Kevin, M.D. - Medical Weblog

Again, this takes place in a pretty data-free zone. Where are the facts showing marked differences in life expectancy between the US and other countries, sparing that, were are the facts showing increased quality of life for US residents WITH INSURANCE over those in other countries? Seriously this kind of argument reminds me of the ones I used to hear in favor of HRT for all menopausal women. People were just CERTAIN it was the right thing to do. Facts are stubborn things, and as far as I can tell they don't support the "Omigosh we'll all die" argument that Panda is selling here. On the other hand, utopia is never an option. There is no system ever on earth that is perfect, so it's easy to anecdote your way to death on this topic on either side. That's why doctors are supposed to be incredibly suspicious of anecdotal evidence and demand statistical evidence. If it works for deciding how to treat patients, how about demanding it for deciding how best to finance health care?
 

The fact that somehow we are able to keep the slovenly obese, chain smoking, meth smoking, moonshine drinking, food stamp redeeming, welfare receiving, high school dropout American public even close to any other country is astounding.

BTW, the poor and uninsured DO GET excellent critical care just like those who pay health premiums. Only difference is that for them it is free. They don't pay. We do have a National health care system. It is called EMTALA
 

We also have universal health care for people without insurance who are not critical or in an emergency. It is called "pay your bills". People without insurance have access to every healthcare procedure that insured people have access to. They just pay for it at the time of service or shortly afterwards instead of prepaying for what they will probably not need.

Why have we become so security obsessed and insurance obessessed. What is so wrong with risk. I have been buying insurance for my family for 12 years now. I have spent enough on insurance to buy 1 1/2 bone marrow transplants--yet we have never had more than 3000 in any one year in health charges. If I had gone bare and invested the money, I would be self-insured for all but extremely unlikely risks now. Even with insurance, I still am not free of all financial risks of healthcare costs. In a prolonged illness, my self-insurance fund, if I had gone that route, would still be there while my commercial coverage will disapppear with my first missed payment. Also, even while it is in place, they may deny coverage of certain procedures for any of dozens of reasons.
 

That last point is worth considering.

Consider the alternative cost of buying a comprehensive catastrophic policy that does not cover ordinary doctor's visits or other common low-cost procedures.

If you could take the difference spent between a common employer-provided high-option comprehensive plan and the lower-cost catastrophic plan and purchase a cash-value-accruing life insurance policy, would you do that? Would that seem like an attractive alternative to most people? It would to some, but to others, I think not.

A lot of people who work and have health insurance might elect to go without any coverage and chance bankruptcy, even if a portable and durable savings instrument were available as an alternative, and even if HSAs were available as an option to fund incidental medical bills.