re: The healthcare system is completely broken in America

She can get the surgery no matter if she can afford it or not.

That’s why the cost is so high, about 25% don’t pay.

quote:

---

BTW, if the USA had single payer/socialized medicine, she would not get the transplant either.

---

She wouldn’t even have the option.

quote:

---

And zero of that goes to experimental end of life care

---

LOFL if you think more is spent in countries with socialized medicine.

quote:

---

And zero of that goes to experimental end of life care.

---

That is false

I went in for a simple ablation and the hospital bill was $268000…

Insurance knocked it down to $56000

Why the discrepancy?

quote:

---

Why the discrepancy?

---

Best marketing ploy every. You get the $268k bill, and think "Oh, thank gawd I have insurance!!". Insurance pays $56k, but would have probably been less if you paid cash. In the mean time you've paid more than $56k in premiums over the previous four years, none the wiser, thinking "so glad I have insurance, and don't have to pay!".

Modern "insurance" is nothing more than pre-paid care.

quote:

---

Half of our country believes unlimited access to health care is a "right"

---

Let's take a page from the LGBTQAIP2% group.

Lack of proper entertainment leads to depression which leads to suicide.

High-quality entertainment is a right. Athletes, singers, actors, etc. all need to work for 60k a year to help provide affordable entertainment to the masses.

We have a "right" to their labor.

quote:

---

and the other half believe it is a "privilege".

---

Privilege - a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group.

No, the other half doesn't think it's a fricking "privilege". You're adopting progressive speak.

The other half of the country thinks you don't have a right to someone else's labor and instead must trade something that that person thinks is of equal value.

The best care is very labor-intensive. I know it sucks, and life isn't fair, but the alternative to this is a society-ending economic system where these same people will die anyway, along with tens of millions of perfectly healthy people.

Maybe if we weren't subsidizing Europe's defense to the tune of billions of dollars each year we could lower taxes, give families more money, and let them donate to charities that could help out in these situations.

Maybe instead of letting millions of illegals flood the border and buying them all cellphones, giving them subsidized food/housing, and busing them all over the country, we could lower taxes, give families more money, and let them donate to charities that could help out in these situations.

There's so many areas where we can tighten the belt, but progressives like yourself cry because it inconveniences someone, somewhere. The only group of people they don't mind shitting on are the people who make the right choices in life.

I don't understand two things,

1. What kind transplant would cure bone cancer?

2. There is an annual out of pocket maximum for every American on Obamacare - you cannot spend more than that per year. Note - that doesn't include dental work and some things like facelifts, etc.

So how would she pay 880k? The maximum is literally one percent of that.

LINK

If the OP os talking about a bone MARROW transplant you can get that in India (excellent hospitals and medical schools there, why do you think half of American's doctors nowadays seem to be Indian or Pakistani?)

Price is 40 times less than America.

LINK

quote:

---

cancer centers running experimental treatments don’t want patients to ruin their precious statistics thus making them look bad so they turn them away as a result, I think it’s safe to say we don’t need to take your opinion to heart. It has zero credibility.

---

Well one of us is a physician and it isn’t you…

Study design is based off of the desired treatment indications. If you are developing a drug to treat terminally ill patients, then you include terminally ill patients in the study. Few interventions, therapies, treatments, pharmaceuticals are looking to do that. They are focused on earlier stages of disease and therefore people are routinely considered too advanced for study inclusion. They also have to narrow indications which can exclude patients with certain comorbidities. You have to control for something in the study, people are always going to get left out. The center itself and the PI for the study get paid for successful enrollments, and a lesser value for participants that fail screening. The incentive on their end is to enroll as many people as possible and finish the study as quickly as possible. The company itself doesn’t want treatment failures, but that doesn’t necessarily stop individuals from getting enrolled and would really only cause someone to be removed from the study after they were already shown to be failing treatment. In reality, drug companies messing with the study on the front end is MUCH more difficult than just burying the data they don’t like on the back end.

You are also a special kind of stupid