- Joined
- Aug 27, 2009
- Messages
- 50
- Reaction score
- 0
Last edited:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/04/26/cheaper.surgery/index.html?hpt=C1
And I thought my life was bad....
Even MRIs are 1/10 of the price in other countries, so it really doesn't make a lot of sense.
good thing he'll never be uninsured again.
I have no idea, it is the same machine, the same 15 minutes to half an hour for a specialist to interpret.
Operations make sense because of added cost due to malpractice insurance, because here you don't hear a lot about people suing doctors. OR time may also cost more overseas, but honestly, I have no idea.
CNN said:Fitteron says self-pay patients are "getting really aggressively overcharged," as hospitals are trying to subsidize for money lost on things such as Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements.
Too bad we don't hear much about the botched surgeries that happen in those countries. Those patients are essentially screwed, with no way of ever recovering any losses (regardless of whether it was the surgeon's fault or not). At least here in the U.S., you know you're safe, and you know your rights are guaranteed as a patient.
Plus, it looks like dude didn't have any insurance. Assuming they had SOME form of insurance, even if it didn't pay a dime, at least the negotiated insurance rate would be a fraction of that 30K. The story was cherry-picked, and written to dramatize the current political situation - nothing more, nothing less...
at least that's what I think...
Too bad we don't hear much about the botched surgeries that happen in those countries. Those patients are essentially screwed, with no way of ever recovering any losses (regardless of whether it was the surgeon's fault or not). At least here in the U.S., you know you're safe, and you know your rights are guaranteed as a patient.
Plus, it looks like dude didn't have any insurance. Assuming they had SOME form of insurance, even if it didn't pay a dime, at least the negotiated insurance rate would be a fraction of that 30K. The story was cherry-picked, and written to dramatize the current political situation - nothing more, nothing less...
at least that's what I think...
Too bad we don't hear much about the botched surgeries that happen in those countries. Those patients are essentially screwed, with no way of ever recovering any losses (regardless of whether it was the surgeon's fault or not). At least here in the U.S., you know you're safe, and you know your rights are guaranteed as a patient.
Plus, it looks like dude didn't have any insurance. Assuming they had SOME form of insurance, even if it didn't pay a dime, at least the negotiated insurance rate would be a fraction of that 30K. The story was cherry-picked, and written to dramatize the current political situation - nothing more, nothing less...
at least that's what I think...
As for charging uninsured patient and insured patient with different rate, that is just totally unfair.
Too bad we don't hear much about the botched surgeries that happen in those countries. Those patients are essentially screwed, with no way of ever recovering any losses (regardless of whether it was the surgeon's fault or not). At least here in the U.S., you know you're safe, and you know your rights are guaranteed as a patient.
Plus, it looks like dude didn't have any insurance. Assuming they had SOME form of insurance, even if it didn't pay a dime, at least the negotiated insurance rate would be a fraction of that 30K. The story was cherry-picked, and written to dramatize the current political situation - nothing more, nothing less...
at least that's what I think...
If you are comparing doing a procedure in some third world countries vs in US , it might be less safe and you rights might not be guaranteed. However, in this specific case, we are comparing doing the procedure in UK vs in US, both have well developed medical system and legal system, yet the cost difference is still that dramatic.
As for charging uninsured patient and insured patient with different rate, that is just totally unfair.
Thats why the people who can afford to go anywhere in the world for the surgeries goto the UK right? O wait they come to the US!
But no one ever pays $120,000 in the US. If you're a self-pay patient, you either don't get it done, or you go to New Zealand, or you just don't pay the bill.. I know of several people who have had expensive motorcycle crashes without medical insurance, and after racking up six figure medical bills....just walked away without paying them.Medical Tourism is a HUGE industry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism
You can go to a country comparable to the US such as New Zealand and get a hip replacement for 20k that costs 120k in US
really? I haven't seen stories of all the major European footballers coming to the U.S. for surgery every time they get injured, nor have I seen stories about Euro royalty, or billionaires (Richard Branson, Roman Abramovich etc.) leaving their countries for U.S. medical care. I think this line of thinking is dangerous, it'll lull us into a false sense of security while more and more people leave the U.S. for cheaper surgeries.Thats why the people who can afford to go anywhere in the world for the surgeries goto the UK right? O wait they come to the US!
Blame the government (and other people). If you give a cash-paying patient a discount that you don't also give to Medicare, you've just committed Medicare fraud.As for charging uninsured patient and insured patient with different rate, that is just totally unfair.
But no one ever pays $120,000 in the US. If you're a self-pay patient, you either don't get it done, or you go to New Zealand, or you just don't pay the bill.. I know of several people who have had expensive motorcycle crashes without medical insurance, and after racking up six figure medical bills....just walked away without paying them.
The hospital sends a bill for $120,000. Insurance might pay $60,000 and Medicare might pay $40,000. If they didn't bill for $120K, then the insurance company (who pays X% of Y cost, or Z flat cost, whichever is less) wouldn't pay the $60K that the hospital actually needs.
They're different systems. You have to ask yourself what's not being told in the story.its still a legitimate problem
3k vs 30K
8k vs 144K
the differences border on ridiculous, as we become more globalized this will become more and more of an issue. Even with insurance (assuming ~20% copay) you still end up paying more than double out of pocket for the same procedure (and their quoted prices include airfare). The ability to sue is a pretty weak incentive to stay in the U.S., the price difference is so large that if something went wrong you could pay to get it fixed, and still end up with a significantly lower bill.
really? I haven't seen stories of all the major European footballers coming to the U.S. for surgery every time they get injured, nor have I seen stories about Euro royalty, or billionaires (Richard Branson, Roman Abramovich etc.) leaving their countries for U.S. medical care. I think this line of thinking is dangerous, it'll lull us into a false sense of security while more and more people leave the U.S. for cheaper surgeries.
Well, it does happen. It's not as uncommon as you'd think.really? I haven't seen stories of all the major European footballers coming to the U.S. for surgery every time they get injured, nor have I seen stories about Euro royalty, or billionaires (Richard Branson, Roman Abramovich etc.) leaving their countries for U.S. medical care. I think this line of thinking is dangerous, it'll lull us into a false sense of security while more and more people leave the U.S. for cheaper surgeries.
Agreed, I seem to remember that Beckham recently flew to Finland to have surgery on an injury. He can afford any surgeon in the world and even after living in the US for awhile he chooses a Finnish surgeon. The US doesn't have a monopoly on quality medical care.
Do you know why MRIs cost so much less? I'm really curious.
I'm sure the difference involves many factors, such as the hospital charging less to use the OR, doctors charging less for their time, etc.
I have family that were able to come to South Africa [So 5 air tickets] and have an MRI and it was cheaper than doing it in the US. And this is high quality private health care, probably some of the best in the world.
Blame the government (and other people). If you give a cash-paying patient a discount that you don't also give to Medicare, you've just committed Medicare fraud.
....
Too bad we don't hear much about the botched surgeries that happen in those countries. Those patients are essentially screwed, with no way of ever recovering any losses (regardless of whether it was the surgeon's fault or not). At least here in the U.S., you know you're safe, and you know your rights are guaranteed as a patient.
Plus, it looks like dude didn't have any insurance. Assuming they had SOME form of insurance, even if it didn't pay a dime, at least the negotiated insurance rate would be a fraction of that 30K. The story was cherry-picked, and written to dramatize the current political situation - nothing more, nothing less...
at least that's what I think...
It can be interpreted in a lot of ways. That's why people have to do some critical thinking instead of just reading an article and assuming it's telling the entire story.Lol, just from the graph it almost looks like all health care expenditure is based on MRIs. A little deceptive!
Its not exactly unfair, in fact it is very similar to a bond credit rating. When working with an insurance company, the hospital knows it will get its money due, so assigns the insurance company the equivalent of a AAA rating. When working with an uninsured patient, there is increased risk that they may not get its money, so the uninsured patient has a lower credit rating, say C. In order to offset this potential for risk, the hospital charges more.
It may seem contradictory to charge more money to someone who may have less money, but its how financial institutes operate. Many times, patients who can pay upfront in get tremendous cost cuts as they achieve their AAA rating equivalency.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/black-market_cosmetic_surgerie.html
"Six women from the Essex County area who wanted fuller bottoms ended up in hospitals after receiving buttocks-enhancement injections containing the same material contractors use to caulk bathtubs, officials said."
The women checked into hospitals in the county after their procedures, apparently administered by unlicensed providers, went horribly wrong, state health officials said.
The NJ case was done by non-licensed practitioner, that means they may not even be physicians. "The women checked into hospitals in the county after their procedures, apparently administered by unlicensed providers, went horribly wrong, state health officials said. " In the soldiers case the aorta was nicked. In the DE case there was no mention of harm caused, he did a different sort of gastric bypass procedure, I'm not certain that there was any harm done. Even assuming the worst about these cases, they represent a very small fraction of America's health care providers and it would be equally easy to cherry pick from the other side.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6945667/
"A doctor may have performed the wrong type of gastric bypass surgery on more than 50 patients at a Wilmington hospital, officials said."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/22/national/main5179900.shtml
"An airman lost parts of both legs and was in critical condition after routine gallbladder surgery at Travis Air Force Base went terribly wrong, his family said."
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/black-market_cosmetic_surgerie.html
"Six women from the Essex County area who wanted fuller bottoms ended up in hospitals after receiving buttocks-enhancement injections containing the same material contractors use to caulk bathtubs, officials said."
Its not exactly unfair, in fact it is very similar to a bond credit rating. When working with an insurance company, the hospital knows it will get its money due, so assigns the insurance company the equivalent of a AAA rating. When working with an uninsured patient, there is increased risk that they may not get its money, so the uninsured patient has a lower credit rating, say C. In order to offset this potential for risk, the hospital charges more.
It may seem contradictory to charge more money to someone who may have less money, but its how financial institutes operate. Many times, patients who can pay upfront in get tremendous cost cuts as they achieve their AAA rating equivalency.
But no one ever pays $120,000 in the US. If you're a self-pay patient, you either don't get it done, or you go to New Zealand, or you just don't pay the bill.. I know of several people who have had expensive motorcycle crashes without medical insurance, and after racking up six figure medical bills....just walked away without paying them.
These women got their butts shot up by some dude in a garage. That's not medical treatment.http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/black-market_cosmetic_surgerie.html
"Six women from the Essex County area who wanted fuller bottoms ended up in hospitals after receiving buttocks-enhancement injections containing the same material contractors use to caulk bathtubs, officials said."
NEWARK -- Six women from the Essex County area who wanted fuller bottoms ended up in hospitals after receiving buttocks-enhancement injections containing the same material contractors use to caulk bathtubs, officials said.
The women checked into hospitals in the county after their procedures, apparently administered by unlicensed providers, went horribly wrong, state health officials said. The women underwent surgery and were given antibiotics. No arrests have been made.
Different from medical-grade silicone, the substance used in the botched procedures was believed to be a diluted version of nonmedical-grade silicone.
"The same stuff you use to put caulk around the bathtub," said Steven M. Marcus, executive and medical director of the New Jersey Poison Information and Education System, who learned about the bizarre procedures through a committee he sits on that monitors outbreaks in the metropolitan area.
I was using the conjunction "or" for a reason. In their situation, they just wouldn't get it done. I'm not defending the current system here.That "works" if you have acute injuries, but if you have an issue that isn't (yet) life threatening it's not always so simple. I have seen people with tumors who cannot get treated because they do not have a tissue diagnosis, and they cannot get a tissue diagnosis because the tumor hasn't reached a high enough stage to make the patient unstable.
Delightful, eh?
LOL.
Have you ever been inside a US hospital, or talked to someone who works in one?
The insurance companies pay late, and pay whatever they feel like paying, and tell the hospitals to take it or leave it.