4
4
0
An easy explanation of what's driving costs up for US healthcare, including the ACA.
What Congress should know about my cat Smokey
Posted from foxnews.com
Healthcare
Economics
Insurance
Government
Socialism
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
1
1
0
Article ignores the fact that there is health insurance for one's pets ... if one chooses to get it.
The article also does not give due weight to the reality that most people won't or can't afford to spend $7200 to save a pet. Having it put down is far, far cheaper ... but not an option for humans.
Rightly or wrongly, we put a higher premium on a human life ... than we do on the life of an animal. That reflects in the price ... as well as the regulatory burden placed on the human side of the health care system vs the animal side.
The article also does not give due weight to the reality that most people won't or can't afford to spend $7200 to save a pet. Having it put down is far, far cheaper ... but not an option for humans.
Rightly or wrongly, we put a higher premium on a human life ... than we do on the life of an animal. That reflects in the price ... as well as the regulatory burden placed on the human side of the health care system vs the animal side.
(1)
(0)
Col Joseph Lenertz
It is right that we put a higher premium on human life, and I think that moral factor and regulatory/statutory requirements DO reflect in the price. Yet I still believe a large component of the cost is due to the structure (the economic model which includes disinterested middlemen insurers) itself. It removes the demand side's sensitivity to cost, so supply is free to increase prices. I admit my own fault in this...when I go to my Tricare appointment, I don't inquire about the reasons and cost for every test, and I don't reduce my appetite for them, because it's "free to me". If I were paying the bill directly, I'd pay more attention...and that feedback mechanism (the demand side of the two crossing econ 101 curves) would drive costs down.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Col Joseph Lenertz - First let me hasten to say I wasn't suggesting lowering the premium on human life. I was simply acknowledging that some believe there should be a higher premium than there is on animal life.
Second, I don't argue that the structure of our health care system carries with it a cost. The structure, and I include Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP in that as well as private insurers, certainly adds a "management fee" to the equation that has to be paid through taxes or premiums, as do the payments to the healthcare providers. At the same time, those insurers, and again I include Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP in that category, negotiate a fee-for-service based on volume. The difference between the "billed amount" and the amount approved by the insurer and accepted by the member health care provider as full payment is usually downright astounding. So I submit that while these insurers do, in fact, add some overhead cost to the equation, it is at least partially mitigated by their bargaining power in the healthcare marketplace. It is a whole different topic to discuss whether that is good or not.
Third, I submit that there is a significant difference between both veterinary practice in general ... and the practice of medicine on humans. The latter is more rigorous than the former ... but interestingly enough, the former produces veterinarians that are GPs and specialists rolled into one. The same vet that spayed my companion ... operated on her leg for a cancerous growth ... and treated her for a poisonous snake bite. That's an OB/GYN, an oncologist and perhaps a surgeon, and an ER doctor in human terms ... all channeled or followed up on by a family practice doctor.
Fourth, and I guess it varies by doctor and specialty, is the expected return on investment that doctors have versus what veterinarians have ... and the cost in both time and money of their educations. Even more relevant is the question of whether that ROI is sufficient to attract that quality of doctors that we want treating our loved ones and, dare I say it, ourselves. While we all hope, just as we do with our serving military, that doctors have "a calling" ... they also have education debt to repay, families to support, and a retirement to fund.
Finally, let me say I'm not being argumentative here. I agree with you that there is an "overhead added" by insurers to our system. Likewise to the cost of car ownership. I am simply noting that the article that you posted focused on one aspect ... and ignored the others. They too factor into the equation. A simple comparison between veterinary care and human care is a false comparison IMV. Great discussion topic!
Second, I don't argue that the structure of our health care system carries with it a cost. The structure, and I include Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP in that as well as private insurers, certainly adds a "management fee" to the equation that has to be paid through taxes or premiums, as do the payments to the healthcare providers. At the same time, those insurers, and again I include Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP in that category, negotiate a fee-for-service based on volume. The difference between the "billed amount" and the amount approved by the insurer and accepted by the member health care provider as full payment is usually downright astounding. So I submit that while these insurers do, in fact, add some overhead cost to the equation, it is at least partially mitigated by their bargaining power in the healthcare marketplace. It is a whole different topic to discuss whether that is good or not.
Third, I submit that there is a significant difference between both veterinary practice in general ... and the practice of medicine on humans. The latter is more rigorous than the former ... but interestingly enough, the former produces veterinarians that are GPs and specialists rolled into one. The same vet that spayed my companion ... operated on her leg for a cancerous growth ... and treated her for a poisonous snake bite. That's an OB/GYN, an oncologist and perhaps a surgeon, and an ER doctor in human terms ... all channeled or followed up on by a family practice doctor.
Fourth, and I guess it varies by doctor and specialty, is the expected return on investment that doctors have versus what veterinarians have ... and the cost in both time and money of their educations. Even more relevant is the question of whether that ROI is sufficient to attract that quality of doctors that we want treating our loved ones and, dare I say it, ourselves. While we all hope, just as we do with our serving military, that doctors have "a calling" ... they also have education debt to repay, families to support, and a retirement to fund.
Finally, let me say I'm not being argumentative here. I agree with you that there is an "overhead added" by insurers to our system. Likewise to the cost of car ownership. I am simply noting that the article that you posted focused on one aspect ... and ignored the others. They too factor into the equation. A simple comparison between veterinary care and human care is a false comparison IMV. Great discussion topic!
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Col Joseph Lenertz - It is all showing up for me. Picking up where it left off for you ...
"payment is usually downright astounding. So I submit that while these insurers do, in fact, add some overhead cost to the equation, it is at least partially mitigated by their bargaining power in the healthcare marketplace. It is a whole different topic to discuss whether that is good or not.
Third, I submit that there is a significant difference between both veterinary practice in general ... and the practice of medicine on humans. The latter is more rigorous than the former ... but interestingly enough, the former produces veterinarians that are GPs and specialists rolled into one. The same vet that spayed my companion ... operated on her leg for a cancerous growth ... and treated her for a poisonous snake bite. That's an OB/GYN, an oncologist and perhaps a surgeon, and an ER doctor in human terms ... all channeled or followed up on by a family practice doctor.
Fourth, and I guess it varies by doctor and specialty, is the expected return on investment that doctors have versus what veterinarians have ... and the cost in both time and money of their educations. Even more relevant is the question of whether that ROI is sufficient to attract that quality of doctors that we want treating our loved ones and, dare I say it, ourselves. While we all hope, just as we do with our serving military, that doctors have "a calling" ... they also have education debt to repay, families to support, and a retirement to fund.
Finally, let me say I'm not being argumentative here. I agree with you that there is an "overhead added" by insurers to our system. Likewise to the cost of car ownership. I am simply noting that the article that you posted focused on one aspect ... and ignored the others. They too factor into the equation. A simple comparison between veterinary care and human care is a false comparison IMV. Great discussion topic!"
"payment is usually downright astounding. So I submit that while these insurers do, in fact, add some overhead cost to the equation, it is at least partially mitigated by their bargaining power in the healthcare marketplace. It is a whole different topic to discuss whether that is good or not.
Third, I submit that there is a significant difference between both veterinary practice in general ... and the practice of medicine on humans. The latter is more rigorous than the former ... but interestingly enough, the former produces veterinarians that are GPs and specialists rolled into one. The same vet that spayed my companion ... operated on her leg for a cancerous growth ... and treated her for a poisonous snake bite. That's an OB/GYN, an oncologist and perhaps a surgeon, and an ER doctor in human terms ... all channeled or followed up on by a family practice doctor.
Fourth, and I guess it varies by doctor and specialty, is the expected return on investment that doctors have versus what veterinarians have ... and the cost in both time and money of their educations. Even more relevant is the question of whether that ROI is sufficient to attract that quality of doctors that we want treating our loved ones and, dare I say it, ourselves. While we all hope, just as we do with our serving military, that doctors have "a calling" ... they also have education debt to repay, families to support, and a retirement to fund.
Finally, let me say I'm not being argumentative here. I agree with you that there is an "overhead added" by insurers to our system. Likewise to the cost of car ownership. I am simply noting that the article that you posted focused on one aspect ... and ignored the others. They too factor into the equation. A simple comparison between veterinary care and human care is a false comparison IMV. Great discussion topic!"
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Excellent article! I have experienced that same care, not quite as expensive with my daughter's MaltiPoo also here in Boston.
(1)
(0)
Col Joseph Lenertz
Thanks. I've also been surprised at how cheap medical care has been for my Golden.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google