Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

G_j

(40,367 posts)
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 10:55 AM Jun 2019

50,000% markup for a shot makes the case for a single-payer healthcare system

https://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-california-single-payer-healthcare-20180615-story.html

50,000% markup for a shot makes the case for a single-payer healthcare system


The reality is that California could, and should, serve as a test case for nationwide universal coverage. It wouldn’t be easy because this is uncharted territory, requiring, among other things, congressional support for use of federal healthcare dollars.

But that doesn’t mean it can’t be done, nor does it mean we shouldn’t try just because no other state has had the courage or wherewithal to give it a go.
There are many reasons to take the plunge — making health insurance available to all, reduced costs through more efficient delivery of healthcare, a pioneering spirit upon which the Golden State was founded.

Or we could just focus on Sandra Stubban’s lidocaine injection.


Stanton resident Stubban, 84, recently visited a Fountain Valley pain-management clinic to receive an epidural for back pain. As part of the procedure, she was given a 10-milligram shot of the local anesthetic lidocaine to numb the injection site, the same stuff your dentist uses before giving you what-for.

Stubban shared her bill with me. It shows that the clinic, Pain Medicine Associates, billed her insurer $20 for the lidocaine.

..more..
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

fescuerescue

(4,448 posts)
2. That's not a very good case to make that point.
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 11:02 AM
Jun 2019

There are tons of better ones.

I have to believe that the doctors time was worth more than 4 cents. Or barring that, I can't imagine any company that would bother to ship a medicine that earns them a gross of 4 cents, with a profit margin of maybe 2 cents. Instead they would just exit that business and then no one would have that medicine.

In fact, using this would in theory make a better case that healthcare cost should rise. We know that's wrong however and that's why the author point, while accurate is using a bad case study to make it.

 

mr_lebowski

(33,643 posts)
6. Do we know that includes the cost of administration? If so I tend to agree w/you ...
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 12:19 PM
Jun 2019

BUT ... if it's $20 for JUST for the dose of lidocaine, it's a bit ridiculous. That'd mean they're charging patients $100 per 50mL bottle. That's absurd, the stuff is dirt cheap and is also sold in MASSIVE quantities worldwide. Probably costs the doctors office $5 at most I'd bet.

Leith

(7,809 posts)
7. 1 - Doctor charges are separate
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 12:19 PM
Jun 2019

2 - Surgery rooms and staff are separately charged
3 - 4 cents is what the insurance company negotiated. It probably came from buying it in bulk and figuring the cost of a single dose

Just about every medical procedure and post care are mandatory a la carte. I know somebody whose spouse recently died after a lengthy hospital stay. That person used to work for the insurance company and had high level contacts who looked into the case and pulled strings on their behalf. The patient had separate insurance for retirees that covered most of it. The surviving spouse was still driven crazy every few days by new mailings and phone calls to get it all sorted out.

This country desperately needs an overhaul of our medical system.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
3. One more extremist justice and this will be moot for at least a generation.
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 11:03 AM
Jun 2019

In fact, it may already be moot with the current conservative majority and we don't know it yet. Various cases are headed for the high court right now.

The people the Republican leadership serve have no intention of allowing single payer if they can stop it, irrelevant whether it would be as the planned extension to the ACA or part of a whole new system. And they intend to destroy the ACA as they've always promised. You know, anti-tax, anti-regulation wealth united with the God's kingdom folk?

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
5. Assuming the insurance company pays anything for the Lidocaine, it will be about $1. The patient
Mon Jun 17, 2019, 11:59 AM
Jun 2019

won't be held responsible for the other $19. In all likelihood, the Lidocaine will be considered included in the payment for the injection.

That's true under Medicare, Medicaid and most insurance plans.

There are other reasons for single-payer, but that is not one of them.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»50,000% markup for a shot...