U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-05-2012, 09:23 PM
 
16,301 posts, read 24,890,167 times
Reputation: 8282

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post

Or more. But now at least you're getting to the sort of expense risk that calls for insurance.
And totally unnecessary because a physical at the doctors office could likely have prevented it. A physical that would save the insurance company $99,000 or or $999,000. Guess who pays the difference? Here's a hint, the people that buy insurance, hopefully you understand how that works.

The irresponsible practices of not paying for preventive care would would put health insurance premiums beyond the reach of all but the the top 1% or 2% of incomes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-06-2012, 06:02 AM
Status: "On The Lookout" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
28,390 posts, read 61,750,545 times
Reputation: 31937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville Native View Post
...because a physical at the doctors office could likely have prevented it.
Maybe. Maybe not.
Even the doctors and public health folks are far more careful how they state such assertions.

But for the sake of indulging this pipe dream lets say there is irrefutable proof that such
doctor visits and exams will actually "prevent" the onset of those catastrophic illnesses...
let alone the other traumatic and bankruptingly expensive courses of treatment.

Make such age/gender specific annual examination with a series of lab tests the law.
How much do you think that (already overpriced) $900 doctor bill will come out to then?

The wealthy won't really care... they can afford it and are probably doing it anyway.
The poor won't care because they already have someone else to pay for it.
Who does that leave?

And that still leave the Q of which of us really need such an exams...
or at least how frequently and to what degree the bells and whistles need to be rung and blown.

In any case, however frequently these exams may be done... that is 100% known in advance.
Being known in advance they can be planned for and scheduled for and budgeted for.

And they should be done (just in case you thought I thought otherwise).
These and dental exams should be the first money spent by individuals.

But they should NOT involve a health insurance company or policy to be done.
Nor should the occasional and low level treatments that are the limit of "care"
that most people will ever need.

Last edited by MrRational; 09-06-2012 at 06:14 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2012, 06:40 AM
 
16,301 posts, read 24,890,167 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
Maybe. Maybe not.

But for the sake of indulging this pipe dream lets say there is irrefutable proof that such
doctor visits and exams will actually "prevent" the onset of those catastrophic illnesses

let alone the other traumatic and bankruptingly expensive courses of treatment.
Of course early detection of hypertension, diabetes, high cholesterol, heart disease, osteoporosis, and a number of cancers couldn't possible reduce costs and extend lives, it all a ruse created by the medical industry, Right

From the bolded part, I can assume that you do not bother with physicals, for they have no impact on your future health? Perhaps you should do a little research, and schedule yours, because there is irrefutable proof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
Make such an age/gender specific annual examination with a series of lab tests the law.
How much do you think that (already overpriced) $900 doctor bill will come out to then?
It's not how much the item price will change, but how much TOTAL health care costs go down. If a physical prevents only 1 in 10 catastrophic events, that alone will save the equivalent outlay of 100 to 1000 physicals, which in turn prevent another 1 in 10 catastrophic medical conditions.

Now for the sake of discussion I chose 1 in 10, what happens to the numbers if it is 1 in 5 or 1 in 3?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
The wealthy won't really care... they can afford it and are probably doing it anyway.
The poor won't care because they already have someone else to pay for it.
Who does that leave?
You really seem to have taken a short sighted and very selfish line, you don't want to help pay for a physical for the person that can't afford or even budget it. What you fail to realize is that your ARE paying for it, many many times over for these are the people that end up in the ER with a preventable stroke or heart attack, with or without insurance, raising health care costs for everyone, the taxpayer and the people that pay premiums to insurance companies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2012, 06:57 AM
Status: "On The Lookout" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
28,390 posts, read 61,750,545 times
Reputation: 31937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville Native View Post
you don't want to help pay for a physical for the person that can't afford or even budget it.
Where did I say that?

And who said they *can't* afford it? That's been your contention.
I contend that if they can afford HI then they can afford the actual care they're likely to need.
---

And that still leave the Q of which of us really need such exams...
or at least how frequently and to what degree the bells and whistles need to be rung and blown.

In any case, however frequently these exams may be done... that is 100% known in advance.
Being known in advance they can be planned for and scheduled for and budgeted for.

And they should be done (just in case you thought I thought otherwise).
These and dental exams should be the first money spent by individuals.


But they don't need to involve a health insurance company or policy to be done.
Nor should the occasional and low level treatments that are the limit of "care"
that most people will ever need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2012, 07:10 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ > Raleigh, NC
15,011 posts, read 18,864,729 times
Reputation: 23970
How about this: I get an alarm system for my house, my homeowners insurance premium gets a discount. I take a defensive driving course, I get aocument discount on auto premiuns (applies typically to teenagers abd seniors).

And I would have proposed that those individuals who take responsibility for their annual or bi-annual check ups get a lower health care premium. Just like those who don't smoke. I'd even extend that reduction in premium to those who can document regular visits to the gym, keeping their weight in check, etc.

$900 for a physical?????? Find a new health care provider. Because of a $5000 annual deductible, I've paid for mine for years - as well as my pap smears, mammograms, and bone density tests. I explain to the providers, (good one's btw) that I'm paying cash, that day, and they don't have to file an insurance claim. The price drops 40-50%. Sadly, this strategy does not work with my dental visits.

Most people I know take more responsibility for taking care of their car than they do for their body. Certainly, most are willing to agree to pay out of pocket for their car maintenance. And think about what MANY women pay each month for their manicures, pedicures, hair stylist and highlights (including me). I find that sense of priorities terribly sad and screwed up.

Last edited by Jkgourmet; 09-06-2012 at 07:18 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2012, 11:42 AM
 
3,099 posts, read 4,122,548 times
Reputation: 2544
Why don't insurance companies already take weight into account when setting premiums?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2012, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ > Raleigh, NC
15,011 posts, read 18,864,729 times
Reputation: 23970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarheelhombre View Post
Why don't insurance companies already take weight into account when setting premiums?
Same reason that the TSA isnt allowed to use profiling when considering security. It wouldn't be politically correct. Worse yet, somebody would eventually hire an attorney who would file a big honking discrimination suit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2012, 09:57 PM
 
3,099 posts, read 4,122,548 times
Reputation: 2544
I am against fatophobia, but I am all for incentives to make people change behavior to become healthier, whether it's lower rates for non-smokers or people who live a fitness lifestyle. I think we need to think about comprehensive incentives to encourage people to live healthier lifestyles, including tax credits and health insurance discounts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2012, 10:02 PM
 
16,301 posts, read 24,890,167 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarheelhombre View Post
Why don't insurance companies already take weight into account when setting premiums?
They do, NC state employees health plan has different coverage (70/30 vs 80/20) and rates for smokers and with a BMI above a certain point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2012, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
870 posts, read 1,961,599 times
Reputation: 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarheelhombre View Post
Why don't insurance companies already take weight into account when setting premiums?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville Native View Post
They do, NC state employees health plan has different coverage (70/30 vs 80/20) and rates for smokers and with a BMI above a certain point.
Yep, and BCBS already does the same thing for it's employees. They'll eventually do the same thing for their individual plans too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:49 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top