America's healthcare problems can be most easily solved by staging a Communist revolution and nationalizing all private sector interests under the iron fist of the proletarian dictatorship for the good of the people.

At least, that's how I'd do it.

slothen wrote:this would be great if you make the assumption that insurance companies would be willing to foot the bill without calling such preventative measures "experimental" or "unnecessary," and then loading up the patient with fairly huge co-pays.

on this front, tort reform could prove helpful as well as better diagnostically-wise methods of treating patients by doing more than just relieving symptoms and treating in ways beyond pharmaceuticals

Easier said than done. Such an endeavor would require huge new bureaucracies to enforce and to change the culture of the insurance industry. It would be hugely expensive, and furthermore, I can say from personal experience that in such a situation, the effectiveness of enforcement varies directly with the interest of the current administration in reigning in businesses that may or may not have made campaign contributions.

don't get me wrong, I don't want to have a FDA or DEA-type nightmare

ultimately, changes in the insurance industry will come from within

THE Hal E. Burton 9000 wrote:ultimately, changes in the insurance industry will come from within

where's the incentive to change? these companies have people by the balls so to speak. and they have enough power in Washington to derail any changes to the system that would threaten that power.

slothen wrote:this would be great if you make the assumption that insurance companies would be willing to foot the bill without calling such preventative measures "experimental" or "unnecessary," and then loading up the patient with fairly huge co-pays.

Part of the problem is that the lay person (and especially the lawmakers) has no understanding of what preventative medicine really is. All it requires is going for regular yearly check-ups, and then following through with whatever the doctor recommends, for example, yearly prostate checks, or a colonoscopy every 5 years. These are things insurance companies are required to pay for, by law they cannot write them off and dump the bill on the patient. By doing these things at regular intervals you can catch dangerous diseases (e.g. colon cancer) and begin treating it early, which drastically increases the chance of recovery, and lessons the debilitating symptoms of the disease. In short, the problem is that people don't go to the doctor when they feel fine, they wait until they are horribly ill, and then have no alternative but go to the hospital and accrue massive bills. If they went when they were supposed to, half of these money issues wouldn't even exist.

Hal-kun wrote:on this front, tort reform could prove helpful as well as better diagnostically-wise methods of treating patients by doing more than just relieving symptoms and treating in ways beyond pharmaceuticals

Unfortunately, this is another sad misconception about the medical field. People assume that doctors just treat symptoms, or just prescribe drugs and nothing more. That is only true in cases where palliative treatment is the only option. For example, a terminal cancer patient in his last few months of life, in which there is no known curative treatment. Otherwise, there is nothing wrong with our diagnostic methods. Certainly, there will always be newer, better, more accurate tests, but it's not like we are practicing in the third world. US citizens consistently rank the quality of their health care as the best in the world, it's only the bills and waiting times they are concerned with. Unfortunately, the waiting times would only become worse with a socialized health care system. I remember reading a study once about doctors in the UK, and somewhere in the neighborhood of 60% said that they regretted going into the field, usually citing dealing with the system as the primary source of their troubles. And as far as giving drugs goes, well, until people are ready to give up their lifestyle of eating McDonald's for each meal, not exercising, and smoking and drinking, they are going to have to be willing to take the anti-hypertensive and anti-cholesterol medications every day.

slothen wrote:where's the incentive to change? these companies have people by the balls so to speak. and they have enough power in Washington to derail any changes to the system that would threaten that power.

you'd be surprised what happens when people get so fed up with a certain system

go read Atlas Shrugged for MOAR on that (you might try the Cliff Notes version though )

@ Brik-kun

don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming doctors or really even the medical industry as a whole

the onus here is, by far, on the patient

what I meant was ALL need to basically lead a generally healthier life and be more willing to give up on some bad habits in exchange for one

THE Hal E. Burton 9000 wrote:ALL need to basically lead a generally healthier life and be more willing to give up on some bad habits in exchange for one

1) People who eat, drink or smoke themselves into an early grave by overindulging in moderately to heavily taxed products can (if the taxes are considered exchangeable against healthcare costs, as is the case in this country) increase the net revenue to the Exchequer.

2) There is continual disagreement about what is healthy, anyway. Despite a recent furore over here about people drinking more than some arbitrary limits pulled out of thin air some years ago, it seems that for men, drinking the equivalent of about 10-15 pints of beer a week is optimal (you need to drink 2-3 times that much to have as much extra morbidity risk as a teetotaller). This is before we get on to any of the other food types and such where advice has flip-flopped over the years.

well, hopefully with more things being discovered regarding health coupled with the whole "custom/it's all about me" manner that everything seems to be moving in, people will be better able to take care of themselves

Mr. Tines wrote:it seems that for men, drinking the equivalent of about 10-15 pints of beer a week is optimal (you need to drink 2-3 times that much to have as much extra morbidity risk as a teetotaller).

In the US medical community, 1-2 drinks is not considered problematic. Studies have also shown this level can decrease risk of heart disease, and also clotting disorders which can lead to stroke, PE, or MI. Someone who has more than 2 drinks per night is should be considered a potential candidate for alcohol abuse. I'm not sure from which study the guidelines came from, but they've been pretty consistent (at least on this side of the pond) for a long time.

THE Hal E. Burton 9000 wrote:you'd be surprised what happens when people get so fed up with a certain system

go read Atlas Shrugged for MOAR on that (you might try the Cliff Notes version though )

Its been on my list for awhile, although I've definitely read the Cliff Notes version. And by that, I mean I've played Bioshock. Unfortunately, Ayn Rand is not truth made flesh.

"Sicko" does offer mostly anecdotal evidence, and it mentions none of the drawbacks of a nationalized free health-care system. I'd say that the focus of the movie is twofold: a health-care system based on for-profit insurance companies encourages unfair business practices and has great potential for victimization of the client/patient/customer. Secondly, in America, these industries have become so large and powerful, they make it quite difficult for any real change to occur in the system.

In my country we have both. State sponsored free health care for everyone who wants it (even illegal aliens are welcome). There's also private health care, mandatory insurance when you get a job (laboral law). But even these private groups are heavily regulated with such stuff as the obligation to cover 100% of the cost of certain life-necessity treatments or drugs. Hell, if it wasn't for that I'd be living under a bridge right now. Public hospitals aren't the nicest of things, I know that well enough. Nevertheless they're free and everyone can have all kinds of treatments there. And if you have money you can go to a less messed up hospital, but the resulting treatment won't make much of a difference.

You can't treat the health issue from a strictly market oriented PoV, as health is a requirement for them 3 principal rights.