Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 153 posts

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#131

Post by chillacy »

rcthompson wrote: post #129
rebootthesystem wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what you should do: Fire-up Excel and develop a financial model for providing dental insurance to a million people. On another tab, develop a financial model for providing mid-range health insurance to a million people. Finally, develop a financial model for providing automobile insurance to a million people. This will answer all your questions.

Perhaps you'd like to enlighten those of us who are not experts in developing financial models for insurance scenarios?

I know nothing about insurance, but treating this like one of those crappy interview questions, I'd say you multiply the probability of an incident with the cost of that incident times 1 million people, and that's your expected cost per year. Then you look at how much you charge each person and see if they're willing to pay.

Probably as someone else mentioned, dental insurance is expensive because even though routine dental work is cheaper than getting cancer / breaking a bone, it happens 100% of the time.

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#132

Post by frostburg »

barking wrote: post #25
peteretep wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bit different, as an opthalmogist is a real doctor who treats eyes. Dental equivalent would by a dental hygienist, I guess.

Ophthalmologists are specialists just like any other medical specialist, e.g. a dermatologist. Does the fact that general practitioners refer people on to dermatologists mean that family doctors are not 'real doctors'? Sorry if that sounds aggressive, I am unfairly taking the inference from what you said that opticians are somehow 'fake'.

I don't want to be excessively glib here, but general practice in modern medicine is often very close to being "health theater" like the TSA is security theater.

We're not talking about the rural doctors of old, their job could be automated in the next five years or so.

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#133

Post by Frondo »

barking wrote: post #95
kilon wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Greek the equivalent to "dentist" is "odontiatros" which translates exactly as "tooth doctor". So for me a dentist not regarded as doctor sounds extremely weird.

same goes for German.

Same in Arabic: طبيبة أسنان = doctor of teeth

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#134

Post by deong »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #114
deong wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that poor people need cash for lots of things. If you're poor enough that you can't go to the dentist, you're poor enough to be hurting in any number of ways. If we give you $500 and say, "now this is for the dentist -- save it in case you need it", they're quite rightly going to tell you to fuck off and go buy food and gas for the car to get to work. And then when they need a dentist six months later,…

> The problem is that poor people need cash for lots of things. That isn't the problem, it's the reason why giving them cash is better. Because if they can't afford to put gas in their car to get to work, using that money will keep them from borrowing it from the credit card company. And then in six months they'll still have $500 less credit card debt plus having not paid 25% APR for six months.

I'm not arguing that they're wrong. I'm arguing that it isn't in any way a solution to the problem of paying for dental care.

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#135

Post by rudimental »

ww520 wrote: post #127
badminton1 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US they have the title of DDS (doctor of dental surgery).

The title "doctor" has been abused by different trades. Optometrist is Doctors of Optometry (O.D.s). Pharmacist is Doctor of Pharmacy (Pharm.D). Nurse has the Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP). Veterinarian is Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM). Physical therapist is Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT). Chiropractor is Doctor of Chiropractic (DC). Of course dentist is Doctor of Dental Surgery (DDS). Medical doctors have…

The wikipedia article has some interesting history:

"Doctor is an academic title that originates from the Latin word of the same spelling and meaning.[1] The word is originally an agentive noun of the Latin verb docēre [dɔˈkeːrɛ] 'to teach'. It has been used as an academic title in Europe since the 13th century..."

"In the United States, the use of the title "Doctor" is dependent upon the setting. The title is commonly used socially by physicians and those holding doctoral degrees;[57] however, there was formerly a division between Letitia Baldrige and Miss Manners on its social usage by those who are not physicians.[58] Baldrige saw this usage as acceptable, while in contrast, Miss Manners wrote that "only people of the medical profession correctly use the title of doctor socially," but supports those who wish to use it in social contexts in the spirit of addressing people according to their wishes."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title)#Development_in_... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title)#United_States

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#136

Post by fav_collector »

mtdewcmu wrote: post #35

The real question is not why is dentistry kept separate from medicine. The real question is why dental insurance is treated like a luxury, compared to regular health insurance. The problem is that so many people are unable to afford dentistry, because of poor or no coverage.

Dental insurance isn't even really insurance so it isn't comparable to medical insurance since there are no out of pocket maximums and the maximum benefit is pathetically low. It's basically a dental care/maintenance subscription and if you need any major work, you're going to pay $$$.

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#137

Post by ethagknight »

LyndsySimon wrote: post #103
PeterisP wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a type of expense that's (a) unpredictable, and (b) rare, then it's a good fit for insurance. Car crashes are unpredictable and rare, so it makes sense to insure them. Regular car maintenance is predictable and tends to happen in (almost?) every insurance period, so it's not - some payment plan or bundling may be an option, but insurance makes no sense, it would only be more expensive than paying directly…

> If you have a type of expense that's (a) unpredictable, and (b) rare, then it's a good fit for insurance. That fits fine for things like cleanings, cavities, and implants - but what about impacted wisdom teeth and resultant issues? Broken teeth due to impact injuries? Even people with excellent dental hygiene have a decent chance of chipping a tooth, and even those types of things aren't covered under medical insur…

I believe injury-related dental issues are covered by medical insurance. At least that was the impression I had from reading through my latest insurance policy from United Healthcare.

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#138

Post by AnthonyMouse »

deong wrote: post #134
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is that poor people need cash for lots of things. That isn't the problem, it's the reason why giving them cash is better. Because if they can't afford to put gas in their car to get to work, using that money will keep them from borrowing it from the credit card company. And then in six months they'll still have $500 less credit card debt plus having not paid 25% APR for six months.

I'm not arguing that they're wrong. I'm arguing that it isn't in any way a solution to the problem of paying for dental care.

How isn't it? They can get the dental care already, the problem is that doing so will put them in debt. Giving them money cancels the debt, which solves the original "problem".

The only way it doesn't pay for dental care is if they don't buy dental care at all because they need something else more. But if they're correct to do that because the other things really are more important, what kind of idiots are we to think we should be finding a way to redirect the money back to dental care?

The only real solution then is to get them enough money that they can pay for the dental care and the more important things.

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#139

Post by com2kid »

mikeash wrote: post #116
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Roughly a third of the citizens of the US would have to go into debt to secure $3K on the spot, they don't just have that laying around in the bank. That doesn't change the nature of the problem. With catastrophic events, one person in 250 will incur a million dollar expense in a given year, so everyone pays four thousand dollars a year for insurance and that person gets covered. With dentistry, one person in five…

I really doubt that multi-thousand-dollar dental events are as common as once every five years. Insurance doesn't have to be for things where most people will never incur the expense. The average time between car accidents in the US, for example, is a bit over a decade, yet car insurance is very much a thing (and not just the legally mandated liability insurance, either).

> I really doubt that multi-thousand-dollar dental events are as common as once every five years.

I chipped a tooth on an olive pit.

$700 of dental work later, another $300 to get my nightguard remade (my bite changed a bit).

Another couple hundred to get that work fixed (the original filling had some issues), and a single olive pit cost me over 1k.

Dental bills add up fast.

Re: Why Dentistry Is Separate from Medicine

#140

Post by mikeash »

com2kid wrote: post #139
mikeash wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt that multi-thousand-dollar dental events are as common as once every five years. Insurance doesn't have to be for things where most people will never incur the expense. The average time between car accidents in the US, for example, is a bit over a decade, yet car insurance is very much a thing (and not just the legally mandated liability insurance, either).

> I really doubt that multi-thousand-dollar dental events are as common as once every five years. I chipped a tooth on an olive pit. $700 of dental work later, another $300 to get my nightguard remade (my bite changed a bit). Another couple hundred to get that work fixed (the original filling had some issues), and a single olive pit cost me over 1k. Dental bills add up fast.

I'm not casting doubt on the potential costs, merely their frequency.
Post reply on HN