FAA is starting to get the ball rolling on the Drivers License Medical

Bad news today - the AME organization is rallying against it! Cuts into their income stream....lovely. :mad2:

The president of the Civil Aviation Medical Association, the group that represents aviation medical examiners (AMEs), says doing away with the third class medical is a threat to public safety. Dr. Mark Eidson has written members of Congress urging them to vote against bills in front of both houses that would eliminate the third class medical for private pilots flying most single engine aircraft.
 
flyingriki said:
Bad news today - the AME organization is rallying against it! Cuts into their income stream....lovely. :mad2:

The president of the Civil Aviation Medical Association, the group that represents aviation medical examiners (AMEs), says doing away with the third class medical is a threat to public safety. Dr. Mark Eidson has written members of Congress urging them to vote against bills in front of both houses that would eliminate the third class medical for private pilots flying most single engine aircraft.
Click to expand...

I know how to solve this problem..Our medical system should be....Not For Profit.......Our health is all bout how much money they can make..Conflict of interests....But that's another story....

Tony
 
1600vw said:
I know how to solve this problem..Our medical system should be....Not For Profit.......Our health is all bout how much money they can make..Conflict of interests....But that's another story....

Tony
Click to expand...

Why shouldn't doctors make money? They paid how much for medical school?
 
EdFred said:
Why shouldn't doctors make money? They paid how much for medical school?
Click to expand...
I don't see anyone arguing that doctors shouldn't make money, however I personally agree that the government should not be supplementing an AME's income by requiring me to pay for an exam that isn't necessary or useful - that exam has no upside potential for me, however it has plenty of personal downside potential. If the broader upside potential were there then it would make up for it, but I haven't seen argument to suggest it is there.
 
C182P said:
I don't see anyone arguing that doctors shouldn't make money, however I personally agree that the government should not be supplementing an AME's income by requiring me to pay for an exam that isn't necessary or useful - that exam has no upside potential for me, however it has plenty of personal downside potential. If the broader upside potential were there then it would make up for it, but I haven't seen argument to suggest it is there.
Click to expand...

Well, he did say not for profit. At the end of the year, the doctor is to have $0? Doesn't sound like much of an incentive to work.
 
C182P said:
I don't see anyone arguing that doctors shouldn't make money, however I personally agree that the government should not be supplementing an AME's income by requiring me to pay for an exam that isn't necessary or useful - that exam has no upside potential for me, however it has plenty of personal downside potential. If the broader upside potential were there then it would make up for it, but I haven't seen argument to suggest it is there.
Click to expand...

The doctors would make more money if their malpractice insurance premiums were lower. Does Obamacare address tort reform?

Let's close some of the law schools and covert them to medical schools, and provide lower tuition costs with some sort of community service for the subsidized graduates.
 
Clip4 said:
And your data to support that statement is?
Click to expand...
We don't need data. If we did look at data, there would be nothing to support the argument that our current third class medical system for general aviation has a significant effect on accident rates. So, since the data does not support our assumptions, we just go with opinions. Right?
 
1600vw said:
I know how to solve this problem..Our medical system should be....Not For Profit.......Our health is all bout how much money they can make..Conflict of interests....But that's another story....

Tony
Click to expand...

Wow, how incredibly generous of you...and what do you do for a living??? Whatever it is i need you to provide me with services for free, well maybe I should at least pay the cost of providing those services but definitely not a profit, God forbid.

Now of course in your world, since it is unthinkable for me to make a profit, I can certainly tack on some of the cost of my medical school, which without rich parents, I will be paying until I'm 65...but of course that is no problem for me except I can't spare any of that extra cash I keep in my pool so I can swim in it.
 
Doctors, (good ones) deserve to make a good living and pay off their schooling. But when I was a kid doctors had two Caddies in the garage and lived at the Country Club. That greed drove the need (perceived) for HMOs that just added another layer of nonsense to pay for and did nothing for the costs. The legal system is driving costs out of line and the solutions so far have been just an excuse for other agendas and more lawyers to stay busy. Now the lawyers drive the Mercedes and live at the Country Club....
We're screwed..... :dunno:
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
At the time I said it, others had quoted it so the false accusation was still there. Those other posts have since been edited. Therefore, I've removed my posts. I hope you and Jim will return the courtesy.
Click to expand...

Done.
 
EdFred said:
Why shouldn't doctors make money? They paid how much for medical school?
Click to expand...

The doctors would still make money in a non-profit. Do you have any idea how many non-profits we have. Do you believe those people work for free?

This was a stupid comment..sorry if it upsets you but it is. My Mom worked for a Non-Profit her complete adult life...

Tony
 
and, by the way, I am a new AME. I am not here to argue for or against the third class medical.

But I do this because I love aviation, I charge about $80.00 for an exam...which means when I set aside the time from seeing my usual patients for an aeromedical exam I actually lose money....
 
mnewb1 said:
Wow, how incredibly generous of you...and what do you do for a living??? Whatever it is i need you to provide me with services for free, well maybe I should at least pay the cost of providing those services but definitely not a profit, God forbid.

Now of course in your world, since it is unthinkable for me to make a profit, I can certainly tack on some of the cost of my medical school, which without rich parents, I will be paying until I'm 65...but of course that is no problem for me except I can't spare any of that extra cash I keep in my pool so I can swim in it.
Click to expand...


Again a stupid comment... Does no one understand how a non-profit works. the people working for them still bring home a weekly paycheck...

Tony
 
Really everyone believes if you work for a non-profit you work for free....Really you people believe this..What about our fire department, our police department. These people bring home a weekly paycheck. Those are Non-profit..Just imagine your house is on fire. the fire department shows up and asks for your prove of fire insurance and co-pay. Oh, you don't have those, sorry we can not help you. Or you call the police and the same thing happens.

Tony
 
I can tell who works for the medical community here.....
 
ClimbnSink said:
Oh snap. It appears some AMEs are not benevolent gods. I am sickened and crushed.:rolleyes2:
Click to expand...

In retrospect it would appear that Jay Honeck may have been more accurate in his assessment of the motivations of AMEs than Dr. Chien was of his fellow practitioners.

I thought Jay was out of line and a bit absurd since all he had was one bad experience. With respect to generalization of other AMEs other than Dr. Chien it appears to confirm the existence of a problem. Presumably Class 1 and 2 exams aren't enough business for their taste.
 
Jim Logajan said:
In retrospect it would appear that Jay Honeck may have been more accurate in his assessment of the motivations of AMEs than Dr. Chien was of his fellow practitioners.

I thought Jay was out of line and a bit absurd since all he had was one bad experience. With respect to generalization of other AMEs other than Dr. Chien it appears to confirm the existence of a problem. Presumably Class 1 and 2 exams aren't enough business for their taste.
Click to expand...

let me re-iterate I LOSE money doing aeromedical exams.....so that makes me ?greedy? :rolleyes2: :mad2:
 
This is not about what the doctors are making but the profits of the hospitals and everything in between.

Tony
 
EdFred said:
Well, he did say not for profit. At the end of the year, the doctor is to have $0? Doesn't sound like much of an incentive to work.
Click to expand...
The way you describe it, I agree -- but there's a difference between salary and profit. "Not for profit" doesn't mean free, and it doesn't mean people don't get paid. Doctors spend a lot of time in school, and most of them spend a lot of money directly or via student loans in the process; they have a specialized ability to provide a service that is in demand and they deserve to be paid well above average for that service. This can be done without adding in the ridiculous beast that has become our business-oriented health care system.

Off-topic re: "not for profit"... my home and auto insurance is provided by a "not for profit" company, one I'm sure many on this board use: USAA. I pay a reasonable amount for the services I purchase, and when it turns out they've collected too much money (which is pretty much every year), I get a small rebate in a few different forms. Wouldn't it be interesting if medical insurance worked like this, instead of like a vampire (only happy if they're sucking your blood dry)?

Luigi said:
The doctors would make more money if their malpractice insurance premiums were lower. Does Obamacare address tort reform?

Let's close some of the law schools and covert them to medical schools, and provide lower tuition costs with some sort of community service for the subsidized graduates.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with this at all, though I'm not sure it's the place of Obamacare to address tort reform as tort reform needs to do quite a bit more than concentrate on healthcare-specific items.
 
Last edited:
mnewb1 said:
let me re-iterate I LOSE money doing aeromedical exams.....so that makes me ?greedy? :rolleyes2: :mad2:
Click to expand...
So AMEs should be happy to not have a need for a money losing service, yes?
 
The doctors company has to have a 0 balance,well this really is not true, they get some monies to keep things going. But the doctor himself can make money so can the nurse and everyone else.
But the massive profits the hospitals are reporting today and CEO's of these hospitals will go and they should go. This is about peoples lives. Go make a profit off of others things and lets put this money back into the health care system to help it work like it should. Simple. But we all believe if you work for a Not-for-profit you do it for free. This is just WRONG....

Tony

P.S. I put this with the wrong quote so I removed the quote. Sorry about this goof up...
 
mnewb1 said:
let me re-iterate I LOSE money doing aeromedical exams.....so that makes me ?greedy? :rolleyes2: :mad2:
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about greed. Could be a case where the AME group's motivation is due to paternalism, the simple desire for control over the lives of otherw, or a genuine fear that is unsupported by any evidence.

I also don't know why you would charge so little as to lose money. If your amortized cost is $200 per exam then you should charge that. (I presume you really are losing money, and this is not just a case where you are making less than you would on other services.) Generosity is decent, and I've seen your posts in the past so I know you are not motivated by greed. Perhaps you should adjust your pricing accordingly and, assuming you agree with proposals to replace Class 3 medicals with something simpler, send letters of support as an AME in support of replacing the Class 3. Repudiation of that group of AMEs' position by other AMEs would be helpful.
 
From http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news...l221803-1.html
"Dr. Mark Eidson says the measure will "seriously threaten the safety of affected pilots, their passengers and the public below.""

This statement sounds like it's tailor made to strike fear in the "fireballs from the sky" crowd. Maybe someone could name specifically some operations a private pilot performs that a sport pilot would not be able to, and which portions of the medical is protecting "the public below".

Put another way, is there a medical reason that a pilot would be able to operate a CTLS at 1320 lbs or less, but not a 172 at more than 1320 lbs? Is there something that happens to a pilot when flying at speeds in excess of 115 kts that an AME can identify? What is the AME seeing that's keeping pilots who are safely flying safely as sport pilots from flying private pilot and endangering "the public below".

If you're an AME, please respond with something. Your own board is saying that something in the 3rd class medical is protecting the public, and that whatever it is somehow doesn't affect sport pilots the same way as private pilots.
 
mnewb1 said:
and, by the way, I am a new AME. I am not here to argue for or against the third class medical.

But I do this because I love aviation, I charge about $80.00 for an exam...which means when I set aside the time from seeing my usual patients for an aeromedical exam I actually lose money....
Click to expand...

Thank you for supporting GA. While I cannot blame anyone for viewing a problem through the lens of their own experience, I am disappointed at the comments of the president of the Civil Aviation Medical Association. Physicians are supposed to be men (and women) of Science and should view any problem dispassionately using the applicable data. The data surrounding the third class medical suggest strongly that it is entirely dispensable.
 
Here is Dr. Mark Eidson's letter to Congress/Senate (with my own comments in bold):

Dear Congressman/Senator,
The Civil Aviation Medical Association (CAMA) is composed of aviation medical examiners (AME’s) who are interested in aviation and who provide medical certification services for our nation’s pilots. AME’s, half of whom are pilots, fully support general aviation and the safe medical certification of pilots. We wish to state our strong opposition to H.R. 3708 and S.2103, which we believe will seriously threaten the safety of affected pilots, their passengers, and the public below. These bills propose complete elimination of the FAA third class medical certificate for private pilots flying in clear weather with up to five passengers at altitudes up to 14,000 feet and speeds up to 287 miles per hour.

The third class medical certificate for private pilots is neither costly nor burdensome(debatable), being required every five years below age 40 and every two years thereafter. Its very existence deters individuals with clearly unsafe medical conditions from applying(hasn't been an issue with light sport). In others, safe certification follows identification and treatment of potentially serious conditions. The House and Senate bills would allow lifelong flying without medical oversight by any physician, much less an AME. Individuals with serious and even life-threatening heart, lung, brain, psychiatric and alcohol/substance abuse conditions could declare themselves fit to fly(as is the case today, a lot can happen in 5 years, even 2, even Friday night). Self-declaration would free these individuals to carry five passengers at high altitudes at speeds approaching 300 miles per hour(self-declaration happens every flight). Complete elimination of medical oversight for these pilots would constitute a clear and present danger to aviation safety(hasn't been an issue with light sport).

Being mindful of challenges to general aviation, a CAMA task force for medical certification has proposed expanded recreational pilot privileges that would allow operation of larger aircraft at greater speeds with relaxed, simplified medical requirements. The key difference would be the preservation of medical oversight by AME’s. This model exists today safely and successfully in Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom—all insist upon medical oversight(the U.S. shouldn't wait until the trail has been blazed, it should make it's own judgments based on facts and sound reasoning and be a leader in aviation. Our national symbol is the American Bald Eagle, not a sheep). CAMA strongly recommends preservation of medical oversight for pilots and urges you to vote against its elimination as proposed in these bills.
Sincerely,
Mark Eidson, M.D.
President, CAMA
 
None of those issues Mark brings up prevent that same person from buying a 7 or 8 passenger van and continuing to drive. Of course, he knows that, but you can't expect him to be genuine when he's going to take a money hit.
 
Rhetoric with NOTHING factual to base it on.

That's all the opponents have. They'd have more credibility if they admitted its about money.
 
QuiQuog said:
Here is Dr. Mark Eidson's letter to Congress/Senate (with my own comments in bold):

Dear Congressman/Senator,
The Civil Aviation Medical Association (CAMA) is composed of aviation medical examiners (AME’s) who are interested in aviation and who provide medical certification services for our nation’s pilots. AME’s, half of whom are pilots, fully support general aviation and the safe medical certification of pilots. We wish to state our strong opposition to H.R. 3708 and S.2103, which we believe will seriously threaten the safety of affected pilots, their passengers, and the public below. These bills propose complete elimination of the FAA third class medical certificate for private pilots flying in clear weather with up to five passengers at altitudes up to 14,000 feet and speeds up to 287 miles per hour.

The third class medical certificate for private pilots is neither costly nor burdensome(debatable), being required every five years below age 40 and every two years thereafter. Its very existence deters individuals with clearly unsafe medical conditions from applying(hasn't been an issue with light sport). In others, safe certification follows identification and treatment of potentially serious conditions. The House and Senate bills would allow lifelong flying without medical oversight by any physician, much less an AME. Individuals with serious and even life-threatening heart, lung, brain, psychiatric and alcohol/substance abuse conditions could declare themselves fit to fly(as is the case today, a lot can happen in 5 years, even 2, even Friday night). Self-declaration would free these individuals to carry five passengers at high altitudes at speeds approaching 300 miles per hour(self-declaration happens every flight). Complete elimination of medical oversight for these pilots would constitute a clear and present danger to aviation safety(hasn't been an issue with light sport).

Being mindful of challenges to general aviation, a CAMA task force for medical certification has proposed expanded recreational pilot privileges that would allow operation of larger aircraft at greater speeds with relaxed, simplified medical requirements. The key difference would be the preservation of medical oversight by AME’s. This model exists today safely and successfully in Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom—all insist upon medical oversight(the U.S. shouldn't wait until the trail has been blazed, it should make it's own judgments based on facts and sound reasoning and be a leader in aviation. Our national symbol is the American Bald Eagle, not a sheep). CAMA strongly recommends preservation of medical oversight for pilots and urges you to vote against its elimination as proposed in these bills.
Sincerely,
Mark Eidson, M.D.
President, CAMA
Click to expand...

http://govt.eaa.org/14781/support-general-aviation-pilot-protection-act/view/

We have over 15,000 people sending over 38,000 letters and emails to our Congressmen and Senators. The number of letters and emails at least doubles the number of comments in the original AOPA/EAA medical petition, which is over 16,000. I think each and every Congressman and Senator in the entire Congress has received hundreds, possibly thousands of letters and emails from us urging the support of GAPPA.

Do you think one person, the president of CAMA, has a chance of persuading Congress to change their minds and derail the proposed GAPPA legislation? Seems the pilots have stood their ground on this issue.
 
Last edited:
N918KT said:
Do you think one person, the president of CAMA, has a chance of persuading Congress to change their minds and derail the proposed GAPPA legislation? Seems the pilots have stood their ground on this issue.
Click to expand...


How much money has CAMA bought the congressmen with? I mean donated to their campaign. Whoever bought them off gets what they want. That's how politics works.
 
mnewb1 said:
and, by the way, I am a new AME. I am not here to argue for or against the third class medical.

But I do this because I love aviation, I charge about $80.00 for an exam...which means when I set aside the time from seeing my usual patients for an aeromedical exam I actually lose money....
Click to expand...

Hell, my doc charged me $350.00 for my last Class lll ! Where are you located? I will gladly pay even more just make it painless!!!
:goofy:
 
QuiQuog said:
The Civil Aviation Medical Association (CAMA) is composed of aviation medical examiners (AME’s) who are interested in aviation and who provide medical certification services for our nation’s pilots. AME’s, half of whom are pilots, fully support general aviation and the safe medical certification of pilots. We wish to state our strong opposition to H.R. 3708 and S.2103
Click to expand...
I'd like to know if he is actually speaking for the majority of CAMA members, or if this is ust his personal opinion. I wonder if the membership was polled on the issue before he sent that letter. In fact, I wonder if the membership is even aware of the letter's existence.
 
DaleB said:
I'd like to know if he is actually speaking for the majority of CAMA members, or if this is ust his personal opinion. I wonder if the membership was polled on the issue before he sent that letter. In fact, I wonder if the membership is even aware of the letter's existence.
Click to expand...

Yeah, when I first posted the link yesterday in this thread (now deleted) at how CAMA opposes the GAPPA and the FAA's proposed rulemaking on DL medicals, I couldn't tell if it was only the president of CAMA who is opposed to it or does he have AMEs in CAMA who also oppose it along with the CAMA president.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top