6 ms·

I found this article really interesting but the author didn't talk about promoting wellness which seems to be a very taboo topic in the U.S. I'm vegan (which r

by sh1mmer 17y ago

I found this article really interesting but the author didn't talk about promoting wellness which seems to be a very taboo topic in the U.S. I'm vegan (which reduces heart disease and cancer risks), I don't smoke and I exercise moderately. However the pool of risk into which I am assigned also includes people that eat large amounts of cholesterol, smoke and don't exercise at all. In this article the author explores the topic of ranking treatments by their effectiveness in terms of QALYs, but a large amount of chronic and acute illnesses can be avoided by improved diet and exercise. As such any system of reform should look at a large piece of education and social change to encourage this.

jswinghammer 17y ago
It's true that you are right now subsidizing others health care and someone else will subsidize you when you're sick from something you didn't expect to get.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- sh1mmer 17y ago
  It's not about me subsidizing others, I understand how insurance works it's about disproportionate risk. There isn't an emphasis on creating change in society to encourage people to live lifestyles that needlessly expose them to risk, and burden our health system. It's unacceptable to not give people treatment for acute problems. However no-one is talking about how a lot of those acute problems are made much more likely by some lifestyles than others. If you buy car insurance you pay more or less based on your risk factors such as age, experience, points on your license, etc. If people choose to increase their risk for health issues than it seems unreasonable that the rest of us should have to pay for their lifestyle choices. It also seems like any healthcare reform should attempt to encourage people to reduce unnecessary burden on the system. That might make it more possible to increase the amount available to spend treatments for people with terminal illness, because less our of GDP would be spent on treating unnecessary chronic or acute illnesses.

by sh1mmer 17y ago

jswinghammer 17y ago

It's true that you are right now subsidizing others health care and someone else will subsidize you when you're sick from something you didn't expect to get.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
sh1mmer 17y ago
It's not about me subsidizing others, I understand how insurance works it's about disproportionate risk. There isn't an emphasis on creating change in society to encourage people to live lifestyles that needlessly expose them to risk, and burden our health system. It's unacceptable to not give people treatment for acute problems. However no-one is talking about how a lot of those acute problems are made much more likely by some lifestyles than others. If you buy car insurance you pay more or less based on your risk factors such as age, experience, points on your license, etc. If people choose to increase their risk for health issues than it seems unreasonable that the rest of us should have to pay for their lifestyle choices. It also seems like any healthcare reform should attempt to encourage people to reduce unnecessary burden on the system. That might make it more possible to increase the amount available to spend treatments for people with terminal illness, because less our of GDP would be spent on treating unnecessary chronic or acute illnesses.