Health care costs, JAMA study, and what they’re overlooking

I found this JAMA study featured in the New York Times: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2752664

I keep thinking about this. As patient, I didn’t witness “administrative waste” so much. The administrators stayed clear of the mental wards and didn’t show up on medical wards much, either. I did, however, witness medical waste. Most of these wasteful practices were done on people who had public insurance. There’s very little oversight when it comes to Medicaid and Medicare.

I did witness people spending hours haggling with greedy insurance companies that didn’t want to pay for various things. I agree that a lot of these procedures aren’t necessary, but often, the insurance companies misjudged and denied something necessary or even life-sustaining.

I also witnessed medical institutions going ahead and doing some unnecessary procedure even if the insurance company said no. Then, the expense fell on the patient, who may or may not have been billed. Often, these costs were “absorbed.” What the heck does that mean?

They can eliminate psych incarceration, which accounts for a huge amount of spending. Maybe if people insist on it, they can go back to those luxury spas for the rich.

Medicaid is paying out huge sums to pharma companies to drug children and elders with antipsychotic drugs and stimulants. This is wasteful and harmful. They can stop that.

They can end ECT, which is putting millions into the pockets of shock docs, anesthesiologists, and institutions that support this harmful practice. This will also cut down on all the subsequent spending that has to be done to either rehabilitate shock survivors, or keep them incarcerated.

With the elimination of psych incarceration, we’d eliminate any subsequent necessary spending on therapy to help people recover from being locked up. They call this “follow-up care.”

They can end any court-ordered medical care, which is very expensive to enforce. Let the people decide!

They can end the “just in case” spending. This would eliminate the unnecessary prescriptions, unnecessary tests such as MRI tests and biopsies, most mammograms, most pap smears, and pushing of the flu shot. Most “checkups” are also unnecessary.

They can end pharma advertising. End the pamphlets. End the TV and radio ads. End the drug-pushing pop-ups such as what I saw when I tried to access the above JAMA article.

They can use re-usable medical supplies instead of creating a huge amount of plastic waste. That plastic bedpan…who paid for that?

They can end discrimination against people who have been subject to psychiatry, and instead of pushing expensive disability checks, expensive prisons, and segregated housing, accept people back into society.

Now, with all the superfluous extras removed, Western Med can do its job. Those that really need medical care will get it more easily, and cheaper.

 

2 thoughts on “Health care costs, JAMA study, and what they’re overlooking”

  1. LOL Julie, you wrote: “I also witnessed medical institutions going ahead and doing some unnecessary procedure even if the insurance company said no. Then, the expense fell on the patient, who may or may not have been billed.”

    …and here’s how my mind is working: I read: “The patient, who may or may not have been killed.”

    (yeah, I worry about “medicine” these days)

    1. Yep, very true. These institutions charge the families after they kill the patient. If I croak, lord only knows how many old medical bills will creep out of the woodwork (as many as they can find) and get mailed to my family.

      I hear that Medicaid reaps the benefits when a recipient dies. You may be thinking you’re leaving your house to your kids, but they take it.

Feedback and comments welcome!