71–80 of 349 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems US was in the title just to give context related to the health care system. I did notice the mutism name (in Arkansas) but it means nothing to me as I am already convinced every culture has good people being the majority. Emphasising that would give the impression that people from that background don't normally do good.
You didn't even deign spell "Muslim" right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, and I retract my final sentence.
Ideally though, all private healthcare would be banned. Aside from ideological concerns about not giving the wealthy an unfair advantage, this has pragmatic benefit in ensuring that the public healthcare system is up to standard. That is, if the wealthy and powerful are forced to use it too, it means they have skin in the game and won't just use their power to run it into the ground in pursuit of profit or from lack…
Personally, I agree with you. Private healthcare should be abolished entirely.
Sorry, if this is another angle, but I would have been more happy if instead of mentioning US doctor (or in addition to mentioning it), they would have mentioned his traits viz. "muslim" and "pakistani-origin". (I am happy none the less) Muslims are currently vilified, and Pakistani isn't in the best books right now. So, a little nod to someone who did good being muslim and pakistani-origin goes a long way to neutral…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The QALY metric they mention is exactly what I had in mind, actually, very cool. Wealth won't get you better care, or faster care, or different in the NHS. That's the point I was making, and your article supports that position. > "You'd have to go elsewhere and on your own dime for expensive treatments." [In a single payer system there's nowhere else to go.] (retracted)
In a single payer system there's nowhere else to go. We have private health care in the UK in addition to the national health service (eg https://www.bupa.co.uk/ ). It's insurance-based, and it pays for treatment in hospitals both inside and outside of the NHS. It's even offered as a perk by some employers. Specifically relevant to this HN story, there's access to cancer treatments before they're approved by the NHS…
In Canada, while in general private cover is not illegal, for covered health services, it roughly speaking does not exist and my statement that you "have nowhere else to go" holds.
I can see that my statement was unclear, hence my edit.
With respect to the other statement I made, that money won't buy you better care within the NHS is true to the best of my knowledge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OBL was found in Abbottabad /minor_nitpick
I was searching crunchbase for a Pakistani company named OBL founded in Peshawar, when I finally caught the bin Laden reference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's inevitable that medical care in some way is tied to personal wealth. Some treatments are so expensive and/or niche that public programs likely wouldn't cover them. Such treatments will probably always exist. (And if they didn't, then that could he a problem by itself.) Not in a single-payer state, no. It's also not really a problem in and of itself. You'll find that if cancer treatments are actually cheaper an…
This isn't correct in the UK under NHS. There's a set amount NHS is willing to pay for drugs and treatment, and beyond that, it's refused altogether. You'd have to go elsewhere and on your own dime for expensive treatments. Here's a link from the BBC I quickly found but it's widely documented: https://www.bbc.com/news/health-28983924
I don't know of any healthcare system that doesn't make some kind of evaluation of cost effectiveness. Insurance companies do this too!
A good question would be what can be done to fix healthcare in the US ? My understanding is that most voters don't support universal healthcare. IIRC even Obamacare was labeled as controversial. Current model costs way more, the model is clearly broken, why there is no pressure to fix it? ps. I don't want to get political or anything by mentioning Obamacare. I'm genuinely curious because the problems of the current h…
Medicare is almost universal healthcare for the elderly and disabled. Expand that and there you go.
Obviously, expanding it to the whole country in one fell swoop would cause a lot of problems. Instead, I would drop the age requirement over many years, to give the systems time to adapt, and allow for oversight and addressing of problems. Potentially also add coverage from the bottom up. Targeting something like 1% increase in enrollment for a few years, and see if you can increase that over time to 5%.
One of the most unfair characteristics of US healthcare is that if the health insurance company does not cover a claim, then the patient is responsible for the payment. It is unrealistic in practice for a patient to know or understand the process by which claims are made (since they are made by an error prone and disinterested provider administrator, and are made in a non-transparent and highly complex way), and also…
I just changed my insurance to LA Care. The doctor they gave me was with UCLA medical. I called and they said they did not and never have accepted LA Care. I called LA Care. The lady said, "I really wish their clinics stopped doing that." She called the UCLA clinic with me on the line and sorted it out. I was then left to give them the rest of my info... At the last step when they asked for my ID, they insisted it wa…