By Jim Selby, AFL Staff

A major study published in the 13, 1999 issue of JAMA, arguably the most prestigious medical journal in the United States, concludes that for-profit health care is dramatically worse for patients than non-profit health care.

"This study reveals the terrible consequences Albertans will face if Premier Klein goes ahead with his plans to allow more and more for-profit health care into our system," said AFL President Audrey Cormack. "This report makes clear that if the Premier is really serious about wanting to alleviate the suffering of Albertans, then he will do that through public, not for-profit health care spending."

The study, Quality of Care in Investor-Owned vs Not-for-Profit HMOs, found that investor-owned HMOs. (Health Maintenance Organizations) scored worse than non-profit HMOs on all 14 quality indicators reported to the U.S. National Committee for Quality Assurance.

"Investor-owned HMO’s pay more attention to their profits than to their patients," said Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard and co-author of the study.

The study examined extensive data from 329 HMO’s that collectively provided coverage for 56% of all Americans enrolled in HMO’s. Among the most serious failings of the for-profit health care providers were their lack of follow up after treatment, their lack of preventative testing and other forms of preventative care, and substandard care for persons with serious illnesses.

Another co-authors, Dr. David Himmelstein, also an Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard, is straightforward in his condemnation of for-profit health care. "In for-profit plans toddlers and adolescents were 12% less likely to get immunizations; women were 8% less likely to receive mammograms, 6% less likely to get early pre-natal care, 5% less likely to get post-partum checkups, and 10% less likely toget pap smears…27% fewer diabetics got the eye care they needed to prevent blindness, and heart attack patients were 16% less likely to get life saving beta blocker drugs," said Himmelstein.

"The lower quality of care in for-profit HMOs translates into unnecessary suffering and death for many patients," concluded Himmelstein.

And, the study showed that there was no significant difference between the cost of the for-profit health care ($128.00 per member/month) and the cost of the not-for-profit health care (127.50 per member/month).