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

The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

thecity.nyc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 175 posts

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#141

Post by joe_the_user »

lultimouomo wrote: post #138
joe_the_user wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point, the people who suspect COVID-19 infection are going to be people who have full-on pneumonia. They would need to go to ER under normal circumstance but indeed, that will have a bad result. Basically, we desperately need a special COVID-19 program, not simply a person's regular physician giving instructions. How many physicians are going to be getting calls soon and how much time does that take important…

> Some multi-track system like this is going to be necessary or more desirable than Italy, which has shut down the part of its health care system not treating COVID patients and is still mostly watching them die. Please don't spread disinformation, this absolutely not what is happening in Italy. ERs are working, hospitals are working. Planned and elective procedures have been delayed, to spare personnel and rooms and…

References? I'd love to believe this is the case but I haven't seen any mainstream news to this effect and I have indeed seen desperate shared tweet.

I mean, I'm happy if this is true but if you want to reassure people, give a reference.

Edit:

ERs are working, hospitals are working.

Press I read says: ER isn't working for non-COVID cases and isn't able to deal with a substantial number of COVID cases.

The term would be overwhelmed. And I know Italian hospitals are better than a lot of American hospitals, which certainly couldn't be called "top notch".

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#142

Post by northwest65 »

AOsborn wrote: post #135
jariel wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$300 seems low. 'The distance' is basically irrelevant. You're paying for a highly available, rapid response team to be prepared for almost any medical emergency, 24/7, literally almost at the press of a button. 'Preparedness' is expensive. What happened if the Ambulance broke down? Or a medic decided to say f-it and skipped a day. Or the phone didn't work. Or the critical piece of gear didn't work. Or ooops ran out…

Different country, but pointing out some reported data on actual costs: https://www.stjohn.org.nz/news--info/news-articles/st-john-a... In New Zealand one of the major ambulance services reports costs of around $615 including taxes per callout. However, the charge passed onto the customer is set at $98 for medical emergencies. This is waived for accidents (covered by the government). A $4000 ambulance bill is offensi…

Hell, New Zealand only charge $800 (USD500) for non residents!

In New Zealand if you get tested (free) positive for Coronavirus they'll put you in hospital (free). Assuming you've collapsed and need to be taken there in an ambulance, you'll still have to pay the $98.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#143

Post by paxys »

tguedes wrote: post #129
paxys wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't intentionally designed, just a side effect of the system as it exists today. There are two ways to bring healthcare costs down in America: 1. Insure everyone — no exceptions (by the government or through private insurance) 2. Let hospitals (and ERs) deny care to those that can't pay Since neither of them is happening anytime soon, Advil is going to keep costing $50.

I don't see how #1 solves anything. The biggest issue which leads to all the cascading effects is the hospitals can charge a ridiculous amount for goods and services, with some hospitals charging more than 1000% more than what the government thinks they should ( https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/06/hospitals... ). I had a colonoscopy done a year ago and the prices pre-insurance ranged anywhere from $700…

The reason hospitals charge more is (1) they need to recoup the cost of the services they are otherwise providing for free and (2) they have no leverage to negotiate with insurance companies and drug manufacturers. Having a national or privatized healthcare system that covers everyone will greatly help with both of them.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#144

Post by tialaramex »

dhuduehe wrote: post #140
tialaramex wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here "Not uncommon" means "Very uncommon" because of course as this story illustrates US medicine is _ludicrously_ expensive and so the only reason you'd _travel_ there to get medical treatment is because that's the only place offering some obscure treatment you want. Also is that list of really weird stats "all objective measures" ? No. It's just "Here are some numbers somebody seemingly randomly picked from a _vast…

>... so the only reason you'd _travel_ there to get medical treatment is because that's the only place offering some obscure treatment you want. When is this not true though? Of course traveling farther would be less desirable when moving between developed countries, it adds burden and costs on top of whatever you were already going to have to pay without offering much opportunity for recouping costs. The only except…

My point is, if you're sat in say, Liverpool, and you see the elective surgery you want is six to nine months out but that seems forever, you don't go "Oh, let's fly to San Francisco and get it done privately there, we can spend the kids inheritance" you start looking at private providers in Liverpool (there are several) or maybe Switzerland. You are attracted by a good price in say, India, or a friend recommends somewhere in Eastern Europe.

The US is very expensive compared to other private options is my point.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#145

Post by mikem170 »

mrguyorama wrote: post #30
smacktoward wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember studying political science as an undergrad two decades ago. My professors all said the same thing about the Electoral College: “it’s a relic that has long since stopped serving a practical purpose, but people live with it because it never rocks the boat. If there’s ever an election where the winner of the popular vote doesn’t actually win because they lost in the Electoral College, there will be a huge mas…

It's not about inertia. Look at which party benefits from the electoral college, and then recognize their attempts at voter disenfranchisement.

There's pros and cons to the electoral college. At the moment the states can award electors however they want, including deciding on their own to commit them to the winner of the popular vote, as some have done. The states legislatures can also choose electors - there's nothing in the 12th amendment saying it's a people's vote.

I think the bigger point that should be talked about is why everyone has invested so much power in the presidency, and argues that their candidate should have won by a 1% majority and is now entitled to implement their national agenda. That is not the way this country was meant to work. You eventually end up with a dictator.

My best guess at the reason why we do this: tribalism and mass media. Human nature. Gotta have a chief, one person to look to for answers.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#146

Post by lultimouomo »

joe_the_user wrote: post #141
lultimouomo wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some multi-track system like this is going to be necessary or more desirable than Italy, which has shut down the part of its health care system not treating COVID patients and is still mostly watching them die. Please don't spread disinformation, this absolutely not what is happening in Italy. ERs are working, hospitals are working. Planned and elective procedures have been delayed, to spare personnel and rooms and…

References? I'd love to believe this is the case but I haven't seen any mainstream news to this effect and I have indeed seen desperate shared tweet. I mean, I'm happy if this is true but if you want to reassure people, give a reference. Edit: ERs are working, hospitals are working. Press I read says: ER isn't working for non-COVID cases and isn't able to deal with a substantial number of COVID cases. The term would…

My direct source is Italian newspapers and personal conversation with ER doctors.

You can use google translate to read this local newspaper from Bergamo that quotes the Lombardy ministry of health about how this Monday they closed day hospitals (clinics? not sure how it translates) and scheduled surgeries are reduced to a minimum:

https://www.ecodibergamo.it/stories/bergamo-citta/gallera-st...

Don't get me wrong - the situation is bad, and it will get much worse. We can probably help Bergamo by shifting people around, if we reverse the trend and the rest of the country stays in a better situation, but if left unmanaged the epidemic would definitely bring the healthcare system to its knees. But we're not there yet and hopefully we'll be able to avoid it.

And again, because this is very important: COVID patients do not go through ER. Please tell everyone around you that if they suspect COVID they must NOT GO TO THE ER. In the beginning of the epidemic, before this information was understood by people, infections in the ER have been a major factor of the virus spread.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#147

Post by dang »

lostgame wrote: post #23
munk-a wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not - the effect these prices have on the poor is an unintended[1] consequence of the true aim. Extracting the most money possible from insurance payors - honestly, if hospitals could bill "You owe us 50$ or as much of that that your insurance would cover" then they would. Nobody actively wants to impoverish the poor (except for a small number of utterly terrible people) but payors force cost pass on to thei…

[flagged]

Personal attacks and flamewar like this are not allowed on HN, regardless of how right you are or feel you are, or how wrong someone is or you feel they are.

We've had to ask you before to stop breaking the site guidelines. We ban accounts that keep doing that, so please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use HN in the intended spirit (curious conversation) from now on.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#148

Post by tedunangst »

Veedrac wrote: post #128
makomk wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, here in the UK she could've been told that she wasn't going to get tested for coronavirus over the phone for free. It's a much more civilized system. (Though to be fair, we did a little better at adding Italy to the list of qualifying countries promptly than the USA.)

UK tests per million: 387 USA tests per million: 26 Not really the same.

There should be some adjustment for expected exposures, no?

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#149

Post by lostgame »

jiveturkey wrote: post #124
lostgame wrote: post #2

As a Canadian who has also lived in America, I am consistently mortified by the costs of health care in the states. Are they intentionally designed to force the lower class into even more poverty (I’ve seen $50 being charged for a pill of Advil - first hand) - or is it just an unintended side effect? I find it harder to believe it’s accidental than intentional. EDIT: Due to jiveturkey’s pathetic and wholly inaccurate…

> I’ve seen $50 being charged for a pill of Advil - first hand A paper plant was having a problem with their mill. They brought in a consulting engineer to help them with the problem. He took a look at the machine and after a few minutes, drew an X on it in chalk. "Hit it there with a hammer". It worked! "How much do we owe you?" "$10,000" "That's absurd! I can't pay you that for literally 2 minutes of your time! I n…

It’s pathetic you’re defending this, and terribly evident you have never had to live in poverty in the states.

It’s also patently, blatantly false. I paid $740 to see the doctor to identify I needed an Advil.

I paid $50 for the Advil!

Your post literally incited a large amount of rage in me. Defending people like Martin Shkreli- which the pharma industry is full of - or the medical industry itself’s rape of the lower class - is pathetic, selfish and just straight up wrong.

EDIT: I’m unsure, as well - how I was unable to downvote this comment.

Re: The Cost of Not Getting Tested for Coronavirus: A $10K ER Bill

#150

Post by jiveturkey »

lostgame wrote: post #149
jiveturkey wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’ve seen $50 being charged for a pill of Advil - first hand A paper plant was having a problem with their mill. They brought in a consulting engineer to help them with the problem. He took a look at the machine and after a few minutes, drew an X on it in chalk. "Hit it there with a hammer". It worked! "How much do we owe you?" "$10,000" "That's absurd! I can't pay you that for literally 2 minutes of your time! I n…

It’s pathetic you’re defending this, and terribly evident you have never had to live in poverty in the states. It’s also patently, blatantly false. I paid $740 to see the doctor to identify I needed an Advil. I paid $50 for the Advil! Your post literally incited a large amount of rage in me. Defending people like Martin Shkreli- which the pharma industry is full of - or the medical industry itself’s rape of the lower…

eh? I grew up in poverty on public assistance and didn't have a decent job until I was 25. I've been hungry. etc etc. I know about being poor, ok.

I also didn't defend the behavior. Get out of your personal shell and re-read it.

You paid 0.05 for the Advil. You paid $49.95 for everything else that goes along with it, when you get an advil at an advanced medical care facility. You would understand that if you comprehended my post.

Do you realize that when you go to any store and buy a coke for $1.50, you are only paying maybe .25 for the soda (incl. the bottle it comes in)? .75 or so is shipping and .50 is to the retailer. Every product has non-production costs associated with it, and that is what you pay for when you get a $50 advil at any kind of medical facility.

Post reply on HN