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.
And all treatments considered experimental are not open to the general public just because they want/need them. They are limited to certain individuals in order to test them and analize the results so the FDA can review and approve/deny them.
Story is tragic, but nothing says ANYONE that needs or wants the "experimental" procedures are entitled to be included in experimental testing.
I think we are missing some important information from the story as usual.
In a single-payer system, medical decisions are between a doctor and his/her patient.
Right now the insurance companies pretty much make the decisions. If they won't pay for it, it's highly unlikely a doctor will perform the work/treatment and go unpaid for their work.
Pray tell, how would the "free market" system help this young boy?
Something tells me the "free market" wouldn't help him. It would just simply let him die because he can't cough up the money to pay for it himself.
Canadian and British health care do not pay for experimental treatment. Since the treatment was not approved by the FDA, the treatment itself might kill th patient. The free market helps the boy because the parents can choose to pay for the treatment themselves. Without free markerts there would be no one willing to try experimental treatments
But we have no proof that government run health care would approve an experimental treatment, In fact i presume most health care services do not approve financing of experimental treatment. The fact that Childcare went ahead and approved one does not mean they or government health care would approve another. So if you are insinuating that we had government health care this child would get experimental health care you are jumping to a conclusion that might not be true. Most health care plans will not pay for experimental procedures that are not approved by the FDA, I would assume a government program would follow the need for FDA approval
And all treatments considered experimental are not open to the general public just because they want/need them. They are limited to certain individuals in order to test them and analize the results so the FDA can review and approve/deny them.
Story is tragic, but nothing says ANYONE that needs or wants the "experimental" procedures are entitled to be included in experimental testing.
I think we are missing some important information from the story as usual.
Canadian and British health care do not pay for experimental treatment. Since the treatment was not approved by the FDA, the treatment itself might kill th patient. The free market helps the boy because the parents can choose to pay for the treatment themselves. Without free markerts there would be no one willing to try experimental treatments
And if the parents are poor? What then?
Do you seriously think these parents have $100,000+ lying around to pay for his treatment?
BTW, even under a single-payer system the parents can pay for the treatment out of pocket. No one would try to stop them.
Canadian and British health care do not pay for experimental treatment. Since the treatment was not approved by the FDA, the treatment itself might kill th patient. The free market helps the boy because the parents can choose to pay for the treatment themselves. Without free markerts there would be no one willing to try experimental treatments
True.. And if the insurance company subjected this little boy treatment that was experimental, and the boy was to die from it, the insurance company would be open to be sued for approving such procedure..
Just because someone wants to take part in an "experiment", it doesnt mean they are entitled to their wishes..
What gets me is that they have paid for an "experimental treatment" in the past and now they don't want to pay for another one.
I am sure the price tag is the main reason they are denying him the treatment.
What gets me is that they have paid for an "experimental treatment" in the past and now they don't want to pay for another one.
I am sure the price tag is the main reason they are denying him the treatment.
They didnt have to pay for the first one... Insurance companies are under no obligation to pay for ANY procedure not approved by the FDA.
They paid for the first one out of kidness, so rather than be greatful you want to just find more reasons to complain..
I bet if we left this boy to the "free market," he'd be dead.
WHO DOES THAT KID THINK HE IS? DOES HE THINK HE'S ENTITLED TO HEALTH CARE, LITTLE CREEP.
WHY DOESN'T HE GET A JOB!
HES LUCKY HE'S NOT IN A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY. JERK ! DOESN'T HEKNOW THE CEOS OF HIS INSURANCE COMPANY HAVE EARNED THAT $200,000.00 A DAY...
LITTLE SOCIALISTCOMMIE, SECRETLY TRYING TO SPREAD THE WEALTH!
Oh, sorry! The evil little christian Republican troll in my computer took over the keys.....I got control back now ....
Last edited by Who?Me?!; 02-10-2010 at 08:25 AM..
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.
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.
