More on health care

Every time I call my doctor's office, I believe that it's for something reasonable. Something's red that shouldn't be. Something hurts and it shouldn't (this much or for so long).
My doctor, whom I like a great deal, will deal with my question reasonably. "Here's some stuff for that thing that's red." "If it hurts when you do that, don't do that." Once in a while, he calls for some tests. Much of the time, the tests are inconclusive. There's something not right, but we don't know what it is. Maybe more tests are in order. Maybe we'll be in a state of watchful waiting.
And then there was the time that the test, a biopsy, confirmed that I had malignant melanoma.
The surgeon removed the malignancy and the biannual check-up with the dermatologist hasn't shown anything new. (One time, she said "Hmm," with a concerned tone. There was a spot on my foot. On closer inspection, we learned that it was dirt.)
I mention all this because Charles Goheen, CFO of Fallon Community Health Plan remarked that root causes for FCHP's troubles, "include higher medical costs, overutilization of services and 'the market power of certain providers.'" (FCHP Loses $8.5M In Q1 | Worcester Business Journal)
As a patient, I make my best guesses regarding superfluous use of the health care system. Most often, that means not calling the doctor if I'm sure I know what's wrong. On occasion, it means deciding against an expensive and more aggressive treatment plan when doing little or nothing works pretty well.
In the early 60s, when local TV news was getting serious about providing timely coverage of local sports, Boston stations sent film crews to the Garden to cover the Celtics. Film was expensive. A station manager was complaining to the sports director about the costs of having a crew cover each home game. "Can't you just shoot the highlights?" he asked.
Wouldn't it save money if we had just the tests and received just the treatments that we needed?