3 ms·
When it comes to healthcare, that's a lot more complicated though. Wider competition with less control/accuracy will often mean that fads get more profitable:
by makeitdouble 2y ago
When it comes to healthcare, that's a lot more complicated though.
Wider competition with less control/accuracy will often mean that fads get more profitable: for instance "gluten free" sells enough that it makes sense for random makers to slap the label on their product even if they don't really care to follow the most rigorous rules.
Letting the market decide will result in the minority (those actually affected by the products) to get shafted, as more and more companies will move to the lower standards they can get by, instead of keeping high priced products that don't sell as well.
That doesn't mean that the status quo is great, but at least we need to be pretty cautious on the direction we want to go. "Let's just do something and see how it goes" isn't a desirable strategy when people are at risk.
- jjk166 2y agoYou can have the regulators choose who can slap a "gluten free" sticker on their product but still give people the freedom to buy products without the sticker. Competition does not mean getting rid of or even lowering standards, just that if those standards are misaligned with real people's needs we're not stuck with them. Maintaining a known-flawed status quo is not being cautious. People suffer severely every day from inaccessible medical care. We can always return to the current system if we don't like a change, but until we actually try it we don't even know how much damage the status quo is doing.