Pay heed. Another rather lengthy story, but true, and it's result affects every patient seeking a second opinion. Living back in the Phoenix area in the '90s, a neighbor whom I worked with at Sears, being affiliated with a Third Political Party, told me of a Dr. friend of his who expressed deep interest in my abilities. The Dr. was an avid gun-owner and shooter, as well as a pillar of his community west of Phoenix, where he had established a large clientele of satisfied patients, most all elderly, and took on the added burden of opening and operating a Lab operation staffed to evaluate the areas' medical tests. He offered me lifetime free medical services if I would make up for him certain accessories for several of his firearms. I drove the long way out to meet him, and had a long talk with him. While there, he had an assistant draw blood, ordered a CBC, did all the things usual in evaluating a new patient, EXCEPT: I requested that, due to the unusual nature of my work done for him, no records be kept, not my name, nothing. (Actually, he already knew my name, but I wanted my info kept out of the database). He seemed to trust me, so I reciprocated. I told him of my suspicion that a nation-wide medical database had by then been established which interferes with "second-opinion" information. He smiled, reluctantly, and admitted, it was true. Second opinions regarding medical decisions were being buried by computer surveillance. He, too, hated this illegal and despicable intrusion into the lives of folks, especially those seriously ill. He was an honest man, caught up in a maze of governmental bureaucracy of medical field intrusion. What this meant was, similar to "Professional Courtesy" offered by lawyers to one-another, a patient thinking he was receiving an honest 2nd. opinion, after, perhaps, being diagnosed with terminal cancer, was being told by a "second-opinion" Dr. that the first opinion was correct: this second Dr., nothing more than a scheming but shrewd money-manager, assured the poor sick bastard before him that the diagnosis was correct. Patient then had little recourse. Allow treatment by first conniver, or second, seek 3rd. opinion, (Ha, ha!), or place suspicion upon the whole bunch, as I would (and DID!). Told I had a "tumor" in my upper jawbone at 19, my Dad ordered the Cauldwell-Luc Radical Maxillary Operation scheduled by the Charlatan oral surgeon, cancelled. Know what? There were no computers, yet, and that happened 55 years ago, though the surgeon told my Dad I might die without the procedure carried out. I'm still here. There was NO tumor. We no longer have the anonymity we once enjoyed. We are today a "Social Number" existing in databases whose tentacles extend way, way, into our personal lives. There exists no longer a true "second-opinion" aimed at weeding out possible mistaken diagnoses. Long Live the Hippocratic Oath, Eh? Frank
That is part of the problem with the medical insurance and Medicare they are tracking you also the people with insurance don’t mind the cost as long as it is covered. If you would get work done on your house/car you might go around and get three or four prices on the cost, but insurance you do not worry about the cost so go ahead and do it, even if it is not needed just because the doctor wants a car payment.
That is scary Frank. Yes, I think a second opinion, and even a third opinion in the event of something serious is always warranted. Your health is too important to leave it to chance, or to the supposed "experts." If I had a serious diagnosis, I would certainly seek a second opinion and I would recommend it to everyone who has been diagnosed with a problem. Tests can be wrong,,,and not all doctors are going to agree on a treatment regimen.