Why Does Health Care in the U.S. Cost So Much?

[Jarhead]

Must be nice to be able to practice your trade, fuck up and kill someone and be immune to your own liability. And have otherwise intelligent citizens favor it.
NO doctor pays over about 10%,if that, for med/mal in any practice UNLESS he has fucked up and had ANOTHER DOCTOR testify their standard of carewas negligent. That is the only way a doctorpays 125K a year in premiums.
Medical malpractice is the 8th leading cause of death in America. Guess why? And you folks want THE INSURANCE companies and politicians, instead of other doctors and citizen juries, to determine the liability and merits of bad doctor's negligence.
And you folks want them to have limits on what they are liable for.
Scary shit there.
Again for the uninformed: It is OTHER DOCTORS that make the case in med/mal cases. NO court in America will accept a med/mal case UNLESS there are other doctors as expert witnesses testifying that the standard of care was NEGLIGENT BY ANOTHER DOCTOR.
No doctor to testufy against the other docor= NO CASE in America. PERIOD. End of story.
THANK GOD there are lawyers out there with the balls to stand up for the injured due to the negligence of doctors and FRONT ALL OF THE EXPENSES before trial or settlement.
Why do you think doctors pay high premiums? Could it possibly be that medical negligence, BAD DOCTORS, is very high? Well DUH.
How about tort reform for auto accidents, home accidents, ALL accidents, bad and inferior construction in buildings.
Now what would happen to the safety on the highways if bridge manufacturers had tort reform? Could it be that doctors have immunity and ARE HARD TO SUE ANYWAY, that they are MORE negligent because of the lax standardsnow in place due to "tort reform"?
You betcha.
Let's just do away with it all and give everyone $1 every time a claim is filed for anything.
Most Americans have no knowledge whatsoever with medical negligence.

You are by far not 100% correct.

It is not other doctors that are EYE witnesses that are crucial to the case.
It is other doctors that are specialists in the practice in question.

They are paid to testify on behalf of the patient or the doctor in the case and their testimony is based on THEIR experiences.

Secondly....no one is saying that those that suffer true malpractice should not be allowed to sue. ANd no one is saying that the insurace companies make the decision.

Tort reform...in a nutshell.....you have the right to sue for anything. However, if the suit fails, the judge uses his/her professionally judgement to determine if it were frivelous...if it is found to be frivelous, the claimant is responsible for the costs incurred by the mal practice insurance company.

You will not see people simply suing for a scar from an incission that was expected to begin with.

Then how come EVERY STATE that has "tort reform" has limits on damages?
Sir, a JURY, not a judge determines the merits of all civil cases.
Your theory is one of appointing a dictator to determine medical liability.
Would YOU award damages for "a scar from an incission that was expected to begin with"?
Or are YOU just like all other Americans and can be a good citizen and sit on a jury and make rational decisions based ON THE EVIDENCE?
Your example does not make court anyway as those cases are NOT worth an attorney's time. Cost too much to hire the expert doctor for that small claim.
And you know that was already next to impossible to sue doctors as it was?
We do not do things that way in America. We arefounded on the JURY system.

I tried to make it clear that the idea is to deter those that know darn well it is frivelous and hope for a quick settlement...which, as you know, is commonplace in the legal world.

Mal practice insurance companies have the burden to determine the cost to win a suit compared to the cost to simply settle....they settle on more frivelous cases than you can iumagine simply becuase to "counter sue" a pateint for punitive damages is next to impossible.

 

[uscitizen]

ON the malpractice issue. How about the rights of informed decisions by consumers of medical services?

Do you get a "Docfax" when you see a new DR?
Telling how many procedures he has performed and how man successes, etc?
Their professional history?

 

[Jarhead]

ON the malpractice issue. How about the rights of informed decisions by consumers of medical services?

Do you get a "Docfax" when you see a new DR?
Telling how many procedures he has performed and how man successes, etc?
Their professional history?

That is already available to you if you request it.
But half the problem is the insurqance companies tend to want to settle malpractice cases....even if they can win them...seeing as it is usually cheaper for them to settle them than fight them in court.
Again, counter suing a patient for court costs is very difficult due to the human emotioin issue.

Case:

Person sues as they do not like the scar they were warned may happen during elective surgery.
Jury finds it is not a valid calim and the doctor wins the lawsuit.
The insuracne company spent 100K to win the suit.
Very few juries will unanimously agree that the patient who just lost the case but still has the scar must ALSO pay 100K in damages....
So insurance companies would prefer settling for 80K than spend 100K in court.

And the doctor is now stuck with the suit on his record labelled as "sued and settled" as opposed to "sued and won"

So that docfax is useless and not truly revealing.

 

[uscitizen]

It is already abvailable?

Link please.
No Doctors office has ever made me aware of it's availability.

 

[Jarhead]

It is already abvailable?

Link please.
No Doctors office has ever made me aware of it's availability.

lol...I did not mean there was really a doc fax....I used it as a metaphore....

What I meant was all you need to do is ask a doictor for his mal pracitce history; amount of surgeries performed, etc.

If he refuses to proidcue it, you move on.

It is not like a car where without the carfax, the history could easily be tampered with.

 

[uscitizen]

It is already abvailable?

Link please.
No Doctors office has ever made me aware of it's availability.

lol...I did not mean there was really a doc fax....I used it as a metaphore....

What I meant was all you need to do is ask a doictor for his mal pracitce history; amount of surgeries performed, etc.

If he refuses to proidcue it, you move on.

It is not like a car where without the carfax, the history could easily be tampered with.

but there is no regulation requiring them to produce it is there.
Or a legal penalty if it is not complet or accurate?

 

[Jarhead]

It is already abvailable?

Link please.
No Doctors office has ever made me aware of it's availability.

lol...I did not mean there was really a doc fax....I used it as a metaphore....

What I meant was all you need to do is ask a doictor for his mal pracitce history; amount of surgeries performed, etc.

If he refuses to proidcue it, you move on.

It is not like a car where without the carfax, the history could easily be tampered with.

but there is no regulation requiring them to produce it is there.
Or a legal penalty if it is not complet or accurate?

There is the AMA. Court records are public records.
I see your pooint and certainly a "docfax" would be useful.....but again, there are so many frivelous cases settled for cost saving reasons, that the best surgeon will look like an amateur with no talent.

My father in law was a pediatrician. He never had a single mal pracitce case go to court...but he had dozens of filings....including one from a patient who claimed she got the chicken pox while at his officed during a chicken pox epidemic in the region. She borught her son to his office due to itching and pox marks....and then filed a suit that she got them at his office.....not from her son who was diagnosed with them.

The insuracne company settled as she had grounds for the court to accept the suit....she claimed the nurse/receptionist never warned her of the danger of her contracting the disease if she had never had it before...which is standard pracitce for the office and was done...but she claimed it wasnt....enough grounds to accept the case.

The settlement was minor...but on his record? It was a settelemnt...looks bad.

 

[Common Sense]

i know im late to this rodeo but i justed want to get the groups opinions on the reasons why i think costs are high and what, if any, might solutions to lowering these costs.

1. Health care being a for profit enterprise (as opposed to a non profit enterprise)
2. The high costs of pharmaceutical drugs
3. patients receiving useless tests and treatments
4. malpractice lawsuits
5. lack of a digital record for all medical files
6. high administrative costs
7. cost of administering services to the uninsured.
8. high costs of medical equipment


now i we can argue the overall affect of each of these somewhere else, but does anyone have suggestions on how to effectively bring down the costs of any or all of these categories.

also, if you think i left something off this list, please feel free to add it.

 

[Nighthawk62]

You have made some very good points. Another cost you should probably consider is fraudulent claims in the Medicare system. The government does not have good fraud detections and prevention systems like they do in the private sector. Some estimates show fraudulent claims submitted by unscrupulous doctors and hospitals account for about 25-30% of our Medicare costs.

i know im late to this rodeo but i justed want to get the groups opinions on the reasons why i think costs are high and what, if any, might solutions to lowering these costs.

1. Health care being a for profit enterprise (as opposed to a non profit enterprise)
2. The high costs of pharmaceutical drugs
3. patients receiving useless tests and treatments
4. malpractice lawsuits
5. lack of a digital record for all medical files
6. high administrative costs
7. cost of administering services to the uninsured.
8. high costs of medical equipment


now i we can argue the overall affect of each of these somewhere else, but does anyone have suggestions on how to effectively bring down the costs of any or all of these categories.

also, if you think i left something off this list, please feel free to add it.

 

[Gadawg73]

You are by far not 100% correct.

It is not other doctors that are EYE witnesses that are crucial to the case.
It is other doctors that are specialists in the practice in question.

They are paid to testify on behalf of the patient or the doctor in the case and their testimony is based on THEIR experiences.

Secondly....no one is saying that those that suffer true malpractice should not be allowed to sue. ANd no one is saying that the insurace companies make the decision.

Tort reform...in a nutshell.....you have the right to sue for anything. However, if the suit fails, the judge uses his/her professionally judgement to determine if it were frivelous...if it is found to be frivelous, the claimant is responsible for the costs incurred by the mal practice insurance company.

You will not see people simply suing for a scar from an incission that was expected to begin with.

Then how come EVERY STATE that has "tort reform" has limits on damages?
Sir, a JURY, not a judge determines the merits of all civil cases.
Your theory is one of appointing a dictator to determine medical liability.
Would YOU award damages for "a scar from an incission that was expected to begin with"?
Or are YOU just like all other Americans and can be a good citizen and sit on a jury and make rational decisions based ON THE EVIDENCE?
Your example does not make court anyway as those cases are NOT worth an attorney's time. Cost too much to hire the expert doctor for that small claim.
And you know that was already next to impossible to sue doctors as it was?
We do not do things that way in America. We arefounded on the JURY system.

I tried to make it clear that the idea is to deter those that know darn well it is frivelous and hope for a quick settlement...which, as you know, is commonplace in the legal world.

Mal practice insurance companies have the burden to determine the cost to win a suit compared to the cost to simply settle....they settle on more frivelous cases than you can iumagine simply becuase to "counter sue" a pateint for punitive damages is next to impossible.

You are confusing ambulance chaser TV lawyers with medical malpractice.
Nothing could be further apart in terms of proof and trial work. They have almost nothing in common.

All liability carriers be it car, home owners, performance, doctors, lawyers-yes they carry it also, whatever; when you have claims every adjustor on earth weighs the costs the same.

Do you practice law or have ever worked on a medical malpractice case? You can not counter sue patients for punitive damages. Where did you come up with that?

Tort reform has not lowered insurance premiums in Georgia. Not in most states and in Texas it wasn't the tort reform that lowered the premiums. It was the state licensing board mandating CE classes and weeding out the bad doctors.

I have seen th victims of medical malpractice and how doctors and the insurance companies FIGHT hard to deny claims and refuse to be responsible for their negligent actions.

Is a loved one killed by a negligent doctor worth more than 250K in your family? That is the non ecomomic value of a life in a med/mal case in Georgia. 250K for a dead family member.
Tort reform is criminal and has been ruled unconstitutional in Georgia. Watch for this bad law to be brought down in most states.

No, doctors and not Gods and should not be treated as such with laws that take away the rights of maimed patients.

 

[Common Sense]

i know im late to this rodeo but i justed want to get the groups opinions on the reasons why i think costs are high and what, if any, might solutions to lowering these costs.

1. Health care being a for profit enterprise (as opposed to a non profit enterprise)
2. The high costs of pharmaceutical drugs
3. patients receiving useless tests and treatments
4. malpractice lawsuits
5. lack of a digital record for all medical files
6. high administrative costs
7. cost of administering services to the uninsured.
8. high costs of medical equipment
9. fraudulent medicare/medicaid claim

now i we can argue the overall affect of each of these somewhere else, but does anyone have suggestions on how to effectively bring down the costs of any or all of these categories.

also, if you think i left something off this list, please feel free to add it.


(added #9 per nighthawks suggestion)

anyone have any solutions to offer up yet?

 

[Gadawg73]

You have made some very good points. Another cost you should probably consider is fraudulent claims in the Medicare system. The government does not have good fraud detections and prevention systems like they do in the private sector. Some estimates show fraudulent claims submitted by unscrupulous doctors and hospitals account for about 25-30% of our Medicare costs.

i know im late to this rodeo but i justed want to get the groups opinions on the reasons why i think costs are high and what, if any, might solutions to lowering these costs.

1. Health care being a for profit enterprise (as opposed to a non profit enterprise)
2. The high costs of pharmaceutical drugs
3. patients receiving useless tests and treatments
4. malpractice lawsuits
5. lack of a digital record for all medical files
6. high administrative costs
7. cost of administering services to the uninsured.
8. high costs of medical equipment


now i we can argue the overall affect of each of these somewhere else, but does anyone have suggestions on how to effectively bring down the costs of any or all of these categories.

also, if you think i left something off this list, please feel free to add it.

The doctors had legislation passed that they must be paid within 30 days of the claim filed in Medicare cases.
The patient gets the paper work 6 months down the road and the doctors knew this.
How much do you believe that severely limits fraud cases?
I work fraud cases for 30 years. I am telling you folks.
THE DOCTORS are the problem sports fans. Their disease care and 3rd party billing bonanza has completely fucked the entire system.
Until we go back to the patient BEING THE FRIGGIN CUSTOMER expect to pay 48K a year in insurance premiums in 15 years from now.
Folks, they double every 7 1/2 years.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why Does Health Care in the U.S. Cost So Much?

Because it works?

What else is there to say? The US Health Care system works.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.

"That’s because 20 percent of patients account for 80 percent of spending, and that 20 percent is made up mostly of the chronically ill."

“Indeed, perhaps the most significant reason Americans are drowning in health care debt may shock you: Americans are getting far too much unnecessary care. Of our total $2.3 trillion health care bill last year, a whopping $500 billion to $700 billion (30%) was spent on treatments, tests, and hospitalizations that did nothing to improve our health. Even worse, new evidence suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us.”
Even as millions aren’t getting treatments they vitally need, a leading medical journalist argues that the main culprit in the soaring cost of American health care is actually overtreatment… and all that extra care is making us very sick.

$500 BILLION: The amount that Americans spend annually on unnecessary care.

30,000: The number of Medicare recipients who die each year as a result of unneeded care.

50%: The portion of surgeries, tests, and procedures that are not backed by scientific evidence.

Consumers aren’t shopping wisely. The moral-hazard argument says that because people don’t pay out of pocket, they use more-expensive health care than necessary. Moral hazard says we go to the doctor when we don’t really need to; we insist on getting a CT scan for a twisted ankle when ice and an Ace bandage will do. Experts will tell you that as many as one in four doctor’s-office visits are “social calls,” and nearly half of emergency room visits are for care that could have been handled in a nonemergency setting. But even this argument doesn’t explain why health care costs so much. That’s because 20 percent of patients account for 80 percent of spending, and that 20 percent is made up mostly of the chronically ill. These patients are often sick with multiple conditions—such as diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure—and more than half of the money we devote to caring for them is spent when they are in the hospital. People who are sick enough to be hospitalized are generally too ill to be insisting on certain tests or procedures.

Indeed, perhaps the most significant reason Americans are drowning in health care debt may shock you: Americans are getting far too much unnecessary care. Of our total $2.3 trillion health care bill last year, a whopping $500 billion to $700 billion was spent on treatments, tests, and hospitalizations that did nothing to improve our health. Even worse, new evidence suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us.
According to estimates by Elliott Fisher, M.D., a noted Dartmouth researcher, unnecessary care leads to the deaths of as many as 30,000 Medicare recipients annually.

Source: AARP Magazine

Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.



Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.



Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.

 

[Common Sense]

Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.

"That’s because 20 percent of patients account for 80 percent of spending, and that 20 percent is made up mostly of the chronically ill."

“Indeed, perhaps the most significant reason Americans are drowning in health care debt may shock you: Americans are getting far too much unnecessary care. Of our total $2.3 trillion health care bill last year, a whopping $500 billion to $700 billion (30%) was spent on treatments, tests, and hospitalizations that did nothing to improve our health. Even worse, new evidence suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us.”
Even as millions aren’t getting treatments they vitally need, a leading medical journalist argues that the main culprit in the soaring cost of American health care is actually overtreatment… and all that extra care is making us very sick.

$500 BILLION: The amount that Americans spend annually on unnecessary care.

30,000: The number of Medicare recipients who die each year as a result of unneeded care.

50%: The portion of surgeries, tests, and procedures that are not backed by scientific evidence.

Consumers aren’t shopping wisely. The moral-hazard argument says that because people don’t pay out of pocket, they use more-expensive health care than necessary. Moral hazard says we go to the doctor when we don’t really need to; we insist on getting a CT scan for a twisted ankle when ice and an Ace bandage will do. Experts will tell you that as many as one in four doctor’s-office visits are “social calls,” and nearly half of emergency room visits are for care that could have been handled in a nonemergency setting. But even this argument doesn’t explain why health care costs so much. That’s because 20 percent of patients account for 80 percent of spending, and that 20 percent is made up mostly of the chronically ill. These patients are often sick with multiple conditions—such as diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure—and more than half of the money we devote to caring for them is spent when they are in the hospital. People who are sick enough to be hospitalized are generally too ill to be insisting on certain tests or procedures.

Indeed, perhaps the most significant reason Americans are drowning in health care debt may shock you: Americans are getting far too much unnecessary care. Of our total $2.3 trillion health care bill last year, a whopping $500 billion to $700 billion was spent on treatments, tests, and hospitalizations that did nothing to improve our health. Even worse, new evidence suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us.
According to estimates by Elliott Fisher, M.D., a noted Dartmouth researcher, unnecessary care leads to the deaths of as many as 30,000 Medicare recipients annually.

Source: AARP Magazine

Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.



Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.



Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.

what if the profits were taken out of the equation? (say be mandating that HC providers be non profits?) how do you think this would affect costs?

 

[The Rabbi]

Must be nice to be able to practice your trade, fuck up and kill someone and be immune to your own liability. And have otherwise intelligent citizens favor it.
NO doctor pays over about 10%,if that, for med/mal in any practice UNLESS he has fucked up and had ANOTHER DOCTOR testify their standard of carewas negligent. That is the only way a doctorpays 125K a year in premiums.
Medical malpractice is the 8th leading cause of death in America. Guess why? And you folks want THE INSURANCE companies and politicians, instead of other doctors and citizen juries, to determine the liability and merits of bad doctor's negligence.
And you folks want them to have limits on what they are liable for.
Scary shit there.
Again for the uninformed: It is OTHER DOCTORS that make the case in med/mal cases. NO court in America will accept a med/mal case UNLESS there are other doctors as expert witnesses testifying that the standard of care was NEGLIGENT BY ANOTHER DOCTOR.
No doctor to testufy against the other docor= NO CASE in America. PERIOD. End of story.
THANK GOD there are lawyers out there with the balls to stand up for the injured due to the negligence of doctors and FRONT ALL OF THE EXPENSES before trial or settlement.
Why do you think doctors pay high premiums? Could it possibly be that medical negligence, BAD DOCTORS, is very high? Well DUH.
How about tort reform for auto accidents, home accidents, ALL accidents, bad and inferior construction in buildings.
Now what would happen to the safety on the highways if bridge manufacturers had tort reform? Could it be that doctors have immunity and ARE HARD TO SUE ANYWAY, that they are MORE negligent because of the lax standardsnow in place due to "tort reform"?
You betcha.
Let's just do away with it all and give everyone $1 every time a claim is filed for anything.
Most Americans have no knowledge whatsoever with medical negligence.

Idiotic post of the day.
No one is denying anyone the opportunity to recover legitimate damages. But the excess "pain and suffering" needs to go.
Malpractice insurance costs can run well over $100k a year. Who pays for that? It isn't the doctor. And today any doctor who spends time in a hospital and has his name on a chart will get sued, regardless of what he actually did.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.

"That’s because 20 percent of patients account for 80 percent of spending, and that 20 percent is made up mostly of the chronically ill."

“Indeed, perhaps the most significant reason Americans are drowning in health care debt may shock you: Americans are getting far too much unnecessary care. Of our total $2.3 trillion health care bill last year, a whopping $500 billion to $700 billion (30%) was spent on treatments, tests, and hospitalizations that did nothing to improve our health. Even worse, new evidence suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us.”
Even as millions aren’t getting treatments they vitally need, a leading medical journalist argues that the main culprit in the soaring cost of American health care is actually overtreatment… and all that extra care is making us very sick.

$500 BILLION: The amount that Americans spend annually on unnecessary care.

30,000: The number of Medicare recipients who die each year as a result of unneeded care.

50%: The portion of surgeries, tests, and procedures that are not backed by scientific evidence.

Consumers aren’t shopping wisely. The moral-hazard argument says that because people don’t pay out of pocket, they use more-expensive health care than necessary. Moral hazard says we go to the doctor when we don’t really need to; we insist on getting a CT scan for a twisted ankle when ice and an Ace bandage will do. Experts will tell you that as many as one in four doctor’s-office visits are “social calls,” and nearly half of emergency room visits are for care that could have been handled in a nonemergency setting. But even this argument doesn’t explain why health care costs so much. That’s because 20 percent of patients account for 80 percent of spending, and that 20 percent is made up mostly of the chronically ill. These patients are often sick with multiple conditions—such as diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure—and more than half of the money we devote to caring for them is spent when they are in the hospital. People who are sick enough to be hospitalized are generally too ill to be insisting on certain tests or procedures.

Indeed, perhaps the most significant reason Americans are drowning in health care debt may shock you: Americans are getting far too much unnecessary care. Of our total $2.3 trillion health care bill last year, a whopping $500 billion to $700 billion was spent on treatments, tests, and hospitalizations that did nothing to improve our health. Even worse, new evidence suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us.
According to estimates by Elliott Fisher, M.D., a noted Dartmouth researcher, unnecessary care leads to the deaths of as many as 30,000 Medicare recipients annually.

Source: AARP Magazine

Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.



Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.



Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.

what if the profits were taken out of the equation? (say be mandating that HC providers be non profits?) how do you think this would affect costs?

One real world indicator is too look at another Capitalist Democracy that took the 'profit' out of health insurance. note: there are private supplement plans people can access if wanted...but why?

FRONTLINE: sick around the world: interviews: pascal couchepin | PBS

... When you said to the insurance companies, "No more profit on the basic health plan," what did they say?

They accept it; they have no choice. And [all these] companies are [heirs] of former social companies. For instance, the Groupe Mutuel ... was built on this idea: no profit; everything must be given to the people who are members of it. So there is a tradition of social attitude in these systems.

I am not systematically against the idea of having profits in the health insurance system, but if we introduce it, it is more with the idea to balance the power in the health insurance system, because now there is a lack of balance of power.

Who has the power?

Who has the power? The small group of the people who leads these companies. And it is something for me which can be dangerous, because it is a business with a billion of Swiss francs, and the check and balance is not optimal in the present system. ...

But you have government regulation, what we might call regulated competition. Does that work?

It is regulated competition. It is in order, but I think, as a Democrat, ... it could be not bad that once a year they [the company managers] have to go in front of a public assembly to answer questions about their salaries, about the way they see the future, about improvement in the quality of the services. It would be, my opinion, not so bad. And it could be possible through a system of shareholders, but not for profit, more for control.

 

[The Rabbi]

Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.

"That’s because 20 percent of patients account for 80 percent of spending, and that 20 percent is made up mostly of the chronically ill."

“Indeed, perhaps the most significant reason Americans are drowning in health care debt may shock you: Americans are getting far too much unnecessary care. Of our total $2.3 trillion health care bill last year, a whopping $500 billion to $700 billion (30%) was spent on treatments, tests, and hospitalizations that did nothing to improve our health. Even worse, new evidence suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us.”
Even as millions aren’t getting treatments they vitally need, a leading medical journalist argues that the main culprit in the soaring cost of American health care is actually overtreatment… and all that extra care is making us very sick.

$500 BILLION: The amount that Americans spend annually on unnecessary care.

30,000: The number of Medicare recipients who die each year as a result of unneeded care.

50%: The portion of surgeries, tests, and procedures that are not backed by scientific evidence.

Consumers aren’t shopping wisely. The moral-hazard argument says that because people don’t pay out of pocket, they use more-expensive health care than necessary. Moral hazard says we go to the doctor when we don’t really need to; we insist on getting a CT scan for a twisted ankle when ice and an Ace bandage will do. Experts will tell you that as many as one in four doctor’s-office visits are “social calls,” and nearly half of emergency room visits are for care that could have been handled in a nonemergency setting. But even this argument doesn’t explain why health care costs so much. That’s because 20 percent of patients account for 80 percent of spending, and that 20 percent is made up mostly of the chronically ill. These patients are often sick with multiple conditions—such as diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure—and more than half of the money we devote to caring for them is spent when they are in the hospital. People who are sick enough to be hospitalized are generally too ill to be insisting on certain tests or procedures.

Indeed, perhaps the most significant reason Americans are drowning in health care debt may shock you: Americans are getting far too much unnecessary care. Of our total $2.3 trillion health care bill last year, a whopping $500 billion to $700 billion was spent on treatments, tests, and hospitalizations that did nothing to improve our health. Even worse, new evidence suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us.
According to estimates by Elliott Fisher, M.D., a noted Dartmouth researcher, unnecessary care leads to the deaths of as many as 30,000 Medicare recipients annually.

Source: AARP Magazine

Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.



Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.



Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit. Profit.

what if the profits were taken out of the equation? (say be mandating that HC providers be non profits?) how do you think this would affect costs?

It will not effect costs at all since non profit status will mean less efficiency.
But you will see worse care and service as profits are typically used for increasing innovations.
No one has ever shown that non profit anything reduces costs. But it does make liberals feel good that they can deny someone some money.

 

[Gadawg73]

Why Does Health Care in the U.S. Cost So Much?

Because it works?

What else is there to say? The US Health Care system works.

You mean the disease care system we have works.

Don't you know we are one of the most unhealthiest countries amongst industrialized nations?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why Does Health Care in the U.S. Cost So Much?

Because it works?

What else is there to say? The US Health Care system works.

You mean the disease care system we have works.

Don't you know we are one of the most unhealthiest countries amongst industrialized nations?

America has the best health care system in the entire history of the world. Rush Limbaugh declared it so.