Inside America's Nightmare Health System

[Pauli]

Hilary Anderson's report for BBC 1's Panorama gave a chilling insight into the horror of America's private health system. It started with a view of a football stadium in Kentucky in the dead of night filling up with thousands of people who had, in some cases driven hundreds of miles to get a number, which would enable them to get out of the cold and into a vast hall where a charity was dispensing free health care. These people are among the 45,000,000+ without health insurance and were there to seek medical help for everything ranging from toothaches to cancer.
It contrasted their plight with the lifestyle of die-hard Republican Foster Friess, a close friend of George W Bush, who believes the USA has the best health system in the world. In fairness to Friess, he did offer to help one of the patients in the film, believing as he does that the rich have an obligation to help the poor. However, his charity, welcome as it is, is discretionary.

Ms Anderson's report also highlighted the awful choices a Michigan couple must make every day in choosing food v medicine or shelter v medicine. It showcased the ultimate nightmare that Debbie Boughan must live daily and detailed how she had to live in a tent to afford chemotherapy.

BBC - Panorama - What next for Debbie and Jessica?

I am not sure whether this is available in Ireland

BBC - Panorama - Hilary Andersson on What Next Mr President?

If nothing else, this was for me an emphatic argument against the further involvement of US health profiteers entering the Irish health service and, of course, another reason why Harney must be removed asap, her policies scrapped and the damage she has already inflicted rolled back to the maximum extent possible.

[20000miles]

It's not a surprise that its a nightmare. It is after all, one of the most regulated industries in the US. State licencing procedures are there to limit the number of doctors in the US. The AMA, also known as the doctors union is one of the strongest in the country.

[Pauli]

Regulation is not the problem, it seems. Not unless you are referring to laws enacted by Congress which have, in many cases, been basically written by the vested interest profiteers who lobby congressmen and women and sprinkle campaign donations through PACs (Political Action Committees) on them. Of 535 Congress members, 533 have received donations from the health industry, including Barack Obama.

[20000miles]

All I'm saying is that healthcare in the US is one of the most heavily regulated. None of the huge pharmaceutical and medical complexes could exist without governmental interference. The pharmaceutical industry benefits from patent protection, while doctors benefit from licencing laws.

I don't want to debate a poosible alternative as it is late, I just can't emphasise enough that the US model should not be confused with a free market healthcare model as the government takes a *keen interest* in the field.

[Pauli]

All I'm saying is that healthcare in the US is one of the most heavily regulated. None of the huge pharmaceutical and medical complexes could exist without governmental interference. The pharmaceutical industry benefits from patent protection, while doctors benefit from licencing laws.

I don't want to debate a poosible alternative as it is late, I just can't emphasise enough that the US model should not be confused with a free market healthcare model as the government takes a *keen interest* in the field.

I agree. (Actually, it's early for me )

[seabhcan]

All I'm saying is that healthcare in the US is one of the most heavily regulated. None of the huge pharmaceutical and medical complexes could exist without governmental interference. The pharmaceutical industry benefits from patent protection, while doctors benefit from licencing laws.

I don't want to debate a poosible alternative as it is late, I just can't emphasise enough that the US model should not be confused with a free market healthcare model as the government takes a *keen interest* in the field.

This is true. The problem is that all the regulation is there to protect the industry, not the customer/patient.

Two good examples of this are the law Bush enacted to ban the negotiation of drug prices. It is actually illegal for the government or health insurance companies to negotiate down the price of drugs they buy. Thats why we get so many spam emails offering "cheap meds" from canada or elsewhere. The price of percription drugs in the US is insane - sometimes thousands of dollars for ordinary things like antibiotics.

The second example is that if you get sick your health insurance company can cancel your cover (or even demand a refund on care they have already paid for) if they find that you 'lied' on your application form. The law defines 'lying' as having omitted any previous illness you ever had, even unrelated ones. These illnesses don't even need to have been diagnosed or treated because if you ever had symptoms for anything that "a prudent person" would have sought medical evaluation for, that is counted as a prior illness.

This rule makes claiming money from your insurance a nightmare as they will spend months and years refusing to payout while they research your past, delaying treatment. If you die while waiting for them to pay - so much the cheaper for them.

In Holland they also have an entirely private healthcare system - but highly regulated to protect the customer/patient. The result is a system significantly better (if more expensive) than the UK's NHS.

[20000miles]

Bumpity bump

I think this thread deserves more attention