MRIs cost WHAT?

madmallard wrote: FSAs were originally supposed to be just like HSA's in that you didn't have to be enrolled in a particular plan, and the funds COULD roll over... The only differences were supposed to be that FSA allowed you to borrow against your income, tax free, with a cap in place, whereas the HSA was tax free only for liquid deposits and a higher cap. but it didn't make it thru congress intact. wonder why...

Obviously, because that is the will of the people, duh.

poopshovel wrote: My take away: Gov't paid doctors are great when you don't need them. Me? I'd rather pay my insurance premiums like a big boy and stick it to the insurance company when I need a million bucks worth of treatment, not stick my neighbors for the tab or trust some mouth breather DMV worker turned medical professional to decide whether I live or die. Would any of you berkeleyers pay a million bucks to keep me alive? Yeah, didn't think so.

It used to be that if you paid your insurance and had a catastrophic claim your lifetime maximum payout would kick in. So when you needed insurance the most....POOF! It was gone. Then, if you tried to get new coverage your had a pre-existing condition and would either be priced out of the market or no one would insure you.

Now, Thanks to Obama and Healthcare reform, your idea is a good one. Pay your premiums and you will be covered as lifetime caps no longer exist.

I'm sure you sitting down now to write your President, Barack Hussein Obama, a thank you letter.

Also, the pre-existing conditions thing should be handled in 2014.

Curmudgeon wrote: In reply to HiTempguy: Nice. I'm 53. So where does that put me? Worth less than the 15 y/o because I have less life expectancy remaining?

Well, if you want to look at it that way...

What it comes down to is you have a limited resource. As with all limited resources, you spend it wisely. If two people, age 15 and 53 came into a hospital, in the exact same condition, but you could only save one, who do you choose?

From a purely cost/benefit analysis, the 15 year old typically. One's productive value (for the MAJORITY of people) is nearing an end. The other's is just beginning.

On the other hand, you could have your system where the same people come in, and it's "which can we squeeze the most coin out of/who has the most comprehensive insurance??" Yes, that system would make me feel more comfortable at night. I'm about as staunchly conservative as they come in Alberta, but I wouldn't trust many private individuals to actually CARE about my health. All you are is a number with money to them.

I know which system I'd rather be in. We also have the option of going to the US (as some have done in this thread) for care. So it's kind of like we have the best of both worlds. To have universal health care requires sacrifices. The same people that complain their old decrepit parents aren't getting timely care here and then taking them elsewhere for treatment is not what we are arguing about. Those are the people who can afford either system.

As for the whole "$4 prescription cost" thing, as a whole, Canadians don't pay that much more than Americans in taxes/gov fees. I wouldn't say it is a wash, and it varies from province and state to province and state, but it is true. So yea...

Don't get bent out of shape about it. It is what it is. I know that when I've needed something fixed, I've gotten it fixed in a timely manner. The system has worked well for me, and I've also taken care of myself. So, waaaadunno.

HiTempguy wrote:

Trans_Maro wrote: Yup, because once your spot on the wait list is up, you're either dead or you're feeling better!

Actually, I think the system is perfectly fine. People who need the treatment NOW get it. People who can wait, wait. Pretty simple concept, cost/time effective. Edit- In Canada, we have better health care and it costs less per capita compared to the US. Doing something right...

Some data on that? Saying "better health care" means you're saying the quality of services in Canada is superior. Haven't heard that quite yet.

Xceler8x wrote:

poopshovel wrote: My take away: Gov't paid doctors are great when you don't need them. Me? I'd rather pay my insurance premiums like a big boy and stick it to the insurance company when I need a million bucks worth of treatment, not stick my neighbors for the tab or trust some mouth breather DMV worker turned medical professional to decide whether I live or die. Would any of you berkeleyers pay a million bucks to keep me alive? Yeah, didn't think so.

It used to be that if you paid your insurance and had a catastrophic claim your lifetime maximum payout would kick in. So when you needed insurance the most....POOF! It was gone. Then, if you tried to get new coverage your had a pre-existing condition and would either be priced out of the market or no one would insure you. Now, Thanks to Obama and Healthcare reform, your idea is a good one. Pay your premiums and you will be covered as lifetime caps no longer exist. I'm sure you sitting down now to write your President, Barack Hussein Obama, a thank you letter. Also, the pre-existing conditions thing should be handled in 2014.

That was the exception, not the rule. Also, the lifetime maximum was rarely under $2million.

That said, i'm glad it's gone.

HiTempguy wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote: In reply to HiTempguy: Nice. I'm 53. So where does that put me? Worth less than the 15 y/o because I have less life expectancy remaining?

Well, if you want to look at it that way... 3On the other hand, you could have your system where the same people come in, and it's "which can we squeeze the most coin out of/who has the most comprehensive insurance??" Yes, that system would make me feel more comfortable at night.

You were on to something, and then you said that. Not even close to accurate or true.

Insurance/payment is ALWAYS handled on the back end when it comes to emergency/urgent care situations. ALWAYS.

HiTemp, you didn't even answer the most important part of my question. That is: if my decrepit old 53 y/o ass dies so some kid can live, what happens to my kid? Does she become a ward of the state? Wouldn't that be more expensive than patching me up so I can pay taxes for another 15 years or so?

Let's take that a step further. Let's suppose both I and your 15 y/o have cancer, but his is a really terrible form of cancer with a 10% survival rate. Mine is bad as well but has a 90% survival rate.

Make the call.

Thank GOD for my insurance company. My 17 y/o Son had an injury that eventually required an ambulance, two different hospitals, MRI's, Oral Maxillofacial (jaw,teeth,etc) surgery.

The only bill I saw mid-way through his treatment was totaling $10,XXX.

I didn't have to pay a dime...

Unless you call giving your life to Uncle Sam and he can do whatever the E36 M3 he wants... (U.S. Military). I've been with this plan for almost 20 years. This will change soon.. Hopefully my next job can match it.. NOT!

Curmudgeon wrote: HiTemp, you didn't even answer the most important part of my question. That is: if my decrepit old 53 y/o ass dies so some kid can live, what happens to my kid? Does she become a ward of the state? Wouldn't that be more expensive than patching me up so I can pay taxes for another 15 years or so? Let's take that a step further. Let's suppose both I and your 15 y/o have cancer, but his is a really terrible form of cancer with a 10% survival rate. Mine is bad as well but has a 90% survival rate. Make the call.

You're smart enough to know that the system doesn't work that way, and who says 53 is old?

As far as wait times, that can be a regional thing. The only thing I've ever had to wait for is a dermatologist. If I wanted to drive to Toronto, I could have been in right away. I've been in emerg rooms twice in the last two weeks, and although there was some priority assessment going on, I was 3 hours and out in one (on a busy Friday night in a big city), and 2 hours last night in the other. In the city hospital, I was talking to the intern that was stapling my head, and asked her if she was going back home to Toronto to practice once she's done. She said not a chance, there are too many doctors in T.O. already, and not enough work.

HiTemp made the blanket statement that choosing between a 15 y/o and a 60 y/o should fall to the 15 y/o because he's younger. That's the kind of thinking that led to the theory of eugenics.

And hell no 53 ain't old.

Curmudgeon wrote: HiTemp made the blanket statement that choosing between a 15 y/o and a 60 y/o should fall to the 15 y/o because he's younger.

That's because he's a lot closer to 15 than 60, and it shows

We've been down this road before. People are afraid of the unknown, and while YOU wouldn't trust the government to look after your health care, most of us cringe at the thought of the insurnace companies running OUR health care system. I've said it before, as long as the insurance companies are involved, you'll always have a second rate health care system. I'm sure you feel the same way about our system.

Urg. The insurance companies are only 1/3rd of the issue.

HiTempguy wrote: I honestly don't understand how you have coverage and had to pay $532 out of pocket... that just don't make sense.

Me neither

I don't blame the insurance companies, I blame people. Healthcare is just like any other product. Would you walk into a car dealer with no knowledge and tell him to sell you a car no matter the costs? Nope. Research and shopping for quality and price is the norm in just about every buying situation except healthcare. Most people only seem to care what the copay is going to cost them. They don't even look at the costs before spending thousands on tests, ordered so some guy in a white coat can cover his ass. Get the sniffles or be in pain and turn off the brain.

Insurance should be for catastrophic coverage or covering chronic illness only. Anything else should be paid for out of pocket. Prices for most services would drop fast when doctors and hospitals started competing on cost as well as quality.

My son went to the ER for back pain last year. Instant MRI ordered to find kidney stones. The prescription was go home and pass them, here's some pain meds. The cost? $7000, with the MRI costing a little over $3000. Bend over buddy, there's a telephone pole around here somewhere. A couple of phone calls the next day found the MRI for $800 and a doctors visit for $60. That's a mistake he won't make again.

My total medical costs not counting insurance in the last 10 years is under $2000. Why? Because I don't go see a doctor every time I have a cold or a hurt toe, because I know what it costs and I know who is paying the bill. I'm reasonably certain I broke a finger a couple of months ago. It still worked, but hurt like hell. I splinted it for three weeks and took some Advil. Problem solved for the cost of a finger splint and a roll of tape from CVS. A trip to the doctor would have been a $1000 with x-rays and he would have given me a splint and a roll of tape and a prescription for pain meds. My last doctors visit was for a spider bite. It cost me $53 out the door because I shopped them and told them I was paying cash. The average visit around here is $120. Making three phone calls cut the bill in half.

My medical insurance is major medical only with a $5K deductible. Having insurance pay for regular scheduled visits and every time you have the sniffles is stupid and just drives the costs up for everyone, because no one really cares what the doctors are charging, because insurance will cover it.

I'm looking forward to the day Walmart opens doctor offices in their stores locally. They did wonders for the prices of prescriptions and eye exams. Amazing that CVS and Walgreens both figured out they could match the prices after the fact.

My car insurance pays for my oil changes and new tires every year.

Twin_Cam wrote:

HiTempguy wrote: I honestly don't understand how you have coverage and had to pay $532 out of pocket... that just don't make sense.

Me neither

I have a $500 deductible per family member ($1500 for the family) and the insurance covers 80% after that. I hadn't met my deductible - as we've only had to pay co-pays prior to Friday.

Several years ago, I cracked a rib on a dirt bike. If you have not had the joy of a cracked rib, let me tell you they hurt like hell. It's worst if you laugh so it's best to suspend your sense of humor till it heals. Used to be they'd strap your ribs, basically wrap your chest tightly with a big Ace bandage but they don't even do that any more.

I went to a party thrown by my GF's boss, the boss was a girl whose fiancee was a MD to be. I sat on the couch and did a little hiss because my rib hurt like the dickens and he asked me what was wrong. I told him I had a cracked rib and man he went FOOL. Asked me if I had been to the doctor and I said no, he says 'why not?' and I said it was because I knew what it was.

He says 'you need to go anyway' and I said 'why?' He says well, they can X ray it. I said yeah, I spend $300-$500 on an X ray to tell me what I already know: I have a cracked rib. He says, but they can give you pain pills. Yeah, give is the wrong word. Another $150-$200 and I won't take them because I prefer to have some pain than to walk around all day feeling like a zombie. He walked away muttering to himself.

Half of what's wrong with people now is they have been convinced that if you have the sniffles you need to immediately run to the doctor and get some pills, then your life will be perfect again. I'm not saying that there is no need for medical care, far from it. It's like Toyman says, it needs to be bought just like anything else: in an intelligent manner.

And your hospital has to look like some sort of high end resort, ficus trees, glass, chrome, expensive woods, granite and travertine tile everywhere, all that crap is expensive. Then people complain when they get the bills. Hospitals don't need to look like dungeons but a lot of the frippery could be cut out and save money. But no; people go to hospitals like that for the same reason they buy a Mercedes: so they can brag about how high class they are.

Oh, well. I guess that's why I will never be rich; I don't know how to fleece those kind of people.

EDIT: I was working on the house yesterday and was listening to the radio as background noise. I tend to tune out the ads, but about halfway through the day I paid attention to them for a few minutes because something stuck out in my mind. The ads were all for new cars and hospitals. A rough percentage would be 60% hospitals and 40% car dealerships. I can understand a dealership advertising, but a hospital? Come on, folks. They are obviously trolling for elective patients, not the ones who really need basic medical care for an accident, etc.

The local scandal rag is full of the same two things, their web site is covered with ads for hospitals as well. It's not just here, Charleston is covered with that type advertising as well. THAT'S where all the insurance money goes: advertising for elective patients.

m4ff3w wrote: $1900 a piece! One with and one without contrast. After meeting the entire deductible in one day - I'm 1/3 of the way to meeting her individual out of pocket maximum for the year. I bet I hit it in the next two weeks. :( I can't imagine having to pay for this stuff w/out insurance - paying for it with insurance is killing me. I nearly E36 M3 myself when they said I needed to cough up $532 today.

I get a minimum of two MRI's a year.

Curmudgeon wrote: The local scandal rag is full of the same two things, their web site is covered with ads for hospitals as well. It's not just here, Charleston is covered with that type advertising as well. THAT'S where all the insurance money goes: advertising for elective patients.

And advertising for drugs that the drug companies pass on to you, me, and the insurance companies. That's a huge portion.

Curmudgeon wrote: Half of what's wrong with people now is they have been convinced that if you have the sniffles you need to immediately run to the doctor and get some pills, then your life will be perfect again. I'm not saying that there is no need for medical care, far from it. It's like Toyman says, it needs to be bought just like anything else: in an intelligent manner. And your hospital has to look like some sort of high end resort, ficus trees, glass, chrome, expensive woods, granite and travertine tile everywhere, all that crap is expensive. Then people complain when they get the bills. Hospitals don't need to look like dungeons but a lot of the frippery could be cut out and save money. But no; people go to hospitals like that for the same reason they buy a Mercedes: so they can brag about how high class they are. Oh, well. I guess that's why I will never be rich; I don't know how to fleece those kind of people. EDIT: I was working on the house yesterday and was listening to the radio as background noise. I tend to tune out the ads, but about halfway through the day I paid attention to them for a few minutes because something stuck out in my mind. The ads were all for new cars and hospitals. A rough percentage would be 60% hospitals and 40% car dealerships. I can understand a dealership advertising, but a hospital? Come on, folks. They are obviously trolling for elective patients, not the ones who really need basic medical care for an accident, etc. The local scandal rag is full of the same two things, their web site is covered with ads for hospitals as well. It's not just here, Charleston is covered with that type advertising as well. THAT'S where all the insurance money goes: advertising for elective patients.

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: And advertising for drugs that the drug companies pass on to you, me, and the insurance companies. That's a huge portion.

I think there is definitely some truth in this. Some folks are all about going to the doc for the magic pill. I know some folks are depressed for a reason. I also know someone who is on head meds potentially forever who has horrible eating habits, doesn't exercise, is chronically under-rested due to staying up all night by choice. Otherwise the guy is healthy. I don't know how much of his depression is due to his unhealthy life choices or an actual chemical imbalance. We won't know because it's easier to take a pill than to eat healthier, exercise, and get proper rest. I love the guy, best friend a guy could have, and wish he'd make some lifestyle changes.

On the flipside of a coin was my friend's father. He had a back ache. He's older (60's) and figured it was a pulled muscle, bladder infection, something pretty simple that rest would fix. The guy ended up on his couch for days. Turns out he had a abscess on his spine that ended up causing him to not be able to walk or urinate during that time. The guy stayed on his couch so long he developed a bed sore. This is a person who should've gone to the doc as now it's a waiting game to see if he has permanent nerve damage. Evidently he didn't go because he was worried about the cost and thought "I would be over it in a few days."

My two examples. One of a guy who may not need to be on meds but is. Another of a guy who should've sought medical help, but did not. Moral of the story? We have too much medicine in one case and not enough on the other.

Curmudgeon wrote: Half of what's wrong with people now is they have been convinced that if you have the sniffles you need to immediately run to the doctor and get some pills, then your life will be perfect again. I'm not saying that there is no need for medical care, far from it. It's like Toyman says, it needs to be bought just like anything else: in an intelligent manner.

^This is the problem with our system in Canada.

My mother was constantly complaining about the steady stream of folks coming to the hospital with a cold, the flu, a sore knee, needing a band-aid (really, I'm not kidding).

There's folks out there who are really hurt or sick and these idiots waste the time and money that has been put into the system.

Heard another radio ad this morning for varicose vein surgery, they were very up front that it was cosmetic and mentioned 3 times that most insurance covered it. What I find funny is that many insurances won't cover birth control pills but will cover varicose vein surgery and Viagra. Hmmm.

Curmudgeon wrote: Heard another radio ad this morning for varicose vein surgery, they were very up front that it was cosmetic and mentioned 3 times that most insurance covered it. What I find funny is that many insurances won't cover birth control pills but will cover varicose vein surgery and Viagra. Hmmm.

Most insurance actually won't cover varicose vein surgery, fwiw.

I see far more policies that cover birth control than cover varicose vein surgery.

Many will only cover Viagra if it can be linked as a cause/contributing factor to a psychological issue. (It's probably really easy to spoof, but it's not so easy as saying "I need penis pills, kthx insurance!!")

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: My car insurance pays for my oil changes and new tires every year.

THANK YOU

As i see it, NONE of the problems that people have can be effectively addressed until we as a population raise our collective intelligence to accept this:

health insurance ≠ health care coverage

The purpose of insurance is to mitigate risk, yet people have an expectation that all of these terms and items are the same or interchangeable.

until that changes, we haven't correctly defined the parameters of the discussion :(

It's because people don't know the difference between "Health Care" and "Health Insurance."

Most people will answer with "They're the same thing, is this a trick question?"

Even the government is guilty of it. It wasn't a "Health Care Reform Act," despite being named as such.

Sorry, everyone created this problem. There will be no fixing it until the actual problem is addressed, and it hasn't been.