3 ms·
That doesn’t make sense - a sick patient costs the shareholders money.
by lostlogin 2y ago
That doesn’t make sense - a sick patient costs the shareholders money.
- simonh 2y agoOnly if you treat the patient. Cures cost money to administer. Better to just deny cover in the first place.
- robertlagrant 2y agoThat's got nothing to do with cures. In that world administering a cure would be cheaper than treating a chronic illness, which is the opposite of what's being said.
- marcus0x62 2y agoSetting aside the previous commenters "the cure is a threat" thing, there's some precedent for this in the US healthcare system in the form of HMOs (particularly Kaiser Permanente.) Part of that is supposed to be vertical efficiency. Part is the idea that it is possible to avoid extremely expensive acute care services with proactive low-cost primary care.
- d0mine 2y agoOne would think so. Unless there are programs that pay you for sick patients (risk adjustment) and you control how much you are willing to spent on a patient. I've made a mistake of consuming healthcare related content due to the recent ceo assassination. Do not recommend.