On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 08:47:17 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 3/16/2016 4:44 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2016 00:47:14 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/11/2016 12:17 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> That was precisely my thought (the latter, not the former;)  )
>>>
>>>
>>> There is a lot of grumbling on this side of the pond at the moment.
>>> With drug treatments being not cost effective. So patients die and
>>> companies prosper.
>>
>> Yeah, on this side as well.  And then we have opportunists like Martin
>> Shrikeli who take drugs that are affordable and jack the prices up, and
>> then justify it by saying the insurance companies cover it *anyways*.
>>
>>
> I hope they throw away the key.

Same here.

>> Because insurance company money is free to the consumer, apparently.
>>
>>
> I wonder how the world would have turned out if you had a "free at the
> point of use" health service.

That would be a nice thing.  As it is now, there's always a concern about 
going to the doctor for something - because "how much is it going to cost 
me?" is always a deciding factor.

Like "I've got kidney stones - but no insurance.  Do I go to the ER for 
pain meds and treatment, or do I live with the pain?" - that's a decision 
nobody should ever have to make.

And then when you get charged $3,000 for the visit (what was essentially 
a 15-minute consultation with the ER doctor), it's not exactly like 
you're in a position to shop around for the least expensive ER, compare 
Yelp reviews, and make an "informed consumer decision" about where to go.

And they don't really say anything about the pricing being negotiable 
(I've had a few people claim that that is actually the case here in the 
US - but I've never known it to be true).

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message