[ad_1]
Check-in 2020.05.15 06:28
The | Revision 2020.05.15 06:36
Democratic Party, “I have never agreed”
Democrats oppose telemedicine in latest regime
Glossary of terms in anticipation of the reaction of medical and civic groups on medical marketing.
“I was in a negative position regarding remote medical care, but I am currently reviewing it positively” (PM 13⋅Cheong Wa Dae Yeon-Myung, Social Manager)
“It is better to use the term off-site medical care than remote medical care.”⋅In addition, the Chairman of the Democratic Party of the Policy Committee)
“We maintain the basic position that active review is necessary to introduce non-face-to-face care.”⋅Ministry of Strategy and Finance Kim Yong-beom 1st Deputy Minister)
“I never introduced or promoted remote medical care. The Blue House also confirmed” (the afternoon of the 14th)⋅Democratic Party Kwan-Seok Yoon, Senior Vice President of the Policy Committee)
On this day, however, confusion erupted over the terms ‘remote medical care’ and ‘face-to-face medical care’ in Yeouido. This is because the Democratic Party hit the opposition and the negative image of civil society and the medical community about telemedicine. In the process of diluting the negative image of telemedicine and strengthening advertising, the term “face-to-face medical care” came up.
On the afternoon of 13, Kim Yeon-myeong, head of Social Affairs at the Blue House, told Democratic Party candidates at a conference that he was “positively respecting remote medical care.” The next day, on the morning of the morning of the 14th, immediately after a question about the morning meeting of the Democratic Party, Kwan-Seok Yoon, senior vice chairman of the Democratic Party Policy Committee, said: “Kim Yeon’s comments -myeong about telemedicine were misunderstood.
However, at the same time, the Minister of Strategy and Finance, Kim Yong-beom, Minister of Strategy and Finance, said at the meeting of the Center for Central Economic Affairs, which was in conjunction with related ministries, “The Ministry of Strategy and Finance also held the basic position that there is a need to actively review face-to-face medical care. ” The term was “face-to-face doctor”, but journalists at the scene understood it as “remote doctor”.
At the same time, the chairman of the Chung Joong-sik Democratic Party Policy Committee said at a policy coordination meeting in the National Assembly, “Kim Yeon-myeong said he had face-to-face treatment for a person who did not he received medical benefits because of the crown, which is not the same as promoting telemedicine seriously. “It is a separate story,” Sung Joon Park, a hospital spokesman, told reporters.
This afternoon, questions arose among reporters who did not understand the difference between telemedicine and face-to-face medical care. Later, Democratic Party spokesman Heo Yoon-jung explained: “(Not that the opposition can be changed.) The Democratic Party has opposed telemedicine for reasons like medical marketing.
“In the course of the Corona 19 experience, the situation has changed since before,” he said. “There are aspects in which remote medical care has been exploited by itself.” However, he emphasized that “remote healthcare and off-site healthcare are different,” and “remote healthcare is a broader concept that extends to areas where IT may be involved, including off-site healthcare. ”
Due to the crown incident, telemedicine, like telephone consultation and prescription, is already being implemented under the name of “face-to-face treatment”. In the case of face-to-face healthcare, the Blue House and the government judged that the sentiment of the mandatory response to the crown crisis was stronger.
Meanwhile, telemedicine, which has been strongly opposed by the medical community, including the Korean Medical Association and some civic groups, has focused on economic viability, such as medical privatization and industrialization. He said: “The Korean Medical Association expressed opposition at first, but the Daegu Medical Association expressed opinions in favor of off-site treatment.”
The Democratic Party is still in the position that it is not considering or seeking telemedicine on an industrial level, as the medical community continues to protest. A Democratic Party official said: “It appears that the obstacles that have prevented face-to-face medical care in the wake of the crown have collapsed.” “You can’t help it.”
The Democratic Party plans to propose a revised medical law for the introduction of telemedicine at the 21st National Assembly. Last year, the Democratic Party prepared a way to restrict remote medical service to military and military soldiers in remote and remote areas, seafarers on seagoing ships, prisoners in correctional facilities, and residents of islands and wallpapers. However, it was said that it did not lead to legislative initiatives in recognition of opposition from civic groups and the medical community, saying that “the commercialization of medical treatment should be avoided.”
However, there is also an answer that the Democratic Party suddenly opposes telemedicine as a party, and suddenly it is burdensome to consider expansion. Kwan-Seok Yoon, Senior Vice President of the Policy Committee, said: “It is not at all to introduce or promote remote medical care. The government is the same and the Blue House has confirmed this, but has never agreed.”
However, Senior Vice President Yoon explained, “If remote healthcare is reorganized, face-to-face healthcare is allowed in several ways in terms of digital public support and healthcare during the crown crisis.”
