5 ms·

I am not sure you understand how often for-profit insurance just says "no". "despite a six-year span of growing literature and updated policies, nearly 1 in 5

by Klinky 4y ago

I am not sure you understand how often for-profit insurance just says "no". "despite a six-year span of growing literature and updated policies, nearly 1 in 5 patients diagnosed with FAI would still potentially be denied coverage. This highlights a continued divide between surgeons and insurance companies." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8259176/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8259176/ US insurance will also make you wait, mandating less costly treatments first, or have you go through a lengthy & convoluted appeals process to finally get covered. I didn't say Canada's health system doesn't have delays or rationing of care, only that the US health system is not superior, suffering from exactly the same concerns you bring up about Canada's health system, yet costing the US like 200% more, while chaining people to their employer.

refurb 4y ago
What’s different between a private insurer saying no and the government? You realize the private US insurers say “yes” to things the Canadian government says “no”? https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4495123 https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4495123 "Then I found out that this other country — which I thought had a healthcare system that was so superior to the U.S. — doesn't test for the tumour marker that saved my life, and doesn't cover this drug that is responsible for pushing my cancer into remission after traditional chemotherapy failed to do that."
- Klinky 4y ago
  The private insurer is 2x the cost. You don't think people travel outside the US to receive care? Medical tourism is alive and well in the US due to the cost burdens for-profit healthcare requires.
- thephyber 4y ago
  American here. This is a bad line of argument. Americans only get 1 insurer at a time, so comparing the NHS to the union of all possible insurers is a strawman argument. Each single insurer covers roughly the same procedures that the NHS does (although insurers frequently deny legit claims and will deny all claims past a certain annual/lifetime claims limit). And your example is at a single point in time. At one point in time, no US insurer covered that procedure (before it was standardized) and eventually if it actually does affordably improve outcomes, it will be covered by NHS. For me, the most valuable feature of CA's system is that its incentives are at least mostly aligned with your long term health interests. Only HMOs and active duty soldiers (covering maybe 15% of Americans at most) in the USA are mostly aligned this way. The remainder of US health care is minimally aligned, so costs are outrageous and long term outcomes are sometimes good, but sometimes terrible.

by Klinky 4y ago

refurb 4y ago

What’s different between a private insurer saying no and the government? You realize the private US insurers say “yes” to things the Canadian government says “no”? https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4495123 https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4495123 "Then I found out that this other country — which I thought had a healthcare system that was so superior to the U.S. — doesn't test for the tumour marker that saved my life, and doesn't cover this drug that is responsible for pushing my cancer into remission after traditional chemotherapy failed to do that."

Klinky 4y ago
The private insurer is 2x the cost. You don't think people travel outside the US to receive care? Medical tourism is alive and well in the US due to the cost burdens for-profit healthcare requires.
thephyber 4y ago
American here. This is a bad line of argument. Americans only get 1 insurer at a time, so comparing the NHS to the union of all possible insurers is a strawman argument. Each single insurer covers roughly the same procedures that the NHS does (although insurers frequently deny legit claims and will deny all claims past a certain annual/lifetime claims limit). And your example is at a single point in time. At one point in time, no US insurer covered that procedure (before it was standardized) and eventually if it actually does affordably improve outcomes, it will be covered by NHS. For me, the most valuable feature of CA's system is that its incentives are at least mostly aligned with your long term health interests. Only HMOs and active duty soldiers (covering maybe 15% of Americans at most) in the USA are mostly aligned this way. The remainder of US health care is minimally aligned, so costs are outrageous and long term outcomes are sometimes good, but sometimes terrible.