Posts by Kate Collins67

mistyjackal842 said:ruggedscout91

I feel like you're making a lot of things up here. I mean, you can't just walk into a hospital and decide to stay. There has to be some kind of medical necessity for being admitted. Most people show up on a specific day because they have a scheduled surgery or something. They don't just wander in whenever they feel like it. And even then, patients often end up waiting hours just for a bed to open up. So, honestly, it seems pretty unbelievable that someone could just show up at a hospital and stay simply because they wanted to.

I know quite a few elderly people who were very ill and ended up passing away either at home or in a private assisted living facility that they paid for themselves.

And just because you say someone lives in a mansion, that doesn't mean they haven't been paying into the healthcare system. It's almost as if you think only people living in apartments contribute anything toward medical costs.

Everything they wrote is spot on.
And you, mistyjackal842, are dead wrong if you think otherwise.
People in our healthcare system basically do whatever they want, however they want, and whenever they want. A "medical indication" isn't some magic prerequisite for getting a hospital bed—and honestly, that lack of oversight is exactly why our hospital system is such a disaster, largely because our primary care system is completely broken.

If you actually believe this is all made up, fine—let me give you some real-life examples that I run into on a daily basis.
Here are a few:
1. Two younger relatives bring their grandmother in and start acting aggressive, claiming she lost consciousness or was vomiting or whatever else they need to say. Grandma just sits there silently, not really answering any direct questions. So, what do you do? You take the patient's word for it, admit her to see what happens—because once she's admitted, you can't just discharge her until some processing is done—only for them to tell you, "Oh, can she stay for a couple of days? We have a wedding to go to and it's a hassle to look after her..."

2. It’s 3:00 AM, and someone rolls into the ER without a referral, yelling at every doctor in sight until they land on me demanding help. What happened? He *thinks* he got bitten by a spider somewhere about 30 hours ago. By the time he gets here, there isn't a single symptom—he just thinks he was bitten.

3. An old man comes back to the same clinic where he was treated ten days ago, complaining of shortness of breath (fluid buildup in his lungs). The thing is, he hasn't been taking the meds they prescribed him. Why? Because those drugs make him pee constantly to flush the fluid out of his lungs, and he doesn't want to deal with running to the bathroom or getting up all night when he wants to go to the local market. So, he stops taking them, ends up back in the ER, and you're stuck giving him the exact same medication he refuses to take because it's inconvenient for him.....

If you want more, I can keep going.

Jacob Fox6 said:My God, I honestly can't wrap my head around how anyone—including you—could actually think like that...

What you just said goes completely against the Hippocratic Oath, the entire foundation of medicine, and basic human decency. And let me tell you, I'm not even speaking as a layperson here...

There are always specific criteria used for selection in every medical situation. Like... if you're waiting on a bone marrow transplant, nobody is asking if you're a smoker or not, you just get the transplant. The right to life isn't some individual choice made based on someone's personal opinion, and honestly, thank God you aren't the one making those calls, because you'd clearly just be treating teenagers while personally organizing funerals or tossing everyone else into the first available grave... it's just shameful. Everyone gets treated without exception, and then doctors step in more aggressively depending on how urgent the situation is...

Ugh, this overhyped Hippocrates guy... I honestly can't stand him.
You can't just call someone else's stance "incorrect" when we're talking about an opinion rather than hard facts.
Unless you're actually out there on the front lines—I mean, working in an ER or a high-pressure trauma center at a major hospital—you don't really have any professional experience to back up these claims. You're basically stuck in the "semi-amateur" category because, while you might be studying medicine, right now it's all just theory to you.

Jacob Fox6 said:Totally agree.

And you just gave the perfect example of exactly what I've been saying... All these people—your grandma, current retirees, folks out of work—they've all been paying into the system, so where is that money now when they need the healthcare they earned??? That’s my whole point: if that money wasn't being stolen, there would be plenty for everyone, but instead, it turns out the very people who spent their entire lives paying for healthcare are left to fend for themselves while others are out driving luxury cars with their cash...

The "solution" they're pushing? It'd be much simpler if they just handed everyone their invested cash in cold, hard cash and told us to switch over to a totally private system. Then you'll see exactly where the money goes—you'll blow through it in a heartbeat and then just drop dead because you can't afford the next round of treatment.

Jacob Fox6 said:My God, I honestly can't wrap my head around how anyone—including you—could actually think like that...

What you just said goes completely against the Hippocratic Oath, the entire foundation of medicine, and basic human decency. And let me tell you, I'm not even speaking as a layperson here...

There are always specific criteria used for selection in every medical situation. Like... if you're waiting on a bone marrow transplant, nobody is asking if you're a smoker or not, you just get the transplant. The right to life isn't some individual choice made based on someone's personal opinion, and honestly, thank God you aren't the one making those calls, because you'd clearly just be treating teenagers while personally organizing funerals or tossing everyone else into the first available grave... it's just shameful. Everyone gets treated without exception, and then doctors step in more aggressively depending on how urgent the situation is...

Just a few months back, if I recall correctly, over in England, a younger patient was denied a liver transplant simply because they couldn't convince the doctors they were going to stop drinking.

So, even in highly developed countries, your utopian little theory doesn't hold water; there are protocols, and resources aren't just handed out equally to everyone without reason.
If I’m reading you right, you’re still stuck in med school? Well, get ready for a massive reality check once you actually start working and having to make real-world decisions on your own. If you keep thinking like this, after just one year grinding in an ER seeing all the absolute madness that goes down, you’re going to need professional mental health support just to keep from losing your mind... our system will break you.

But hey, I don't want to act like I have all the answers. Why don't you come back and post here in a few years? It'll be interesting to see how much you've changed.

ruggedscout91 said:YES, CHOOSING WHO GETS HELP IS HUMANE. Is it humane to let someone with ruptured appendixes die because they couldn't get surgery because a 90-year-old with an incurable disease occupied the operating room or the bed?
Is it humane when hearts fail because someone was busy shuttling an elderly person back and forth from the ER to the hospital, leaving no ambulances available for someone's son, grandson, or great-grandson?

Here in America, because there is zero trust in the system, the relatives of the elderly act in a way that drives up the cost of care, making it impossible for other patients. They clog up the system, and no one has the decency to tell them to moderate their demands.
While they are busy making unrealistic demands of the staff, there isn't enough time or resources left to help people in acute crisis.
That is our culture: "Give me everything, and let everyone else rot."
And believe me, when you visit these seniors at home, they are often neglected and stripped of basic human rights. Yet, once they reach a hospital or a doctor, their families treat them like they descended from heaven. Meanwhile, the poor grandparents aren't even aware that their presence only serves to soothe their relatives' guilty consciences, while a young life slips away because they are stuck in the system.
There is no need to criticize me for thinking this way. This is a lesson learned through experience. My own mother passed away at 88, and I knew there wasn't any other way. It was far more important to provide her with care while it still made sense to do so.

We could also talk about the VIP suites and luxury rooms where bodies—more or less warmed up—lie at someone else's expense, sometimes with a little extra paid out of private pockets.
Fortunately, you can't cheat death, even if God is your father.

Thanks.
If I had kept pushing this point harder, people probably would've still taken it the wrong way—but I’m signing off on this, and honestly, I try to explain this logic to everyone, whether it's here on this forum or in my actual life.

Brian Cruz2 said:Hey everyone! 🙂

I've been struggling with being underweight for years now—honestly, just trying everything to gain some weight. I eat basically anything under the sun, from healthy stuff to total junk, fruit, veggies, blah blah blah... but nothing seems to stick. 😢😢 I’m about 5'9" and only 112 lbs. Summer is right around the corner and I'm starting to feel pretty desperate about it. Does anyone have any solid advice on how to actually put on some mass?? 😕

Well, there’s an endless mountain of advice out there on how to lose weight... so just do the exact opposite.

Like it was mentioned before, go get your thyroid levels checked—and seriously, check your blood sugar too (especially if you've dropped weight suddenly).
Basically, if you want to gain weight, you need to be hitting 3,000-4,000 calories a day and maybe just stay off your feet all day.🙂

@ mistyjackal842

Look, let's just drop this—there's no point in arguing when you clearly don't understand how the system actually functions from the inside.
I’m not looking for a fight, really, and hey, you’re more than welcome to hold onto your idealistic little viewpoints if that makes you feel better; the only issue is that they just don't square with reality.

mistyjackal842 said:Believe me, we’ve been right there in that exact situation. My grandma was quite elderly and wasn't doing well. She passed away at home, and her primary care physician didn't just refuse to write referrals, as you put it. No, she provided them whenever they were actually needed and was always very fair. I mean, what should we be denying to all our seniors? They need regular checkups too, like monitoring their blood work. One time, my grandma even had to get a transfusion at a day hospital because she was dealing with severe anemia—back then, we didn't even know she had cancer yet. After that, she stayed in the hospital for a little while until they could confirm the final diagnosis. The transfusion didn't do wonders for her, but really, why deny her that care just because her illness was terminal? I truly believe we have to support the elderly. You can't just say, "Oh, let them die, they're old anyway, and they're costing the healthcare system too much." My grandma worked for thirty years as a professor, so... I guess you could say she earned the right to receive medical help. Grandpa also passed away at home; he was sick, and I doubt he cost the healthcare system much at all. He worked his entire life, too.

That isn't even the right way to frame it. It’s easy to sit here and play the saint—saying "Oh, I'd give everyone equal treatment"—but let's be real: you can only make those kinds of calls if you're swimming in cash.

Let me flip the script and ask you this: If you were the one making the call, who are you helping? Are you pouring resources into an 87-year-old grandmother battling terminal cancer with only months left to live, or are you helping a 50-year-old who *might* have a heart attack in a few days?
I'm not saying these are the exact scenarios we face every single day, but in my opinion—and this is where it gets ugly—we far too often find ourselves forced into these impossible choices. And when we are, what do we actually choose?

Here is my inevitable take on this whole mess.

Look, there are countless grandmothers out there facing the exact same situation you are. We are pouring massive amounts of money into keeping people afloat for just a few months, and then—get this—that same money isn't there when someone younger (and I’m talking about folks in their late 60s or even younger) suddenly needs medical care after a lifetime of staying healthy. It’s a cycle, isn't it?

mistyjackal842 said:Believe me, we’ve been right there in that exact situation. My grandma was quite elderly and wasn't doing well. She passed away at home, and her primary care physician didn't just refuse to write referrals, as you put it. No, she provided them whenever they were actually needed and was always very fair. I mean, what should we be denying to all our seniors? They need regular checkups too, like monitoring their blood work. One time, my grandma even had to get a transfusion at a day hospital because she was dealing with severe anemia—back then, we didn't even know she had cancer yet. After that, she stayed in the hospital for a little while until they could confirm the final diagnosis. The transfusion didn't do wonders for her, but really, why deny her that care just because her illness was terminal? I truly believe we have to support the elderly. You can't just say, "Oh, let them die, they're old anyway, and they're costing the healthcare system too much." My grandma worked for thirty years as a professor, so... I guess you could say she earned the right to receive medical help. Grandpa also passed away at home; he was sick, and I doubt he cost the healthcare system much at all. He worked his entire life, too.

I guess I'll just let things be interpreted however they're going to be interpreted.
The more we beat our heads against this wall, the messier this whole situation gets.
Look, regarding your grandmother—it’s already established she had cancer, and it's known she suffered from frequent anemia as a result. That was all determined at the hospital, where they concluded she wasn't a candidate for surgery, radiation, or chemo anymore.
So what's left? Checking blood counts and providing a transfusion when levels drop? Fine, I agree with that—but not in a major hospital setting. That kind of thing should be handled by a primary care physician. But let's be real: those doctors aren't even fighting for a patient-centered system anymore. Instead, they're pushing for a system where they do less actual medicine and more administrative paperwork for the exact same paycheck—because, honestly, being an administrator is a hell of a lot easier than being a doctor.

mistyjackal842 said:I mean, I’m pretty sure Canada allocates way more funding to healthcare than we do here. Even Anderson Cooper pointed out on his show how much more money is poured into the healthcare system in Austria compared to our situation. And honestly, I haven't heard of any GP just handing out referrals for no reason. In fact, it feels like it's actually much more common for them to deny you a referral, which basically forces you to pay out of pocket for a private visit. A few years back, I had this minor issue that my GP just couldn't sort out. He wouldn't give me a referral even though I practically begged him. I ended up handling it myself—my dad helped me out and took me to see a specialist he knows, and everything was resolved in just a few minutes. That specialist actually told me it was a good thing I came in when I did. What was I supposed to do? Just stay home and suffer because my doctor refused to give me a referral? Maybe if I had gone back there several times over the next two weeks, he might have finally felt merciful enough to give it to me. It was just an older GP covering shifts, probably close to retirement, so I doubt Medicare would have even cared if he had just given me the referral. For what it's worth, I hadn't even asked for a single referral in the five years leading up to that.

Believe me, primary care doctors—and look, I don't want to generalize, but at least the ones I deal with—they do hand out referrals, but it’s rarely for someone like you or anyone in your age group facing a potential issue. No, they're focused on the elderly patients whose conditions are already set in stone, people for whom even a trip to the hospital won't change their ultimate outcome, regardless of how much it might help someone younger like you.

The reason? It’s simple: they don't want the liability of an elderly patient passing away without having "sent them in," even though any sane person knows that at a certain point, medical intervention won't slow down the inevitable. (And let's be honest, pressure from the family plays a massive role here, too). It’s much easier to push a referral through for a younger person who isn't going to die in the next few years than it is to scramble for someone who could pass away in hours—even if, at 87 years old, death is just a natural part of life....

Jacob Fox6 said:Honestly, I’ve been saying this whole time—the healthcare system is broken.👍

I think there might be a little misunderstanding here. 🙂

I totally agree with you. I was just trying to distance myself from all the political stuff... personally, I don't care if we're talking communism or capitalism, the reality for me is that things just aren't working right now. From my perspective, all I want is to be able to see a doctor when I need to without having a nervous breakdown or emptying my bank account. Since everyone is so fed up with our healthcare, I'm definitely leaning towards being angry and calling people out.

That comment from Milinovic about cutting supplemental insurance for people on unemployment is just insane to me. If someone is unemployed, should they immediately be cast aside and treated like trash? His excuse was, "as a husband, I make enough to pay for my wife's supplemental insurance"... man, that statement still makes my blood boil...

I don't even know where to start arguing with that... I won't even try because my blood pressure would probably hit 190 thanks to my social conscience (unfortunately).

The guy is just an idiot... only a complete fool could say something like that. And that brings me back to my point—we’re stopping being a socially conscious nation. When I say "social" (looks like we had a misunderstanding there😉), I don't mean political leanings, I mean a specific discipline within medicine that exists on paper even though its actual practice is super questionable. When a pillar of capitalism—the US—works specifically to change the status quo from non-social medicine, I have to ask: "Who does Milinovic think he is to have an opinion on this?"

It sounds super pessimistic, I know, but honestly, it feels like these politicians today—regardless of which party they belong to—just don't have the power to change a single thing anymore... It’s not even just about the healthcare system at this point, it’s about basic survival, like how since September the government hasn't even had the funds to cover pensions because they emptied out the pension funds (thank God🙄) in a way that wouldn't fly in any civilized nation. In Germany, I know for a fact that anyone can choose at any time whether they want their entire life savings to go into a pension fund, yet our seniors are sitting there wondering if they'll even see a dime despite working hard and paying their taxes their whole lives...

The US has been completely robbed. And then you have them in Congress messing around with laws to statute-limit those infamous old corporate takeovers... It's pure idiocy and a blatant attempt (which, sadly, looks like it might actually work) to make sure the "important people" never have to answer to the law. Which leads me straight into the next mess, which is that the ruling party or coalition basically gets to hand-pick the constitutional judges—the political interference in the Constitution and our democracy is as obvious as day, and it's definitely not how things work in most other countries in the European Union. One massive problem just keeps dragging another one behind it... Without a totally independent judiciary, you just can't have a true nation governed by law in America, and that's just a fact.

So, back to the healthcare stuff. We're dealing with an overleveraged State, a State where the Secretary of the Treasury is practically rubbing his hands together while we pile on more debt through bonds in America, a State without a real industrial base, and without that, there's no money flowing into the treasury because while he was busy pushing "small business growth," they were suspiciously selling off or gutting major factories... basically, the State has zero income coming in, so the only solution our politicians see is taking on even more debt just to "patch the holes" temporarily. And then you throw healthcare into this mix, which is this massive machine involving private insurance, public coverage, a mountain of employees (and nobody can even fire doctors because there's already such a shortage), and huge pharmaceutical companies... and now... who is actually listening to what the people need regarding healthcare when we can barely afford basic survival and pensions? Personally, I don't think things are going to move in a positive direction anytime soon (sadly...) because health versus the healthcare system is what defines the well-being of any nation...

Sometimes I really wonder why I even bother stressing over this stuff when nothing ever seems to get better, and honestly, it feels worse than ever. But unfortunately for me, since I'm actually a medical student and I have a pretty clear picture of what my future career is going to look like, I can't just look the other way when it comes to social issues. I still believe in humanity, but I really wish it wasn't just expressed through the kindness of individual doctors (again—sadly—just individuals) but through the entire system itself... though I guess that's just my little utopia...

Once you graduate and get swallowed up by the machine, that utopia disappears pretty fast—though maybe you'll be the exception to the rule.

A quick thought on this whole transition toward socialized healthcare here in the States.
Just imagine if, as a nation, we had spent twenty years operating under a purely private healthcare model instead of a social one. Instead of dumping, say, $30 billion annually into the system, we only allocated what was strictly necessary to maintain basic functions—maybe just a billion or whatever the actual math dictates. We're talking about potentially saving hundreds of billions over two decades (adjust the numbers for accuracy, but you get the point).

Now, if we took those massive savings, pumped them directly into entrepreneurship, boosted production, and skyrocketed our GDP, we could eventually become a nation running at a massive surplus. If, after twenty years of dominance, we decided to pivot back to a socialized healthcare model, maybe we could actually pull it off? But there's a catch—that "success" would have been paid for with countless lives lost during those twenty years. The US did it—well, if we hadn't pushed for socialized healthcare from the start, who knows what kind of global power we'd be today? Maybe we wouldn't even be in the top five.

mistyjackal842 said:Isn't it just obvious that the healthcare system in Canada is better than ours? This guy wasn't even born in Canada. He spent a huge chunk of his life living here in the States and was covered by insurance, so... I guess he actually has some ground to stand on when making that comparison. Around here, it feels like hospital equipment is constantly breaking down. And even if you have supplemental insurance that you pay for out of your own pocket, if a machine is busted and they have no clue when it’ll be fixed, you’re stuck paying for a private scan yourself. I know about how Medicare handles cost reimbursements, but from what I've heard, even at places like Medikol, if you try to go in with a referral for an MRI, you could be waiting months—even if you're paying for that extra coverage. But, if you just pay for the full exam upfront without a referral, you can sometimes get it done within the same week. I haven't had to deal with that personally, but I've heard it from people who've booked appointments at Medikol. I suspect the same probably goes for other private clinics that take Medicare.

Look, there is a perfectly logical explanation for this. Here is the simplest way to look at it—and honestly, this applies to pretty much any diagnostic test or surgical procedure.

Let’s say a specific surgery or scan costs $33 (I'm making up this number just to make the math easy). If the government were to cover five of those procedures a day, it would cost the state $167. If they covered ten, it would cost 1000, and so on...
If the budget for this year is, let's say, 10 $0.00, that means they can only afford to cover 100 total procedures because that is all the money there is. Those 100 slots have to be spread out over 12 months, which works out to about 8 procedures a month.

Even if the facilities actually have the capacity to handle 20 procedures a day, they can't do it—because there isn't anyone to pick up the tab. It's that simple. It’s pure economics. At the end of the day, it always comes down to the money.

Look, I can't sit here and lecture anyone about how the healthcare system works in Canada—I haven't been there, I haven't done the deep dive research, I just don't know.
But if we make a logical assumption that it’s better than what we have here, then let's also make a logical assumption that they either allocate way more money to healthcare than our government does—whether through individual out-of-pocket costs or state funding at the expense of someone else—or maybe they operate on a principle where patients can't just demand whatever tests they want. Maybe tests are only performed based on strict medical necessity, and doctors who just churn out referrals without any actual medical justification get slapped with penalties.
That right there is one way you could save a massive amount of money. Sure, patients would be pissed off at first because they'd think we're just ripping them off, but wouldn't that eventually lead to a much more functional, cost-effective system with way fewer mistakes and oversights?

mistyjackal842 said:So, why isn't the care in Canada considered worse than it is here in the States? I mean, I haven't heard people complaining much about it. I actually had the chance to chat with an American who lived and worked in Canada for many years. I didn't even prompt him; he just started telling me how top-tier their healthcare services really are. He was in a serious car accident once, and he told me that the level of quality care he received there after the crash... well, I guess he wouldn't have seen anything like that back home in the US.

Look, those are just anecdotes—hearsay, really. They aren't actual, measurable indicators of medical service quality.
The guy didn't experience a car accident here, nor did he receive any kind of emergency assistance in that specific way locally, so how can he possibly compare "what if" scenarios? It's pure speculation.
Again, let me be clear: I have absolutely no idea how the Canadian system actually operates—how much people pay into it, what's included in the coverage, what isn't, or even which specific groups are covered by insurance and which aren't...

mistyjackal842 said:I honestly feel it’s completely wrong to scrap free supplemental insurance for people who are unemployed. My unemployment benefits, which I was entitled to for six months, have already run out. So, why should I be expected to pay for supplemental coverage out of my own pocket when I have zero income? I live with my parents, and since they’re retired, they’re already struggling with massive utility bills. They don't cover my medical costs, either. I had to pay for my own dental crowns—something neither standard social security nor supplemental insurance even touches. I’ve been paying for private checkups myself, both last year and this year. Even when I was referred to the hospital, I used my official referrals, but it’s pretty obvious you can't get everything done through the standard system. I even dealt with my primary care doctor constantly messing up the codes on my referrals; it happened more than once, so I had to keep going back just to get them fixed.

I just don't understand how they can't see that most of us aren't unemployed because of our own fault. If someone isn't even bothering to look for work, then sure, let them pay for their own supplemental insurance. It's like what Milinovic said—if a woman has a wealthy husband, he should just cover it. But should those of us who have been searching for jobs for months be penalized by having our supplemental coverage cut? When I actually had a job, I paid for my own supplemental coverage, and I think that’s perfectly fair. But for the unemployed, the supplemental insurance really should stay free. Not all of us have wealthy husbands, despite what Milinovic suggests. Besides, my parents aren't legally required to support me since I'm an adult.

Look, personally, I don't think anyone should even be paying for supplemental coverage—at least not in the way it's set up currently.

The absolute basics of medical care ought to be free for everyone, period. All emergency screenings and tests should be treated equally regardless of who you are. Everything else? That's on you. Whether people want to grab extra coverage, opt for add-ons, or just pay the bill directly for a specific service—whatever works for them—that should be their choice. If you want the bells and whistles, fine, pay for them. But the essentials shouldn't be a luxury.

I can't really draw any fair comparisons between Canada and Cuba because, frankly, I don't know the first thing about how their systems actually function.

But, if we're absolutely forced to make some kind of comparison—and I think we should—I’d say we share way more common ground with Cuba than we ever would with Canada, at least when you look strictly at the financial side of things.

@ mistyjackal842

They haven't exactly proven themselves when it comes to helping people without insurance—it really just boils down to whether some individual feels like being kind or not. So, sometimes they step up, and other times? They just let people die. It’s that simple.

If—and that’s a huge "if"—this healthcare reform currently gaining momentum in the US actually goes through, it’s going to tank their standard of care whether they like it or not. There are way too many moving parts to lay it all out clearly, but I can give you a rough idea: once everyone is covered, the government is going to be on the hook for paying for certain services. And because the government always wants to find the cheapest way out of any deal, they won't want to pay private providers—those guys are too expensive. Instead, the state will start churning out its own doctors or importing them to work for the public sector. These state-employed doctors will end up getting paid way less than anyone in the private sector, and as a direct result, the quality of care in public hospitals will plummet compared to private ones. Naturally, every talented, high-quality doctor will just jump ship to the private sector. When you look at the big picture, overall healthcare services are going to get worse. In the current system, you have both provided and unprovided services—but since those without insurance don't even enter the equation, the "unprovided" services aren't even factored into the quality assessment...
If I keep going, I’m just going to start tripping over my own words.

@ ruggedscout91

Take one of those grandmothers who ends up hospitalized about 20 times over just two or three years—someone who’s been poked and prodded in various clinics maybe 30 or 40 times in that same short window—and get this: she spent her entire life as a homemaker, never having contributed a single cent to the national budget.

So, you feel for her, right? We all do. But at the end of the day, someone has to foot the bill. In the US, an elderly woman in that position wouldn't even get a basic checkup if she couldn't pay out of pocket, so now you’re stuck with a choice—except you aren't really choosing anything, because no political party in this country actually advocates for an Americanized system like that.
That $400 $0.00 amount starts looking very easy to spend when you finally hit those years and find yourself in that same grandmotherly position.
Whether or not you should be paying for someone else? I’ll leave that for you to decide.
Given what I know about how much life can throw at you—and knowing that most people wouldn't be able to cover their own medical bills if they actually needed them—even though I personally hate paying for others, I wouldn't dare switch to the US healthcare system. In that setup, you lose everything you've worked for, and sometimes, you lose your mind even faster.

Jason Nelson64 said:My experience with the US healthcare system has been nothing short of tragic. At 16, I was diagnosed with a prolactinoma—a pituitary adenoma. To confirm the diagnosis from my gynecologist, who refused to jump to conclusions without exploring every possibility, we needed an MRI of the pituitary gland immediately. My blood work showed positive results for sex hormones and a tenfold increase in prolactin levels. We needed that scan right away so I could start treatment and prevent long-term consequences. However, when we called the General Hospital, they told us to call back in a month just to schedule an appointment. I called back a month later, only to be told I might get a slot in November. When I first scheduled, they were telling me FEBRUARY!!! I was stunned, completely in shock at how long I’d have to wait for a diagnostic test that was absolutely essential for starting my therapy. I had no choice but to go private, and it cost me over $667. It turns out the General Hospital shares one of its two MRI machines with a private clinic, which uses it every afternoon from 2 PM to 8 PM, while the public hospital only gets access for four hours in the morning from 8 AM to 12 PM!!! What kind of absurdity is that? A state-run hospital and a private clinic sharing the same equipment, where you wait nine months in the public sector, but if you pay up, you can use that exact same machine within a week!!! I recently read a story about a woman in the same situation; she had to wait months at the General Hospital, whereas the private clinic could see her immediately if she paid. She somehow managed to beg the private clinic to see her for free because she couldn't afford it. But did anyone ask if my family had an extra $667 lying around for this scan??? Of course they found the money; anything for my health.
The second thing eating at me is that our glorious American bureaucracy won't fund medications that aren't on their approved list. The only one that *is* on the list is intolerable and causes severe side effects. During a clinical trial for a different medication, I actually fainted before they could discharge me. The drug dropped my blood pressure so low they couldn't even get a reading, and I had to receive a 2-liter IV infusion. They could barely find a vein to administer it. Despite all that, the department head refused to approve funding for an alternative medication. His logic? "You're young, you'll get used to it eventually." But I have to take this medication for the REST OF MY LIFE, just in varying doses!!! So, for four years now, I've been paying for it myself and importing it from abroad. In the meantime, my doctor moved from public practice to a private practice, and naturally, I followed him because he knows my case better than anyone and can finally give me his full attention. But that costs money, obviously. It’s depressing that if you want quality care, you have to pay extra for it. It’s also heartbreaking how they treat children; there should at least be some concern for them, if not for anyone else. Before I started treatment, I was just a typical 15-year-old who hadn't had a period in a year, and people kept telling me it was normal for my age to have an irregular cycle. It wasn't until they realized it wasn't going to fix itself that I saw a gynecologist, who figured everything out. But those who were supposed to ensure I received proper treatment once the diagnosis was confirmed failed me through sheer negligence, indifference, and total apathy.

I wouldn't call it an absurdity. Look, the block from 8 to 12 is funded by the State, while the other shift is paid for out of your own pocket. Honestly, the State should have enough surplus cash to pay for the staff and the upkeep to run it in the afternoons too. It’s basic logic, really—but unfortunately, most people willfully ignore it because we're still stuck with that old socialist mindset where we've been conditioned to expect everything for nothing, or at least for next to nothing....
And honestly, arguing about the MRI machine itself is a moot point; those things are delicate pieces of tech. The more you run them, the faster they break down, and let's be real, these aren't cheap machines to replace.

Jason Nelson64 said:My experience with the US healthcare system has been nothing short of tragic. At 16, I was diagnosed with a prolactinoma—a pituitary adenoma. To confirm the diagnosis from my gynecologist, who refused to jump to conclusions without exploring every possibility, we needed an MRI of the pituitary gland immediately. My blood work showed positive results for sex hormones and a tenfold increase in prolactin levels. We needed that scan right away so I could start treatment and prevent long-term consequences. However, when we called the General Hospital, they told us to call back in a month just to schedule an appointment. I called back a month later, only to be told I might get a slot in November. When I first scheduled, they were telling me FEBRUARY!!! I was stunned, completely in shock at how long I’d have to wait for a diagnostic test that was absolutely essential for starting my therapy. I had no choice but to go private, and it cost me over $667. It turns out the General Hospital shares one of its two MRI machines with a private clinic, which uses it every afternoon from 2 PM to 8 PM, while the public hospital only gets access for four hours in the morning from 8 AM to 12 PM!!! What kind of absurdity is that? A state-run hospital and a private clinic sharing the same equipment, where you wait nine months in the public sector, but if you pay up, you can use that exact same machine within a week!!! I recently read a story about a woman in the same situation; she had to wait months at the General Hospital, whereas the private clinic could see her immediately if she paid. She somehow managed to beg the private clinic to see her for free because she couldn't afford it. But did anyone ask if my family had an extra $667 lying around for this scan??? Of course they found the money; anything for my health.
The second thing eating at me is that our glorious American bureaucracy won't fund medications that aren't on their approved list. The only one that *is* on the list is intolerable and causes severe side effects. During a clinical trial for a different medication, I actually fainted before they could discharge me. The drug dropped my blood pressure so low they couldn't even get a reading, and I had to receive a 2-liter IV infusion. They could barely find a vein to administer it. Despite all that, the department head refused to approve funding for an alternative medication. His logic? "You're young, you'll get used to it eventually." But I have to take this medication for the REST OF MY LIFE, just in varying doses!!! So, for four years now, I've been paying for it myself and importing it from abroad. In the meantime, my doctor moved from public practice to a private practice, and naturally, I followed him because he knows my case better than anyone and can finally give me his full attention. But that costs money, obviously. It’s depressing that if you want quality care, you have to pay extra for it. It’s also heartbreaking how they treat children; there should at least be some concern for them, if not for anyone else. Before I started treatment, I was just a typical 15-year-old who hadn't had a period in a year, and people kept telling me it was normal for my age to have an irregular cycle. It wasn't until they realized it wasn't going to fix itself that I saw a gynecologist, who figured everything out. But those who were supposed to ensure I received proper treatment once the diagnosis was confirmed failed me through sheer negligence, indifference, and total apathy.

That isn't "sad"—that's called capitalism. As far as I know, if you want a better TV, you pay more than you would for a crappy one, just like pretty much everything else in life.

The bottom line is that money makes the world go 'round, and healthcare isn't some exception to that rule (and I'm not even talking about bribery or corruption here). You invest heavily, you get a lot back, and vice versa.