4 ms·
The article notes this particular healthcare fund made billions of dollars in profit for the year and one of the parties interviewed speculates that this indivi
by plagiarist 2y ago
The article notes this particular healthcare fund made billions of dollars in profit for the year and one of the parties interviewed speculates that this individual's care would represent a few minutes of that.
The gastroenterologist is not the expensive part, either, the expensive part was the manufacturing process for the drug. It would be super cool to invest the billions of profit for this insurance company into developing more efficient ways to produce this category of drug. Alas,
Instead we are investing in finding the most underhanded ways possible to deny medical care for each patient, all the while pretending we are not making medical decisions for them.
- peitho_pls 2y agoAbsolutely, the insurer could sacrifice some profitability to pay for this case, but eventually health care costs have to be rationed somewhere. I don't think any health care system can afford this level of treatment for as often as it is needed, and I don't think capping the profit in the industry solves that problem. Also I would agree the insurer is absolutely making medical decisions with its own definition of medical necessity. But the Doctor is also making financial decisions when he recommends a drug that pays him significant consulting fees every year. There's warped incentives all over.