[extropy-chat] Health data

[spike]

> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Amara Graps
> Subject: [extropy-chat] Health data
> 
> spike:
> >Ja, we have yet to mention the health cost of our legal system.  If a
> >doctor misses some oddball disease because she failed to order the
> >test for it, then she is liable for malpractice lawsuits.
> 
> ...
> doctor visit, the doctor at the neighborhood clinic (private, walk-in,
> services) profusely apologized for how expensive was his visit +
> antibiotics. He said that if there were not the high cost malpractice
> lawsuits, he could charge reasonable fees ... Amara


Ja I have long advocated a medical malpractice lawsuit structure along the
following lines: the doctor's track records all become public domain, but in
return they need not buy insurance or take on any liability.  The patients
contract privately with the insurance company: make it clear exactly what
they want done, write up a contract specifying if the medic screws up in
this particular way, we pay this much, etc.  Both parties (patient and
insurer) agree to binding arbitration by a randomly chosen member of a
professional pool of judges, with full transparency.  So good doctors will
end up being cheaper to insure, which would bring them more business and
more profit.  So the feedback path is intact, enhanced even.  If a patient
has a record of suing for medical malpractice, then the insurance company
would be wary.  It makes medical insurance more like car insurance. 

Currently the very poor need not pay for their health costs, but rather they
can hang out all day at the emergency room.  In the slack times, the medics
will see them free.  OK arrangement seemingly, but eventually it must occur
to the destitute that if the medics goof this free service, the patient can
sue for millions.  A lawyer will take the case for a cut of the profit, so
the destitute patient is offered free medical lottery tickets.  Surely this
would encourage penniless but healthy patients to clog the ER and the legal
system.

We could do the same trick with big pharmaceutical companies: instead of
suing the company, you buy insurance against a particular medication messing
you up.  If a particular medication is expensive to insure, it provides an
instant feedback to the patient on which drugs are dangerous.  We could even
do the same trick with recreational drugs: let companies with actual
statistics, competitive pricing structure and profit motive determine which
forms of dope are dangerous and which ones not.  This would work so much
better than having the proletariat guess at it (as I did incorrectly on LSD
a few months ago) based on sensationalized mass media coverage.  

Having the patients buy their own insurance would save costs all over the
place.

spike