I remember when I was a kid, doctors were so interactive and really took time to get to know you and talk to you, learn about what you’re going through and explain things. Now as an adult, it’s been nearly impossible to find a doctor who is willing to take any amount of time to sit down, explain things, show any sort of compassion or empathy at all.

I suffer from acid reflux, and in order to diagnose that, they basically put a tube down your throat, it’s called an endoscopy. You have to be fully sedated with anesthesia and take nearly an entire day off of work because the way the anesthesia affects you, you can’t drive and someone has to drive you. Well for many years now we’ve had this other procedure which is a tube, but they put it through your nose instead. There’s been lots of research papers about the use of it, it’s used in other countries as a procedure regularly. So I asked several gastroenterologists if they offer the procedure and every single one of them said no, and would not provide any additional information or insight as to why you have to be completely sedated and pay thousands upon thousands of dollars for expensive anesthesia. I am simply blown away. It makes no sense. A research tested method that has been written about for about a decade now in actual research studies by board certified medical physicians, and no one offers it. Literally no one, and they won’t even consider it.

I’ve also been through at least several primary care physicians because the ones I have seen are so short and don’t really take time to get to know you at all. They just pop in, ask you a handful of questions and leave, if your test results come back with anything abnormal, they say it’s nothing to worry about, they don’t want to take any extra time to help look into anything or diagnose you… like wtf?

It just seems like doctors these days are out to get you to spend as much money as possible and do the absolute bare minimum for you in return. And now we have direct primary care options where you can circumvent insurance entirely, pay your doctor thousands upon thousands of dollars a year for the same level of care that we had in the '90s. But now you have to pay out of pocket for that in addition to your insurance. Wtfffff

  • harsh3466@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Capitalism.

    Healthcare and insurance are for profit industries and the corporations running the healthcare and insurance business don’t give a fuck about the health of the patients. They want all the monies and want to move patients through as quickly and cheaply as possible to maximize their profits.

    • bluGill@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      What the US has isn’t free market capitalism. It is capitalism but with government imposed rules that are harmful to the common person. Your insurance depends your employer and you don’t get a reasonable choice - they put in $1000/month that if you go elsewhere you lose that. Of course what your employer wants and what you want are different. Your employer wants the lowest costs for something expensive, and they want you to not quit until they are ready to get rid of you. You want some service with that insurance, but you are not a player with power so you don’t get that.

      • harsh3466@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s not pure capitalism, but it’s definitely crony capitalism. Us plebs get fucked either way.

        • bluGill@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I feel compelled to point that out though as government provided health care is not the only possible solution, and I’m in the group that would oppose that. However I have provided a better alternative: eliminate the deductions for employer provided insurance. (I think the above about other benefits jobs provide - I should be comparing paycheck not “fringe benefits”.

          • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            This might be better for wealthy people but it’s hard to see how this would benefit the very poorest who are in most need of health care. What does this solution do for them?

            • bluGill@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Only a tiny minority who mostly don’t have jobs and thus no insurance and so we already need to do something different. For the middle class this is better.

              • Random123@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Thats BS theres plenty of lower class who have jobs and get shit insurance. I shouldnt have to say this…

                But sure the middle class is more important

                • bluGill@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  The middle class is much larger. Not ignoring the plight of them, but don’t force something subpar on me just for a small percetage. With several hundred americans there are a lot of poor but still a tiny percentage

                  • Random123@fedia.io
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Please tell me your sources because a quick google search will indicate that the lower class is not considered a “small percentage”

              • Grunt4019@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                What about contracting a terminal illness like cancer where you might not be able to work. You need a job to keep your healthcare but if an illness or disability that you have or get at some point stops you from working and you need to pay for that healthcare, what do you do?

                • bluGill@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I think insurance should cover you for all current conditions for life even if you otherwise switch insurance for new issues

          • harsh3466@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            The profit motive needs to be removed from healthcare, or patients will continue to get fucked.

            Healthcare needs to be separated from employment, and the profit motive needs to be removed from healthcare.

            Should the government run it? Maybe not, but what’s the alternative? It’s like every election. Choosing one of two bad choices and hoping you choose the less bad.

            And in the case of healthcare, I’ll take government run, profit free, tax funded healthcare over what we have now.

            Edit: autocorrect error.

            • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Non profit, non vertically integrated healthcare. Letting the insurance companies “partner” with the pharmacies and hospitals is monopolistic or at best duopolistic in some markets. And it lets them charge whatever or threaten to leave a community. Which has happened repeatedly in my area. Then the biggest hospital in the area buys up another small one and the costs go up again.

          • harsh3466@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Also, I don’t see how eliminating the deductions helps. And I don’t mean that in a snarky way. I’m genuinely asking how that would make the situation better.

            • bluGill@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              When companies pay me more if I don’t take their insurance I have an option to choose something better. Right now I have no optioniso nobody cares to serve me.

      • Random123@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        The policies out in place by healthcare and hospitals arent forced by government… these policies are by the companies so its not even about “but da gubnent is ebil!”

        • bluGill@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          They are the naturatual concequense of the policies put into place. They are not required but they are still the result that should be expected.

    • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      this is such a cliché, short-sighted oversimplification that doesn’t address the root of how individual physicians end up caught in these systems of apathy.

      like yes capitalism is part of the problem but that’s about as useful as saying, why is there climate change? capitalism! like sure, yes, but isn’t there so much more to the story that can inform us on why the systems are the way they are, so that maybe we can address it? or i guess lemmy.ml users already have that answer, just start a global revolution and hope the winners care enough to fix it before all the survivors die of heat stroke dysentery and starvation, easy. capitalism. upvotes to the left.

      • tee900@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        How do people not get so sick of this meme of an answer?

        Its like how every opinion teenagers have is the antithesis of their parents ideology.

        What if a communist doctor withholds execllent care to preserve resources for the motherland?

          • tee900@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Im not convinced alturism seeps from our pores when currency is taken away. I would say its more human nature to claim and horde anything of value, and those who are generous will slowly give up their equity to those who arent generous.

            If the system is changed to force people to be generous or outlaw hording then you would see people with power continuing to do it, as they do now.

            Maybe captialism is just what fits because this is what we are.

      • harsh3466@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Capitalism/the profit motive is how physicians get caught in these systems of apathy. My comment isn’t an over simplification, it is the root cause.

        Is the entirety of the healthcare system incredibly complex? Absolutely, and within that complex system there are all sorts of problems that could be teased out to study and address. None of that will dramatically change the outcome of a system that is designed solely to extract as much profit as it can.

        When profit is the primary goal of a healthcare company (and the legally mandated responsibility of that company if it is publicly traded) the end result is the system we have.

    • placatedmayhem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s exactly this. The policies put in place by “healthcare administrators” (MBAs and such with healthcare flavoring, not people that actually know how to care for people’s health like doctors and nurses) are designed to process the most patience in the least amount of face time possible, so that each doctor and nurse can see more patients per day, meaning more office visit fees, meaning higher profit. My dad calls it the “cattle shoot” and I feel that’s a pretty apt analogy. It’s the same general reason that fast food restaurants and pharmacies and department stores are perpetually understaffed: fewer staff members means lower “overhead” costs.

    • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      This combined with liability. If the patient gets anything even resembling an unsatisfactory result, they’re likely to sue the doctor.

      • Buttflapper@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Honestly, I think this is not true, in my experience at least. I think suing doctors was a feature of the '90s and early 2000s, but now people are so poor they can’t afford lawyers to sue a doctor for them, and medical malpractice runs so rampant that doctors don’t even seem to care at all. Everyone has had a bad running with a doctor, yet you’re very unlikely to hear of someone who has sued a doctor and gotten away with it.