Doctors Support National Health Care

Support for national health care seems to be growing, at least among doctors.

A study conducted by Indiana University shows that a majority of U.S. physicians support a national health care system. That number has grown 10% since 2002, when the university initially conducted the study.

The survey, released Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine, seeks to follow up on attitudes of American physicians toward universal health care. Approximately 5,000 doctors were asked two questions: Whether or not they supported government legislation to establish national health insurance; and if they supported achieving coverage through more incremental reform.

Among the participants, 59% supported legislation, and 55% supported achieving universal health care through incremental care. Although 14% of doctors rejected adopting a national health care system, they supported incremental changes to the current system.

By specialty, the greatest support for national health insurance was found among psychiatrists, followed by doctors in pediatric subspecialties. Support was lowest among radiologists.

"As doctors, we find that our patients suffer because of increasing deductibles, copayments, and restrictions on patient care," said Ronald T. Ackermann, MD, MPH, assistant professor medicine and associate director of the Indiana University School of Medicine's Center for Health Policy and Professional Research, in a press release. "More and more, physicians are turning to national health insurance as a solution to this problem."

The topic of universal health care and whether it should be mandated for all has been a controversial topic in the campaign. If you're interested in knowing the differences among the candidates, check out our comparison chart. If you'd like more detail, that's available in the candidates' platforms.

Valarie Basheda
Managing Editor, WebMD

Reported by Rebecca Noelle Bates.

GOP, Dems Divided on Health Care

It comes as no surprise that a political divide exists on the quality of our health care system.

Most Republicans think the United States has the best health care system in the world. Democrats aren't quite as enthusiastic.

The findings come from a poll released Thursday by the Harvard School of Public Health and Harris Interactive.

The survey, of 1,026 people conducted March 5-8, found that 69% of Republicans believe our health system is the best, while 40% of independents and 32% of Democrats agree.

The poll, part of the school's Debating Health: Election 2008 series, focused on how Americans see the U.S. health care system in relation to those of other countries.

An earlier survey looked at Americans perceptions of socialized medicine.

To those who consider the U.S. the best, the World Health Organization (WHO) begs to differ. It ranked our nation 37th among nearly 200 countries worldwide; France ranked first.

So what might this mean for the presidential race?

Researchers found that Democrats were most likely to support a candidate who would put in place a system similar to that of France, the United Kingdom, or Canada. Independents were less enthusiastic, and Republicans were least likely to support a candidate who would borrow ideas from abroad.

If you're interested in reading more about how the remaining presidential candidates would handle health care, check out our comparison chart. We also have detailed plans for each candidate.

Valarie Basheda
Managing Editor, WebMD

Jarret Cassaniti contributed to this entry.

Debating Science?

A number of prestigious scientific organizations, including the National Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Medicine, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the Council on Competitiveness, are asking the presidential candidates to participate in a science debate.

Their call is supported by members of Congress, Nobel Laureates, university presidents, business leaders, and labor leaders, among others. Combined, they claim to represent over 125 million American voters.

Topics considered fair game by the organizers include climate change, the health care crisis, pandemic diseases, stem cells, and the space program.

They have a location: The Franklin Institute in Philadelphia.

They have a date: April 18.

Now all they need are some candidates.

The debate organizers said they have invited Sens. John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama. The invitation letter, sent to candidates before the March 4th primaries, says the debate will be held "even if only one candidate participates."

So far no one has accepted.

If and when they do, we'll let you know.

Valarie Basheda
Managing Editor, WebMD

Jarret Cassaniti contributed to this entry.

John McCain's Health Records

Should presidential candidates be required to release their health records for public inspection?

The question has come up with Sen. John McCain, in part because in 2000 he was diagnosed with melanoma, the most serious form of skin cancer, and had surgery to remove it. At 71, he is also the oldest candidate.

The presumptive Republican nominee had a physical Monday and told the media that he's fine and that there's no evidence that his melanoma has returned. He promised to release his full medical report in April. (When he ran for president the first time, he released 1,500 pages of medical and psychiatric records, according to the New York Times.)

The health of presidents has often been a secretive subject in the past. As WebMD reported, while cover-ups of presidential conditions were once common, today we can find out details about President Bush's latest physical, such as his percentage of body fat, cholesterol levels, and what he takes to help with seasonal allergies.

Political expert Larry Sabato, who was quoted in our article, argues that all nominees should be required to release their records so we know if they are healthy enough to withstand the rigors of the job. Do you agree? Let us know what you think.

Valarie Basheda
Managing Editor, WebMD

Jarret Cassaniti contributed research for this entry.

Ron Paul: "Victory not available"

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul effectively has ended his bid for the White House, saying his campaign will "wind down" and that "victory in the conventional political sense is not available in the presidential race."

Paul made the comments in a 7-minute video on his campaign web site last week.

The Texas congressman and doctor talked in the video about the next phase of planning for the "campaign for liberty."

While Paul's message of limited government appealed to some voters and helped him raise millions, it never caught on with enough voters to make a dent in the race. He didn't win a single primary and had 21 delegates to date, according to cnn.com. His two best finishes were second place in the Montana and Nevada caucuses.

Paul's message extended to his plan for health care, as well. He proposed that responsibility for health care be returned to the individual and that people could receive tax credits for expenses. He is pro-life but believes decisions on abortion should be made by the states, not the federal government.

Paul's platform will continue to be available on WebMD under the "Who's Out" section.

Valarie Basheda
Managing Editor, WebMD

McCain Clinches, Huckabee Bows Out

Sen. John McCain made his comeback complete.

And Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, McCain's only remaining serious contender, made a good run of it. He did make it interesting, but in the end, he just couldn't make it.

Huckabee dropped out of the race for the Republican presidential nomination Tuesday night.

He was always a long shot, but tonight his luck, and pluck, finally ran out, even though he still had strong evangelical support.

Huckabee was a strong advocate of preventive health care (he personally lost over 100 pounds) and proposed an overhaul of the health care system with input from the private sector, health care providers, and Congress.

Meanwhile, McCain clinched the GOP nomination by winning in Texas, Ohio, Vermont, and Rhode Island. Not a surprise now, but it certainly would have been a surprise prediction last summer when his campaign was prematurely written off.

So now the GOP health message is the McCain health message. He believes that controlling costs through market-based solutions is key to making health care more affordable. McCain sets down three primary goals: paying only for quality care, offering diverse insurance choices responsive to individual needs, and restoring a sense of personal responsibility.

Meanwhile, if you want to know more about Huckabee, you can still find out about him in our "Who's Dropped Out" section of our election special, "Health Matters in the 2008 Election."

As for the narrowing number of remaining candidates still in the race, Republican, Democrat, and Independent, you can see how they face off on health, a major concern for voters, in our candidate comparison chart.

And you can always get the latest news from around the country on the remaining races on our election news page.

We'll keep you posted.

Sean Swint
Executive Editor, WebMD

McCain Joins Autism Debate

Republican presidential front-runner John McCain is making news for a statement he made over the weekend about vaccines and autism.

According to ABC reporter Jake Tapper, McCain said during a town hall meeting in Texas on Friday that "there's strong evidence" that thimerosal in vaccines causes autism.

His comment was made in response to a question from a mom whose son has autism.

"It's indisputable that autism is on the rise among children," McCain said. "The question is, What's causing it? And we go back and forth, and there's strong evidence that indicates that it's got to do with a preservative in vaccines."

Thimerosal is a mercury-based preservative that has not been used in infant vaccines since 2001 (except for some flu vaccines).

Organizations such as the CDC and American Academy of Pediatrics have said there is no link between the two.

"No scientific data link thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines with any pediatric neurologic disorder, including autism," the AAP states on its web site.

Their position is supported by a growing body of evidence. Here are some examples:

In 2004, an expert panel convened by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to review the data on vaccines and autism said there was no link. In another, published earlier this year, California researchers found that autism rates were rising even though thimerosal was no longer used in vaccines.

"We are reassured that we found no link between routine childhood vaccination and increases in childhood autism in the data," California DPH Medical Officer Robert Schechter, MD, told WebMD in January.

A similar study was published in 2007 in the American Journal of Medical Genetics. While researchers in that study said they hoped their findings would calm the fears of parents, some parents' groups continue to question the findings.

This emotional and heated convtroversy is not likely to go away any time soon, and since this was originally written, a federal court made a ruling that vaccines helped cause autism-like symptoms in a 9-year-old girl with a rare mitochondrial disorder.

WebMD will continue to provide the latest scientific findings as they are made public. We have information on autism on the site, and a message board for those who wish to weigh in on the debate.


Valarie Basheda
Managing Editor, WebMD