Re: The fight is being lost...
From: Daniel Margulies (danymarg@fibertel.com.ar)
Mon Sep 27 08:36:10 2004
Sorry if I donīt get the real point
Why don`t the good US offices, departments, etc.. give the service people
are expecting.
That will assure the highest quality of the ultrasound
That will make the US departments gain a lot of good money
In my Country, Argentina, the pregnant families loves coming to US to
bond with the baby to come and I asume all over the world is the some story.
Why not charge a plus and give them the nice 3D-4D on a CD, VHS, or DVD
and nice pictures of the face.
Perhaps I am wrong
Sounds like the fight is only for money
I believe the fight is for families and fetus rights.
>----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Berck" <djberck@yahoo.com>
To: "Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND" <ultrasound@dns.obgyn.net>
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: The fight is being lost...
> That may be true, but I don't think that too many
> insurance companies take this seriously, certainly a
> small minority. And ACOG has kept the bar pretty low
> in terms of what they consider acceptible ultrasound
> credentials, e.g. and ob/gyn residency.
>
> --- "art fougner, md" <evsono@pipeline.com> wrote:
>
> > Some insurance companies are taking care of the
> > office ultrasound
> > situation by only paying for services offered by
> > accredited practices.
> >
> > art
> >
> > At Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Dave Berck wrote:
> > >
> > >I totally agree!
> > >
> > >--- "DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@uams.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > >> " This just doesn't seem like such a big deal
> > when
> > >> most ultrasound in
> > >> the US is being done by jokers who wouldn't know
> > a
> > >> nuchal fold from a
> > >> fig newton."
> > >>
> > >> This is the best argument for mandatory licensure
> > >> and ARDMS
> > >> certification for all using sonography... even
> > the
> > >> RNs and MDs.
> > >>
> > >> Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS, FSDMS, FAIUM
> > >>
> > >> Associate Professor & Director
> > >> Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program
> > >> University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, CHRP
> > >> 4301 West Markham St. Mail Slot #563
> > >> Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205 USA
> > >> 501-686-6510
> > >> DuBoseTerryJ@UAMS.edu
> > >> http://www.io.com/~dubose/
> > >> http://www.uams.edu/chrp/dms/default.asp
> > >> http://www.obgyn.net/us/panel/panel.htm
> > >>
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >--
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> From: ultrasound@obgyn.net
> > >> [mailto:ultrasound@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of
> > >> Dave Berck
> > >> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 8:48 AM
> > >> To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND
> > >> Subject: Re: The fight is being lost...
> > >>
> > >> I'm not a big fan of fetal foto, but the only
> > strong
> > >> argument against them is that
> > >>
> > >> 1) it's bad for the baby.
> > >>
> > >> But
> > >> Does anyone really think that this is true? Is
> > >> there any ultrasound professional who uses any
> > >> genuine
> > >> restraint in indications for ultrasound in order
> > to
> > >> abide by ALARA principles? If not, it's time to
> > get
> > >> off the high horse. I don't think the prohibition
> > >> analogy holds here -- diagnostic u/s isn't bad
> > for
> > >> babies.
> > >>
> > >> 2) the techs won't know what to do with an
> > anomaly
> > >> (e.g. cleft lip or anencephaly).
> > >>
> > >> But
> > >> Does anyone familiar with the quality of
> > >> ultrasound
> > >> in the US (i.e. low) think that the overall
> > quality
> > >> of
> > >> fetal fotos could possible be worse than what
> > >> general
> > >> ob/gyns generate in their offices? Who's done a
> > >> worse
> > >> job -- the radiologist who misses anencephaly at
> > 20
> > >> weeks, or the fetal foto tech who misses it at 30
> > >> weeks?
> > >>
> > >> This just doesn't seem like such a big deal
> > when
> > >> most ultrasound in the US is being done by jokers
> > >> who
> > >> wouldn't know a nuchal fold from a fig newton.
> > >>
> > >> -- Dave Berck, MD, MPH, RDMS
> > >>
> > >> --- Allen Worrall <jworrall@alaska.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > I am afraid it is going to be like Prohibition:
> > >> > there are some things that the people want and
> > you
> > >> > can pass all the laws you want, but it will not
> > >> stop
> > >> > even law-abiding folks from doing whatever it
> > is
> > >> > (drinking alcohol or having prenatal sonos.).
> > >> >
> > >> > Of course it could be greatly reduced, by
> > >> > considering it something as bad as dealing
> > drugs,
> > >> or
> > >> > a similar really bad thing. Then you would have
> > >> > underground ultrasound "speakeasies". Probably
> > no
> > >> > one on this forum is old enough to know what I
> > am
> > >> > talking about.
> > >> >
> > >> > Allen
> > >
>> > >>> > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > From: Dr. Wolfgang Moroder
> > >> > To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND
> > >> > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 11:21 AM
> > >> > Subject: Re: The fight is being lost...
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks Terry, well the war ... drags on!
> > >> > Wolfgang
> > >> >
> > >> > Am 23/set/04 um 21:05 schrieb DuBose, Terry:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Wolfgang... no, but it helps. Basically,
> > in
> > >> > the USA there are folks,
> > >> > > some untrained in medicine, who are opening
> > >> > "Fetal Studios" and
> > >> > > charging
> > >> > > large fees to provide the parents with
> > >> pictures
> > >> > and videos. This is
> > >> > > without any medical indication or
> > diagnosis.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > There are at least two sides, probably many
> > >> > more, and a lot of
> > >> > > disagreement in what should be done.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Hope this helps.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS, FSDMS, FAIUM
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Associate Professor & Director
> > >> > > Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program
> > >> > > University of Arkansas for Medical
> > Sciences,
> > >> > CHRP
> > >> > > 4301 West Markham St. Mail Slot #563
> > >> > > Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205 USA
> > >> > > 501-686-6510
> > >> > > DuBoseTerryJ@UAMS.edu
> > >> > > http://www.io.com/~dubose/
> > >> > > http://www.uams.edu/chrp/dms/default.asp
> > >> > > http://www.obgyn.net/us/panel/panel.htm
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > > -----Original Message-----
> >---------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > > From: ultrasound@obgyn.net
> > >> > [mailto:ultrasound@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of
> > >> > > Dr. Wolfgang Moroder
> > >> > > Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 2:00 PM
> > >> > > To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND
> > >> > > Subject: Re: The fight is being lost...
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Do I have to be a registered user of NYT to
> > >> > understand what this is all
> > >> > > about?
> > >> > > Best regards
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Wolfgang
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Am 23/set/04 um 16:20 schrieb Philippe
> > Jeanty,
> > >> > MD, PhD:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/technology/circuits/23ultr.html?th
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> =====
> > >> David J. Berck, MD, MPH
> > >>
> > >=====
> > >David J. Berck, MD, MPH
> > >
> >
> > --
> > art fougner, md
> > ich bin ein New Yorker
> >
>
> =====
> David J. Berck, MD, MPH
>
