Volume 196 - Issue 3

What is wrong with Medicare?

Authors:  Arthur Karagiannis and William J H Glasson

Med J Aust 2012; 196 (3): 169. || doi: 10.5694/mja12.10146
Published online: 20 February 2012

To the Editor: Since the claims made by Webber in his recent article1 were, in his own words, not based on any substantiated data, it is disappointing that the Medical Journal of Australia did not seek to contact either the Australian Society of Ophthalmologists (ASO) or the Royal Australian New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists (RANZCO) for comment.

Certainly, considerable work can be done to improve the operation of Medicare. We are on record as having raised our concerns with successive governments.2 However, Webber’s generalised, sensationalist and unsubstantiated claims add nothing to constructive debate about Medicare.

It is disappointing that the Journal would risk damaging its reputation, by choosing to publish a perspective without offering an alternative view to demonstrate balance and evidence, as one would expect in a peer-reviewed journal.

Ophthalmology involves more than just removing cataracts, and while technology has made cataract procedures safer and less invasive, they remain complex and the technology very expensive.3

The RANZCO and ASO have worked with government through the Medicare Benefits Schedule Review to address concerns and shortcomings, as well as providing supportive evidence.4 On at least two occasions, we have offered revisions to the funding of treatment of macular degeneration that could save many millions of dollars in the health budget.

Additionally, our proposal to reinvigorate the key subspecialty of paediatric ophthalmology has been accepted by government.


Authors


Competing interests


References