EVERYONE at first look sees this headline to mean malpractice insurance for doctors. I did the quick math and with about a million doctors that means about $50,000 a head. I knew that this wasn't right so I "read the article" which explains that the "fear of potential malpractice court suits" drives doctors to order redundant or unnecessary tests and that is the number cited here. AHA!
By noon today, however, you will see that as a reason to spew against lawyers who sue doctors. It will be played up as "why we need tort reform". You watch.
Just so you know, and I looked this up before calling into a talk show a couple years back. 3% of the physicians account for 50% of all malpractice suits. Good docs get sued on occasion and generally prevail. Bad docs are sued repeatedly - that means the worst doctors actually are sued often -many many times in fact. It isn't the risk of the sub specialty but the bad docs who drive up malpractice. Last, where there has been "tort reform", states like California for instance, there has been NO DROP in malpractice suits. Tort reform does NOTHING to stop malpractice litigation. End of story. Doctors police yourselves first and the rest of you watch the spin.