Prevention is key… but is it economically feasible for doctors?

It's a shame when a doctor needs to choose between what is better for his patients – ie. helping them take preventative measures so they don't have to undergo expensive surgeries—or getting higher reimbursements due to our nation’s incentives system (ie. more money for himself/his office). Cardiology is a prime example of a medical field where proper prevention (knowledge of which has been increasing every year) can reduce the risk of a heart attack by up to 80%, according to The New York Times article, "What's a Pound of Prevention Really Worth?"

Unfortunately, "preventive medicine just doesn't pay in the current American medical system." As one doctor said, "The time we spend with patients -- we get rewarded almost zilch."

Yes, universal healthcare – ie. providing the nation's almost 50M uninsured with health care-- is a major topic (as evidenced in President Bush's State of the Union Address last night) but so is reducing the unnecessary expenses that are encouraged by this nation's incentives system (doctors don't get reimbursed for preventative medicine under the current system). This is what Dr. Arthur Agatson (aka, the South Beach diet doctor) is trying to bring to the forefront and bring to everyone's attention– the idiocy of the current incentives system.

He has one idea of how to do this:

My dream has been to go to a corporation and say, "Have all your executives and all your high-risk employees come to our practice, and if they hit our goals and still have a heart attack, we'll give you a million dollars."

We're sure there must be a corporation somewhere that will take him up on his offer.