Live data from Hacker News

The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

nytimes.com

171–180 of 481 posts

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately the NHS is, in many ways, pretty bad. They're pretty good at dealing with pregnancies, cancers, and emergencies but try getting seen for a chronic pain and you'll follow this rough timeline: - Try see your GP. Wait 2 weeks until your appointment. - GP will give a cursory examination and recommend a dietary change, taking ibuprofen/paracetamol, and to come back if problem persists. - Problem persists. Bo…

> They're pretty good at dealing with pregnancies, cancers, and emergencies I agree with everything you say, except the part about cancer. Even by European standards, the NHS is actually quite terrible at dealing with cancers - even "routine" cancers (like breast cancer and prostate cancer), let alone rare cancers. The five-year survival rate for prostate cancer in the UK is 55%, whereas in the US it's upwards of 90%…

> The five-year survival rate for prostate cancer in the UK is 55%, whereas in the US it's upwards of 90%.

Such survival rates are from date of diagnosis; IIRC, because prostate cancer detected early usually doesn't have interventions that are less harmful than the cancer is likely to be, there's considerable debate about the utility of screening; there has been considerable argument that the US tends to overscreen and over-intervene for prostate cancer.

If the UK doesn't do that and tends to screen in a way that tends to catch less of the less-imminently-dangerous prostate cancers, it would have a lower 5-year survival rate simply by not diagnosing prostate cancer where the diagnosis isn't usefully actionable; this doesn't mean they are actually worse at dealing with it.

> Prostate cancer is an incredibly treatable form of cancer; for most people, as long as it's detected early and managed appropriately, they will die with prostate cancer as opposed to from it

Prostate cancer is very often an extremely non-aggressive cancer with interventions that can have significant negative impacts, which is why, even when it's diagnosed “watchful waiting” or “active surveillance” are often the preferred management approaches; quite a lot of people will die with, rather than from, prostate cancer with no active intervention.

Population-wide 5-year survival rates from diagnosis are probably not a good metric for comparing countries with different screening practices; mortality rates are a better comparison metric, but also don't tell the whole story.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#172

I am having problems with my insurer at this very moment. I went to an in-network hospital for an ER visit, which turned into an 8-day stay (yes, it was serious). Evidently, none of the doctors at the hospital are in-network, however, (claims from various technicians are still "in processing", so I don't know how they will turn out) despite the fact that the hospital itself is definitely in-network. I had no choice a…

First, hope you're feeling better. This is exactly why Congress should not be exempt from any health care legislation. They need to go through this also, so it can be fixed.

At the moment they get payments from the government to purchase ACA gold plans from the Washington DC exchange.

(the Gold plans are closest to other federal government provided health insurance...)

Of course, many members of Congress are quite wealthy and wouldn't be much more than annoyed by a bill in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#173
post #4

Over here (in Europe) we get the impression that US has such a crazy healthcare system. Why aren't people marching in the streets? Is it not as crazy as it sounds for most users? If you're taken to ER how are you supposed to know if the doctors are all part of "your network" (whatever that even means)?

It's at least as crazy as you think.

I don't think that anybody really believes that the mess we've made of billing/paying-for services via insurance + government + hospital/doctor is a good idea. At least nobody who has dealt with it for more than 5 minutes, which is most people over 25.

The problem is that nobody can agree on how to fix it. One side wants to socialize the whole thing, the other side wants to do... something else, I guess. Regardless, neither side has enough power to just do what they want, so we're stuck with this bizarre Frankenstein's monster instead.

Meanwhile it's almost impossible to escape from the mess. You can't just have no insurance and pay for yourself, because they've made the prices for most things ludicrously high and then basically rebated them to the insurance companies.

Actually, it reminds me just a bit of that paraphrase of the Laws of Thermodynamics: you can't win, you can't break even, and you can't get out of the game.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#174
post #4

Over here (in Europe) we get the impression that US has such a crazy healthcare system. Why aren't people marching in the streets? Is it not as crazy as it sounds for most users? If you're taken to ER how are you supposed to know if the doctors are all part of "your network" (whatever that even means)?

Unfortunately, We've tried. It does little good. This last Saturday, there was a peaceful protest of around 200 people held in DC in front of Congress. One of my friends attended this protest. Around 150 of them were arrested, and then given bullshit charges, like crowding, obstructing, incommoding, or resisting arrest (of what charge were they being arrested for, angering Trump...).* When you try to "peacably protes…

We have rules in place that allow the population to peacefully protest without interfering with the business of others. These people didn't follow the rules and were punished accordingly just like every other law on the books.

If you are unable to enact the change you want from within the system it's because not enough people agree with the change you are proposing.

Welcome to the complexities of Society.

If you don't want to participate you don't have to. Abandon the laws of man and return to the laws of nature. Just remember the law of nature demands conflict be resolved in the favor of the more powerful will. I doubt very much you would fair well.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are "bad" guys. I've pointed out to a doctor that their agreement said that I would agree to pay any charge they decided to bill me for. I pointed out that I was in their office because they were in network for my insurance and that I couldn't agree to pay literally anything they decided to bill. So, I asked them to tell me what the maximum they might bill would be. And, they kicked me out of the office…

> So, I asked them to tell me what the maximum they might bill would be. And, they kicked me out of the office. Sounds like dental care in Canada.

A major area of Canadian health care which is not covered by the socialized system ends up looking a lot like the US system? How expected.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're pretty good at dealing with pregnancies, cancers, and emergencies I agree with everything you say, except the part about cancer. Even by European standards, the NHS is actually quite terrible at dealing with cancers - even "routine" cancers (like breast cancer and prostate cancer), let alone rare cancers. The five-year survival rate for prostate cancer in the UK is 55%, whereas in the US it's upwards of 90%…

I'm unfamiliar with how the US stats get collected - is that 90% of "everyone who had prostate cancer" survives 5+ years; or is that "everyone who had prostate cancer and private medical insurance"? If so then that is rather shocking. Prostate cancer may be something of an outlier given the hesitation people have in discussing it. This is something that has only really recently been attempted to be addressed in the U…

> I'm unfamiliar with how the US stats get collected - is that 90% of "everyone who had prostate cancer" survives 5+ years; or is that "everyone who had prostate cancer and private medical insurance"?

It's survival rate from point of diagnosis. Obviously, insurance and access will affect whether and when diagnosis occurs, but the effects aren't as simple as just limiting the scope to the insured or not.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#177

If you want to understand how medical billing works and why these ridiculously high bills get created, there's a lot of important context that this article unfortunately leaves out. Large hospital systems accept patients who have a range of payers (Original Medicare, Medicare Advantage, various Medicaid plans, private insurance, and uninsured patients). On the aggregate, they want to make sure that their entire syste…

We're talking about how much the hospital has to pay its suppliers

Except suppliers can engage in their own fiat prices, as the OP demonstrates.

But your narrative does show the basic situation - where you have an elaborate digraph of buyers and sellers, most of which have a more or less monopolistic position. These monopolistic suppliers initially/formally set their prices based on "what they could possibly imagine getting", expecting regulators/down-stream-buyer to be the ones who will push things back into sanity (or not).

American health care, of course, has bounced from regulatory regime to another, with all of the players having to adjust. And moreover, all the players are now adept at adjusting, able to switch gears to leverage whatever ad-hoc cost reductions might go with any new system (cautious enough to lay-low when the new system comes since they know the politicians need to point to gains but will move on - see the way Obamacare worker great for two years, etc, etc).

And with all the bouncing, the situation has gotten only broadly more catastrophic. Health care was ~18% of GDP a year or two ago and no doubt is higher still.

Not only does health care have a problem but the four or eight cycle of ad-hoc fixes to health care has itself broken. Which might relate to the general breakdown of the countries political system, and so-on. I assume when (part of) Rome fell apart, no had seen an empire disintegrate on quite those terms (where a lot of civilization still remained on higher terms than Rome's neighbors). Perhaps our descendants will look back on this era in similar terms.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#178
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

socialism is bad, most americans stop thinking at the point until it affects them directly.

Most Americans repeat "socialism is bad" while driving down their toll-free interstate highways.

Ahh, the good old false equivalency.

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#179

I am having problems with my insurer at this very moment. I went to an in-network hospital for an ER visit, which turned into an 8-day stay (yes, it was serious). Evidently, none of the doctors at the hospital are in-network, however, (claims from various technicians are still "in processing", so I don't know how they will turn out) despite the fact that the hospital itself is definitely in-network. I had no choice a…

I'm sorry for your current struggles. I too was recently bitten; billed $4500 for a $40 blood test, with no recourse.

--

My state's bad ass Insurance Commissioner is trying to mitigate this problem:

Surprise billing legislation passes state House of Representatives

https://www.insurance.wa.gov/news/surprise-billing-legislati...

Be sure to call and voice support. Public pressure matters.

Long-term fix is single payer, universal coverage. Remove the (worst) profiteering from our healthcare system (racket).

Re: The Company Behind Many Surprise Emergency Room Bills

#180

If you want to understand how medical billing works and why these ridiculously high bills get created, there's a lot of important context that this article unfortunately leaves out. Large hospital systems accept patients who have a range of payers (Original Medicare, Medicare Advantage, various Medicaid plans, private insurance, and uninsured patients). On the aggregate, they want to make sure that their entire syste…

Why is a clear, insightful comment like this being downvoted? Is it not true?
Post reply on HN