader’s, and, as in the health care environment, the Second Opinion represents the opinion of another person, who hopefully has the knowledge, to help the person solve the health care issue that is can be confusing for those involved. Of course, as I told patients for many years, I chose controversial topics and those that I thought the information in the media was too confused or confused to allow even the viewer educated enough to see the underlying issues at hand.
In the past few decades, as in many topics in America and the world, almost any issue has been politicized. Differences of opinion and opinion are common, but the vitriol we have endured even on health care, fueled by so-called radical progressives on the left and fundamentalist conservatives on the right, they have made thoughtful discussion a rare thing of the past. I mean, really, who is against health care?
In this wonderful country, which is still free now, the health care policy should be directed to the common principles common to our people. First, health care should be available to all within the borders. People come to America through the front door, or through the back door. We all wish that legal immigration was a thing of the day, but that is another goal that has yet to be achieved. As we’ve heard, the supposed bipartisan effort to make progress on our borderless border has been thwarted by political considerations.
This has health implications because immigrants, perhaps because of the hard life that led them to seek accommodation here, or the journey itself, can get sick and have infectious diseases such as tuberculosis or caused by a virus that can sow seeds here. Putting up 100% effective barriers that prevent them from leaving has not worked. When they are here, sick people should be treated, if at least to prevent them from spreading disease and allow them to thrive. Effective border control is the solution, but demonized immigrants are not.
The cost of health care, whether it’s health care premiums, or outrageous copays, can make health care so unaffordable that even middle-class US citizens can’t afford it. to pay for health care, so they suffer the consequences of not getting proper or basic care. It was embarrassing for many American doctors who teach or attend conferences abroad to try and explain how we, the richest and greatest country the world has ever seen, are I had many of its citizens uninsured and unable to access even basic health care, except through Scarlett O’Hara’s “kindness to others,” that is, charity care.
Attempts to reform our health care “system” since the beginning of the 20th century were marked by political discord and therefore collapse. The creation of Medicaid, then Medicare, and now the Affordable Care Act provided notable improvements in coverage for the poor, disabled, elderly, and economically disadvantaged in the country. us. If someone or their family members get health insurance through their job, they know what that means when they lose that job. Sadly, and predictably, the political winds of this election cycle have reignited this debate. As I wrote in a recent column, the health care aspects of Project 2025 threaten the support of these health care programs for vulnerable people in this country. So health care is clearly on the ballot next week.
And another principle that has emerged from many of my Second Opinions has been the improvement of quality of care. In general, the richer the population, the better the care. Not only can they see the doctors they need, they can get the highest quality tests, and they can afford the best recommended treatments. And, of course, the opposite is true. Even assuming that there is health care in economically weaker or rural areas, there may be an overall reduction in the quality standards used to assess the adequacy of care. These public health facts are real.
About 25 years ago, after watching healthcare reform being thwarted again by financial and political forces, I had an epiphany that healthcare technology could be the way to step forward. Knowing that venture capital would see this as an opportunity to make money, I began attending health care conferences in Silicon Valley where I learned that technologists were not sure what health How does beauty work? But gradually, and with the guidance of experienced doctors and academics who collaborated with health care technology companies or actually participated, technology has provided better solutions.
That health care did not collapse during the COVID pandemic is a reflection of how technology in the form of telemedicine and international cooperation with the amazing “all hands on deck” mentality was passing. institutional size, international constraints and political considerations were something I was into. the right to participate. As the epidemic continues to erode the public consciousness, that sense of cooperation has eroded, and politics has once again begun to throw itself at each other.
In my opinion, the next step for health care will be the continuous development of technology, new methods confirmed by clinical research, the use of new treatment methods based on systematic evidence. of diseases, and all this works under the aegis of controlled artificial intelligence. Those will be the topics of my upcoming Second Opinion columns and perhaps some public speaking engagements if there is interest.
But first, we have options. I hope you voted early, but if not, please make sure you’ve voted. In a functioning democracy, it is the primary way your voice is heard. Your health care is in the choices.
Irving Kent Loh, MD, is a cardiologist and director of the Ventura Heart Institute in Thousand Oaks. Email him at drloh@venturaheart.com.
#health #care #election