3 ms·

That's my doctor's site! The real takeaway (to me) is that single-payer health insurance would be the way to go.

by pstuart 14y ago

thatswrong0 14y ago
I think it's a bit more complicated than that. It's easy to look at other countries and say, hey, that works there, therefore it will work here. But not all governments are created equal. If the government in the U.S. had a better track record, maybe it would be more palatable. But as is, I don't see single payer being the solution to our problems.
- pstuart 14y ago
  It doesn't solve everything but it should help to simplify matters greatly. What would help too is ubiquitous electronic records management, e.g., any records from a visit with one doctor should be usable by the patient at another doctor. Add to that cheaper testing and more AI / self-help and that should take it even further. Lastly, kill the corn lobby and get some real sense into people about how their diet and lifestyle directly impact their health. What percentage of US healthcare costs are going towards diabetes and any related illnesses? And what percentage of that is directly related to obesity and a sedentary lifestyle?
  - epmatsw 14y ago
    Electronic Health Records are harder to implement than you'd expect. HIPAA sets really harsh penalties for violations that can occur much more easily if hospitals and doctors provide open access to other facilities. Organizations are also often reluctant to provide their data to other facilities because of a perception that it will lead to a loss of competitive advantage. Add to that the typical problems of cross-vendor interfacing between organizations. That said, EHRs are definitely the way to go, and we'll see much more of them in the future. Once Stage 2 of Meaningful Use[1] kicks in, you'll see a bunch of hospitals scrambling to upgrade their IT infrastructure to make sure they continue to receive the bonus Medicare/Medicaid payouts they're receiving now. 1. http://www.healthit.gov/providers-professionals/meaningful-use-definition-objectives http://www.healthit.gov/providers-professionals/meaningful-u...
- jbooth 14y ago
  Other countries are pretty diverse with how they implement single-payer. Britain has NHS, Canada has private hospitals with government handling the insurance. One thing in common: They all suck, yet are all much better than our system.
  - seehafer 14y ago
    "They all suck, yet are all much better than our system." By what measure? If you're trying to see a specialist -- say, to get a surgeon -- soon, our system is far superior, which is why Canadians routinely cross the border to take advantage of our system. A still simplistic and incorrect but fairer appraisal would be to say that the NHS and Canada's Medicare are optimized for everyday care and our healthcare system is optimized for specialty care.
    - jbooth 14y ago
      By "better/equivalent average outcomes for significantly lower average cost" as a measure.
rogerbinns 14y ago
IMHO the best solution would be a standard health care product paid for in a standard way (but reasonably affordable/means tested). It doesn't mean that the government has to collect all the money, or that the actual care has to be provided by the government. But what it would mean is that a baseline is available to everyone. It should also include discovering and disseminating best practises, improving overall health through any practical means (ie not just pills and doctor visits), and looking at things like hospice care for end of life instead of very expensive procedures and drugs. And on top of that the free market can provide extras using whatever economic model works for them.
- astrodust 14y ago
  It's probably better if the federal level of government sets standards and it's up to the states to implement them. Vermont, for example, is already ahead of the curve here.
  - rogerbinns 14y ago
    That is why I put "discovering and disseminating best practises" in there. We can all guess what the best way of specifying and implementing the standards is, but why not experiment and find out? This ranges from the setting of the standards (eg how detailed they are), through how they are implemented. And of course all the other things (eg reducing hospital infection rates, improving overall hearth health).

That's my doctor's site! The real takeaway (to me) is that single-payer health insurance would be the way to go.

by pstuart 14y ago

That's my doctor's site! The real takeaway (to me) is that single-payer health insurance would be the way to go.

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. It's easy to look at other countries and say, hey, that works there, therefore it will work here. But not all governments are created equal. If the government in the U.S. had a better track record, maybe it would be more palatable. But as is, I don't see single payer being the solution to our problems.

pstuart 14y ago
It doesn't solve everything but it should help to simplify matters greatly. What would help too is ubiquitous electronic records management, e.g., any records from a visit with one doctor should be usable by the patient at another doctor. Add to that cheaper testing and more AI / self-help and that should take it even further. Lastly, kill the corn lobby and get some real sense into people about how their diet and lifestyle directly impact their health. What percentage of US healthcare costs are going towards diabetes and any related illnesses? And what percentage of that is directly related to obesity and a sedentary lifestyle?
- epmatsw 14y ago
  Electronic Health Records are harder to implement than you'd expect. HIPAA sets really harsh penalties for violations that can occur much more easily if hospitals and doctors provide open access to other facilities. Organizations are also often reluctant to provide their data to other facilities because of a perception that it will lead to a loss of competitive advantage. Add to that the typical problems of cross-vendor interfacing between organizations. That said, EHRs are definitely the way to go, and we'll see much more of them in the future. Once Stage 2 of Meaningful Use[1] kicks in, you'll see a bunch of hospitals scrambling to upgrade their IT infrastructure to make sure they continue to receive the bonus Medicare/Medicaid payouts they're receiving now. 1. http://www.healthit.gov/providers-professionals/meaningful-use-definition-objectives http://www.healthit.gov/providers-professionals/meaningful-u...
jbooth 14y ago
Other countries are pretty diverse with how they implement single-payer. Britain has NHS, Canada has private hospitals with government handling the insurance. One thing in common: They all suck, yet are all much better than our system.
- seehafer 14y ago
  "They all suck, yet are all much better than our system." By what measure? If you're trying to see a specialist -- say, to get a surgeon -- soon, our system is far superior, which is why Canadians routinely cross the border to take advantage of our system. A still simplistic and incorrect but fairer appraisal would be to say that the NHS and Canada's Medicare are optimized for everyday care and our healthcare system is optimized for specialty care.
  - jbooth 14y ago
    By "better/equivalent average outcomes for significantly lower average cost" as a measure.

rogerbinns 14y ago

IMHO the best solution would be a standard health care product paid for in a standard way (but reasonably affordable/means tested). It doesn't mean that the government has to collect all the money, or that the actual care has to be provided by the government. But what it would mean is that a baseline is available to everyone. It should also include discovering and disseminating best practises, improving overall health through any practical means (ie not just pills and doctor visits), and looking at things like hospice care for end of life instead of very expensive procedures and drugs. And on top of that the free market can provide extras using whatever economic model works for them.

astrodust 14y ago
It's probably better if the federal level of government sets standards and it's up to the states to implement them. Vermont, for example, is already ahead of the curve here.
- rogerbinns 14y ago
  That is why I put "discovering and disseminating best practises" in there. We can all guess what the best way of specifying and implementing the standards is, but why not experiment and find out? This ranges from the setting of the standards (eg how detailed they are), through how they are implemented. And of course all the other things (eg reducing hospital infection rates, improving overall hearth health).