Telemedicine means change
I wrote the following brief essay a few weeks ago as a nursing student at UAA regarding telemedicine after a classroom lecture on the subject. After reading the article written by Tegan Hanlon (Dec. 13), it seems an appropriate response:
I have mixed emotions about telehealth. I believe that it has its place in the practice of medicine in remote regions; however, I fear it will one day trend toward a time when physician care will shift more toward telehealth and away from the traditional office visit model, even when that care is provided locally. I also envision it as fraught with liability, along with a trend toward attorneys specializing in "telemalpractice." Nevertheless, we are a litigious society and we do love our lawsuits; to that end, I envision 1-8-0-0-T-E-L-E-S-U-E commercials popping up on cable TV with monotonous regularity in the years to come, featuring some handsome, hungry, young attorney sporting a "come hither" smile and an air of solicitous smarm. This means that the next step in telehealth will be an entirely new philosophy espousing patients' rights in the technological world — authored by IT nerds and the legal profession, of course.
Perhaps I judge mankind (and lawyers) too harshly; however, the fact is that traditionally medicine is a hands-on practice, one that evokes feelings of warmth and caring, and represents true therapeutic communication between the provider and the patient. Yet there is no denying that I am a dying breed; my generation was not born with a cellphone clutched in one fist and a joy stick in another, so, eventually, I suppose I will have to bow to the inevitable and accept that the world — and the way in which people connect — is changing. I might even learn to embrace it. Someday, anyway.
— Karen Niebert
Anchorage
ADN delivering the news
Just because someone doesn't like the reality of national news, that doesn't make it "fake news." Personally, I find the ADN well-rounded and informative.
— Della Dempsey
Wasilla
State's savings going fast
It appears Alaska state senators are posturing for the upcoming session. Shelley Hughes argues we don't need spin but honesty and can further cut the budget. Of course we can; it's not zero yet. Talk about spin — she and her fellow leadership senators completely ignore the real issue, portfolio preservation. I'm talking about the Constitutional Budget Reserve and the Permanent Fund.
Refusing to balance the budget, they have forced the drawdown of the CBR by about $3 billion per year since 2015, when it stood at $10 billion and is now $3.9 billion. If they stonewall in 2018 it mostly depletes the fund. This is a stunning $10 billion loss in three years. For those who are investing- and portfolio-management challenged, and it's apparent our Senate leadership is, they just blew an easy $400 million per year income (.04 X 10B).
Further, the deficit after 2018 will have to be paid out of the Permanent Fund earnings. Without getting into the earnings reserve vs. the core, 4 percent is a proven safe withdrawal rate, so
.04 X 60 billion yields $2.4 billion. With a deficit of $2.8 billion minus the $2.4 billion, that leaves $400 million to be made up with taxes. It also leaves nothing for a PFD check.
Keep some PFD payout, then more taxes. With a stabilized economy, our legislators would have time to responsibly pare the budget. If we don't get this fiasco under control soon our savings will further erode with no realistic means to replenish it.
— Ron Silva
Eagle River
Tax bill hypocrisy sickening
I have not seen the final version of the federal tax bill, but the hypocrisy shown by its proponents is sickening. Adding to the national debt should only be done when it is required for the good of the nation, not the good of the wealthiest.
When the wildly optimistic dreams about revenue growth meet with reality, cuts will have to come from somewhere. If they have successfully funded the military, that leaves Medicare, Medicaid, nutritional assistance, Social Security and other social programs to absorb the cuts. These are the programs that the wealthy do not need, but they are very important to a lot of Americans.
Our representatives have forgotten who elected them. If you want to vote for a Republican in future elections, make sure that you pick a better one in the primary. I know that there are a lot of them out there. Let's not end up as serfs. Remember, we all do BETTER when we ALL do better.
— Mark Beaudin
Anchorage
The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter under 200 words for consideration, email letters@adn.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@adn.com.