Tag Archives: bias

Biased LA Times Article About Cedars-Sinai

An article in today’s LA Times about Anthem Blue Cross excluding Cedars-Sinai and UCLA Medical Center from the health plan provided to people employed by the City of L.A. (due to these two institutions’ prices being higher than some other community hospitals) omitted several crucial facts.  These facts were provided to the reporter, but for some reason were not included anywhere in the article.

As someone who knows the extraordinarily high quality of care that you and your colleagues provide to all of our patients, you may have taken exception to the statement that our clinical quality isn’t measurably better than other community hospitals and therefore is not worth the higher cost.

I’ve attached some key facts about Cedars-Sinai quality that were not included in the article.  I’ve also attached key points about the unique, highly specialized services provided by academic medical centers like Cedars-Sinai that are not provided at lower-cost community hospitals, but which benefit the entire region and nation.

Cedars-Sinai treats more patients with highly complex medical problems than any other medical center in California.  Much of this highly specialized care – for complex cancers, advanced heart disease and serious brain diseases, for example — is not available at community hospitals, as it requires an enormous investment in special technology and equipment, as well as superbly trained experts on staff.

We also provide care for a high volume of Medi-Cal patients and uninsured patients as part of our mission.  In most cases we are paid only a small fraction of the cost, or in some cases not paid at all.   In fact, the total amount of Cedars-Sinai’s subsidy of these programs, as well as the hundreds of programs and services we provide in the community, and our research and education programs – was more than $600 million last year.

While many people recognize the importance and value of these services we provide, others have not connected the dots about the importance of how these programs are funded, and the shared stake that everyone has in keeping these programs viable for the continued health and well-being of the community, California, and the nation.

While academic medical centers will always be more costly than community hospitals for all the reasons I’ve noted, we must also uphold our obligation to accomplish our mission in the most efficient way possible.  We must continue to look for ways to lower costs without lowering quality, and without losing sight of our unique mission. Our current work to do this, including initiatives such as Cedars-Sinai Medicine as well as the work being done in every department to ensure we are operating in the most efficient, patient-centered way possible, will  continue to be crucial to our long-term success on behalf of our patients and our community.


  • Cedars-Sinai’s quality of patient care and our clinical outcomes are significantly better than most hospitals in California and the nation:

  • Cedars-Sinai is the only hospital in California (and one of only 7 in the nation) to have a 30-day survival rate better than the national average for four consecutive years in all three of the following key diseases:  Heart Failure, Pneumonia and Acute Myocardial Infarction (Heart Attack).
  • Cedars-Sinai is significantly better than other hospitals in California and the nation in reducing the incidence of Central Line-Associated Blood Stream Infections (CLABSI).   Cedars-Sinai’s CLABSI infection rate is 80 percent lower than the state average and 91 percent lower than the national average.
  • Out of 301 hospitals in California, Cedars-Sinai is one of only 10 that is better than the national average for complications in Hip and Knee Replacement Surgery.
  • The quality of the physicians in Cedars-Sinai Medical Group and Cedars-Sinai Health Associates consistently ranks in the top among the more than 200 California medical groups participating in HMO and managed care plans.  On independent surveys, Cedars-Sinai Medical Group and Cedars-Sinai Health Associates consistently rank in the top tier (90th percentile and above) for patient satisfaction.
  • In addition to our higher quality, the many region-wide services that academic medical centers like Cedars-Sinai provide (and community hospitals do not) add to overall cost, but benefit everyone in the region:

  • Many of the highly specialized services that only academic medical centers like Cedars-Sinai provide for everyone in the region are costly to maintain.  These include:
  • Advanced heart disease treatments
    • Specialized treatments for complex (and in some cases, rare) types of cancer
    • Surgical and medical treatments for serious brain disorders, such as complex aneurysms, brain tumors and stroke
    • Advanced Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
    • Comprehensive Transplant Center
  • Having these services centralized at academic medical centers is actually much more cost-efficient for everyone than having these complex, costly services available at every hospital.
  • The added cost burden that academic medical centers like Cedars-Sinai take on to benefit the entire region includes the cost of specialized technology and equipment, as well as the costs of keeping highly trained specialists on staff.
  • For example, as one of just four Level One Trauma Centers in LA County (and the only one not operated by the government), Cedars-Sinai has  a neurosurgeon and a trauma surgeon in the hospital  24 hours a day, as well as other trauma specialists and equipment to treat the most severely injured people in automobile crashes and other traumas.

Thomas M. Priselac
President and CEO, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

Biased Los Angeles Times Boy Scout Series

The Los Angeles Times hates the Boy Scouts. In their relentless attempt to drive the Boy Scouts out of existence, they have published one of the most biased articles in the history of “news” reporting. Article authors Jason Felch and Kim Christensen have broken almost every rule of news reporting in their article “Boy Scout files reveal repeat child abuse by sexual predators.”

First, the article isn’t “news” at all, since all the events occurred over two decades ago. The implication that the Boys Scouts are still allowing sexual predators to serve in their ranks is false.

Second, the emphasis of the article is on some secret Boy Scout list from the 1970’s that was supposed to keep repeat homosexual predators out of scouting. The list failed to keep some predators from repeating their perversions, probably because it was not consistently checked when new leaders signed up. However, this list has not been the primary means of screening sexual predators for decades!

Having been the adult leader of a Cub Scout Pack, I was involved in leader selection and screening from 1998 to 2007. We never checked any secret Boy Scout list to screen our leaders. We went to the police department, who ran the screening to search for registered sex offenders. Nowadays, this can be done online. However, this was not the only method the Boy Scouts used to prevent of sexual abuse. Following the abuse outlined in the LA Times article, the Boy Scouts implemented youth protection training in 1990. The training was required for all leaders, Scouts and Scouting parents. One of the key provisions of youth protection was that a leader was never allowed to be one on one with any Scout at any time. Two-deep leadership prevented all the abuse that had occurred in previous decades, which is why the LA Times article could not report abuse after 1991. The LA Times article does not mention any of this information, but just left the impression that abuse of Boy Scout youth was an ongoing problem. Shame on them!