United Healthcare CEO murder.....

[pinkytoe]

These systems are all related - eat unhealthy food, get chronic disease and then try to deal with even greedier health insurance companies. I guess we are all complicit as we close our eyes ad don't demand better. I do feel though for the sons of of the CEO. Having your Dad murdered is a tough one.

[LDAHL]

What's your take? I myself have foresaw such since the mid 80's and am amazed that it took so long to happen.

And no, it's not right. But then again neither is illegally denying patient claims to boost share price/executive bonuses. Perhaps this murder will prevent a few innocent policyholder deaths via illegal denial of claims for corporate profit?

A. We can hope, no?

B. The United States really HAS sunk to this. It warms my heart to see more people seeing this! Rob

Sunk to what? Seeing the bright side to murder?

So you think it’s a good idea to butcher the occasional CEO to encourage the others? Would the same logic apply to teachers who send functional illiterates out into the world or grocers who sell wilted lettuce?

[early morning]

The gross profiteering involved in healthcare is insane and immoral.

Agreed. While I don't condone the killing, I have to admit that part of me thinks "wow, it couldn't have happened to a bigwig of a better industry". Honestly, I can muster very little sympathy for him. For his kids, I feel very badly. Losing a father at a young age has to be a terrible thing. But, I know other fathers, and other people's beloved children, who were lost due to the lack of compassion in the profit driven healthcare system. So there is that. And I wonder - is this the cause that will force a reckoning of our insane economic divide? Is this the issue that will being JQ Public into the streets, and behind the barricades? Reading responses to this story, I have to say I'm a bit surprised by the apparent deep seated resentment towards our health"care" system. This could be a tempest in a teapot, or a real turning point. Who knows?

[bae]

My daughter points out to me that this sort of thing doesn’t seem to happen to the executives who run the NHS in the UK, even though the NHS does engage in rationing behaviour.

[Rogar]

I might have to read the book that was supposedly an inspiration, or at least get some sort of valid summary, to understand the motivation. My end of career employer used UHC as their health insurance carrier and the feed back I heard from fellow workers was complimentary. Maybe that changes for older people with more serious and common ailments. Once I was asked to change from name brand medication to generic. At least a couple doctors I've talked with have complained about compensation and cost to self-insure outside of employment seems excessive, but has little to do with denied procedures or treatments? I don't question that the health care system is broken, but denying coverage for a medical condition that should or could have been covered by insurance is not something I know much about.

The new regime will not doubt offer some changes to the system, for better or worse.

[catherine]

It's not just the heathcare insurers. It's a dance among the pharmaceutical companies, insurers and pharmacy benefit managers and the physician. New branded products are often a fortune, so the insurers don't just approve them until cheaper drugs have been tried and had limited effect. And it's true that they will deny treatment if they think it's too expensive unless the doctor appeals. But the whole process is so time-consuming and costly for the doctors, who typically have staff whose sole job is to go back and forth with the insurance company, that they give up and prescribe an alternative.

Plus, time is money in the hospital, so that's a whole other matter. Have you read how insurance companies are going to limit the amount of time that anesthesia is used in the OR? At least one group of anesthesiologists is protesting.

It's OK to have gatekeepers, but while many insurers do have medical degrees, they have to think like businessmen, not clinicians. Insurance companies are typically less restrictive in areas like oncology and mental health, but they still make the majority of their decisions on the basis of cost.

[iris lilies]

Direct care, physicians cut out some of that dance with insurance companies.

Catherine, that reminds me, at my holiday lunch with some garden club ladies I polled five separate women and asked if their doctors do a blood test annually and they each one of them said yes, each with a different physician. I cannot understand why your physician does not order a basic blood test.

[Rogar]

I'm sure all of that is true. I just get some different messages from experiences. Both my primary physician and a routine specialist have complained about the insurance allowances do not allow them to cover overhead, insurance, plus a fair wage. If the insurance companies are making huge profits, where can I buy stock like to buy stock. I had a casual discussion with my primary care doctor recent about insurance coverage for the popular weigh loss drugs. He said it varied, but commonly insurance would ask for some sort of verification from the doctor that the patient had been recommended to pursue diet and exercise as a first line of treatment. If they covered it at all. How many people would rather just take a drug first? Denied/ I've actually been employed in an R+D drug enterprise, and the cost of getting approval is enormous and private companies are entitled to be compensated.

I'm not specifically arguing, but it's just not all that simple to me.

[catherine]

No, it's not simple. That's the problem.

[iris lilies]

I'm sure all of that is true. I just get some different messages from experiences. Both my primary physician and a routine specialist have complained about the insurance allowances do not allow them to cover overhead, insurance, plus a fair wage. If the insurance companies are making huge profits, where can I buy stock like to buy stock. I had a casual discussion with my primary care doctor recent about insurance coverage for the popular weigh loss drugs. He said it varied, but commonly insurance would ask for some sort of verification from the doctor that the patient had been recommended to pursue diet and exercise as a first line of treatment. If they covered it at all. How many people would rather just take a drug first? Denied/ I've actually been employed in an R+D drug enterprise, and the cost of getting approval is enormous and private companies are entitled to be compensated.

I'm not specifically arguing, but it's just not all that simple to me.

Let us not forget that Obamacare put in the place of stipulation that health insurance companies could only make X amount of profit survey have to return any money above that.