SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A US National Health Care System?

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: i-node who wrote (18621)8/5/2010 3:18:45 AM
From: dybdahl  Read Replies (1) of 42652
 
"That more such visits would make people more healthy and therefore save us money."

In other words, you visit the doctor in order to keep the long-term health care costs down.

The agenda is totally different here - we're trying to carefully find out, who should go to the doctor, and who should not. Most people live a life where a doctor is not needed. For instance, there have been screening programs for breast cancer, but the benefits don't always outweigh the problems: Making people worried. There is simply not scientific evidence for a full scale breast cancer screening program. There is no doubt that the screening catches some cases early which is good, but making people worried about their health damages their health. Therefore, if you only look into breast cancer statistics, the screening programs make sense, but if you look at it from a public health viewpoint, those screening programs must be targeted at high risk groups.

Getting a good long-term health requires much more than conversations with a doctor and measurements on your current health state. I would, at a minimum, require the doctor to make a home visit. It is common knowledge that patients are extremely awful at reporting about their life.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext