I had a health crisis in France • Hacker News Board

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#211

Post by cowl » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 3:53 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #91

antirez wrote: post #21

This is normal on all western Europe states. However France has very high standards in general about health care and is regarded as one of the best systems. I think it's time for US citizens to accept that most of Europe has better life expectancy, lower infant mortality than US, and to be ill is not a financial tragedy. Moreover the treatment that a low-income and high-income citizen receives is very similar, so the…

> Obama was going in the right direction Can you expand on this? I've heard many critics of Obamacare (that say it doesn't actually work that well in reality), and in general, it seems that it was only tackling a part of the problem. In Europe, you usually have a single payer, single buyer and single executor (or at least each of those is very regulated, so there's less chance for exploitative monopolistic behaviour…

sorry but that boat has already sailed for US. the problem is not just an insurance one. The global tax-payed healthcare of EU could never pay the declared hospital costs of US. EU's public healthcare works because hospital costs (what the state pays instead of citizens) are still reasonable.

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#212

Post by kelvin0 » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 3:56 PM UTC

I'm sure it's great ... in France. Because here in the province of Québec (Canada) it's hell on wheels. Granted we have 'free' access to healthcare, but waiting 24 hours in an emergency room is not uncommon due to the shortage of Doctors and low incentives for them to work in the public system. I think it's only marginally better than the USA because it's cheaper, but the actual care you get is scary bad in most hospitals and clinics. Couple that with an ageing population, it's a nice recipe for the shitstorm we call healthcare in these parts ...

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#213

Post by tmptmp » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 4:03 PM UTC

gotchange wrote: post #196

nothrabannosir wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just convenient to use the system. I even had multiple MRIs and dozens of XRays after minor sport injuries just to be sure. I'm not sure where to draw the line, though. How do you determine when "just in case" costs too much? Remember, all Austrians paid for your mris and X-rays. I don't doubt it was worth it this specific case, but aren't the incentives wrong?

What makes you think that he doesn't pay into the system already as part of all people who chipped in whether Austrians or not? Systems like these can be susceptible to abuse and this should be researched and prevented as much as possible but this attitude that any free health care receiver is to be treated with suspicion and distrust till proven innocent is not healthy, sorry for the pun.

>>Systems like these can be susceptible to abuse and this should be researched and prevented as much as possible

This is good in theory but very difficult to implement effectively. The conservatives take an extreme condescending view of social welfare and demand extreme checks on it whereas any checks and balances for abuse is what is attacked by many liberals/leftists.

That's where immigration is playing a destructive force. A lot of immigrants (if not all/most) can be seen abusing social welfare.

Also slightly related is what is happening in Briton w.r.t brexit. Brexit was welcome by many Britons also for this reason.

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#214

Post by germanguy4711 » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 4:10 PM UTC

cel1ne wrote: post #145

antirez wrote: post #21

This is normal on all western Europe states. However France has very high standards in general about health care and is regarded as one of the best systems. I think it's time for US citizens to accept that most of Europe has better life expectancy, lower infant mortality than US, and to be ill is not a financial tragedy. Moreover the treatment that a low-income and high-income citizen receives is very similar, so the…

It's not just that the costs of getting healthy are taken care of. Here in austria free, yearly "health checkups" are offered to you by every doctor. Meaning, when you go there because of a cold, he will tell you that you ought to do a checkup every year, which include blood tests, psychological screening for alcoholism and other individualized tests like prostate cancer for men. It's just convenient to use the syste…

> and dozens of XRays after minor sport injuries just to be sure

Sorry, but this is hard to believe. The use of XRays for minor injuries is not standard anymore. Not only for cost reasons, but also for the still unclear situation about increased cancer risk due to xrays.

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#215

Post by Normal_gaussian » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 4:21 PM UTC

brianwawok wrote: post #93

Normal_gaussian wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using: http://chartsbin.com/view/1445 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mo... births out of 1000 that are stillbirths: France 3.87 UK 3.50 USA 2.95 Germany 2.43 Infant Mortality (under 5) per 1000 live births USA 5.87 UK 4.38 France 4.30 Germany 3.70 Combining the two for a birthed (Still or not) and didn't make it to 5 rate: USA: 8.8 France: 8.2 UK: 7.9 Germany: 6.1 Obviously the studies…

Now refine that down to college educated nonndrug using people. I suspect it would be even more narrow.

Because you are now selecting for that which is untreatable, assuming access to finance and an education of the parents are the primary factors in treatable deaths.

If that is the case the interesting comparison would be the rate for the populace excluding those people.

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#216

Post by mmagin » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 4:26 PM UTC

jdub wrote: post #74

iraklism wrote: post #30

I still giggle a bit every single time one of these EU healthcare stories pops up. It highlights a core difference between one of the two most "advanced" places in the western world. For us Europeans, we don't even think that free healthcare, free education ( university included ) , and free state support when things go wrong is a right. It is a as essential as a core human function as breathing and blinking. We don'…

There's another way to look at it that I don't think the USA will be ready to understand any time soon: Universal health and education are (key parts of) freedom. You can even put a market spin on it: None of the risks involved in starting a small business in Australia have to do with health care for myself, or for people who might consider joining my small business as employees. I've never felt as if I'm giving up a…

> You can even put a market spin on it: None of the risks involved in starting a small business in Australia have to do with health care for myself, or for people who might consider joining my small business as employees.

Though you may have heard politicians in the USA profess their love of small business, in general, their actions are contrary to it. Both parties regularly do things which are good for big business, but which do hardly anything to 1. reduce the tax burden on small businesses, 2. reduce the paperwork/bureaucracy burden on small businesses, 3. make it easier for a larger percentage of society to engage in the creation of new businesses. Even though ACA (Obamacare) has been somewhat of a step in the right direction, it's still the case that if you want _good_ insurance, you better be part of a group healthcare plan (i.e. not an individual plan.)

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#217

Post by fallinghawks » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 4:29 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #121

tomp wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Obama was going in the right direction Can you expand on this? I've heard many critics of Obamacare (that say it doesn't actually work that well in reality), and in general, it seems that it was only tackling a part of the problem. In Europe, you usually have a single payer, single buyer and single executor (or at least each of those is very regulated, so there's less chance for exploitative monopolistic behaviour…

The primary issue with the system before Obama was two-fold. 1) Too many young people didn't insure themselves meaning that the relatively low cost of having them as insured couldn't be used to balance out the higher cost needed for later on in life. This was putting the primary burden of the cost on the older generations. By forcing everyone to pay the idea was that you could even out the cost. 2) Pre-existing condi…

> insurance agencies wouldn't cover you if you came into their plan with an existing condition.

Before ACA I went through a period of unemployment and had to buy my own health coverage. I had been on Kaiser previously through my employer, so they had my health records. And they rejected me for a pre-existing condition -- eczema. Seriously. A decidedly non-fatal skin condition, in my case a minor annoyance, and they won't cover me at all.

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#218

Post by DasIch » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 4:31 PM UTC

germanguy4711 wrote: post #214

cel1ne wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just that the costs of getting healthy are taken care of. Here in austria free, yearly "health checkups" are offered to you by every doctor. Meaning, when you go there because of a cold, he will tell you that you ought to do a checkup every year, which include blood tests, psychological screening for alcoholism and other individualized tests like prostate cancer for men. It's just convenient to use the syste…

> and dozens of XRays after minor sport injuries just to be sure Sorry, but this is hard to believe. The use of XRays for minor injuries is not standard anymore. Not only for cost reasons, but also for the still unclear situation about increased cancer risk due to xrays.

There is a difference between retrospectively determining that an injury is minor and doing so prospectively. It might not have looked all that minor when those tests were made.

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#219

Post by stefs » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 4:32 PM UTC

nothrabannosir wrote: post #187

cel1ne wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just that the costs of getting healthy are taken care of. Here in austria free, yearly "health checkups" are offered to you by every doctor. Meaning, when you go there because of a cold, he will tell you that you ought to do a checkup every year, which include blood tests, psychological screening for alcoholism and other individualized tests like prostate cancer for men. It's just convenient to use the syste…

It's just convenient to use the system. I even had multiple MRIs and dozens of XRays after minor sport injuries just to be sure. I'm not sure where to draw the line, though. How do you determine when "just in case" costs too much? Remember, all Austrians paid for your mris and X-rays. I don't doubt it was worth it this specific case, but aren't the incentives wrong?

> How do you determine when "just in case" costs too much?

the physicians usually try to take the safe route just in case - if they deem it worth it. i'm still in the low risk category (~~young~~ not old, passably athletic) so my doctor told me more than once that it's probably nothing and we don't need to do the (expensive) X, the (cheap) Y is enough (maybe Y reveals something that justifies X).

it doesn't always work; as a personal anecdote - my uncle suffered a debilitating headache once and was told to take aspirin for several days until my aunt had enough and drove him to the hospital on her own. turned out to be cerebral bleeding. he barely survived and is now mentally disabled.

this a) takes him out of the workforce, which looses the state money through reduced taxes and b) ensures him an invalidity pension, which costs the state money.

was it worth it to save the money? on paper it's the additional cost of checking N people who're having headaches plus the cost of treating M people who're actually affected vs. the money he would have paid into the system plus the money he now costs the system over, say, 20 years. additionally he consumes less and his wife's business is struggling because he's not much help anymore.

for us, personally, it's still a tragedy, but those cases happen. you have to draw the line somewhere. it's not just additional costs though, it's still a trade off.

Re: I had a health crisis in France

#220

Post by realusername » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 4:35 PM UTC

geomark wrote: post #155

realusername wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Competition is not the issue, it's private healthcare itself. There is not a single country I know of where private healthcare works.

I live in Thailand. Private healthcare is excellent here. In fact, hundreds of thousands of people from around the world come here every year to take advantage of it - Thailand is a huge medical tourism destination. There is also a public healcare system here which is quite terrible. Interestingly, some public hospitals offer "special clinic" hours where you can get treatment on a cash basis instead of using the publ…

I did not explain very well my thoughts on this. By "works", I mean healthcare as a commodity that everyone (including the poorest) can afford. In order to exist, the private system has to be better than the public one, which means better facilities, top doctors and therefore higher prices. The reason the public service is terrible is because the private system exists, top doctors are going private to get better salaries and the public one will never improve.

I'm pretty sure the private healthcare in Thailand is very good, but the only reason it's affordable for us is the difference of the cost of life, I doubt a farmer there can afford those services.