05-23-2018 10:30:41 AM -0700
05-18-2018 12:27:15 PM -0700
05-17-2018 08:38:50 AM -0700
05-11-2018 07:34:04 AM -0700
05-09-2018 10:17:16 AM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.

Most Trusted Name? CNN Runs Outrageous Health Care Tale

I went on Yelp.com and contacted the very first ENT I found in Indianapolis: Dr. Ed Krowiak, board-certified. Here's his response to my quote request:

In summary, for endoscopic sinus surgery for a polyp patient paying cash at our facility in Indianapolis, [here] are the following costs:

Facility $1600.00

Anesthesia $425.00

Supplies (debrider) $250.00

Surgeon $1165.00

I would be happy to discuss these issues with anyone interested.

By the way, we have 10 ENT docs at our surgery center who would all follow this general financial guideline.

Ed Krowiak

That comes to $3,440 -- a tenth of what CNN and Davies claimed to be the cheapest price he could find.

I tried a doctor in a city with a higher cost of living: Dr. David Alessi, board-certified ENT in private practice in Los Angeles. Dr. Alessi is also on staff at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center:

Assuming the polyps aren't complicated, the total "cash package" could be as low as $4000. This would include endoscopic sinus surgery and removing the polyps by the "roots" and not just snipping a few in the nasal cavity. This fee includes everything; anesthesia, operating room, nurses, post-op recovery, everything, and that's in the "big city."

Simple outpatient surgery at a hospital is expensive, and this topic alone could be the basis for a valid, worthwhile article on CNN. But having the same surgery in an outpatient center is quite feasible even for those without insurance, and this research would have taken CNN -- or Godfrey Davies himself, who supposedly took off for Wales rather than perform it -- one phone call.

CNN's story was through and through false, intended to sensationalize the health care debate. With journalism this egregiously bad being allowed to appear, all other health care reporting produced by this outlet needs to be more thoroughly examined.