The Wall and health care

why does my medication cost $130.00 per month here in the u.s and only 13.99 in europe-same med-same company-not generic. why doesn't the u.s. govt negotiate prices like europe?? why do americans have to pay more, so europeans can pay less??why did my wifes knee surgery cost 2,000.00 in italy with overnight stay in hospital and here in the u.s they wanted 12-15,000.00 as an outpatient?? where is the cost cutting in this so-called health reform bill?why doesn't theu.s. media show how health care delivery in europe really works and just how good it is, and at 1/5 the cost to taxpayers??

When I think of the American Healthcare fiasco...I not only get a glaze
over my eyes, but my mind begins to melt.. How can a country where
the belief is that you are the superpower...you are the heart of the world, charge its people for healthcare. Without your health you are
literally a free agent for disaster. Ergo healthcare should be the main
objective in every thought the leaders of this country have....If we follow
what other nations have done and how they have prospered from giving free healthcare to its people we would surely be in a better position to lead the rest of the world...As it stands we might as well get
in the back of the line.

I also grew up in Europe. We didn't suffer fom this terrible uncertainty
that we might not get treated if we got sick. Doctor visits, hospitalizations, lab tests, meds..everything was free. New moms got 3 YEARS with pay to stay home to take care of their babies. But if the moms wanted to go back to work, there was abundant quality childcare available..also free of charge. Education was free (including higher education)
It's terrible to live here and being afraid all the time..that was socialism and this is capitalism. Of course every American (every human being for that matter) has the right to affordable health care..
I'd amend to Constitution to guarantee that right, and dismantle the health insurance industry.
I'm praying for socialized medicine. No one should ever profit by taking care of the sick. It's bizarre. I'd get better, more humanistic care in a developing country. Thank you

My family is part of growing population in this country of people with chronic conditions who can't get health insurance even though they have good jobs and a good income. My four year old son has severe hemophilia A with an inhibitor. His clotting factor alone runs in the neighborhood of $120, 000 a month. My husband's job provides us with health insurance and my son went through the $3,000,000 life time cap in 25 months. Our income is too high to qualify for medicaid or our state's Children's Health Insurance Program. My husband and I put ourselves through school and worked very hard so that we could provide for ourselves and our children, and now I hold my breath everyday hoping that my son doesn't fall and beginning bleeding internally before I can get him into bed at night because I may not have the clotting factor he needs to save his life. We are not the only family out there who is dealing with a situation like this. Many hemophiliacs and their families have to change jobs every two years or so, many times having to uproot the family and move. Every day
that we don't have something in place that will allow people to get health insurance who need it regardless of income is another day that we are literally throwing away thousands of our country's best resources, it's people. Reforming the medical malpractice laws isn't going to help families like mine neither is eliminating waste inherent in the medical system. We need reform that is going to make sure that everyone gets the care they need so that they can contribute fully to their families and communities, which means that someone is going to have to step up and tell the insurance companies that they will no longer profit from people's misfortune and misery.

I love this country, I made a choice to be a citizen of this great country and I'm grateful for the life I've been able to have here. This is my home, but I'm not blind and I can't be blind to the many inequalities that I see around me. I can't understand why half of this great country cannot see the truth. We do have the best health care – it's the best health care that MONEY CAN BUY. But what about those 50% of Americans that don't have the money to buy it? Should we just forget them? If we do that, what separates us from all the third world countries? This has always been the great land of opportunity, but God help those unfortunate ones – maybe that's why this country's motto is "In God We Trust"? As caring human beings, shouldn't we at least acknowledge those that are not as fortunate and give them a helping hand. For those of us that can afford our health care and want to keep it – no problem, we can keep it. But at least let the other 50% of Americans have something, if we don't we'll have to continue being at the mercy of the insurance companies and health care providers continually raising our own fees.

I am a resident physician in training, and I have been spending a lot of time recently reading various message boards in an attempt to better understand different peoples' perspectives on the healthcare issues currently under debate. Regarding some of the comments above, every person in favor of socialized healthcare must take a moment to consider the actual costs of implementing such a system. Of course I would want all of my patients now and forever to get the absolute best care available for all of their problems without cost or access as limiting factors. Deep down all physicians would likely agree. However, I've spent several years in college, medical school, doing research, and now in residency training discovering the knowledge and science that forms the foundation of modern healthcare, and learning to approach issues of uncertainty with careful reasoning in order to avoid rash decisions and potential mistakes.

Universal health coverage is an extremely complicated issue that cannot be solved by passionate individuals without a real grasp on the hundreds of issues that must first be adequately addressed. It is a simple, undeniable fact that the US cannot and will never be able to afford providing the newest and best in medical care to every one of its citizens. The numbers simply do not add up (especially considering that a large portion of the population do not contribute much if anything financially, and yet would expect to reap the most collective benefit), and we cannot simply just provide it all without regard to cost or we would be in a downward spiral of financial turmoil. New technology (imaging, diagnostic blood tests, genetic testing, new and minimally invasive procedures, medical devices, and especially new drug therapies) is very expensive to research, develop, and bring into practice, and is also very risky in the current legal climate due to the potential onslaught of lawyers and malpractice suits that can result from unforeseen complications of a new treatment. As a result, the newest (and often best, or else it wouldn't make it to market) technology is priced high for years in order to compensate for these expenses. Assuming we do attempt to adopt some sort of cost-contained universal coverage, it would not be capable of supporting much, if any, of these prohibitively expensive ventures, and over time the companies will see little financial incentive to develop new treatments and the progress currently being made in healthcare could end up coming to a screeching halt.

Other nations with universal coverage or socialized medicine are struggling with this cost-containment issue, and I would be very surprised if they even attempt to provide new and expensive therapies such as the clotting factor supplementation previously mentioned for Hemophilia A.

Many people are under the impression that the quality of socialized healthcare in other nations is on par or even better than that being documented in the US. Again, this is not a simple fact to be taken at face value. Much of this "quality" research is based upon disease prevalence and outcomes data that is recorded for patients who are being treated for an illness. In case you haven't heard, the US is experiencing an unprecedented obesity epidemic. It's citizens are less active, more overweight, and more at risk for acquired diseases as a population than in European nations. In addition, in the US we treat any patient for any injury or illness that enters the hospital with even a remote chance of recovery. In other nations with "universal healthcare," cost-containment results in restrictions, and not every ailment or seriously ill person (especially the elderly, with less to gain from expensive interventions) is considered an appropriate use of healthcare resources. Thus, a very sick person who enters a US hospital and costs a fortune in healthcare, but subsequently has a bad outcome due to the nature of their severe illness, might not have ever been treated in a nation with socialized healthcare, and it is this effect that also skews "quality" data. These studies are trying to compare "apples" to "oranges" and do not paint an accurate portrait of the quality of care in the US.

In many ways the quality of care is much better in the US than these nations. For example, we have the best cancer centers in the world, hands down. Other nations don't even attempt to treat much of the difficult cancer cases that we tackle on a regular basis, and the progress made in our research hospitals (such as near mastery over childhood leukemia at St. Judes Children's Research Hospital) has benefited all of these other nations with improved therapies that may never have been funded otherwise. It's expensive, and their efforts to cost-contain their universal coverage won't allow for much (if any) of it.

Regarding the "profit-hungry" US insurance companies, they started as a business and have always operated as one. Without profits, their share-holders would not invest, they would not grow, and they would be forced into an even stricter cost-containment mindset than they already are. I agree that it seems immoral for an insurance executive to make millions of dollars while their company denies coverage for millions of people in need. However, the money tied up in their profit margins would not even come close to fixing our healthcare problems. Many people (including politicians in favor of the new healthcare legislation) would restrict insurance companies from denying people due to pre-existing conditions. This is a difficult issue to approach. Obviously, these people need health insurance. However, the nature of health insurance goes against this entirely. Paying money into a health insurance company entitles you to a portion or share of the total coverage they can afford to provide. You are paying along with millions of others to share your collective risk, with the assumption that more will be paid in than will be needed to cover those who get sick. When you have an expensive disease (such as Hemophilia A) and buy into a health insurance company, and are incapable of putting as much into the system as you are requiring from it, then you are having an immediate negative impact upon the pool of other people's money that is available to cover their illnesses. If one person does it, it's not that big of a deal. However, if everyone out there with an expensive disease jumped into the insurance company's financial pool, they would collectively put very little money in and would quickly tie up the resources needed to cover the health expenses of the paying majority. Who are the paying majority? People who are capable of working and earning a living. Honest, hard-working people that deserve to have their ever-increasing insurance payments result in adequate coverage in the event that something happens to their health. They deserve the best that our healthcare system can provide, and these "profit-hungry" insurance companies are providing for some of those expensive (and often more effective) therapies previously mentioned.

Many people are under the impression that healthcare is a right, just like "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." I'm inclined to disagree with this statement to a certain extent, if only because healthcare is and will always be an expensive commodity that we cannot afford to provide for everyone in it's fullest. The vast majority of hospitals and physicians will provide at least a basic level of healthcare without regard to a patient's insurance status or ability to pay for their services. However, even these hospitals and physicians have shrinking operating budgets and would be in financial ruins if none of their patients contributed anything financially.

Regarding the previous comment that "no one should ever profit by taking care of the sick," I would recommend that they undergo 8 years of education (4 undergrad, 4 med school) followed by years of training with a very low salary and very long hours, all the while worrying about hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt that continues to collect interest. After all of that, I would like you to try and open up a non-profit clinic and somehow support a family, your overhead expenses for running your practice, your exorbitant malpractice insurance premium, and pay back your monstrous loans. If you find a way to full it off, more will follow, I'm sure.

These are just a few examples of factors complicating the great healthcare debate. I just brushed the surface of each. Our country is in need of a change to improve the financial aspect of providing healthcare. Are we focusing on the real issues that have to be addressed in order to affect real change, and have we adequately addressed any of these major problems with the current legislation proposals? Not in my opinion. It's time that people and politicians learn the issues and barriers to change, and form more constructive opinions as to how to disassemble those barriers, rather than blindly support a system of socialized medicine or universal healthcare that will leave the majority of them severely disappointed in the long haul.

I agree to right to access but there is no such thing as free - even in Europe. In Europe, healthcare costs are paid for by taxes. There are waiting lists for certain treatments but if you ADDITIONALLY have private health insurance you can perhaps get specific treatments sooner, the US is the physical location where most new drugs are discovered - not Europe. I know because I worked on healthcare issues in Europe: people not getting care, lack of new drug discovery there. There is a lot to understanding how the European (and other) healthcare systems work and how it does not. For sure, there are good things to it and we should look to those instances; but I spent much more time trying to help Europeans with access than I did with Americans. And I worked in the cancer field.

Yes, I do believe every American is entitled to basic (albeit perhaps limited) health coverage. I think a constitutional argument could be made in favor of it, that it falls under the "happiness" clause of the Declaration of Independence ("We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness".). If the government were to provide a public health option, individuals still could purchase better, more comprehensive insurance, if needed or wanted. I haven't been closely following the health care bill going through Congress, so I really can't comment on it too intelligently. I would read the bill, if I had the time. I'm surprised it hasn't gotten more coverage in the press, but Americans seem very distracted right now. Incidentally, I have health care insurance through my employer and pay an additional amount each pay period in order to be covered under a non-HMO, better plan. I am very grateful for my health coverage. I view it like my library card, as a form of insurance. Who says the best things in life shouldn't be free? or nearly free? All Americans should be entitled to certain basic services, even if they are unemployed.

If our government leaders believe their health care proposal is as good as they are saying, I think they should prove it, be the first to sign up.. better yet make it the mandatory health care option for all government employees !!!!!!!!! Senate & House first....

My personal experience having to deal with insurance companies has shown how wastful the HMO practices actually have been. After experiencing difficulty breathing, swelling in hands and feet, and lungs feeling as if they were filled with liquid, I was repeatedly diagnosed as having asthma, all without any tests (apparently, they saw overweight person and made the assumtion). Fifteen years, and tens of thousands of dollars later, I finally got a doctor with some smarts who started playing around with my diet. Turns out, I'm allergic to dairy products: eating cheese or drinking any form of milk immediately clogs my lungs and causes my hands, feet and face to swell. This is something that could have been addressed long before if the insurance companies had permitted a couple of tests that my doctors recommended earlier in the disease, which would have been far cheaper than the near $100,000 they'd paid out over the years for hospitalizations and expensive meds for the other conditions the allergy caused, such as chronic ulcers and migraines.
I understand the medical practice is complicated, but it doesn't have to be an "all or nothing" concept to offer basic care. We do have a "do everything to live" attitude when it comes to medicine in the US, but developing guidelines, or even restrictions when it comes to universal care, can still offer basic health before things get out of control and become expensive.

I am discouraged and dismayed when confronted by the greed exhibited by health care providers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, and medical equipment providers. Ted Kennedy noted this as well. I only wish that the rest of our lawmakers could see his point. I am 57-year-old grandmother suffering with a myriad of autoimmune disorders resulting in functional blindness, severe hearing impairment, joint problems, abdominal disorders, and other ongoing challenges. I live on less than $950 per month and am not eligible for Qualified Medicare Beneficiary coverage. As a result, I cannot afford a gastroenterologist or rheumatologist, being limited to the services of my internist and retinal specialist. Even with Medicare Part D, the cost of my medication is unbelievable when you compare those costs with my income. I cannot purchase Medigap insurance for any amount of money because I am less than 65 years of age. Other insurance policies will not cover me because I have so many pre-existing conditions. I have contacted both of my senators and my congressional representatives. One offered a plethora of phone numbers which I doggedly called in pursuit of hope, only to find out that I am correct. NO ONE will cover me. NO PROGRAMS will help me. In the days before I became disabled, I was a Registered Nurse here in Knoxville with a B.S.N. from the University of Tennessee. In addition, I have experience in community health nursing. If I cannot find the available resources, who can? The sad answer is that there are few resources to find and none to help me and others like me.

I absolutely think every American has a right to health care coverage. Yes, hospitals do have little notices posted that state they will not turn anyone away because of their lack of insurance or inability to pay ... but if you've never been on the receiving end of a hospital collections call, you really should count your blessings this Thanksgiving. I am not the only one staggering under the weight of bills from breast cancer treatment that I'm now working three jobs to try and pay off (assuming the rent doesn't go up, the car doesn't break down, gas prices remain somewhat stable, etc., etc.). I will never be able to buy a home, get a car loan, or perhaps even get a better job because of my crappy credit rating – apparently when it comes to the almighty credit score, job discrimination is not only OK, it's encouraged. I'll bet we'll never see Congress taking that issue on. But I digress.

Many times I've wished that the cancer had just gone ahead and killed me. Living with all this debt and misery isn't worth it. I hope that health care reform does become a reality. It's too late for me to get any benefit from it, but if it saves someone else from having to go through what thousands of others and I have gone through, that will be a truly wonderful thing.