Another billing article

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
True government run, single payer would require banning & bankrupting of the insurance companies in this country, along with their lobbyists. That alone, makes it extremely unlikely to happen in the USA. Combine that with that fact that the American experiment with single payer, the VA system, is a disaster, and 'single payer' is dead on arrival, at least with me. Add to that, the fact that often when the government tries to 'fix' a problem, they make it worse, and/or create more. See Obamacare.

Members don't see this ad.
 
It does not cost $1 billion to research a drug. That's pharmaceutical industry propaganda.

How much does it cost? To research hundreds of different compounds, do animal testing, followed by arduous FDA approval process, human trials, then marketing afterwards? Since you are an apparent expert on the TRUE cost, then please enlighten us.
 
How much does it cost? To research hundreds of different compounds, do animal testing, followed by arduous FDA approval process, human trials, then marketing afterwards? Since you are an apparent expert on the TRUE cost, then please enlighten us.

Wife worked for Merck up until 2009 in their R&D department. She worked on the team that designed Gardasil, Rotateq, and Quadra-something (pneumococcal vaccine) Lets just say that you're about right.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
How much does it cost? To research hundreds of different compounds, do animal testing, followed by arduous FDA approval process, human trials, then marketing afterwards? Since you are an apparent expert on the TRUE cost, then please enlighten us.
Just a note, dude - you brought up the billion. The onus is on you to back that up, especially if you demand the same of others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
A few things. Both sides of this are playing With the numbers. To “debunk” they say “Half of the remaining $650 million was recouped by the company through tax breaks. The remaining figure, approximately $330 million, actually represented the average for only the costliest 20 percent of drugs: those that were developed in-house”.

So the cost is real.

Whatever it is, it isn’t cheap. My buddy started a biotech company and is raising money for trials of a single drug that isn’t novel. Big big money.
 
Just a note, dude - you brought up the billion. The onus is on you to back that up, especially if you demand the same of others.
I was just quoting the commonly brought up numbers. Note I ceded the point when someone else provided evidence. But $90 million or $1 billion is still too expensive under any single payer system.
 
I was just quoting the commonly brought up numbers. Note I ceded the point when someone else provided evidence. But $90 million or $1 billion is still too expensive under any single payer system.
I don't disagree, guy - it's just precision. The commonly quoted number is like the statement "we only use 10% of our brains" - we only use 10% at any one time, but 100% of the brain gets used (like your brain is a house where you live alone; you can only be in one room at a time, but all rooms get used). The commonly quoted number is just imprecise.

Not dinging you, dude!
 
I still can't believe that physicians are arguing for single payer. All of us have had experience with the VA system, and the government employees unions who run it. Why does anyone think a national single payer system would have different results when we would have things run by government employees unions who get to decide which patient gets treatment and how soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I still can't believe that physicians are arguing for single payer

You’re surprised that the same people who thought tobacco smoke enemas, bleeding patients with leaches and ‘Pain as the fifth vital sign’ were good ideas, think single payer is a good idea?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I still can't believe that physicians are arguing for single payer. All of us have had experience with the VA system, and the government employees unions who run it. Why does anyone think a national single payer system would have different results when we would have things run by government employees unions who get to decide which patient gets treatment and how soon.

I think you missed the point in my post when I said NON-GOVERNMENT. CMS and VA have shown us that it doesn't work so well when it's government operated. I'm speaking of a non-profit, non-government insurer with hospitals and physicians private as they currently are.
 
I think you missed the point in my post when I said NON-GOVERNMENT. CMS and VA have shown us that it doesn't work so well when it's government operated. I'm speaking of a non-profit, non-government insurer with hospitals and physicians private as they currently are.

I don't understand how such an entity can exist. How can it be non-profit, but bill the government exclusively without government control? I could see having a "private" shell corporation run in the background by government bureaucrats. That would be de-facto government-run single payer except in name.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I don't understand how such an entity can exist. How can it be non-profit, but bill the government exclusively without government control? I could see having a "private" shell corporation run in the background by government bureaucrats. That would be de-facto government-run single payer except in name.

Why is it billing the government? People pay the single payer that in turn pays claims. Where is government involved?
 
Why is it billing the government? People pay the single payer that in turn pays claims. Where is government involved?

Single payer means the government is the payer. Ultimately they will choose what they want to pay for and how much. They are not going to allow physicians or some "Private non-profit" bill them unlimited amounts. They will set reimbursements, and cut where necessary when they have inevitable budget shortfalls. They will decide what procedures they will cover, how many they will do in a year, and how much they will pay for them.

If it's a private, non-profit how will it make up for the inevitable shortfall? There is no alternative but to have government pay in a single payer system, as no private company could absorb the losses for long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Are you being Ironic? I don't think there's one physician on this forum who would want "VA-style" healthcare, which incidentally is how all single-payer care would end up in this country.

The interesting thing, of course, is that you cannot find a single person eligible for VA care who wants healthcare outside of the VA system. Look around at the "whaling and gnashing of teeth" when a VA hospital/clinic is slated for closure and the veterans are told that they have to go to a "civilian hospital" for healthcare. Decades ago, we discussed cutting back on services at our AF hospitals in areas where there was a large civilian healthcare presence (e.g., Omaha with two medical schools) and spread out the military physicians to the isolated locations so there wasn't one OBGYN on single coverage 24/7/365 at a place like Loring AFB (long since closed.) The blowback from every rank from O-10 to E-3 was tremendous. They absolutely refused to go anywhere near the civilian healthcare system. Even today, if you gave a retiree the option to either a) have healthcare at their local civilian hospital, or b) be treated at a military hospital, I guarantee you that 99 out of 100 would chose option (b). If you don't believe me, go camp out at your local American Legion for a week or so.
 
The interesting thing, of course, is that you cannot find a single person eligible for VA care who wants healthcare outside of the VA system. Look around at the "whaling and gnashing of teeth" when a VA hospital/clinic is slated for closure and the veterans are told that they have to go to a "civilian hospital" for healthcare. Decades ago, we discussed cutting back on services at our AF hospitals in areas where there was a large civilian healthcare presence (e.g., Omaha with two medical schools) and spread out the military physicians to the isolated locations so there wasn't one OBGYN on single coverage 24/7/365 at a place like Loring AFB (long since closed.) The blowback from every rank from O-10 to E-3 was tremendous. They absolutely refused to go anywhere near the civilian healthcare system. Even today, if you gave a retiree the option to either a) have healthcare at their local civilian hospital, or b) be treated at a military hospital, I guarantee you that 99 out of 100 would chose option (b). If you don't believe me, go camp out at your local American Legion for a week or so.

I once had a vet threaten physical harm against anyone who badmouthed the local VA hospital.
 
The interesting thing, of course, is that you cannot find a single person eligible for VA care who wants healthcare outside of the VA system. Look around at the "whaling and gnashing of teeth" when a VA hospital/clinic is slated for closure and the veterans are told that they have to go to a "civilian hospital" for healthcare. Decades ago, we discussed cutting back on services at our AF hospitals in areas where there was a large civilian healthcare presence (e.g., Omaha with two medical schools) and spread out the military physicians to the isolated locations so there wasn't one OBGYN on single coverage 24/7/365 at a place like Loring AFB (long since closed.) The blowback from every rank from O-10 to E-3 was tremendous. They absolutely refused to go anywhere near the civilian healthcare system. Even today, if you gave a retiree the option to either a) have healthcare at their local civilian hospital, or b) be treated at a military hospital, I guarantee you that 99 out of 100 would chose option (b). If you don't believe me, go camp out at your local American Legion for a week or so.
You could not be more wrong. I had a cash only practice 15 minutes from the local VA. I probably had 2-5 new patients per month come to me because they got sick of waiting to see anyone at the VA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The interesting thing, of course, is that you cannot find a single person eligible for VA care who wants healthcare outside of the VA system. Look around at the "whaling and gnashing of teeth" when a VA hospital/clinic is slated for closure and the veterans are told that they have to go to a "civilian hospital" for healthcare. Decades ago, we discussed cutting back on services at our AF hospitals in areas where there was a large civilian healthcare presence (e.g., Omaha with two medical schools) and spread out the military physicians to the isolated locations so there wasn't one OBGYN on single coverage 24/7/365 at a place like Loring AFB (long since closed.) The blowback from every rank from O-10 to E-3 was tremendous. They absolutely refused to go anywhere near the civilian healthcare system. Even today, if you gave a retiree the option to either a) have healthcare at their local civilian hospital, or b) be treated at a military hospital, I guarantee you that 99 out of 100 would chose option (b). If you don't believe me, go camp out at your local American Legion for a week or so.

Anecdotes are not evidence. Of course they could be brainwashed like Canadians, or British supporters of NIH......(waiting for Progessive members of the forum to go crazy now)
 
Yup. There are many veterans who are fanatical about the VA. They hate the fact that in the private world they are “just another patient” compared to their typical VA customer experience. (The actual quality of their medical care, especially surgical, doesn’t seem to bug them as much.) Then there’s another faction that can’t stand the place and hate that they can’t get care anywhere else.

I worked at a VA ED for a number of years, my saying was that when the patients can’t get fired and the staff can’t get fired, at times you’re gonna have some major conflict.
 
The interesting thing, of course, is that you cannot find a single person eligible for VA care who wants healthcare outside of the VA system.
I'll bet you a year's salary that if you came and asked that question down here, well over 50% of those surveyed would wish they didn't have to jump through VA hoops. Since we don't have a VA hospital here, and the clinic is backlogged for years, they end up having to fill out paperwork to get seen in clinics the rest of us use. And they universally prefer it. I haven't met a single vet here that prefers the VA system. YMMV. Your VA may also vary. But your statement is laughable.
 
I'll bet you a year's salary that if you came and asked that question down here, well over 50% of those surveyed would wish they didn't have to jump through VA hoops. Since we don't have a VA hospital here, and the clinic is backlogged for years, they end up having to fill out paperwork to get seen in clinics the rest of us use. And they universally prefer it. I haven't met a single vet here that prefers the VA system. YMMV. Your VA may also vary. But your statement is laughable.

I'm inclined to agree. Lots of vets/eligible folks down here on the gulf coast of FL; and the vast majority hate the VA system.
 
The interesting thing, of course, is that you cannot find a single person eligible for VA care who wants healthcare outside of the VA system. Look around at the "whaling and gnashing of teeth" when a VA hospital/clinic is slated for closure and the veterans are told that they have to go to a "civilian hospital" for healthcare. Decades ago, we discussed cutting back on services at our AF hospitals in areas where there was a large civilian healthcare presence (e.g., Omaha with two medical schools) and spread out the military physicians to the isolated locations so there wasn't one OBGYN on single coverage 24/7/365 at a place like Loring AFB (long since closed.) The blowback from every rank from O-10 to E-3 was tremendous. They absolutely refused to go anywhere near the civilian healthcare system. Even today, if you gave a retiree the option to either a) have healthcare at their local civilian hospital, or b) be treated at a military hospital, I guarantee you that 99 out of 100 would chose option (b). If you don't believe me, go camp out at your local American Legion for a week or so.

The bolded is categorically false. As a private, non-VA Pain Physician, I have VA patients that come to me all the time. In fact, the exact reason they come to me, is because for years and years, their pain care has languished so badly in the VA system. Finally, through a program called HealthNet, they're allowed to see a non-VA physician, outside of the VA system, for specialty care. Invariably what I hear from them, when we discuss getting an MRI of the spine and discuss what interventional options are appropriate, is, "Wow. I didn't know any of this existed. They act like it doesn't in the VA. They just let me deal with my pain for the past ten years on the same medicine which isn't working."

It's actually worked out great, because they're sending patients to me simply to do any interventional treatments that might help and they go back to their VA PCP for their meds.

The patients only end up seeing me, specifically, because they were offered the choice of either taking a 2 hour drive to the nearest VA Pain MD, or seeing me, who's 3 miles away, and they chose me.

When the do finally get in to see me, they're blown away at how fast we get an MRI and get them whatever injection they need (if any) compared to how it is in the VA system, which according to them, is exactly "never," at least in the past 10 or so years, they've been suffering with their painful condition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The interesting thing, of course, is that you cannot find a single person eligible for VA care who wants healthcare outside of the VA system. Look around at the "whaling and gnashing of teeth" when a VA hospital/clinic is slated for closure and the veterans are told that they have to go to a "civilian hospital" for healthcare.

Wailing, man. Wailing. ... nobody is hunting whales in this metaphor.

Jump, jive, and wail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top