7 ms·

To everyone that reads this: If you've not had a checkup in the last year go and get one! It'll be included on your health insurance and the blood draw will in

To everyone that reads this: If you've not had a checkup in the last year go and get one! It'll be included on your health insurance and the blood draw will include things like if you have high cholesterol.

rmellow 5y ago
In the US I presume? Canadians have a harder time... In Canada/Ontario, you have to convince your doctor to give you a cholesterol test, e.g. family history. It won't be done preventively [1]. Even if you manage to get tested, if you're under 40 the doctor won't care and there will be no followup. [1] https://exechealth.ca/ontario-drops-annual-physicals/ https://exechealth.ca/ontario-drops-annual-physicals/
- testesttest 5y ago
  A test in the US < $50 and is easy to schedule without having a doctor involved at LabCore or similar. Is that an option in CA?
  - rmellow 5y ago
    There are private clinics one can become a member of, but this is extremely uncommon and most people don't know it's an option. Costs upwards of $3,000 annually.
    - foota 5y ago
      Only 3,000? chuckles in American
      - xeromal 5y ago
        You can go to quest diagnostics or labscorb and order yourself a test for under 200$ (no insurance needed) that would do an entire panel on you. I did this and then called a teledoc for like 40$ (copay) and had them go over hte results with me. It's pretty sweet.
        InitialLastName 5y ago
        > called a teledoc for like 40$ (copay) So, more like $7400 annually [0], plus a $40 copay, discounting whatever other health care you needed in the year. [0] https://www.kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2020-section-6-worker-and-employer-contributions-for-premiums/ https://www.kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2020-section-6-worke...
        ejolto 5y ago
        If you make 100K a year in Canada you pay $29,986 in taxes of which about a third goes to healthcare, so $10000 annually and you still won't get tested preventatively.
        InitialLastName 5y ago
        The difference is that the US cost is true whether you're wealthy or poor (above a certain margin). In Canada, if you make the median household income of $35k, you presumably pay proportionally less (or even less than that; I can't be bothered to look up the progressive taxation margins) in taxes, so $3500 max.
  - Karawebnetwork 5y ago
    In Quebec at least, a doctor's prescription is required for all blood tests even at private labs.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - SOLAR_FIELDS 5y ago
      Crazy how different it is vs the States - check out for instance what you can get immediately at this pretty popular chain: https://www.anylabtestnow.com/general-health/ https://www.anylabtestnow.com/general-health/ Hundreds of different ones. Granted you still need some level of medical expertise to be able to accurately interpret results on a lot of them but a smart enough layman could probably self diagnose some illnesses with enough homework.
      - Karawebnetwork 5y ago
        We even need a prescription for repeat labs. So if my doctor is away for personal reasons for a month and I need to have my [thing that I get tested every month] checked, I can't without having to navigate the entire healthcare system to find a workaround. I would be easy for me to interpret the results as my doctor is clear that [number] should not fall under [threshold]. It even comes back highlighted in red on the result sheet if it falls under that number. And I have clear instruction on what to do if that happens. But nope.
  - doublepg23 5y ago
    That's interesting pricing. I just did some blood tests at Quest Labs w/o a Dr and it ran me $200
    - testesttest 5y ago
      You got a cholesterol test and only a cholesterol test? That was what the parent comment is about. Tests vary a lot by test. LabCorp states their prices very clearly. Walgreens also has cholesterol tests for ~30$ https://news.walgreens.com/press-center/news/walgreens-introduces-daily-testing-for-cholesterol-blood-glucose-and-a1c-at-more-than-1400-stores-in-33-states-and-washington-dc.htm https://news.walgreens.com/press-center/news/walgreens-intro...
      - doublepg23 5y ago
        I read the comment wrong. I thought they meant a full test battery not just a cholesterol test.
- daniel-cussen 5y ago
  Meh. Might be an American thing, if you watch TV or news the images of persons will be constantly telling you to ask your doctor about this, consult a medical professional before this other activity they advertise, and oh you gotta see a dentist every six months. Just demand creation, better just to get a blood-pressure test when you do see a doctor and a cholesterol test based on the result.
  - tommoor 5y ago
    You can have perfectly normal blood pressure and high cholesterol FWIW
  - InitialLastName 5y ago
    To be fair, all the ad revenue for pharma products on American television networks whose parents happen to own a news network also do a great job of building leverage against the pharma companies ever being investigated too deeply.
nradov 5y ago
Annual checkups are not justified from an evidence-based medicine perspective for most healthy adults. They don't produce better outcomes. https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/is-the-annual-physical-unnecessary/ https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/is-the-annual-physical-unne... Annual checkups aren't necessarily fully covered by health insurance plans. However, other preventative care services are. https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/preventive-care-benefits/ https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/preventive-care-benefits...
robbiep 5y ago
There is no real medical need for an ‘annual physical’ it is a creation of the American medical-industrial complex and creates more problems than it solves. Having said that seeing a doctor occasionally for blood pressure etc is useful, but the interval for someone young and otherwise not experiencing any symptoms doesn’t need to be annually
- mrmuagi 5y ago
  Isn't there catch-it-early type diseases? Like breast cancer, testicular cancer, colon cancer, etc... that prove this wrong? The funny thing is, the older you get, you are likely to have some sort of symptom. Such is life. For blood pressure, I would expand and add general bloodwork for health conscious individuals or people with a family history for certain issues -- diabetes, liver, androgen, heart health markers.. Here in Canada you just need to mention you are interested for health reasons and a doctor refers you -- not sure how costly it is in USA -- but apparently private clinics are a choice to build custom panels.
  - franga2000 5y ago
    I've heard many experts talk about issues with "catching disease early", one being that what doctors find might have never developed far enough to cause harm and so the treatment might actually be more harmful. I don't want to risk trying to explain it from memory since I have zero medical knowledge, but there's a YouTube video by "MedlifeCrisis" about this that also has sources cited in the description. The title is something like "the problem with screening".
    - throwaway4aday 5y ago
      > one being that what doctors find might have never developed far enough to cause harm and so the treatment might actually be more harmful. This is not a reason to not screen regularly. If treating very early is the problem then you should still aim to detect it early and then closely monitor it until you have enough information to decide whether to act or not. There are many people that will simply not go in for testing until there is a major problem if you advise against regular testing. A close family member of mine just passed away recently because he didn't go in for regular testing and they caught the cancer way too late.

rmellow 5y ago

In the US I presume? Canadians have a harder time... In Canada/Ontario, you have to convince your doctor to give you a cholesterol test, e.g. family history. It won't be done preventively [1]. Even if you manage to get tested, if you're under 40 the doctor won't care and there will be no followup. [1] https://exechealth.ca/ontario-drops-annual-physicals/ https://exechealth.ca/ontario-drops-annual-physicals/

testesttest 5y ago
A test in the US < $50 and is easy to schedule without having a doctor involved at LabCore or similar. Is that an option in CA?
- rmellow 5y ago
  There are private clinics one can become a member of, but this is extremely uncommon and most people don't know it's an option. Costs upwards of $3,000 annually.
  - foota 5y ago
    Only 3,000? chuckles in American
    - xeromal 5y ago
      You can go to quest diagnostics or labscorb and order yourself a test for under 200$ (no insurance needed) that would do an entire panel on you. I did this and then called a teledoc for like 40$ (copay) and had them go over hte results with me. It's pretty sweet.
      - InitialLastName 5y ago
        > called a teledoc for like 40$ (copay) So, more like $7400 annually [0], plus a $40 copay, discounting whatever other health care you needed in the year. [0] https://www.kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2020-section-6-worker-and-employer-contributions-for-premiums/ https://www.kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2020-section-6-worke...
        ejolto 5y ago
        If you make 100K a year in Canada you pay $29,986 in taxes of which about a third goes to healthcare, so $10000 annually and you still won't get tested preventatively.
        InitialLastName 5y ago
        The difference is that the US cost is true whether you're wealthy or poor (above a certain margin). In Canada, if you make the median household income of $35k, you presumably pay proportionally less (or even less than that; I can't be bothered to look up the progressive taxation margins) in taxes, so $3500 max.
- Karawebnetwork 5y ago
  In Quebec at least, a doctor's prescription is required for all blood tests even at private labs.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - SOLAR_FIELDS 5y ago
    Crazy how different it is vs the States - check out for instance what you can get immediately at this pretty popular chain: https://www.anylabtestnow.com/general-health/ https://www.anylabtestnow.com/general-health/ Hundreds of different ones. Granted you still need some level of medical expertise to be able to accurately interpret results on a lot of them but a smart enough layman could probably self diagnose some illnesses with enough homework.
    - Karawebnetwork 5y ago
      We even need a prescription for repeat labs. So if my doctor is away for personal reasons for a month and I need to have my [thing that I get tested every month] checked, I can't without having to navigate the entire healthcare system to find a workaround. I would be easy for me to interpret the results as my doctor is clear that [number] should not fall under [threshold]. It even comes back highlighted in red on the result sheet if it falls under that number. And I have clear instruction on what to do if that happens. But nope.
- doublepg23 5y ago
  That's interesting pricing. I just did some blood tests at Quest Labs w/o a Dr and it ran me $200
  - testesttest 5y ago
    You got a cholesterol test and only a cholesterol test? That was what the parent comment is about. Tests vary a lot by test. LabCorp states their prices very clearly. Walgreens also has cholesterol tests for ~30$ https://news.walgreens.com/press-center/news/walgreens-introduces-daily-testing-for-cholesterol-blood-glucose-and-a1c-at-more-than-1400-stores-in-33-states-and-washington-dc.htm https://news.walgreens.com/press-center/news/walgreens-intro...
    - doublepg23 5y ago
      I read the comment wrong. I thought they meant a full test battery not just a cholesterol test.
daniel-cussen 5y ago
Meh. Might be an American thing, if you watch TV or news the images of persons will be constantly telling you to ask your doctor about this, consult a medical professional before this other activity they advertise, and oh you gotta see a dentist every six months. Just demand creation, better just to get a blood-pressure test when you do see a doctor and a cholesterol test based on the result.
- tommoor 5y ago
  You can have perfectly normal blood pressure and high cholesterol FWIW
- InitialLastName 5y ago
  To be fair, all the ad revenue for pharma products on American television networks whose parents happen to own a news network also do a great job of building leverage against the pharma companies ever being investigated too deeply.

nradov 5y ago

Annual checkups are not justified from an evidence-based medicine perspective for most healthy adults. They don't produce better outcomes. https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/is-the-annual-physical-unnecessary/ https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/is-the-annual-physical-unne... Annual checkups aren't necessarily fully covered by health insurance plans. However, other preventative care services are. https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/preventive-care-benefits/ https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/preventive-care-benefits...

robbiep 5y ago

There is no real medical need for an ‘annual physical’ it is a creation of the American medical-industrial complex and creates more problems than it solves. Having said that seeing a doctor occasionally for blood pressure etc is useful, but the interval for someone young and otherwise not experiencing any symptoms doesn’t need to be annually

mrmuagi 5y ago
Isn't there catch-it-early type diseases? Like breast cancer, testicular cancer, colon cancer, etc... that prove this wrong? The funny thing is, the older you get, you are likely to have some sort of symptom. Such is life. For blood pressure, I would expand and add general bloodwork for health conscious individuals or people with a family history for certain issues -- diabetes, liver, androgen, heart health markers.. Here in Canada you just need to mention you are interested for health reasons and a doctor refers you -- not sure how costly it is in USA -- but apparently private clinics are a choice to build custom panels.
- franga2000 5y ago
  I've heard many experts talk about issues with "catching disease early", one being that what doctors find might have never developed far enough to cause harm and so the treatment might actually be more harmful. I don't want to risk trying to explain it from memory since I have zero medical knowledge, but there's a YouTube video by "MedlifeCrisis" about this that also has sources cited in the description. The title is something like "the problem with screening".
  - throwaway4aday 5y ago
    > one being that what doctors find might have never developed far enough to cause harm and so the treatment might actually be more harmful. This is not a reason to not screen regularly. If treating very early is the problem then you should still aim to detect it early and then closely monitor it until you have enough information to decide whether to act or not. There are many people that will simply not go in for testing until there is a major problem if you advise against regular testing. A close family member of mine just passed away recently because he didn't go in for regular testing and they caught the cancer way too late.