A first hand (actually second hand) interpretation of UHC

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Fox5

Originally posted by: eskimospy
As big a supporter of UHC as I am, anecdotal evidence isn't really very useful. Late last year I had some strange swelling in my face and neck and so I went to my doctor, who proceeded to give me all the quick and cheap checks. He gave me some allergy tests, and they did nothing. Then he said it was an infection and gave me some antibiotics... that did nothing. Then I was sent to get an ultrasound to check my thyroid, which did nothing. When it finally got bad enough I decided to go to the emergency room and not leave until they figured out what was wrong with me, and after waiting for about six hours it turned out that I have cancer. I sat around with cancer for the better part of a month because people here wanted to try the cheap solution first. How shitty is that?

Even that having been said though, my experience really doesn't impugn the quality of US health care, which in general is quite good. The problem with the US system is its absurd cost/benefit ratio. People should support UHC because it saves us all money and still provides equivalent quality, not because they had some good experience or bad experience somewhere.

Ever try having one of the lesser HMO plans in the US? Care isn't really any better than that, probably worse. I have to make my appointments 6 months in advance.

BTW, US funds the majority of medical research. Would there still be money for that under a universal health care system that cuts costs as much as possible?

Uhh I don't know what HMO plan you are on, but mine isn't exactly a basket of fruit but I do get decent enough care and I don't have to wait for it.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: Fox5

Originally posted by: eskimospy
As big a supporter of UHC as I am, anecdotal evidence isn't really very useful. Late last year I had some strange swelling in my face and neck and so I went to my doctor, who proceeded to give me all the quick and cheap checks. He gave me some allergy tests, and they did nothing. Then he said it was an infection and gave me some antibiotics... that did nothing. Then I was sent to get an ultrasound to check my thyroid, which did nothing. When it finally got bad enough I decided to go to the emergency room and not leave until they figured out what was wrong with me, and after waiting for about six hours it turned out that I have cancer. I sat around with cancer for the better part of a month because people here wanted to try the cheap solution first. How shitty is that?

Even that having been said though, my experience really doesn't impugn the quality of US health care, which in general is quite good. The problem with the US system is its absurd cost/benefit ratio. People should support UHC because it saves us all money and still provides equivalent quality, not because they had some good experience or bad experience somewhere.

Ever try having one of the lesser HMO plans in the US? Care isn't really any better than that, probably worse. I have to make my appointments 6 months in advance.

BTW, US funds the majority of medical research. Would there still be money for that under a universal health care system that cuts costs as much as possible?

the US funding medical research is a big myth. Pharma companies spend 4 times more on marketing then on R&D. A lot of the pharma companies are also European.