[ExI] USA Health Costs

[spike]

> ...On Behalf Of Stathis Papaioannou
> Subject: Re: [ExI] USA Health Costs
> 
> 2009/6/2 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
> 
> > Ja.  I would lean toward incorrect, or at least not 
> exactly.  A bigger 
> > driver to overservicing is the threat of lawsuit should the 
> medic miss 
> > anything during any office visit.  So they just test for 
> everything.  
> > Then the bills go thru the roof.  The legal system demands 
> overservicing.
> 
> So medicine would be the only part of a free market system where they
> *don't* try to sell you stuff you don't need?... Stathis Papaioannou


Hmmm, depends on how one defines the term "need."  Do we need airbags in our
Detroits?  People who have a ton of money might argue that we do, or that
they are a good health investment.  Others disagree.  If one saved money by
not having an airbag, perhaps one could afford to move to a neighborhood
where she is less likely to be slain by the local thugs for instance.  The
airbag/slum paradigm is a good way to view the question of the medical
establishment overtesting.

The doctors have a hell of a difficult job.  They must decide on what
medical tests are a good value to the patient.  If so, do they take into
account if the patient has medical insurance?  I would think so, for if they
recommend an expensive test which offers some (but not a lot) of risk
reduction, they may be pricing the patient out of her airbags, or into a
more dangerous neighborhood for instance.  But if the patient has insurance,
then it wouldn't remove their airbags or move them into the poorer more
dangerous hoods.  Tough question.  I am glad I decided against medical
school.

spike