Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You keep complaining about charges for your "relative" but you do not tell us what the charges were for. Do you have an itemized bill? Also, the amount appears to have increased from $433 to $500.
I will personally keep the current education system and licensure, without which any bozo could hang out a shingle and "treat" patients.
Snake oil, anyone?
Just because something is natural rather than synthetic doesn't mean it can't work, does it?
Just because something is synthetic doesn't mean it is guaranteed to work, does it?
You keep complaining about charges for your "relative" but you do not tell us what the charges were for. Do you have an itemized bill? Also, the amount appears to have increased from $433 to $500.
Yup, it keeps increasing, I got a lab bill after my post (simple potassium levels)
Here are charges
Office visit $265 (rip off), and that's after they took off $100 as a big favor for the needy.
Venipuncture $17 (rip off)
Electrocardiogramm -$62 (reasonable)
Bloodwork (potassium levels) - $265 (outrageous rip off)
I do have an insurance, I know what they charge insurance and what insurance pays. Here what they charge insurance
Office - $209 (and they get $130)
Venipuncture $8
Comprehensive blood test - $150 (they charged insurance, I'm not sure yet how much they would get)
At labcorp they did comprehensive blood tests (more elaborate than I got for $150) for $58 cash, I guess it costs less than $50 to do it. It didn't cross my mind that I'll be taken for $265 like that, even though I should have known better (I brought older blood tests with me), no way I would have agreed. I figured that even walk in clinics don't charge for basic urine & blood tests, $90 covered all of that last time.
All I know - when crooks fight vultures, I save. When you are left alone with vultures they would shred you to pieces. If I see useless I know useless, it doesn't take a genius to know trivial stuff, especially if you deal with it every day. The only reason I drag her to doctors because they have the monopoly on prescriptions and that is nothing but pure racket in the overwhelming number of cases. Again, I don't ask them to work for free (or cheap), charge whatever you want but let the jungle be 100% jungle and not a monopoly.
Since hospitals do not do much, I guess you do not care whether one is available if you are in an automobile accident or have a heart attack.
Quote:
I used a room at a hospital for half an hour. The doctor charged $300 for the procedure, but the 1/2 hour room rental was $1,000!!! If it were always in use at that rate (24/7) that would be $1.5 million a month! Made me think if a Dr. could bring the equipment to a house it would be so much cheaper.
Since hospitals "do not do much," do you think your procedure was unnecessary?
Quote:
I met a nurse who worked for a huge chain of hospitals & clinics. She said she was getting over $40 an hour, & that was about a decade ago.
So you feel nurses are paid too much?
Quote:
A man on a forum said cannabis stopped his mom's seizures, after 25 prescription pills failed. Pharmacies sold cannabis until 1937, including cannabis in oil form. Cancer was rare then. Now we have a cancer epidemic. Lately, there are anecdotal reports of people using cannabis oil to cure cancer & other sometimes fatal illnesses.
No, cancer was not rare then and cancer rates are going down, not up.
Quote:
But instead of that cheap bottle of cannabis oil, people get cutting, burning, & poison torture treatment that has about a 0% survival rate after 10 years, for a mere few hundred thousand. "Treatment" kills some even faster than the cancer would. But the safe & effective treatment is good for up to 100 years in prison, in places like Oklahoma. Big Pharma gives most in Congress $100,000-$500,000 a year.
No, the survival rate for most cancers is not "about 0%". On January 31, my son will have the 24th anniversary of the diagnosis of his leukemia. Long term survival for his diagnosis exceeds 90%. He had heavy chemo and irradiation. Yes, the treatment was awful. Yes, it was expensive --- thankfully we had insurance. But it was effective.
A person make have a psychiatric problem, so they're given a pill that probably won't adequately help, but causes weight gain. The weight gain causes diabetes, so they get a pill for that. Again, probably doesn't help, but may give them arthritis. A popular arthritis drug, Celebrex, did not have real serious warnings at first. Now the new TV ad for it says it can cause 4 conditions that are sometimes fatal.
Not all psychiatric drugs cause weight gain Many people who take them do improve and are able to become functional, work, and lead happier lives.
Despite the ads, many people choose to use Celebrex because it helps their arthritis and most people will not have serious complications from it.
Quote:
In the US, I read family physicians will begin receiving double the previous low Medicaid reimbursements. They need it to pay back their student loans, or nearly all would choose to become specialists.
Yup, it keeps increasing, I got a lab bill after my post (simple potassium levels)
Here are charges
Office visit $265 (rip off), and that's after they took off $100 as a big favor for the needy.
Venipuncture $17 (rip off)
Electrocardiogramm -$62 (reasonable)
Bloodwork (potassium levels) - $265 (outrageous rip off)
I do have an insurance, I know what they charge insurance and what insurance pays. Here what they charge insurance
Office - $209 (and they get $130)
Venipuncture $8
Comprehensive blood test - $150 (they charged insurance, I'm not sure yet how much they would get)
At labcorp they did comprehensive blood tests (more elaborate than I got for $150) for $58 cash, I guess it costs less than $50 to do it. It didn't cross my mind that I'll be taken for $265 like that, even though I should have known better (I brought older blood tests with me), no way I would have agreed. I figured that even walk in clinics don't charge for basic urine & blood tests, $90 covered all of that last time.
All I know - when crooks fight vultures, I save. When you are left alone with vultures they would shred you to pieces. If I see useless I know useless, it doesn't take a genius to know trivial stuff, especially if you deal with it every day. The only reason I drag her to doctors because they have the monopoly on prescriptions and that is nothing but pure racket in the overwhelming number of cases. Again, I don't ask them to work for free (or cheap), charge whatever you want but let the jungle be 100% jungle and not a monopoly.
The charge for the potassium level does indeed look questionable. You could call other offices and find out what the charge would be.
I still think you are ignoring the fact that a first visit is usually more expensive than a repeat visit.
Why did you not offer to get her labs done wherever you paid the $58 cash?
Most doctors charge separately for any labs.
Were the charges for insurance that you mention submitted by the same or a different doctor?
If you feel her problem is trivial, why do you think she needs a prescription anyway?
I'm familiar with the British Healthcare system (I prefer to use my insurance and 'go private' than to use the NHS)
The German Healthcare system (I spend just under half my life there) and
The US Healthcare system. (I've just got out of hospital and am recuperating from major surgery.)
The standards in each are pretty good (there are obviously always going to be exceptions) but why do the prices - particularly within the US system - vary so much?
In Mar 2006 we were living in Heidelberg (Baden-Württemberg) and my cardiologist referred me to the University hospital for a procedure which involved filling me up with 'glow in the dark' stuff, getting on an exercise bike and filming what happened to my heart under load. I did what I was required to do (it took about an hour and a half) changed back into my street clothes, picked up the bill (and paid it at die Kasse) and went home.
The bill was €585. (At that time, about $800.)
In March 2007, we were living in Vicksburg (Mississippi) and my wife was required to undergo the same test. (NB: The doctor treating her had already determined that she had not had a heart attack.)
Exactly the same test - but with one or two significant differences!
1. For some reason, the test could not be done as an out-patient procedure. It required a 3-day hospital stay.
2. The test didn't cost $800. It cost $14,750.
(Well, that's what it said on the bill. Had we not had insurance, we would've been required to pay $14750, but the insurance company paid the hospital about $2750 which they accepted in full and final settlement.)
Questions:
1. If the procedure is an outpatient procedure in Germany, why does it require a 3-day hospital stay in the US? (And she underwent no other procedures during that stay.)
2. If a hospital is happy to accept $2,750 in 'full and final settlement' from an insurance company, why should an individual be stuck with a bill for $14,750?
The last time I was in hospital in Germany, I was presented with a bill. - Everybody gets a bill and everybody takes that bill to their insurance company ... the law requires everybody to have insurance.
The front of the bill explained what I was being charged for and the back bore a detailed breakdown. Every item used, every procedure performed was listed, together with the amount charged and the authority for that charge. - Prices are set by the state.
If the provider wants to provide a service, then (s)he or it knows how much (s)he /it can charge for that service. If the provider is not prepared to provide the service at that price, then either somebody else will do so or the state will have to increase the approved charge to attract sufficient providers.
I'm familiar with the British Healthcare system (I prefer to use my insurance and 'go private' than to use the NHS)
The German Healthcare system (I spend just under half my life there) and
The US Healthcare system. (I've just got out of hospital and am recuperating from major surgery.)
The standards in each are pretty good (there are obviously always going to be exceptions) but why do the prices - particularly within the US system - vary so much?
In Mar 2006 we were living in Heidelberg (Baden-Württemberg) and my cardiologist referred me to the University hospital for a procedure which involved filling me up with 'glow in the dark' stuff, getting on an exercise bike and filming what happened to my heart under load. I did what I was required to do (it took about an hour and a half) changed back into my street clothes, picked up the bill (and paid it at die Kasse) and went home.
The bill was €585. (At that time, about $800.)
In March 2007, we were living in Vicksburg (Mississippi) and my wife was required to undergo the same test. (NB: The doctor treating her had already determined that she had not had a heart attack.)
Exactly the same test - but with one or two significant differences!
1. For some reason, the test could not be done as an out-patient procedure. It required a 3-day hospital stay.
2. The test didn't cost $800. It cost $14,750.
(Well, that's what it said on the bill. Had we not had insurance, we would've been required to pay $14750, but the insurance company paid the hospital about $2750 which they accepted in full and final settlement.)
Questions:
1. If the procedure is an outpatient procedure in Germany, why does it require a 3-day hospital stay in the US? (And she underwent no other procedures during that stay.)
2. If a hospital is happy to accept $2,750 in 'full and final settlement' from an insurance company, why should an individual be stuck with a bill for $14,750?
The last time I was in hospital in Germany, I was presented with a bill. - Everybody gets a bill and everybody takes that bill to their insurance company ... the law requires everybody to have insurance.
The front of the bill explained what I was being charged for and the back bore a detailed breakdown. Every item used, every procedure performed was listed, together with the amount charged and the authority for that charge. - Prices are set by the state.
If the provider wants to provide a service, then (s)he or it knows how much (s)he /it can charge for that service. If the provider is not prepared to provide the service at that price, then either somebody else will do so or the state will have to increase the approved charge to attract sufficient providers.
I do not know why your wife was in the hospital for the test unless part of the stay was before the test to rule out the heart attack or part of the stay was after the test to monitor something shown on the test. Those tests are also sometimes less accurate in women.
I think a large part of the problem in the US is the fallacious thought that making hospitals compete will lower prices. It does not. They have to spend money on advertising and frills to try to attract patients. Every hospital wants to have state of the art technology and to provide the most lucrative services. If they are privately owned, they have to make a profit for the shareholders. Then the reimbursement from insurance is so poor that the uninsured patients are faced with high fees that subsidize those insured patients.
Americans want the high tech and they are not willing to accept the inevitable rationing that occurs if there are fewer hospitals with MRIs and CAT scanners and fewer hospital ORs. If someone has a need for a new knee, he does not want to go on a waiting list to get it.
She was in the hospital for other tests (to rule out the - in this particular instance - very low chance that she had had a heart attack.) That had been done and the nuclear medicine test seems to have been an 'afterthought'.
A 'nice little earner' - or a part of the 'CYA diagnostic protocol'?
You said; "...the reimbursement from insurance is so poor that the uninsured patients are faced with high fees that subsidize those insured patients."
If uninsured patients really are expected to subsidise insured patients, then perhaps the first thing to do wold be to set up an American Association of Uninsured Patients (AAUP) to lobby Congress and the healthcare providers.
The hospital which treated me in Heidelberg was a commercial (non-subsidised) organisation. They managed to carry out the test for $800. I've no doubt they broke even - and probably even made a small profit.
The hospital in Mississippi wanted $14,750. Admittedly, they also took my wife's vitals and ran a blood test to check for enzymes which would suggest she had had a heart attack (those enzymes were not present.)
My wife's US Insurers paid the hospital $2,750 - a lot less than the $14,750 we would've had to pay but still considerably more than the $800 I'd paid in Germany.
...
Americans want the high tech and they are not willing to accept the inevitable rationing that occurs if there are fewer hospitals with MRIs and CAT scanners and fewer hospital ORs. If someone has a need for a new knee, he does not want to go on a waiting list to get it.
There will always be rationing. - You can ration on price or you can ration on time - by implementing delays.
I ruptured a disc in Aug 2000. (I was in the UK at that time) I used my private insurance and had an MRI 4 days later (There was no machine at a local hospital and the travelling machine had called 2 days earlier.)
Had I elected to use the NHS, I would also have had an MRI.
Once I'd come to the head of the 3-month long queue.
I ruptured another disc in Feb 2012 (OK, I'm a slow learner )
My wife took me to a local hospital.
I had an MRI.
I had to wait one hour (It happened in the evening and the technician had gone home.)
There will always be rationing. - You can ration on price or you can ration on time - by implementing delays.
I ruptured a disc in Aug 2000. (I was in the UK at that time) I used my private insurance and had an MRI 4 days later (There was no machine at a local hospital and the travelling machine had called 2 days earlier.)
Had I elected to use the NHS, I would also have had an MRI.
Once I'd come to the head of the 3-month long queue.
I ruptured another disc in Feb 2012 (OK, I'm a slow learner )
My wife took me to a local hospital.
I had an MRI.
I had to wait one hour (It happened in the evening and the technician had gone home.)
So it would have taken 3 months to get the MRI through the NHS? How long to get treatment after the MRI?
My brother recently ruptured two discs in his neck (Christmas Eve). He suffered through Christmas, saw a doc the day after, was tried on steroids and pain medication for a few days (no help - excruciating pain) and had surgery this past Monday. How long would he have had to wait in the UK?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
