Waste in US Healthcare System: $700 Billion on average

[zephyrprime]

Man, I can't believe that unecessary test and drugs are the #1 waste category.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9Government doesn't need to prove anything. With insurances constantly denying pre-existing conditions, denying coverage, and outright dropping unfavorable clients, while increasing profits 10 fold in 5 years, they need to be eliminated.

Are you talking about Death Panels at Private Insurance Companies? Say it ain't so! We all know that health insurance companies are benevolent organizations that would never want to fleece the public nor do anything contrary to the public interest. They would never never get between patients and their doctors and the care people need, never ever ever.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Ozoned
They already spent stimulus money to address the one I bolded. Tort reform will take care of a lot of the reduntant paperwork, and a lot of the others you listed.

I think the impact of tort reform is being overestimated. Doctors are still going to get sued and will still want to carry malpractice insurance and will still practice defensive medicine because of it.

If we do have tort reform, where does the expense of caring for people who were injured from medical malpractice or mere mistakes go? Do those costs just magically vaporize? If doctors stop fearing malpractice and lawsuits, will they make more mistakes, increasing the amount of medical malpractice and the costs of malpractice and mistakes?

What you people don't realize is that the torts system also compensates injured people for their injuries and reduces the amount of malpractice. How exactly it should work under a socialized national health care system, I don't know, but injured people do need to be compensated for their injuries or at least cared for and we do need and want to have deterrents against negligence and recklessness.

Yup. Unless suing your doctor is completely banned under tort reform (good luck with that).

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Ozoned
They already spent stimulus money to address the one I bolded. Tort reform will take care of a lot of the reduntant paperwork, and a lot of the others you listed.

I think the impact of tort reform is being overestimated. Doctors are still going to get sued and will still want to carry malpractice insurance and will still practice defensive medicine because of it.

If we do have tort reform, where does the expense of caring for people who were injured from medical malpractice or mere mistakes go? Do those costs just magically vaporize? If doctors stop fearing malpractice and lawsuits, will they make more mistakes, increasing the amount of medical malpractice and the costs of malpractice and mistakes?

What you people don't realize is that the torts system also compensates injured people for their injuries and reduces the amount of malpractice. How exactly it should work under a socialized national health care system, I don't know, but injured people do need to be compensated for their injuries or at least cared for and we do need and want to have deterrents against negligence and recklessness.

I agree with everything you've written. And that's why the estimated savings from malpractice tort reform are so small, as most awards really do fairly compensate those injured by negligent mistakes made by physicians.

I doubt that a socialized system would change the malpractice environment significantly.

 

[piasabird]

I think the number one waste is just the paperwork and the fact that the government is about 1 trillion and 1 year behing in paying the valid claims. If you walk into a doctor's office there are like 4 clerical people to each office. The more the government gets involved the more useless paperwork is required.

A lot of people have conditions that require periodic testing like Blood Pressure, Diabetes, etc. This is just common sense. You have to know certain things like glucose level, A1C, Sugar, Colesterol, etc. Otherwise you could be walking around like a giant ticking bomb, not knowing you are about to die. I doubt if not testing is going to make Diabetes or High Blood pressure go away or be easier to diagnose.

The longer people manage to stay alive the more they need medical care. There is a correlation here. I guess you could cut off health care at age 65 and just let people die slowly if you think that is the best thing to do. Is that what you are proposing?

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Ozoned
They already spent stimulus money to address the one I bolded. Tort reform will take care of a lot of the reduntant paperwork, and a lot of the others you listed.

I think the impact of tort reform is being overestimated. Doctors are still going to get sued and will still want to carry malpractice insurance and will still practice defensive medicine because of it.

If we do have tort reform, where does the expense of caring for people who were injured from medical malpractice or mere mistakes go? Do those costs just magically vaporize? If doctors stop fearing malpractice and lawsuits, will they make more mistakes, increasing the amount of medical malpractice and the costs of malpractice and mistakes?

What you people don't realize is that the torts system also compensates injured people for their injuries and reduces the amount of malpractice. How exactly it should work under a socialized national health care system, I don't know, but injured people do need to be compensated for their injuries or at least cared for and we do need and want to have deterrents against negligence and recklessness.

Yup. Unless suing your doctor is completely banned under tort reform (good luck with that).

The changes advocated primarily deal with limiting so-called "non-economic" damages (such as "pain and suffering") - typically to $500k, limiting the fees payable to plaintiff's attorneys, and increasing the standards for what constitute "expert" witnesses. No one thinks that actual economic damages caused by negligent physicians should be limited.

 

[piasabird]

Maybe we should develop an automated testing device you can wear like a necklace or an arm band. Maybe them star trek medical beds will come out soon.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I hope that people understand mds will practice defensive medicine in the current litigtious climate. Now the government may just tell doctors how to practice, but if it does and provides no protection, health care providers will simply go away.

 

[Exterous]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
Man, I can't believe that unecessary test and drugs are the #1 waste category.

Really?

Heaven forbid you claim chest pain when going to the doctor - they will throw battery after battery of test against you to check for heart problems and then a miriad of others. They know that if they miss something - even if it a small % chance its the cause - they will get sued for it.

This doesn't suprise me at all

 

[QuantumPion]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: Patranus
Look. If government wants to prove that it can do something right, clean up the fraud and waste and once that is done, come back with the government option.

The fact that they claim that they are going to fund the majority of it with these cuts without being able to show that they will actually be able to make the cuts is disturbing. Even if you are pro government option, this should worry you.

I am opposed to the government option right now but would feel a s*little* bit better about it if the government could show that these saving actually exist and the government can take advantage of the savings.

Government doesn't need to prove anything. With insurances constantly denying pre-existing conditions, denying coverage, and outright dropping unfavorable clients, while increasing profits 10 fold in 5 years, they need to be eliminated.

You think the government, which is in a multi-trillion dollar deficit, can take over 1/6 of the economy and not deny a huge number of claims?

Guess which health care provider is the number one denier of claims...it's medicare.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: QuantumPionYou think the government, which is in a multi-trillion dollar deficit, can take over 1/6 of the economy and not deny a huge number of claims?

Guess which health care provider is the number one denier of claims...it's medicare.

It's not as though insurance companies aren't already denying people's claims and subjecting them to death panels. The 17% of GDP that is currently spent on health care could be used to fund a more efficient government system.

Oh, by the way, in nations with evil, evil socialized medicine and national health care, nobody, nobody other than perhaps the wealthy or capitalist freaks supports scrapping their nation's system in favor of the American system. They think that our system is retarded.

 

[irwincur]

Government doesn't need to prove anything. With insurances constantly denying pre-existing conditions, denying coverage, and outright dropping unfavorable clients, while increasing profits 10 fold in 5 years, they need to be eliminated.

Funny you should say that. A little know fact is that Medicare denies more claims than any of the private insurance companies. The government itself is in the business of denying claims.

What makes you think this will stop. Especially when you will only have a relatively restricted menu of conditions and treatments to choose from for coverage.

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: QuantumPionYou think the government, which is in a multi-trillion dollar deficit, can take over 1/6 of the economy and not deny a huge number of claims?

Guess which health care provider is the number one denier of claims...it's medicare.

It's not as though insurance companies aren't already denying people's claims and subjecting them to death panels. The 17% of GDP that is currently spent on health care could be used to fund a more efficient government system.

Oh, by the way, in nations with evil, evil socialized medicine and national health care, nobody, nobody other than perhaps the wealthy or capitalist freaks supports scrapping their nation's system in favor of the American system. They think that our system is retarded.

Why do you want to give the government MORE money when they already fuck off the insane amount we give them already? You really think giving them more will do any good? You have to much trust in the government.

 

[BoberFett]

I'll heartily agree that UHC would go far in lowering the costs due to ignored preventable conditions such as the above mentioned diabetes. I unfortunately also believe any cost savings in that area would be more than offset by the gross inefficiency and waste that every massive government program inevitably encounters.