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

UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 394 posts

Re: UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

#91

Post by throwawa14223 »

ct520 wrote: post #18
throwawa14223 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? Should he be caught it seems like an open and shut case with video evidence.

What I believe he is referring to is Jury nullification. I interpret your statement of open and shut case as you believe jury must convict if what they interpret to be facts of breaking a laws written by man. By a jury choosing not to convict there is another form of justice implied…

What about this case leads you to believe the shooter was in the right or that the law was unjust? It seems like premeditated murder caught on camera.

Re: UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

#92

Post by polalavik »

BadHumans wrote: post #84
polalavik wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to get a medication for a stomach bacteria called C. diff. It has bad relapse rates and its best to get it in check asap. What my doctor prescibed was the newest/best antibiotic for the issue, the other have worse recovery rates and way worse side effects. I have very good insurance. The price of the medication without insurance was about $5000, the price with very good insurance was about $1300. After redditin…

> After redditing i found a thread where you can find a manufacturers coupon on the manufacturers website. After knowing this seemingly secret hidden trick the medicine was $50. My doctor didnt know about that, my insurance didnt either. Absolutely insane. This is GoodRx's business model in a nutshell. I used them when I didn't have insurance and saved a ton on medicine.

i just looked up the medication on goodrx [1]. still listed as ~$5000 when there is still a $50 coupon [2]

[1] https://www.goodrx.com/dificid

[2] https://www.merckconnect.com/dificid/coupon/

Re: UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

#93

Post by black_13 »

paulgb wrote: post #26
griomnib wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a New Yorker myself, I’m fairly confident.

I'm also a New Yorker and I think that most of us actually do not believe that assassinations are a net benefit to society, no matter how dissatisfied with the health care system we are.

[dead]

Re: UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

#94

Post by lenerdenator »

whatever1 wrote: post #59

I really don’t get why everyone involved is allowed to have hidden prices. It looks like a highway robbery. I had a relative visiting from Europe and they had to go to the urgent care for some blood and urine tests and consultation. They received a $2,500 bill! My relative told the hospital that they are leaving the country and offered to pay $250 or good luck collecting from abroad. Then something magical happened.…

Technically speaking, there's supposed to be an available price sheet of services posted somewhere where patients can find it. IIRC this was a law passed during the first Trump administration.

The way that healthcare companies have been dealing with this is to post indecipherable price lists in a place that's buried within their websites. [0]

[0] https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/01/new-hospital-price-l...

Re: UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

#95

Post by henry2023 »

spondylosaurus wrote: post #52
lambda wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one of the leading theories. Obviously, there's not enough information to say for sure. But the CEO's wife has said that there were threats, possibly related to lack of coverage: https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/05/us/unitedhealthcare-ceo-kille... > In an interview with NBC, Thompson’s widow, Paulette told the network that “there had been some threats” against her husband. > “Basically, I don’t know, a lack of cove…

UHC also has the highest claim denial rate in the healthcare industry, and they're notorious for stiffing doctors on payments as well. If there was ever a health insurer who'd stoke the kind of grudge that drives people to violence, it's UHC, because they're the worst among the worst.

32% of claims are denied. I don't know how is this legal.

Re: UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

#96

Post by samatman »

77pt77 wrote: post #32
ct520 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I believe he is referring to is Jury nullification. I interpret your statement of open and shut case as you believe jury must convict if what they interpret to be facts of breaking a laws written by man. By a jury choosing not to convict there is another form of justice implied…

And all it takes is one juror being inflexible.

That's all it takes for a hung jury, yes.

In which case the prosecution will have plenty of grounds to screen for that in the next trial, that next trial will happen, and then the guy gets convicted of first degree murder. Presuming he's found in the first place.

There's no world in which all twelve jurors vote not guilty if the defendant is demonstrated to be the assassin beyond reasonable doubt. That simply won't happen, it's a delusion. Hanging the first trial would merely delay the inevitable, and I don't expect that to happen either.

Re: UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

#98

Post by JumpCrisscross »

iwontberude wrote: post #46
threemux wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be so sure. It's interesting how quickly the places where this ghoulish view is proliferating (Reddit) have forgotten what they learned a month ago. The Internet is not reality and online posts are not a representative sample of the population. Instead, every survey of Americans shows around 80% are satisfied with their health coverage.

Ghoulish? Internet? Have you spoken to regular people not terminally online? They have no sympathy for the CEO. I had sympathy for him as a human and a worker, but his behavior was beyond the pale and unfortunately rule of law doesn’t exist in the US.

> Have you spoken to regular people not terminally online? They have no sympathy for the CEO

Everyone I have spoken to has no sympathy for him as a CEO but sympathy for him as a human. He is wrong and the healthcare system is broken. But this was also murder. If your sense of empathy is so fucked that you’re pro murder, you need to speak to a professional.

(If you’re struggling with this and don’t want to let hate turn you into a monster, consider the difference between believing someone deserved what was coming to them and supporting that which delivered it.)

Re: UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

#99

Post by Veserv »

polalavik wrote: post #73
whatever1 wrote: post #59

I really don’t get why everyone involved is allowed to have hidden prices. It looks like a highway robbery. I had a relative visiting from Europe and they had to go to the urgent care for some blood and urine tests and consultation. They received a $2,500 bill! My relative told the hospital that they are leaving the country and offered to pay $250 or good luck collecting from abroad. Then something magical happened.…

I had to get a medication for a stomach bacteria called C. diff. It has bad relapse rates and its best to get it in check asap. What my doctor prescibed was the newest/best antibiotic for the issue, the other have worse recovery rates and way worse side effects. I have very good insurance. The price of the medication without insurance was about $5000, the price with very good insurance was about $1300. After redditin…

Well of course. In the USA, health insurance is legally required to spend at least 80% of premiums on medical care [1]. So, if they paid for only 50$ of care, they would only be able to make at most 62.50$ of revenue. The only way to keep revenue and total profits increasing is to increase costs.

[1] https://www.healthcare.gov/health-care-law-protections/rate-...

Re: UnitedHealth's Effort to Deny Coverage for a Patient's Care (2023)

#100

Post by standardUser »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #21
griomnib wrote: post #6

No jury will convict the shooter, I suspect he’ll “resist arrest” and never make it to a court room for that reason.

I think the pro-murder caucus is quite a bit smaller than you're envisioning. Some juries wouldn't convict the shooter, sure, but willingness to convict if that's where the evidence points is something the prosecution will be considering in jury selection.

If one man is responsible for one death and another man is responsible for thousands, which man does the pro-murder caucus support?
Post reply on HN