Earlier quoted context omitted.
Um, no. Patient care is the biggest culprit in US overspending on medicine. Administrative overhead is minor. http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/what-makes-the-u...
Insured middle classes competing directly with the super-rich over a limited pool of medical professionals is probably the biggest culprit.
Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
191–200 of 223 posts
Re: Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
First of all: "the United States is Cambodia or Burkina Faso or rural India, with access to a doctor available if you can pay the bill out-of-pocket" Although it dovetails with the well worn narrative on HN, this comparison fails due to the level of care. Also, from the article comments: "There are just a couple problems. In 2009, the French Society of Radiology equipment in France was critically undermining care, an…
> Although it dovetails with the well worn narrative on HN, this comparison fails due to the level of care. The context is purely the model of provision; level of care isn't addressed. > Second, some of the development of MRI technology happened in Britain. Most was performed in the U.S. Who is paying for the cost of development of this and other new technology and drugs? It's often not the people in places like Cana…
Exactly. The level of care is not addressed, therefore you can call the US a backwater and hence receive upvotes.
Re: Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
This kind of problem seems fairly widespread in America. Americans are incredibly self-confident, innovative and have achieved a great deal as a nation. They are also extremely proud of their country. Unfortunately this combination often leads them to assume things are good purely because they are American. They tend to accept their own familiar values and ideas and readily dismiss alternatives because that would be…
A major driver of U.S. costs that isn't discussed in the article is our parasite lawyer class, who drive up the cost of insurance for doctors and lead to widespread over-testing or "defensive medicine". Few Americans are proud of our litigious society.
From a Booklist review of the book:
By demonizing trial attorneys and exaggerating high-profile litigation
awards -- the famous McDonald's hot-coffee case -- campaigns for limiting
damage awards threaten to jeopardize the American right to civil jury
trials guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Investigative reporter Mencimer
examines the Republican campaigns for tort reform that would protect
large corporations from "frivolous lawsuits." The campaigns carry the
dual benefit of supporting the interests of corporations that are major
Republican campaign contributors and hurting trial lawyers, who are part
of the contribution base of Democrats. Mencimer criticizes the media for
their lack of understanding about civil litigation, willingness to
swallow reports of litigation abuses, and failure to understand that
Republican tort reform will also limit the ability of news organizations
to sue for information. Drawing on national data and scrutiny of
individual cases, Mencimer defends the civil justice system and its
reliance on jurors, average citizens who are the same people who vote.
This is an eye-opening look at an important issue for readers concerned
with the civil justice system.
also, "The Lawyer Myth: A Defense of the American Legal Profession"[2]From the Booklist review:
However disliked lawyers have become, they have played an essential role
in the development of the American democracy, assert legal scholars
Strickland and Read. Taking aim at media critics -- left and right -- who
blame lawyers for a host of social ills, Strickland and Read debunk
several popular myths about lawyers. They begin with the notion that
there are too many lawyers and lawsuits, citing statistics to put things
into perspective, and they point to the benefits that have come from
lawsuits, including increased consumer protection from faulty products.
But they concede the need for reform in a chapter that calls for major
research into alternative legal mechanisms. Finally, Strickland and Read
look toward the next generation of lawyers and outline the
characteristics most essential for the practice of law: competency,
responsiveness, and integrity. They emphasize that it’s not what lawyers
bring to the law but what they give that makes a difference. This book
is not likely to stop lawyer jokes, but it is an insightful look at a
much-maligned profession.
[1] - http://www.amazon.com/Blocking-Courthouse-Door-Republican-Co...[2] - http://www.amazon.com/The-Lawyer-Myth-American-Profession/dp...
Re: Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
#194Can't believe they didn't even mention the Monopoly Protection Certificate racket run by the government in many states: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_of_need And never mind the huge monopoly granted to AMA certified physicians, in terms of providing medical care. Of course those guys have a huge incentive to keep as many people out of the physician pool as possible. We certainly couldn't allow competition,…
Re: Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
#195Not only do Americans spend more per-capita on health care than Canadians, the American government spends more per-capita on health care than the Canadian government. And yet Americans still need private medical insurance. And depending on how you count, more than 60% of American bankruptcies are for unpaid medical bills and about 78% of those people had medical insurance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_…
Having lived in Canada for 10 years, and recently moved back to the US because of health care, I can attest that while Canadian health care looks good on paper, it's not. Sure, it's there when you need immediate emergency care. But for anything long term, it's horrendous. Autism, for example, is a perfect example, and something I know first hand. In Quebec? The best thing you can do for autistic children is to leave…
Having lived in both countries, my experience in the U.S. was less than ideal. About the same amount of wait times as in Canada, and the doctors I saw gave me very little options as to how I could treat one of my chronic injuries. Never suggested a follow up appointment, physio, or even x-rays/MRI's to get a better look. In Canada, they recommended me a specialist, and I have a nurse at a clinic who has built a great relationship with me to assess my needs when I need help, as well as x-rays/MRI's done within a week.
My experience isn't like all in Canada or the U.S. but after touting how much better I thought the U.S. would be because of my great insurance and living in one of the top cities in the country, I wasn't impressed at all.
Re: Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
#196What annoys me as an American about our health care is not that some other countries achieve better outcomes at much lower cost--it is that they do so in so many different ways. For instance, if they all did it by having the government completely run the health care system, with all doctors working for government hospitals and clinics, and being trained in government medical schools, with all costs set by the governm…
Re: Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
#197http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/newsgraphics/2012/0115-...
about 20% of physicians are in the top one percent. This is the highest percentage of all occupations.
Re: Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Insured middle classes competing directly with the super-rich over a limited pool of medical professionals is probably the biggest culprit.
I don't believe that is the case. Otherwise, we would see a shortage of care provided. Since everyone gets care, the competition with the super rich- if any- is vote driving prices
[edit] And hang on a second. You say if any? Really? You think there is no competition for resources?
Re: Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
That comment seems to claim that the French government is keeping the cost per scan low by having less scanners available to people. Now, I'm no economist, but that argument does seem to make absolutely no sense whatsoever.
In a way this can happen (though i'm far from being sure it actually does...): the medical area is one where the prices are the most regulated. In the public sector the prices for an MRI are probably very largely fixed by the government (and more probably completely) and given that even in the private sector you need an authorization to build an MRI counting them mean the medium price will not increase too much and t…
I just want one of them. Is that ok?
[ I want to scan beez :) ]
Re: Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
The labor costs would vary from country to country. The article questions the price of a service performed by machine (that supposedly differs very little from country to country).
So why doesn't the U.S. allow doctors to immigrate to this country? The median American MD makes $143K; I'm sure that plenty of foreign doctors would love to come here and make half that.