The difference between business and academia

[mrbadger]

There are excemptions for chronic medical condtitions

I have an excemption due to being epileptic. My wife has one for her medical condition.

Not all chronic conditions can get it. certain kinds of Diebetes don't for example, unless they can be determined to not be self inflicted, such by alcohol abuse or obesity. But such kinds can usually be reversed if the sufferer stops drinking or loses weight. They usually don't, so prescriptions aren't free.

Other types, like type 2 diabetes caused by autoimmune disorder just can't be reversed no matter what you do, since it's your own body causing it. Those usually get exceptions, or used to. I think they still do. It's up to the doctor.

[Observe]

Other types, like type 2 diabetes caused by autoimmune disorder just can't be reversed no matter what you do, since it's your own body causing it.

Just for the record, that would be Type 1 diabetes - not Type 2.

[mrbadger]

Other types, like type 2 diabetes caused by autoimmune disorder just can't be reversed no matter what you do, since it's your own body causing it.

Just for the record, that would be Type 1 diabetes - not Type 2.

No, type 2, Type 1 as well, but type 2 can be the result of autoimmune disorders as well. I know, I have a friend with it, a quite thin, very fit frind who has a thyroid issue and was warned years ago they might develop diabetes. and a a couple of years ago they did.

They get quite angry about all the 'you can cure type 2' stuff that's peddled, because it's only true if the type 2 diabetes is self inflicted, and hers wasn't.

If you have one autoimmune disorder you are more likely to develop another apparently.

[Rice]

Type 1 is if the pancreas has been "destroyed"
Type 2 if the body can't work with the Hormon(Insulin) anymore
as a rough summary, both can happen from youth to old age, the mechanism why the body can't work with "sugar" anymore is just a difference.
so both are right to some degree

[mrbadger]

In my friends case, her body is attacking the pancreas and damaging its ability to produce insulin. But not enough to become type 1.

It's not because of being overweight or drinking. The usual modern causes.

[philip_hughes]

[...] We have a cheezy website and everything if you want to look it up. [...]

Important question about the website. Why didn't Aleksey Achkasov and Sebastine Ugbaje get one of those sleek FluroSat shirts for their pictures?

Seb wasn't there for the photo shoot. Alex lives in ukrain- which adds to the difficulty.

@pjknibbs, we are working on converting our excellent healthcare system into something third world. At the moment we are covered, give it some time.

[Usenko]

Incorrect - although there are user-pays elements to our system, basic health care is free to all.

OK, happy to be proven wrong on that one. What "user-pay" elements do you have? In the UK NHS patients usually have to pay for prescriptions and dental treatment, unless they have an exception due to genuinely being too poor to afford it.

GP services are free for the most part. Specialists have the option of bulk-billing patients (i.e. putting them on Medicare) if they believe it necessary, but usually patients who can afford to do so pay some of the fee for a specialist.

Prescriptions are paid for by the patient (with a government subsidy so that all prescriptions are the same price), but there is a "safety net" - If a family accumulates a certain amount of prescription medication in a year, they are able to have the government pay for more of the costs. Dental work is not covered by Medicare (for some screwed up reason), so the patient pays for that.

Complicated and expensive diagnostic tests are paid for by Medicare BUT only if a patient's needs meet a stringent set of criteria. Recently I had an MRI on my knee, and although it was needed and recommended by several doctors, my symptoms did not match the criteria, so I needed to pay for the scan (This doesn't bother me at all; the fee was low and easily within my means to pay).

Medical insurance is paid for by individuals. Generally speaking, if you can afford it, it's a good idea to have medical insurance; if you don't have it, you will still be treated, but non-life-threatening cases can be waiting a long time for surgery or other treatments, and you have little choice regarding doctors or hospitals. Basically if you have health insurance you can move out of the public system and be treated in the private system by the doctor of your choice, in the hospital of your choice and at a time of your choice.

[pjknibbs]

You do pay for a bit more than we do, then, since scans and X-rays are free under the NHS. Prescriptions and dental treatment are also fixed charge, with there being three charge levels for dentistry (one for checkups and the like, one for simple stuff like fillings, and one for more major work like crowns or root canal).

[Usenko]

A little, yes. The basic rule is that Medicare will pay for anything that you can get at a normal hospital (e.g. X-Ray and routine scans like that will be covered by Medicare) but anything more complex you will only get Medicare if you meet stringent requirements; mostly you expect your private health insurance to cover that.

However it needs to be said that people in genuine need will be treated, and you won't be denied services for poverty. Those who can't afford to pay have health services paid for by government.

The government does sometimes hide behind weasel words. "Elective" procedures are often placed on waiting lists, which may be over a year long in extreme cases. This doesn't sound too bad, because it SOUNDS like "elective" means "Procedures you don't really need." The catch is that "Elective" actually means "Procedures you need, but won't die without."

I am old enough to remember the system before Medicare came in. I have to say that whilst Medicare is a pretty good system, there are aspects of it that were better previously. One big problem is that the government has, since the introduction of Medicare in the 1980s, paid for both hospitals and doctors from the one pool of money[1], meaning we have lost quite a number of hospitals.

The bottom line is that there was simply not as much money allocated to the system as there should have been, and it continues to get short-changed here and there[2]. Partly this is because of the relatively small taxpayer population in Australia (despite a high per-capita income, it is difficult to allocate enough government money to pay for a lot of things, including the health system), but also government mismanagement over a long period.

[1] Previously, under the "honorary" system, specialist doctors worked for free in public hospitals, in exchange for the right to use public facilities for private patients - this meant that the government received a lot of medical care without paying for it, which was good for the system; doctors liked it too, because it meant that they could get access to top-class facilities (the Aussie government has always equipped good hospitals), in exchange for some pro-bono work.

[2] I know - government short-changing things! It's hard to believe . .