Comments on: Healthcare Color by Numbers http://ciampa.com/blog/2009/12/12/healthcare-color-by-numbers/ Rob Ciampa's Markets, Musings & Meanders Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:19:37 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Rob http://ciampa.com/blog/2009/12/12/healthcare-color-by-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Rob Sun, 17 Jan 2010 02:33:10 +0000 http://ciampa.com/blog/?p=121#comment-32 Jonathan, that's the problem: there are lots of numbers, but weak (if any) correlation. Perhaps the optimist in me feels that quantification would give us solid ground for a rational, national debate. I think even chaos theory would struggle with this. Until we have that ground, we'll all continue screaming at one another. -Rob Jonathan, that’s the problem: there are lots of numbers, but weak (if any) correlation. Perhaps the optimist in me feels that quantification would give us solid ground for a rational, national debate. I think even chaos theory would struggle with this. Until we have that ground, we’ll all continue screaming at one another.
-Rob

]]> By: Jonathan Kranz http://ciampa.com/blog/2009/12/12/healthcare-color-by-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-12 Jonathan Kranz Wed, 23 Dec 2009 14:10:35 +0000 http://ciampa.com/blog/?p=121#comment-12 I don't know, Rob. There are plenty of numbers already. Do we really need more? I think you're pursuing an illusion of certainty ("let's just quantify this") that does not, and can not exist. Simply put, there will never by a way of achieving pure "objectivity"; whatever numbers emerge, will be, by the nature of the way they're gathered and used, colored by some degree of subjectivity. At some point, we need to drive a stake in the ground and take action, even if it's imperfect. After years of delay, now's the time. I don’t know, Rob. There are plenty of numbers already. Do we really need more? I think you’re pursuing an illusion of certainty (“let’s just quantify this”) that does not, and can not exist. Simply put, there will never by a way of achieving pure “objectivity”; whatever numbers emerge, will be, by the nature of the way they’re gathered and used, colored by some degree of subjectivity.

At some point, we need to drive a stake in the ground and take action, even if it’s imperfect. After years of delay, now’s the time.

]]> By: Rob http://ciampa.com/blog/2009/12/12/healthcare-color-by-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-10 Rob Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:28:14 +0000 http://ciampa.com/blog/?p=121#comment-10 Hey Mike, The call-out to Adam Smith is warranted, but the deficiencies in quantification by "experts" shouldn't impede our pursuit. I agree with your concerns, but that we need to figure out "how to count." Until we do that, we'll continue to burn money and jeopardize lives. Rob Hey Mike,

The call-out to Adam Smith is warranted, but the deficiencies in quantification by “experts” shouldn’t impede our pursuit. I agree with your concerns, but that we need to figure out “how to count.” Until we do that, we’ll continue to burn money and jeopardize lives.

Rob

]]> By: Mike Turgeon http://ciampa.com/blog/2009/12/12/healthcare-color-by-numbers/comment-page-1/#comment-8 Mike Turgeon Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:13:29 +0000 http://ciampa.com/blog/?p=121#comment-8 Rob, I agree that measuring results is the first step to addressing the issue. However, I would add that the debate over what we measure is just as complex as the debate over how to fix it. The "experts" that will provide the data, analysis, and commentary will be lead by powerful groups who are interested in maintaining the existing system or tweaking any new system to suit their own purposes. Drug Companies, Insurance Companies, Trial Lawyers, Universities, and the media all have interests that are not in sync with the public. To paraphrase Adam Smith "The interest of the dealers... is always in some respects different from and even opposite to that of the public... The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order ought always be listened to with great precaution, and never be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with scrupulus, but with the most suspicious attention." All of the "Dealers" mentioned above and many more than I can not even think of will have their hands in this soup. Publicizing the numbers will only be helpful if they are analyzed with scrutiny and suspician by the public. This takes time, and open debate. I fear our impatience, fueled by the media and the rhetoric of both political parties will result in the birth of a colossal bureaucracy that affords little improvement to the public and new windfalls for the dealers. Rob,

I agree that measuring results is the first step to addressing the issue. However, I would add that the debate over what we measure is just as complex as the debate over how to fix it. The “experts” that will provide the data, analysis, and commentary will be lead by powerful groups who are interested in maintaining the existing system or tweaking any new system to suit their own purposes. Drug Companies, Insurance Companies, Trial Lawyers, Universities, and the media all have interests that are not in sync with the public.

To paraphrase Adam Smith

“The interest of the dealers… is always in some respects different from and even opposite to that of the public… The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order ought always be listened to with great precaution, and never be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with scrupulus, but with the most suspicious attention.”

All of the “Dealers” mentioned above and many more than I can not even think of will have their hands in this soup. Publicizing the numbers will only be helpful if they are analyzed with scrutiny and suspician by the public. This takes time, and open debate. I fear our impatience, fueled by the media and the rhetoric of both political parties will result in the birth of a colossal bureaucracy that affords little improvement to the public and new windfalls for the dealers.

]]>