logoalt Hacker News

AnotherGoodName • today at 5:37 PM • 2 replies • view on HN

There’s an economic disconnect working against preventative medicine in the USA. The commercial interests take more of a cut on the expensive reactive treatments.

I’m from a country where you are mailed things like a free bowel cancel screening kit every two years unsolicited from the time you turn 50 (Australia). The reason is that the kit and test cost a few cents and detecting it early saves the socialised medical system so much money this sort of thing is a no brainer. There’s a direct economic incentive for socialised medicine to integrate preventative care into day to day life.


Replies

briffle • today at 5:47 PM

There SHOULD be the same incintive in private health care like the US to also lower costs. but when we voted in the ACA (Obamacare) there was a well meaning clause that said insurers had to spend 85% of their premiums on care. That should also re-inforce the cost savings part, but then the largest companies started buying Pharmacies, Pharmacy Benefit Managers, Doctors offices, and even whole Hospitals.

Now they can still spend 85% of the INSURANCE premiums on care, but then those costs are going to their other divisions which can raise prices at will, and make massive profits for the whole group.

tptacek • today at 6:08 PM

Nobody's twirling their mustaches hoping people get sick, but they don't need to be for fee-for-service incentives to bias standard practice towards responses to conditions rather than prevention. On the other hand: you can go too far the other direction (and some cardiologists would point to CAC tests as an example). Preventative care can be bad if the tests drive unnecessary procedures.