5 ms·

I think it's incredible that her health insurance didn't cover electronic prosthetics. The hook prosthetic is just a simple open/close grabber tool. Imagine tr

I think it's incredible that her health insurance didn't cover electronic prosthetics. The hook prosthetic is just a simple open/close grabber tool. Imagine trying to navigate through life with two grabbers. The modern myoelectric prosthetics offer way more functionality and freedom. You can use a computer, dress yourself, drive a car, and feed yourself (of course the author can't do all these yet, it does take time to learn). You can't do this at all with hooks. I fractured/dislocated multiple wrist bones two years ago and it wasn't life threatening but I would have had diminished functionality without surgery -- insurance covered it no problem. My hand is great. How the hell does it make sense to fix a wrist in order to allow someone to do the activities of daily living but it doesn't make sense to give them a common commercial prosthetic in order to do the same thing?

TheBeardKing 9y ago
This is why the entire health insurance market doesn't make sense. Right now, as a healthy person, how am I supposed to weigh the impact of every potential health issue in my life? I'm sure she could've purchased some cadillac plan to cover it, but without experiencing that and with such a minute chance of an accident like that occurring as a teacher of all things, why should she ever buy it? Or even know to look for that kind of coverage? Who can price the repercussions of going without some medical procedure or medicine without ever having experienced that situation? I can understand car, boat, our house insurance and can easily replace those tangible items, but how should I price the risk to my health?
- adventured 9y ago
  Healthcare is heavily rationed in socialized medicine systems. That's why wait times are so extreme in Canada, and doubled from ~1990 to 2015. Rationing is the same exact thing as what you're talking about. They're choosing who gets what medical access and when. If you're 92 years old and you want an extremely expensive surgery or treatment in Canada, and it's only going to prolong your life by 18 months, you are not going to get that treatment, period. The same applies in France and Britain. Rationing is a required tenet of socialized healthcare. I'm not saying all rationing is bad, however pretending that under socialized healthcare it's just a free-for-all, is flat out wrong. A very recent example of the rationing squeeze: "N.H.S. Overwhelmed in Britain, Leaving Patients to Wait" "Cuts to the National Health Service budget in Britain have left hospitals stretched over the winter for years, but this time a flu outbreak, colder weather and high levels of respiratory illnesses have put the N.H.S. under the highest strain in decades. The situation has become so dire that the head of the health service is warning that the system is overwhelmed." "Some doctors took to Twitter to vent their frustrations publicly. One complained of having to practice “battlefield medicine,” while another apologized for the “3rd world conditions” caused by overcrowding." https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/world/europe/uk-national-health-service.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/world/europe/uk-national-...
  - trhway 9y ago
    >That's why wait times are so extreme in Canada, and doubled from ~1990 to 2015. what are wait times for 30M uninsured in the US? Infinity? Or even for underinsured : http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/may/problem-of-underinsurance http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/20... "Half (51%) of underinsured adults reported problems with medical bills or debt and more than two of five (44%) reported not getting needed care because of cost. "
    - adventured 9y ago
      Who said the US system was better? You're attempting to stand up a strawman counter. I said socialized medicine requires heavy rationing of care. The comment I replied to was implying that somehow the selection of and or limitation of care is wrong (eg under the US health insurance system): all socialized systems depend on that exact approach, aka rationing. They limit access, they restrict types of therapies based on age or expected outcomes due to cost, they extend wait times dramatically based on what they decide is more or less important, and so on. Socialized medicine would collapse instantly without such aggressive rationing. And nowhere in the above paragraph did I say the current US system is superior to alternatives in the developed world.
      - trhway 9y ago
        you must be kidding. You brought up the socialized medicine as a strawman counter in your first comment in this thread.
        adventured 9y ago
        I didn't do that in any manner. I brought up the fact that socialized medicine depends on restrictive filtering systems - rationing - to strictly control for costs. It can't function otherwise. The argument in favor of socialized medicine isn't that it enables any care you need at any time you need it. It's that it's supposed to be a morally superior distribution of resources.
      - 9y ago
tyingq 9y ago
Agreed, especially for a person that needs two. You could perhaps rationalize the insurance position in the case of only one hand. I fail to see how it's a luxury for someone that needs two.

TheBeardKing 9y ago

This is why the entire health insurance market doesn't make sense. Right now, as a healthy person, how am I supposed to weigh the impact of every potential health issue in my life? I'm sure she could've purchased some cadillac plan to cover it, but without experiencing that and with such a minute chance of an accident like that occurring as a teacher of all things, why should she ever buy it? Or even know to look for that kind of coverage? Who can price the repercussions of going without some medical procedure or medicine without ever having experienced that situation? I can understand car, boat, our house insurance and can easily replace those tangible items, but how should I price the risk to my health?

adventured 9y ago
Healthcare is heavily rationed in socialized medicine systems. That's why wait times are so extreme in Canada, and doubled from ~1990 to 2015. Rationing is the same exact thing as what you're talking about. They're choosing who gets what medical access and when. If you're 92 years old and you want an extremely expensive surgery or treatment in Canada, and it's only going to prolong your life by 18 months, you are not going to get that treatment, period. The same applies in France and Britain. Rationing is a required tenet of socialized healthcare. I'm not saying all rationing is bad, however pretending that under socialized healthcare it's just a free-for-all, is flat out wrong. A very recent example of the rationing squeeze: "N.H.S. Overwhelmed in Britain, Leaving Patients to Wait" "Cuts to the National Health Service budget in Britain have left hospitals stretched over the winter for years, but this time a flu outbreak, colder weather and high levels of respiratory illnesses have put the N.H.S. under the highest strain in decades. The situation has become so dire that the head of the health service is warning that the system is overwhelmed." "Some doctors took to Twitter to vent their frustrations publicly. One complained of having to practice “battlefield medicine,” while another apologized for the “3rd world conditions” caused by overcrowding." https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/world/europe/uk-national-health-service.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/world/europe/uk-national-...
- trhway 9y ago
  >That's why wait times are so extreme in Canada, and doubled from ~1990 to 2015. what are wait times for 30M uninsured in the US? Infinity? Or even for underinsured : http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/may/problem-of-underinsurance http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/20... "Half (51%) of underinsured adults reported problems with medical bills or debt and more than two of five (44%) reported not getting needed care because of cost. "
  - adventured 9y ago
    Who said the US system was better? You're attempting to stand up a strawman counter. I said socialized medicine requires heavy rationing of care. The comment I replied to was implying that somehow the selection of and or limitation of care is wrong (eg under the US health insurance system): all socialized systems depend on that exact approach, aka rationing. They limit access, they restrict types of therapies based on age or expected outcomes due to cost, they extend wait times dramatically based on what they decide is more or less important, and so on. Socialized medicine would collapse instantly without such aggressive rationing. And nowhere in the above paragraph did I say the current US system is superior to alternatives in the developed world.
    - trhway 9y ago
      you must be kidding. You brought up the socialized medicine as a strawman counter in your first comment in this thread.
      - adventured 9y ago
        I didn't do that in any manner. I brought up the fact that socialized medicine depends on restrictive filtering systems - rationing - to strictly control for costs. It can't function otherwise. The argument in favor of socialized medicine isn't that it enables any care you need at any time you need it. It's that it's supposed to be a morally superior distribution of resources.
    - 9y ago

tyingq 9y ago

Agreed, especially for a person that needs two. You could perhaps rationalize the insurance position in the case of only one hand. I fail to see how it's a luxury for someone that needs two.