How Will New Medicare Rule Play Out?

Medicare's new policy not to pay for 10 "reasonably preventable" medical mistakes seems good in theory. I'll be interested to hear from readers how the new rule, which goes into effect today, works in practice.

Press Fails to Say Who Funds Drug Studies

The news media often fail to report when a drug study has been funded by pharmaceutical companies, according to a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Press accounts often use brand names instead of generic names when talking about medications.

The first problem is a bigger issue than the second because it speaks to a larger point about conflicts of interest. (Using generics names instead of brand names may simply be too idealistic a request--like remembering to ask for a tissue instead of a Kleenex).

Just because someone pays for a study doesn't mean it's necessarily biased but you should at least have the information. Which is why I'm glad that some pharmaceutical giants are now now making public the fees they make to outside doctors. Often the toughest part about medical reporting is not getting the technical facts right but rather finding an expert who hasn't been paid to promote his or her opinion.

Abortion, Text Messaging and Free Speech

Verizon changes course on censoring text messages after it becomes the focus of a front-page article in the New York Times.

Like a lot of other advocacy groups, NARAL wanted to keep in touch with like-minded folk by allowing them to sign up for short text messages. But when the abortion-rights group talked to Verizon about setting up such a service, the telecom giant balked. Abortion is just too controversial to allow text messages about it on their network, Verizon decided.

Adam Liptak wrote about the text message ban in today's New York Times and within hours Verizon announced it was changing its policy to permit text messages from the abortion rights group, which after all, go only to those people who have signed up for them.

Liptak's article is well worth reading because it shows how certain rights--such as free speech--can get lost with the adoption of new technologies.