Re: [FairfieldLife] Get Rid of the For-Profit Health Insurance Industry
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:52 PM, do.rflex wrote: > > > "Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars > on things that have nothing to do with care: overhead, > underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments > as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay. > Doctors and hospitals must maintain costly administrative > staffs to deal with the bureaucracy. > > Sometimes hospitals (which are now for profit conglomerates though theoretically they are non-profit), doctors and insurance companies are running a scam together. A few months ago a friend of mine lost his balance on a stair case, tumbled and bruised himself a bit. EMT (a public service which cost him/his insurance company $600 for a 2 mile ride) took him to the diagnostic hospital nearby. After about 6 hours in the ER and running up a $7,000 ER bill as they performed every expensive scan they could on him, my friend was getting dressed to go home. In walked a neurologist. He told my friend that by law my friend could not drive until six months had passed or he underwent one week of observation, tethered to EEG leads and under video camera surveillance for a week. My friend told the neurologist that he did not have a convulsion, no one in his family had ever had one, and anyway his company would not pay for him to take off a week for such a thing nor would his insurance company pay for it. Plus his EEG was as flawless as a TMSP flier's could be with those gamma delta tau waves and all. The neurologist assured my friend that he had contacted the insurance company. They would foot the entire bill plus pay my friend's salary for the week. The neurologist told my friend that he picked out a nice executive suite for my friend, with DVD, WII, Wi-Fi, gourmet meals ordered off a menu, just sign here. Just a coincidence that these accommodations were the max the insurance company would cover, remember. Total cost for losing balance? One week tethered to EEG leads, privacy only in the bathroom, one hour of strobe lights aimed at him every day, one week lost on an important project and $38,000 in medical bills, all paid for by my friend's insurance company. My friend was released when the week was up and since his wife dropped the car off outside, he drove the 2 miles home, scratching his head all the time. The biggest insult was getting a thank you note from the hospital conglomerate's CEO a week after he got back home. Get this. The insurance company also paid for guest meals. So visitors were immediately given a menu when they/I went to see my friend. Now, President Obama, tell me how this $38,000, including visitor's meals at $16 a pop, fits in with Evidence Based Medicine? Meanwhile in another part of town at the city hospital where people without fabulous insurance go...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Get Rid of the For-Profit Health Insurance Industry
And they're wasting a lot of health dollars fighting single payer health care by putting money into the hands of the congress critters. I don't think we're every going to have a decent health care system without have a civil war or revolution so we can erase the blackboard and start all over again. The United State of America is going to be a text book example of what is wrong with capitalism. do.rflex wrote: > "Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars > on things that have nothing to do with care: overhead, > underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments > as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay. > Doctors and hospitals must maintain costly administrative > staffs to deal with the bureaucracy. > > "Combined, this needless administration consumes one-third > (31 percent) of Americans' health dollars." > > + + > > -Single-Payer National Health Insurance- is a system in which a single public > or quasi-public agency organizes health financing, but delivery of care > remains largely private. > > Currently, the U.S. health care system is outrageously expensive, yet > inadequate. Despite spending more than twice as much as the rest of the > industrialized nations ($7,129 per capita), the United States performs poorly > in comparison on major health indicators such as life expectancy, infant > mortality and immunization rates. > > Moreover, the other advanced nations provide comprehensive coverage to their > entire populations, while the U.S. leaves 45.7 million completely uninsured > and millions more inadequately covered. > > The reason we spend more and get less than the rest of the world is because > we have a patchwork system of for-profit payers. > > Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars on things that have nothing > to do with care: overhead, underwriting, billing, sales and marketing > departments as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay. Doctors and > hospitals must maintain costly administrative staffs to deal with the > bureaucracy. > > Combined, this needless administration consumes one-third (31 percent) of > Americans' health dollars. > > Single-payer financing is the only way to recapture this wasted money. The > potential savings on paperwork, more than $350 billion per year, are enough > to provide comprehensive coverage to everyone without paying any more than we > already do. > > Under a single-payer system, all Americans would be covered for all medically > necessary services, including: doctor, hospital, preventive, long-term care, > mental health, reproductive health care, dental, vision, prescription drug > and medical supply costs. > > Patients would regain free choice of doctor and hospital, and doctors would > regain autonomy over patient care. > > Physicians would be paid fee-for-service according to a negotiated formulary > or receive salary from a hospital or nonprofit HMO / group practice. > Hospitals would receive a global budget for operating expenses. Health > facilities and expensive equipment purchases would be managed by regional > health planning boards. > > A single-payer system would be financed by eliminating private insurers and > recapturing their administrative waste. > > Modest new taxes would replace premiums and out-of-pocket payments currently > paid by individuals and business. Costs would be controlled through > negotiated fees, global budgeting and bulk purchasing. > > ~ ~ Much more at link including Single Payer Facts and Myths & FAQ that > debunk the usual self-serving for-profit Insurance Industry talking points > ~~ Physicians for a National Health Program > http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single_payer_resources.php > > > ALSO at link: > > The Case Against For-Profit Care > > Overview: The High Costs of For-Profit Care > Editorial by David Himmelstein, MD and Steffie Woolhandler, MD in the > Canadian Medical Association Journal > > > For-Profit Hospitals Cost More and Have Higher Death Rates > Devereaux, PJ "Payments at For-Profit and Non-Profit Hospitals," Can. Med. > Assoc. J., Jun 2004; 170 > > Devereaux, PJ "Mortality Rates of For-Profit and Non-Profit Hospitals," Can. > Med. Assoc. J, May 2002; 166 > > > For-Profit Hospitals Cost More and Have Higher Administration Expenses > Himmelstein, et al "Costs of Care and Admin. At For-Profit and Other > Hospitals in the U.S." NEJM 336, 1997 > > > For-Profit HMOs Provide Worse Quality Care > Himmelstein, et al "Quality of Care at Investor-Owned vs. Not-for-Profit > HMOs" JAMA 282(2); July 14, 1999 > > > For-Profit Medicare Plans Cost 11 Percent More Than Traditional Medicare > MedPac Report, Jun 9, 2006 > > > > > > >
[FairfieldLife] Get Rid of the For-Profit Health Insurance Industry
"Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars on things that have nothing to do with care: overhead, underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay. Doctors and hospitals must maintain costly administrative staffs to deal with the bureaucracy. "Combined, this needless administration consumes one-third (31 percent) of Americans' health dollars." + + -Single-Payer National Health Insurance- is a system in which a single public or quasi-public agency organizes health financing, but delivery of care remains largely private. Currently, the U.S. health care system is outrageously expensive, yet inadequate. Despite spending more than twice as much as the rest of the industrialized nations ($7,129 per capita), the United States performs poorly in comparison on major health indicators such as life expectancy, infant mortality and immunization rates. Moreover, the other advanced nations provide comprehensive coverage to their entire populations, while the U.S. leaves 45.7 million completely uninsured and millions more inadequately covered. The reason we spend more and get less than the rest of the world is because we have a patchwork system of for-profit payers. Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars on things that have nothing to do with care: overhead, underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay. Doctors and hospitals must maintain costly administrative staffs to deal with the bureaucracy. Combined, this needless administration consumes one-third (31 percent) of Americans' health dollars. Single-payer financing is the only way to recapture this wasted money. The potential savings on paperwork, more than $350 billion per year, are enough to provide comprehensive coverage to everyone without paying any more than we already do. Under a single-payer system, all Americans would be covered for all medically necessary services, including: doctor, hospital, preventive, long-term care, mental health, reproductive health care, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs. Patients would regain free choice of doctor and hospital, and doctors would regain autonomy over patient care. Physicians would be paid fee-for-service according to a negotiated formulary or receive salary from a hospital or nonprofit HMO / group practice. Hospitals would receive a global budget for operating expenses. Health facilities and expensive equipment purchases would be managed by regional health planning boards. A single-payer system would be financed by eliminating private insurers and recapturing their administrative waste. Modest new taxes would replace premiums and out-of-pocket payments currently paid by individuals and business. Costs would be controlled through negotiated fees, global budgeting and bulk purchasing. ~ ~ Much more at link including Single Payer Facts and Myths & FAQ that debunk the usual self-serving for-profit Insurance Industry talking points ~~ Physicians for a National Health Program http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single_payer_resources.php ALSO at link: The Case Against For-Profit Care Overview: The High Costs of For-Profit Care Editorial by David Himmelstein, MD and Steffie Woolhandler, MD in the Canadian Medical Association Journal For-Profit Hospitals Cost More and Have Higher Death Rates Devereaux, PJ "Payments at For-Profit and Non-Profit Hospitals," Can. Med. Assoc. J., Jun 2004; 170 Devereaux, PJ "Mortality Rates of For-Profit and Non-Profit Hospitals," Can. Med. Assoc. J, May 2002; 166 For-Profit Hospitals Cost More and Have Higher Administration Expenses Himmelstein, et al "Costs of Care and Admin. At For-Profit and Other Hospitals in the U.S." NEJM 336, 1997 For-Profit HMOs Provide Worse Quality Care Himmelstein, et al "Quality of Care at Investor-Owned vs. Not-for-Profit HMOs" JAMA 282(2); July 14, 1999 For-Profit Medicare Plans Cost 11 Percent More Than Traditional Medicare MedPac Report, Jun 9, 2006
