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

Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

modernhealthcare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 122 posts

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#91

Post by zeroname »

abalone wrote: post #78
sadris wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

literally every other country has "death panels" in which they deny care based on cost/benefit ratio. In America, everyone gets every treatment; we have the best cancer survival rates, but we pay for it. 90% of all health Care spending is spent on people within the last two years of their life: because in America we try to keep people alive for as long as possible. They have different goals in Europe. There's a reaso…

> literally every other country has "death panels" Source? This term was invented by Sarah Palin and was judged 2009’s Lie of the Year by PolitiFact.[1] > In America, everyone gets every treatment You have no idea what you’re taking about. There are 28 million uninsured Americans and millions more who are unable to afford treatment due to high deductibles.[2] You cherry-picked one statistic, but overall the U.S. has…

> Source? This term was invented by Sarah Palin and was judged 2009’s Lie of the Year by PolitiFact.[1]

The lie (or at least misrepresentation) was that Obamacare had a "death panel clause" in it. An argument could be made that it still does:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/14/obamacare-d...

For the equivalent in the UK:

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-28983924

> You have no idea what you’re taking about. There are 28 million uninsured Americans and millions more who are unable to afford treatment due to high deductibles.[2]

Your source doesn't actually say that. It only says 28.5 million Americans are uninsured for whatever reason. A high deductible implies low monthly premiums. To give the example of the NHS, it's 13% of your paycheck - you don't have the choice. If everybody was forced to buy insurance, premiums could be lower as well. Obamacare is just a "have your cake and eat it too" system that cannot work in the long run.

You "Medicare for all" proponents simply need to own up to the cost and not keep bullshitting about how some European country has better care at less cost and therefore the US could have the same. It's just not comparable. Several countries like Germany or Australia also have a public-private mix system. That option shouldn't be off the table either.

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#92

Post by cdoxsey »

curiousgal wrote: post #79

I find this whole situation ironic because whenever I come across a news article online of some Third World country making an improvement, mostly in regards of human rights like Saudi Arabia allowing women to drive or Tunisia passing inheritance equality laws, the general response is "Meh, this shouldn't have been an issue to begin with". When it comes to the U.S., particularly with anything that involves its helathy…

Healthcare systems are not uniform. Canada or the UK's system is quite different from other systems. For example the Netherlands has a hybrid system that utilizes a competitive, private, for-profit insurance market (with subsidies from the government). I think a lot of first-world countries have systems like that. (they aren't publicly managed, single-payer systems) And given the rhetoric on this issue I was very surprised to learn that.

I agree that the US system is in need of major reform, but prices, competition and markets can be an important part of a healthcare system for price constraints, innovation, mitigating corruption, etc.

As an example, consider food stamps, which helps people get food, but does so via the private market. The program would be a lot worse off if the Government decided to open grocery stores or tried to run the whole supply chain.

Perhaps a similar line of reasoning applies to healthcare?

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#93

Post by hombre_fatal »

40four wrote: post #31

This is very exciting to me. I have been wanting this for a long time, and I belive it's a small step towards improving the healthcare system in the United States. It shouldn't matter these aren't he "real" prices, as so many folks have been quick to point out. But it's the starting point for what ever you think the "real" price is, and it's information that has never been easily accessible to the public until now. A…

> A̶n̶d̶ ̶i̶t̶'̶s̶,̶ ̶m̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶c̶e̶r̶t̶a̶i̶n̶l̶y̶ ̶a̶ ̶r̶e̶a̶l̶ ̶p̶r̶i̶c̶e̶ ̶i̶f̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶n̶o̶ ̶i̶n̶s̶u̶r̶a̶n̶c̶e̶.̶

Aside, I hope crossed-out-text generators don't become popular on HN. Maybe a trailing "(not)" will have the same rhetorical effect, though I don't think it added anything to your post.

It triggered my browser's "Do you want to translate from Vietnamese?" pop-up.

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#94

Post by zeroname »

rscho wrote: post #90
zeroname wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am talking about actual Medicare, which causes big losses for hospitals. Those need to be covered, that is my point. You can not just import other nations healthcare systems. Those are cheaper because the doctors and nurses earn less and the service is worse.

Switzerland...

...is a total outlier country in every respect. It also has a vastly higher cost of living. Nominal salaries are not comparable with the US. Still, they're better than in other European countries, so their doctors (and many other professionals) flock to Switzerland (after having taken all their "free" training in their home countries).

By the way, health insurance in Switzerland is entirely private, but its affluent citizens are forced to buy insurance by law.

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#95

Post by rayiner »

temp231239 wrote: post #74
40four wrote: post #31

This is very exciting to me. I have been wanting this for a long time, and I belive it's a small step towards improving the healthcare system in the United States. It shouldn't matter these aren't he "real" prices, as so many folks have been quick to point out. But it's the starting point for what ever you think the "real" price is, and it's information that has never been easily accessible to the public until now. A…

I am hopeful of these changes, too. But market alone won't have any influence in deterring hospitals from charging arbitrary charges. Market works best when there are range of options available, but in case of hospitals in US only few big players are hoarding all medicinal resources leaving patients with no choice.

That doesn’t seem true. I live in a small city and have three major hospitals within a 20 minute drive, plus half a dozen urgent cares.

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#96

Post by DanBC »

joshgel wrote: post #42
abalone wrote: post #39

> Modern Healthcare decided to see how long it would take to present the data in a more consumer-friendly format. It took less than two hours Having been through several hundred thousand dollars of chargemaster charges with one of the hospitals on this list I can confidently say this info is not consumer-friendly at all. First of all, did anyone look at the damn PDFs? Do you have any idea what a "HCHG SP EVAL MTN FLU…

I'm a doctor. I'm pretty sure I know what those things mean. But ya, wouldn't expect you to. Ultimately that's irrelevant, because you don't choose the services you get in a hospital, "I" do. If I come in and recommend this or that test, are you going to check the price? Of course not, because the issue is only partially hidden prices. Its also knowledge asymmetry and fear. I think most doctors only recommend tests t…

> I think most doctors only recommend tests they feel will be helpful

Why are the rates of over-testing and over-diagnosis so high?

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#97

Post by DanBC »

zeroname wrote: post #91
abalone wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> literally every other country has "death panels" Source? This term was invented by Sarah Palin and was judged 2009’s Lie of the Year by PolitiFact.[1] > In America, everyone gets every treatment You have no idea what you’re taking about. There are 28 million uninsured Americans and millions more who are unable to afford treatment due to high deductibles.[2] You cherry-picked one statistic, but overall the U.S. has…

> Source? This term was invented by Sarah Palin and was judged 2009’s Lie of the Year by PolitiFact.[1] The lie (or at least misrepresentation) was that Obamacare had a "death panel clause" in it. An argument could be made that it still does: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/14/obamacare-d... For the equivalent in the UK: https://www.bbc.com/news/health-28983924 > You have no idea what you’re taking abou…

> For the equivalent in the UK:

> https://www.bbc.com/news/health-28983924

What do you think this means? How are you understanding this article? Because I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean what you think it means.

Are you honestly saying US insurance companies don't do exactly the same thing?

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#98

Post by DanBC »

zeroname wrote: post #59
abalone wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally every other industrialized country has a Medicare For All type system and somehow the hospitals manage to stay open. And you can’t mention a tax increase without mentioning the savings of not having to pay for private insurance.

I am talking about actual Medicare, which causes big losses for hospitals. Those need to be covered, that is my point. You can not just import other nations healthcare systems. Those are cheaper because the doctors and nurses earn less and the service is worse.

> the service is worse.

You keep saying this but you've never provided any evidence, and it's clear the US care is worse across a range of indicators.

Some people say the US system works best for the rich and healthy, but even they suffer because of the weird amount of over-testing and over-diagnosis that happens.

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#99

Post by jtbayly »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #93
40four wrote: post #31

This is very exciting to me. I have been wanting this for a long time, and I belive it's a small step towards improving the healthcare system in the United States. It shouldn't matter these aren't he "real" prices, as so many folks have been quick to point out. But it's the starting point for what ever you think the "real" price is, and it's information that has never been easily accessible to the public until now. A…

> A̶n̶d̶ ̶i̶t̶'̶s̶,̶ ̶m̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶c̶e̶r̶t̶a̶i̶n̶l̶y̶ ̶a̶ ̶r̶e̶a̶l̶ ̶p̶r̶i̶c̶e̶ ̶i̶f̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶h̶a̶v̶e̶ ̶n̶o̶ ̶i̶n̶s̶u̶r̶a̶n̶c̶e̶.̶ Aside, I hope crossed-out-text generators don't become popular on HN. Maybe a trailing "(not)" will have the same rhetorical effect, though I don't think it added anything to your post. It triggered my browser's "Do you want to translate from Vietnamese?" pop-up.

It was an edit, not meant for rhetorical effect, I don’t think.

Re: Hospitals release lists of retail prices for services

#100

Post by DanBC »

zeroname wrote: post #88
abalone wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t cite any evidence to support your claim. Most U.S. doctors graduate with >$100K in medical education debt. Other countries have better health outcomes, so that pretty much kills your “worse service” claim. Rob Delaney is a great example of an American who experienced both US and U.K. systems in depth. Look him up.

> You don’t cite any evidence to support your claim. Most U.S. doctors graduate with >$100K in medical education debt. You posted a source yourself: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/03/u-s-pays-more... Salaries are almost twice as high. Those other countries also tend to have higher taxes and other salary deductions, so doctors earn less. > Other countries have better health outcomes, so that pretty much k…

Everyone knows that 5 year cancer survival rates in the US are high because the US over-tests so much.

This is evidence that harm is being caused. It's not evidence of a good health care system.

Why are male incontinence products so prevalent in the states? It's because men are pushed to get PSA and similar screening for prostate cancer. This means the US detects a lot of slow growing cancer that's unlikely to kill someone (which improves the 5 year survival stats), but it also means that the US then provides treatment to those men. That treatment has side effects.

Post reply on HN