3 ms·

But of course that "service" is mostly waste. If you self-refer yourself to Dr. Smucker, the best [foo] surgeon in the business, you're likely to find that you

But of course that "service" is mostly waste. If you self-refer yourself to Dr. Smucker, the best [foo] surgeon in the business, you're likely to find that your [foo] isn't broken at all and even if it was, it doesn't need surgery. So you've wasted Ms. Smucker's time and your insurance company's money, and you haven't made anyone, including yourself, any healthier. And of course, there's like a 50-50 chance that Ms. Smucker is actually out of network by the time you see her, and you'll get a $2,000 bill to pay. Take out the profit motive and you can build systems to actually make people healthier: networks of clinics and registered nurses and family physicians to handle the bulk of the work (which is, after all, mostly routine) backed up by specialists for the hard cases, and everyone with a mandate to do what is best for the patient rather than what makes the most money. That's what other countries do and it works extremely well, providing better health outcomes than the USA for a fraction of the cost.

twoodfin 9y ago
We can argue about the potential cost savings of restricting who patients can see and when, but that's my point! Politically, telling folks who are happily "wasting" money on medicine that the government and not their doctors will decide what they can and can't have is a huge loser. Currently, their insurers are not heavily restricting them, because they're paying for the privilege.
- jernfrost 9y ago
  Insurance companies are not different than government, they also try to limit your usage of health services. Every time you get service it is an expense for them. But honestly I think single payer is just part of the solution. You also need public hospitals, because hospitals have no incentive to suggest a good but cheap solution to a medical problem. I read a book, where an American went all around the world with the same ailment, got examined and suggestions for procedure to treat it. A VERY telling outcome was that in the US only the most expensive and complicated procedure was suggested to the patient. In other countries he was informed about cheaper and far less invasive procedures. Which btw worked and made him happy, so he avoided a complicated and potentially risky surgical procedure. This is a problem with the US system. There are something like 2-3x as many surgical procedures that needed often simply worsening the well being of the patient. This is the flawed American thinking that good health care is the same as getting lots of complicated medical procedures. The drug consumption is also astonishing. When using American health care I was shocked by how aggressively they pushed medication on me. People are trying to push medication on people everywhere in the US. Doctors, commercials, drug stores etc. You are not a patient. You are just a customer. The US system really just leads to the health care sector focusing on pushing as many expensive drugs and procedures on the people who can pay for them an ignoring the rest, regardless of whether that brings better health or not.
  - unclenoriega 9y ago
    I think the book you are referencing is The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care by T.R. Reid.

twoodfin 9y ago

We can argue about the potential cost savings of restricting who patients can see and when, but that's my point! Politically, telling folks who are happily "wasting" money on medicine that the government and not their doctors will decide what they can and can't have is a huge loser. Currently, their insurers are not heavily restricting them, because they're paying for the privilege.

jernfrost 9y ago
Insurance companies are not different than government, they also try to limit your usage of health services. Every time you get service it is an expense for them. But honestly I think single payer is just part of the solution. You also need public hospitals, because hospitals have no incentive to suggest a good but cheap solution to a medical problem. I read a book, where an American went all around the world with the same ailment, got examined and suggestions for procedure to treat it. A VERY telling outcome was that in the US only the most expensive and complicated procedure was suggested to the patient. In other countries he was informed about cheaper and far less invasive procedures. Which btw worked and made him happy, so he avoided a complicated and potentially risky surgical procedure. This is a problem with the US system. There are something like 2-3x as many surgical procedures that needed often simply worsening the well being of the patient. This is the flawed American thinking that good health care is the same as getting lots of complicated medical procedures. The drug consumption is also astonishing. When using American health care I was shocked by how aggressively they pushed medication on me. People are trying to push medication on people everywhere in the US. Doctors, commercials, drug stores etc. You are not a patient. You are just a customer. The US system really just leads to the health care sector focusing on pushing as many expensive drugs and procedures on the people who can pay for them an ignoring the rest, regardless of whether that brings better health or not.
- unclenoriega 9y ago
  I think the book you are referencing is The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care by T.R. Reid.