Ferris Loc: South Carolina

My opinion of socialized medicine is not based on one news report. I am a retired MD who practiced for over 35 years and saw the changes, the vast majority of which were negative, in the bureaucratization of a once proud profession, now racked with significant rates of depression and suicide among physicians largely attributable to the excessive and ridiculous demands of bean counters. This is leading to a decline in numbers of physicians available to provide this needed specialty and relegating clinical decisions to lesser trained and experienced caregivers, who robotically interact more with computers than the patients they are interviewing in the same room, and who dishonestly produce "documentation" of largely irrelevant information to satisfy the payor in order for the parent employer to be paid. Socialized medicine is a bureaucracy, and the vast majority of bureaucracies are inferior to alternatives.

John N Loc: HP14 3QF Stokenchurch, UK

You're not short of bureaucracies in your own medical practices. Just that they are private ones and not 'socialised' ones.

It's not like there are many Countries following the U.S. model.

Abo

But in terms of performance, safety, comfort and looks Toyota produce better
cars that cost less than Cadilacs LOL

Ferris Loc: South Carolina

The increasing insurgency of bureaucracy in medicine is exactly what I am talking about. There is an existential difference between a "profession" and a bureaucracy. Some bureaucracies are government based, others tools of free enterprise (like Blue Cross/Blue Shield) to enhance profitability. I saw the worst of both. Some say that there is some good in these systems and I agree. But the natural trend is toward more, not less, bureaucratization, regardless of the source. The victim is the profession, and the quality of that profession. I am sure that those that are relatively healthy love socialized medicine; they seldom have to use it. In Great Britain the NHS was years behind the US in approval life-saving chemotherapies because of the cost of the medicine which was ties to the development costs. You get what you pay for. Other countries lag behind the US in innovative therapies developed in part because of the chance of profits through the US system.

Doddy Loc: Barnard Castle-England

But, you are and others on this thread are demonising the likes of the NHS, which treats all of our citizens... rich or poor! Look at the facts...millions of your citizens cannot afford even basic healthcare, I have watched documentaries about US healthcare showing people suffering because they can't afford treatment! People have even gone bankrupt just to get well! That wouldn't happen over here! We know US healthcare is the best in the world, but only for those who can afford the insurance payments!...surely being the richest country in the world you would think it could give its citizens a healthcare system that cares for the most vulnerable as well.











9

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

But more often the "investment firms" are actually owned by the doctors as the investors. Doctors are notorious for not knowing what to do with all their money and hire others who most often put it into medical labs---and conglomerate health systems. (Nearly unregulated private placements) Nothing is for the patient. Sadly---though---look at the single payer---government systems like in UK and you won't hear of better service and probably not a cheaper total price tag to someone. Buy supplement and read about alternative medicine--stay thing and active---and don't call on doctors for a cut thumb or much else except to set bones?-----

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

You saved the three grand!

rwoodvira

I was for 40 years an insurance broker. In 2014 I was diagnosed with esophageal cancer - the disease is metastatic so in addition to my esophagus it could be anywhere. The carrier wanted to have me scanned via CT; my doc who was a full professor at Penn, wanted a PET. The carrier tried to deny me access to their expert - I advised that I'd be calling the Insurance Dept the next day. The medical firm tried to deny me access to their consulting physician - I gave the same threat. It turned out that their "expert" was a pediatrician - the second one was a CT specialist. My surgeon advised the insurer no operation without the PET and that I'd seek an injunction from the court. I got my PET.
One of my clients had a worker that was sun-blinded and rear ended a tractor trailer and was instantly k**led. The accidental death carrier denied his claim as they said he had a heart attack. I called the coroner who confirmed he did have a heart attack as his chest was crushed - I called the carrier to pay up as they couldn't prove the attack happened before or after. Their next move was to deny the payment as the guy had sleep apnea - he was supposed to be tested that night for the disorder. I said it was inconclusive as he never had the test - the carrier paid.
I was a SVP who knew the angles, but someone outside the business would not have a chance.
I could give more examples, but I think you can get the drift on this. The insurers often get away with it daily; it is a disgrace.

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

In my youth I read Adelle Davis and books by the earlier Bernarr McFadden, the health and fitness originator. When Dirk Pearson appeared on Mike Douglass I bought his book co-authored with Sandy Shaw---Live Extension. I keep up with new developments in supplements and science of health and have never needed a prescription. (except an anti-biotic) It is all a scattergun, of course---but cheaper than doctors. I haven't needed a doctor--and only when eligible for a free checkup and tests did I have some. And haven't for six years now. I haven't been all that careful physically, though---and did fracture lumbars--but that is not general health. And in that case--doctors have nothing to do to help--unless it is actually the cord. So---buy your supplements--take what ever number of capsules or powders it takes and live to 100. And remember---you are as young as your arteries---so think of them first. For that, take Niacin--grams a day---and more and more as you get older. For inflammation causing arthritis---take aspirin, the anti-inflammatory as a prophylactic not for pain---but before you might need it for arthritic pain.---live to be 100.------

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

OldSchool-WI Loc: Brandon, Wisconsin 53919

You also must be alert to what doctors "write on your chart." I looked after my Mother after Dad died for 27 years. On a checkup a doctor wrote she was a "boarderline diabetic." Her premiums doubled. We had to go all the way to Marshfield--a field system connected with Mayo to a specialist who set the record straight. Another time when a fill in doctor--"a little foreign man who spoke in whispers" and Mother was hard of hearing, claimed in the notes she had "early dementia!"----because she didn't seem to understand what he was saying--but neither could I!---so keep your eyes open--on both the docs and insurance.

John N Loc: HP14 3QF Stokenchurch, UK

I can't and won't disagree with you on those points, but the Country was busy rebuilding after WWII and paying back LeaseLend through the 50's / 60's and possibly into the early 70's. The money wasn't there, not Private nor Public.

People had to be housed first and Industries rebuilt. Bureaucracy is a scourge on us all.

agillot

If you talk to europe , France in my case , they dont mind their health care , the system work .Same with Canada . You dont go bankrupt over medical bills there , the number one cause in the US .

Ferris Loc: South Carolina

Actually in the US there are many programs available for medical care for the poor. In the final analysis, it comes down to a matter of individual choice. When I have a medical condition that requires an intervention, I have options from which I can choose. I don’t want that decision to be made by a faceless government panel looking at a budget to decide whether I can get what would be best for me, that may not be the best for them.
Again, you get what you pay for.

Ichiban365

No, here in the US the decision is made by a faceless panel of bean counters who are in effect making medical decisions and therefore practicing medicine without a license. They decide what treatment I can get based on what is best for their profits, not what is best for me. In the UK, the government panels are there not to make medical decisions for individuals, but to keep costs from spiraling out of control as they have in the US.

In 2006 I was diagnosed with prostate cancer. The best available treatment for me was HIFU (High Intensity Focused Ultrasound). This method was approved in almost every country in the world, but not the USA. Why? Because it is a cheap, outpatient procedure with no overnight hospital stay, therefore low profit margin. So the FDA was blocking it. Just like they do with other innovative therapies developed elsewhere which might reduce profit margins of US companies. My insurance refused to pay, saying it was "experimental" even though Japan was doing 5 year follow up studies. They also claimed it was "not medically necessary" even though I clearly had cancer. I ended up going offshore and paying for it myself.

The idea that some global left-wing cabal is trying to wreck the health services industry (it is far from health "care") in this country is total nonsense of the Q***n variety. The problem with health care in the US is greedy runaway capitalism, not socialism.

Being from the UK, but living in the US, I can say that the UK system is far better except for the wealthiest 1%, and they can afford to go anywhere they choose for treatment.