The Best Health Care System in the World!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,859
4,976
126
Well when the entire population of your country is the size of a large US suburb it tends to change things. I love when people make comparisons like this. There are so many factors to take into account beyond just population but it never fails that someone will compare small European countries to the United States as if they are even remotely the same.

So as the volume goes up, prices should come down right? Simple economy of scale?
Just like buying beef in bulk.
 

DrunkenSano

Diamond Member
Aug 8, 2008
3,892
490
126
The biggest and what should be the primary issue right now is not our healthcare system itself but the medical and pharma industry. Cost is out of control and big pharma needs to be locked down. They should be 100% research and 0% advertising and profit. Money made on drugs should just go to making sure they are running efficiently, the employees are being paid properly for their performance, and any "profit" goes to drive down medical costs or further efficient research. That will help drive current insane medical charges down. Medical charges needs to be regulated and locked down as well. No one should be charged thousands and thousands of dollars for inane things. Once you have the costs finally in control and realistic, then you can apply some sort of healthcare system. Right now, any system in the US will fail because of how much of a scam the medical industry is with its criminal price gouging.
 

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,669
266
126
And Iceland has a population of 340k, 0.1% of the US. They can manage a more efficient health care system.

I have a good friend who lives in England. She's had several health issues and uses the UK public health care system. Invariably, this has bee her experience:

Has a problem
Has to wait a week or more to go to her regular doc
Doc examines her and schedules tests
She waits up to 4-6 weeks for said tests
waits another week or so for results
Doc refers her to a specialist
Waits 4-8 weeks to see specialist
Gets more tests - again a few week wait
Waits a few weeks for results
Finally gets treated
Doctor (in some cases) effed up somehow

No thanks.

I'm by no means saying that what we have is great. It could most definitely be improved. I was involved in a discussion on this board 10 years ago and offered some suggestions. Surprisingly, a few of the left-leaning members back then thought some of my suggestions had some merit.

I wish there could be a legit discussion on this, but it'll never happen. Everyone is agenda driven and the .gov only cares about itself and returning this country to feudalism.

There was an interesting article/story today about an American woman who was living in iceland who found a lump ....

was told to go straight to cancer center, got screened, got second test to be sure all within a short time, and since she was a foreigner she had to pay a little bit of a copay, but it more or less amounted to around $3.

https://www.dailydot.com/irl/breast-lump-us-healthcare/

Also, while Iceland's system is MUCH better than the US, I don't think they are considered #1 in the world.
(Isn't USA ranked like #50 or something?)
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,167
1,638
126
And Iceland has a population of 340k, 0.1% of the US. They can manage a more efficient health care system.

I have a good friend who lives in England. She's had several health issues and uses the UK public health care system. Invariably, this has bee her experience:

Has a problem
Has to wait a week or more to go to her regular doc
Doc examines her and schedules tests
She waits up to 4-6 weeks for said tests
waits another week or so for results
Doc refers her to a specialist
Waits 4-8 weeks to see specialist
Gets more tests - again a few week wait
Waits a few weeks for results
Finally gets treated
Doctor (in some cases) effed up somehow

No thanks.

I'm by no means saying that what we have is great. It could most definitely be improved. I was involved in a discussion on this board 10 years ago and offered some suggestions. Surprisingly, a few of the left-leaning members back then thought some of my suggestions had some merit.

I wish there could be a legit discussion on this, but it'll never happen. Everyone is agenda driven and the .gov only cares about itself and returning this country to feudalism.
I heard there was some potential trade deal pending to bring US health insurance companies into the mix in the UK , if anything like this happens, then I expect their costs will skyrocket and quality of service will get even worse ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
I heard there was some potential trade deal pending to bring US health insurance companies into the mix in the UK , if anything like this happens, then I expect their costs will skyrocket and quality of service will get even worse ...

Perhaps looking at their system from the ground up by people who know WTF is going on should be the real option here. When nurses have to become sex workers to pay their bills there's something inherently wrong.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,221
4,452
136
I have a good friend who lives in England. She's had several health issues and uses the UK public health care system. Invariably, this has bee her experience:

Has a problem
Has to wait a week or more to go to her regular doc
Doc examines her and schedules tests
She waits up to 4-6 weeks for said tests
waits another week or so for results
Doc refers her to a specialist
Waits 4-8 weeks to see specialist
Gets more tests - again a few week wait
Waits a few weeks for results
Finally gets treated
Doctor (in some cases) effed up somehow

Unlike in the US where it goes like this:

Has a problem
Has to wait a week or more to go to her regular doc
Doc examines her and schedules tests
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for test.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval.
Has to wait a week to get test.
Waits another week or so for results
Doc refers her to a specialist
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for specialist.
Insurance denies specialist.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval to see specialist
Sees specialist.
Specialist orders more test.
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for test.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval.
Gets more tests - again a few week wait
Waits a few weeks for results
Specialist recommends treatment.
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for treatment.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance.
Insurance decides it would be cheaper for patient to die and get sued.
Dies waiting for approval that will never come.
Family gets bill for half a million dollars for what insurance didn't cover.
Family tries to sue insurance only to find out that have a binding clause of arbitration with insurance.
Arbiter works for insurance company and denies claim.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
27,648
26,746
136
Unlike in the US where it goes like this:

Has a problem
Has to wait a week or more to go to her regular doc
Doc examines her and schedules tests
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for test.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval.
Has to wait a week to get test.
Waits another week or so for results
Doc refers her to a specialist
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for specialist.
Insurance denies specialist.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval to see specialist
Sees specialist.
Specialist orders more test.
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for test.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval.
Gets more tests - again a few week wait
Waits a few weeks for results
Specialist recommends treatment.
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for treatment.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance.
Insurance decides it would be cheaper for patient to die and get sued.
Dies waiting for approval that will never come.
Family gets bill for half a million dollars for what insurance didn't cover.
Family tries to sue insurance only to find out that have a binding clause of arbitration with insurance.
Arbiter works for insurance company and denies claim.

That is so much better, The insurance company saved a fortune. Actual outcome doesn't matter.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,566
9,928
146
SMOGZINN replies:

"Unlike in the US where it goes like this:

Has a problem
Has to wait a week or more to go to her regular doc
Doc examines her and schedules tests
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for test.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval.
Has to wait a week to get test.
Waits another week or so for results
Doc refers her to a specialist
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for specialist.
Insurance denies specialist.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval to see specialist
Sees specialist.
Specialist orders more test.
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for test.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval.
Gets more tests - again a few week wait
Waits a few weeks for results
Specialist recommends treatment.
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for treatment.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance.
Insurance decides it would be cheaper for patient to die and get sued.
Dies waiting for approval that will never come.
Family gets bill for half a million dollars for what insurance didn't cover.
Family tries to sue insurance only to find out that have a binding clause of arbitration with insurance.
Arbiter works for insurance company and denies claim."

^^^ And all this, at a per capita cost to all Americans of nearly twice what Britain spends.

As the Brits say, "Brilliant!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,566
9,928
146
So does anyone know how much M4A saves?
I don't, but I am aware of the problems around M4FA, all of which are indicative of any attempt to amend our present system -- that there are winners and losers in every proposal, and that all the special interests -- hospitals, doctors, insurance companies, low info voters for whom the very word "socialism" makes them soil their drawers, and the right wing politicians whose political survival depends in these dumbbells support -- will rise up and oppose those reform attempts.

For instance, hospitals and doctors will spend copious amounts of money opposing M4FA because payments/reimbursements through M4FA are lower than they presently get.

Our present system if fucked, but it is entrenched. It's tentacles have a grip on all sorts of powerful stakeholders, which means, shorthand, that attempts our attempts to change are fucked. We're fucked.

So, ummmm, do you wish to speak on your question of "how much M4FA saves," or on any of the myriad ancillary issues that surround it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
I don't, but I am aware of the problems around M4FA, all of which are indicative of any attempt to amend our present system -- that there are winners and losers in every proposal, and that all the special interests -- hospitals, doctors, insurance companies, low info voters for whom the very word "socialism" makes them soil their drawers, and the right wing politicians whose political survival depends in these dumbbells support -- will rise up and oppose those reform attempts.

The answer to "how much does it save" is that we don't know what if anything will be saved. The guy who did the study that people said will save 2 trillion? He a bit miffed because his study never said that.

The rest? Well I suggest that people stop becoming "low info" and come up with a viable solution. Naturally people assume docs are greedy millionares and a few, a vanishingly small number are. I mentioned one who was not and she was forced out of practice by low information people. Those who insist on that they do not understand? Oh yes, Republicans are among them.
For instance, hospitals and doctors will spend copious amounts of money opposing M4FA because payments/reimbursements through M4FA are lower than they presently get.
Our present system if fucked, but it is entrenched. It's tentacles have a grip on all sorts of powerful stakeholders, which means, shorthand, that attempts our attempts to change are fucked. We're fucked.

You want to put providers out of business. I understand your sentiment although I think it a bad idea. Add to the tenticles an almost religious devotion to solutions that don't address the issues (although I WOULD like to see a VIABLE answer to universal coverage) but goddammit that's what we want.


So, ummmm, do you wish to speak on your question of "how much M4FA saves," or on any of the myriad ancillary issues that surround it?

I've already addressed what I called a metric shitton of problems, and that having the One True Solution when most haven't the first clue about care (Republicans too), what it entails nor care what happens if faith turns out to be a poor substitute for logically derived and tested solutions in the context of our nation.

I've put out a roadmap of sorts and hell people haven't done the least effort to think about the reality on the ground. "Just pay less" is a pretty stupid approach.

So what "experts" have come up with anything close to addressing drug costs outside that?
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,566
9,928
146
You want to put providers out of business.
No, I don't. It is hysterical of you to glean from the factually true statement of mine that I want to put hospitals and doctors our of business.

For those following at home, here is the statement you quoted and reacted to:

For instance, hospitals and doctors will spend copious amounts of money opposing M4FA because payments/reimbursements through M4FA are lower than they presently get.

^^^ That's a FACT. And it is one of the many impediments those who wish to reform our system face.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,993
13,519
136
How does single payer work in scandinavia?
Beyond getting great care, institutes for public health identifies that middle aged men are idiots.. thus they launch an ad campaign, tv, busstops, the works, to get middle aged men to go to the doctor to get that prostate checked out.
Certain demographics also use healthcare more so than others like lone elderly people will schedule an appointment cause, well, they are lonely and lack social contact, they will often get a nice chat with the clerky about whats up in life and whats not. Point is, it covers the whole spectrum of healthcare and has an underlying mission statement that says a healthy population is a productive population.
Public healthcare is about taking care of your brothers and sisters and in turn they will take care of me. For the life of me I cant figure out how the "fuck you got mine" mentality got so engraved in american society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
No, I don't. It is hysterical of you to glean from the factually true statement of mine that I want to put hospitals and doctors our of business.

For those following at home, here is the statement you quoted and reacted to:



^^^ That's a FACT. And it is one of the many impediments those who wish to reform our system face.

I responded to your generalization appropriately I believe as you have put M4A as the solution when so much needs to be done in advance before any plan can be seen as such. I have given you examples of real-world issues and solutions. So do likewise or not but while I'm passionate perhaps, I'm not ignorant of the problems which exist and we don't need almost religious fervor in picking the One True Path- neither one of us knows where that lies but it's quite likely that many options and variations exist.

What is a fact is that there will always be resistance to what should be a logical path to optimal solutions. You may not "want" to put practices out of business yet it happens and so we have people asking for that which they say they don't want. Such is life.

Bottom line is that yes there is resistance due to a great deal of fear and ignorance and that is exhibited all too often, yet I have not seen one sign of a "clue". To the Dems credit, they at least understand there's a problem. If they only would recognize that they don't yet have an informed understanding of the scope of the problem as it applies to a "system" which doesn't even exist.
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,077
126
No ones talking about how UK is now worried Trump is going to force their hand in a trade deal and their healthcare and may actually come together and end Brexit to prevent it?
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,566
9,928
146
I responded to your generalization appropriately I believe as you have put M4A as the solution when so much needs to be done in advance before any plan can be seen as such.

1. WHAT fucking generalization of mine are you talking about?

2. WHERE have I put M4A forward as the solution?

Please document your bullshit accusations with quotes, or be a standup guy and admit just how ridiculously wrong you are.
7G3zITG.png
 

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,669
266
126
I'm sure that this happens in some cases (especially in niche health situations), but I know many with cancer who get to a specialist and have the tests done and start treatment within a couple of weeks; my niece is an example. I am by no means saying that the US system is anywhere near ideal. I'm only saying that letting the .gov run it wouldn't be the Utopian panacea that many on the left think it would be.

Unlike in the US where it goes like this:

Has a problem
Has to wait a week or more to go to her regular doc
Doc examines her and schedules tests
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for test.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval.
Has to wait a week to get test.
Waits another week or so for results
Doc refers her to a specialist
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for specialist.
Insurance denies specialist.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval to see specialist
Sees specialist.
Specialist orders more test.
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for test.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance to get approval.
Gets more tests - again a few week wait
Waits a few weeks for results
Specialist recommends treatment.
Has to get pre-approval from insurance for treatment.
Insurance denies approval.
Has to spend up to 4-6 weeks arguing with insurance.
Insurance decides it would be cheaper for patient to die and get sued.
Dies waiting for approval that will never come.
Family gets bill for half a million dollars for what insurance didn't cover.
Family tries to sue insurance only to find out that have a binding clause of arbitration with insurance.
Arbiter works for insurance company and denies claim.
 

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,669
266
126
Name 1 first world country that has a population of 340M. No, China does not count.

Again - I am in NO EFFING WAY claiming that our system is the best. We definitely can improve. But unlike many on the left, I don't have faith enough in our .gov to take the healthcare system over and make it much better.

Name one first world country that doesn't have a more efficient health care system than the US.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,167
1,638
126
Most of the people who want some sort of single payer setup do not want the government to "run health care."
We want the hospitals and doctors offices to be run by the doctors and nurses.

The "thing" we want to replace is the health insurance industry since it wastes time and money for everyone.

The way to make it work, is to ensure that congress, senate do not have an option for a different or better plan. Make 1 public universal plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie