It's wild how all the people screaming at Stancil on this one are unaware of the existence of organisations like NICE (UK) or the PBAC and the MBS review taskforce (AU) whose job is to do this under single payer. They do a better and fairer job than the US system, as Stancil says in his first post. - ThreadSky

johnb78.bsky.social • 81 days ago

It's wild how all the people screaming at Stancil on this one are unaware of the existence of organisations like NICE (UK) or the PBAC and the MBS review taskforce (AU) whose job is to do this under single payer. They do a better and fairer job than the US system, as Stancil says in his first post.

Reposted from Will Stancil

So who decides which procedures are eligible for coverage

Comments

johnb78.bsky.social•81 days ago

But it is absolutely true that people are routinely denied lifesaving care for economic reasons under single payer systems, *and* that this is the right thing for the system to do in a world with limited resources. If you don't understand this you shouldn't be allowed an opinion on health policy.

earwicga.bsky.social•77 days ago

Do you think women not being allowed testosterone as HRT under NICE guidelines is an economic decision?

earwicga.bsky.social•77 days ago

*cis women

johnb78.bsky.social•81 days ago

The best argument for US healthcare reform, in that it doesn't rely on making false claims about single payer systems or questionable assumptions about money savings versus care provision, is purely Hobbesian: even a system with bad rules is preferable to a system with no rules

johnb78.bsky.social•81 days ago

("preferable" here is based on Hobbes's view of human nature, which I think is broadly correct in this case - even "computer says no and so you die" is psychologically easier for most people to deal with than "there are no rules and every trip to the doctor is a lottery")

bondles.bsky.social•81 days ago

Or a different phrasing - “We decided that won’t be funded in Australia” is kinder than “if you were obscenely wealthy or willing to bankrupt your entire extended family, we would save you.”

vincentmackay.bsky.social•80 days ago

I think the difference—and here I speak only of my Canadian & US experiences—is that those agencies establish guidelines but don't review case-by-case like US insurers often do. Once my Canadian doctor prescribed me something that fit the guidelines, there was no second guessing by the government.

iaincoleman.bsky.social•81 days ago

Stancil really does attract a certain type, doesn't he?

rhyspockett.bsky.social•81 days ago

Denial on the basis of disease type/ procedure type is pre know and that means every single trip isn't a dice roll with a man the others are calling doc.

johnb78.bsky.social•81 days ago

Yup. Which is a far better way of rationing care in terms of justice, efficiency and planning than the US model, but still a way of doing it.

rhyspockett.bsky.social•81 days ago

Basically see my thoughts earlier and I should expand on them. https://bsky.app/profile/rhyspockett.bsky.social/post/3ld436zq2ak2t

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply