medical expenses

B

Burnt Orangeman

1,000+ Posts
Most businesses are accountable. You pay for goods and services and if there is a problem they are expected to make it right.

Then there is the medical "practice" which behaves like a business only when it suits their purpose. If they fail to the extent that you are worse off than before should you still owe them their exorbitant fees (that you had no effective power to negotiate the terms of)?

They want to be paid like a business. They will sic the bill collectors on you and **** up your credit if you don't pay them regardless of the outcome of their performance.

Why should they have their cake and eat it too. Get the benefits of being a business without the responsibility and accountability?
 
Good question. Should doctors try to slow the progression of cancer to extend a person's life? Should they provide medication to slow down the ravages of rheumatoid arthritis? What about removing bone and tissue for someone with osteomyelitis? Clearly doctors shouldn't be paid unless the patient says that he feels better. And should pharmacists, retailers and drug companies get paid if a person's headache doesn't go away quickly?

And firemen and policemen and lawyers - don't get me started. Should firemen get paid for stopping a fire if most of the house is lost? And policemen, should they get paid if the bad guy gets away? And attorneys, should they get paid if their client still goes to jail?
 
I want to agree with you but I'm not sure I completely understand your point.

Doctors pay a huge chunk of money for malpractice insurance. If they screw up; they get sued.

Plus, not all medical conditions are curable. Some diseases or conditions are un-curable, some are made worse (or better) by the patient's lifestyle, etc... There are quite a few variables to a condition. So, unlike a business where you can get something absolutely fixed or otherwise, the medical field isn't quite so simple.
 
As to pharma... this isn't a defense. It's more of a question.

I always thought pharmas charged more in the U.S. for a certain drug, for a certain amount of time, to recoup expenses on research of said drug. Then, at some point, the drug goes generic and everyone pays a lower rate. This initial timeframe doesn't apply to other countries so wouldn't pharmas have to sell a drug at a much lower price abroad just to be able to compete while selling the same drug at home at a higher price? Perhaps I'm wrong and will gladly take re-education on the matter.
 
Burnt
That is such a strange rant what prompted it?
did you see a Doc who promised you something he didn't deliver?
 
What prompted this was a bill sitting on my desk I'm thinking about not paying because post second failed surgery I'm worse off to the tune of 25% of my income from lost time in pain management. I'm having a tough time not thinking they owe me. It's a broken foot we are talking about.

Why should not the rest of the world pay for r and d? Perhaps it has more to do with big companies being able to run rough shod over Americans.
 
burnt
wow that is tough and I wish there was something we could do to make it better

if you are convinced it was due to Dr mismanagement ir incompetence you should sue
I bet there are lawyers on here sho could advise you

i am sorry you are in pain. terrible way to try to live your life
 
Sorry to hear about your pain but the poster above is correct. If it was malpractice, just step outside or listen to the radio. There are plenty of ambulance chasers that will take up your cause.

The U.S. does bear the brunt of cost for R & D. Most - if not all - other countries don't have to follow the cost of recouping money as soon as the drug hits the market.
 
Yes pharmaceuticals are subsidized by US citizens b/c we can afford it. We do have many regulations which force prices to be higher but it is an unfair practice that our lawmakers are doing nothing about.

Now for the outlook, I can tell you that there simply aren't very many new blockbuster drugs coming to the market in the next 5-10 years. We continue to see generic utilization go up and up. It is almost 80% now. Many of the new drugs coming out are for less common conditions and aren't all that effective anyways. I see many new cancer drugs which costs 50k to 100k a year and are perhaps more toxic than they are beneficial. Many combo drugs keep coming out and alternate formulations such as extended release. So you should think that generics should continue to be dominating the mainstream market, especially with so many going generic in the next couple of years, so that costs will go down.

What lawmakers can do is get more companies making these generics so that costs will decrease and supply will be there. We have had so many shortages in last year and much of it has to do with only 1 company making the generic and basically having a monopoly.

Not sure if you wanted all of this info and it doesnt' really have anyting to do with the OP.
 
On medical expenses. I will start charging only based on outcomes when I can upcharge you for everyday you dont exercise, every drive thru you stop at, over drinking, pounds over weight, non compliance w treatment, etc. Ad naseum.
 
So with no details of the case known at all, multiple posters are advising a lawsuit against the physician? For what?

Specifically what do you guys think this doctor should be sued for?

First off, I'm going to go way way out on a limb and guess that there just might have been something wrong with the foot in question BEFORE said doctor became involved in this case. As a doctor, I'll tell you that a lot of injuries and conditions are frustrating for the doctor too, because there is often no much that is gonna work in some cases. Some things are hard to fix.

Second, if every patient who has a bad outcome feels like their doctor's insurance company ought to pay them a huge sum, where the hell do you think that money is going to come from (hint: you)?

BO, this rant not directed at you. I know it wasn't you who started talking lawsuits. Furthermore, I'm the last person who would defend America's healthcare system -- a horribly broken system. I definitely can imagine the $$$$$ size of the bills you're facing and the frustration that you're facing these bills without being made whole.

I wish you well.
 
Me: These drugs are more tightly regulated. It requires additional expertise and raises the cost of both manufacturing and distributing.



You: No ****. What's your point? That there aren't enough large generic manufacturers to make generics of these so that we don't have shortages? It may certainly make less companies want to jump in there but there is no reason why should only have 1 or 2 choices on some of these C2s such that we end up with shortages and higher prices.


I am not trying to be condescending, but you don't understand business. In almost any industry, the third and the fourth identical product to the market gains no marketshare.

Pharmaceutical markets generally are not large compared to general household goods. Pharmaceutical companies make money less off of volume and more off of price. So when the price of a generic is low, the total revenue generated isn't huge.

Further, like any generic product, margins are low. However, they are higher than household goods because the FDA creates barriers to entry. Only well manufactured products can reach the market and companies that don't control manufacturing according to specs are not allowed to sell in the US.

So the generics industry has low margins and relatively small markets, and you wonder why there aren't more than a handful of competitors for a particular product - It is business 101.

Take your MTX example. There are 2 large generic MTX manufacturers in the US and 3 smaller ones. Why are the other 3 manufacturers small? Because they are late to market and don't have the sales and distribution channels to change their market position.

One company, Ben Venue, has poor manufacturing practices and is forced to fix its problems. The other generics can't scale up quickly because of FDA regulations and because they have been selling the same volume for years and haven't had the need to build facilities, buy equipment, and hire people. Again, it is business 101.
 
Missing work, finding an attorney, rescheduling and losing patients, and stressing is a loss. Knowing someone that had a heart attack during that process makes the loss even more obvious. Getting sued sucks. There is no winning. One can only mitigate losses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top