Heart Surgery In India For $1,583 Costs $106,385 In U.s.

[Sancho Panza]

Bloomberg 28/7/13

'Devi Shetty is obsessed with making heart surgery affordable for millions of Indians. On his office desk are photographs of two of his heroes: Mother Teresa and Mahatma Gandhi.

Shetty is not a public health official motivated by charity. He’s a heart surgeon turned businessman who has started a chain of 21 medical centers around India. By trimming costs with such measures as buying cheaper scrubs and spurning air-conditioning, he has cut the price of artery-clearing coronary bypass surgery to 95,000 rupees ($1,583), half of what it was 20 years ago, and wants to get the price down to $800 within a decade. The same procedure costs $106,385 at Ohio’s Cleveland Clinic, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. '

Mish Shedlock 25/4/11

'Take a good look at those emails and ponder the massive waste in our healthcare system, especially Medicare and Medicaid.

If government needs to be involved at all, the goal should be to provide healthcare at reasonable costs to taxpayers or patients. The only way to do that is increase competition.

Instead, the system is geared toward reducing competition as described by Dr. Schmitt, and also by absurdities like Nancy Pelosi's statement "We have to pass the health care bill to see what's in it."'

I realise it's not fashionable these days to point out these issues especially if there's any critiscism,implied or explicit of the NHS.However,it seems a mathematical certainty that we'll need to have an honest conversation about healthcare within a generation.

Edited July 29, 2013 by Sancho Panza

[interestrateripoff]

Nancy Pelosi's statement "We have to pass the health care bill to see what's in it."'

With such insight like that the world is in safe hands.

One of the problems with US health costs is litigation. It's why drugs costs are so high, they have to cover the cost of potential future litigation if side effects are discovered. Whilst over there recently there I saw a legal firm trawling for clients for a class action lawsuit over diabetes drugs, I think it was saying they had helped cause cancer or heart problems can't recall exactly what.

Remember with costs going up it's all adding to GDP... We can't have people like this cutting costs, next he'll be advertising in the US punters.

[LiveinHope]

Take a good look at those emails and ponder the massive waste in our healthcare system, especially Medicare and Medicaid.

I figured it was a good time to shrug.

I love fly fishing and have had a lot in Alaska on the best river in the world so I built a house and live up north fishing, skiing, kayaking, and reading. It is sad because most doctors know the system doesn't work and are very frustrated. They don't dare do anything to try to fix it because of the things that have happened to me and many other creative docs who are also shrugging.

The system is making a lot of 'givers' shrug, and go fly fishing

[richc]

With such insight like that the world is in safe hands.

One of the problems with US health costs is litigation. It's why drugs costs are so high, they have to cover the cost of potential future litigation if side effects are discovered. Whilst over there recently there I saw a legal firm trawling for clients for a class action lawsuit over diabetes drugs, I think it was saying they had helped cause cancer or heart problems can't recall exactly what.

Remember with costs going up it's all adding to GDP... We can't have people like this cutting costs, next he'll be advertising in the US punters.

Has nothing to do with American pharma companies spending more on marketing than R&D (and far, far more than on any legal settlements)?

Litigation is a problem, but it's not THE problem in US healthcare. How exactly does the spending of billions on advertising prescription drugs on television improve medical outcomes?

[R K]

Within a generation the boomers will all be dead.

It's a wonderfully self-resolving system.

[interestrateripoff]

Has nothing to do with American pharma companies spending more on marketing than R&D (and far, far more than on any legal settlements)?

Litigation is a problem, but it's not THE problem in US healthcare. How exactly does the spending of billions on advertising prescription drugs on television improve medical outcomes?

It's all linked together.

Had to say I was impressed all the TV ads I saw promoting popping a pill for healthier living. Saw one promoting a pill to help maintain eyesight.

[Bloo Loo]

With such insight like that the world is in safe hands.

One of the problems with US health costs is litigation. It's why drugs costs are so high, they have to cover the cost of potential future litigation if side effects are discovered. Whilst over there recently there I saw a legal firm trawling for clients for a class action lawsuit over diabetes drugs, I think it was saying they had helped cause cancer or heart problems can't recall exactly what.

Remember with costs going up it's all adding to GDP... We can't have people like this cutting costs, next he'll be advertising in the US punters.

drugs are exempt from litigation if the drugs are passed by the DPA.

http://www.whiteoutpress.com/articles/q32013/supreme-court-rules-drug-companies-exempt-from-lawsuits/

Edited July 29, 2013 by Bloo Loo

[ChumpusRex]

drugs are exempt from litigation if the drugs are passed by the DPA.

Not correct. The US supreme Court ruling is a strange one:

Generic "copycat" drugs are exempt provided that the generic manufacturer complies with FDA rules on what side effects should be declared.

The "original" manufacturer that originally did the R&D is not exempt, and can be sued for unwanted side effects regardless of the FDA license.

[Bloo Loo]

Not correct. The US supreme Court ruling is a strange one:

Generic "copycat" drugs are exempt provided that the generic manufacturer complies with FDA rules on what side effects should be declared.

The "original" manufacturer that originally did the R&D is not exempt, and can be sued for unwanted side effects regardless of the FDA license.

FDA...of course...The American medical Industry is a total mess. Obamacare is going to finish the US off, what with big firms being exempt and small firms having to cut hours of staff to avoid the thing...I read that even the Obamacare helpline is using mainly parttimers to avoid the same costs.

what a mess...Country with no money pretends its rich.

[Bloo Loo]

It's all linked together.

Had to say I was impressed all the TV ads I saw promoting popping a pill for healthier living. Saw one promoting a pill to help maintain eyesight.

ah...THAT pill, its called the Jumbo Mortgage Pop...allows one to get on with ones life.

[eejit]

It costs about £16k in the UK. but i think that is average, so some might cost a lot more if recovery doesn't go well.

[Riedquat]

Cheap in India? Well, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom was on TV the other day, hope that doesn't explain it.

[ChumpusRex]

Healthcare in India is extremely variable. Be very careful where you choose. This is advice given to me by several Indian doctors who all left India, because the healthcare system in India is so sick, that they could not bear to work there.

Government healthcare in India is very basic. If someone has a condition which doesn't have a good chance of cure, and they can't pay, they are basically told to go home and die.

Private is better, but it's more ruthless even than in the US. At least in the US, you will get emergency care, and a bill later. In India, it's not unknown for a surgeon to refuse to book an emergency life-saving operation, until he has the cash in hand (or cleared funds).

Counterfeit drugs are rife, and hospitals have been known to cut everything to the bone (even essential safety practices) in order to improve the bottom line.

[alexw]

FDA...of course...The American medical Industry is a total mess. Obamacare is going to finish the US off, what with big firms being exempt and small firms having to cut hours of staff to avoid the thing...I read that even the Obamacare helpline is using mainly parttimers to avoid the same costs.

what a mess...Country with no money pretends its rich.

The issue with the U.S. healthcare system is that healthcare in the private sector seems to function as a series of localized monopolies. When your ill your bargaining power to negotiate a better deal is next to nil, and when trying to protect your health by pre-buying insurance your bargaining power is again next to nil.

So in the U.S. system all the incentive lies in increasing profit as much as possible while there being next to no incentive through market pressures to minimize costs. That results in things like a whole slew of blood-work tests when you have some simple already identified condition, or a CT scan + MRI after getting a black eye (yes that actually happened).

The U.S. gov did try and implement direct cost saving measures in obamacare. For example when it was first proposed it was supposed to work as a mixed public-private single payer system such as operates in canada. Of course the medical and insurance industries spent boatloads of money to make sure obamacare ended up as expensive (and so as profitable) as possible.

[scepticus]

Within a generation the boomers will all be dead.

It's a wonderfully self-resolving system.

^This.

BUT:

As long as all the knowledge about performing heart surgery, building complex analogue electronics, finding new oil reserves etc, is all passed on and not lost.

As long as the dead-boomer wealth is not concentrated via inheritance into a new aristocracy which then ossifies as a result of declining liquidity and transaction volumes to produce a new feudal system.

While it might be nice to think of boomer die off as a mean reverting process, we should note that long run history is path-dependant and does not tend to mean-revert - it takes a random walk in the short run but over the long run it does not repeat.