• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    There’s two sides to this coin. On the one end, you have insurance companies refusing to pay for anything because the modern industry is just six scams in a trench coat.

    But on the other, you have doctor’s offices where the physician literally leases an MRI machine to the tune of several million dollars and then has to run a certain number of patients through the scanner every year or lose money. That’s because the MRI patent is held by GE and they can charge 10-100x markups on hardware that is fundamental to modern medicine.

    Its the same with diabetes treatments. Insurance companies will try and refuse service or kick people off their policies if they are at risk. But then pharmacy companies will sell $3 of insulin for $75, then kickback a chunk of the balance to judicial/congressional bribes in order to guarantee the cash flow.

    At some level, the only insurance companies that can survive in such a market are the ones that say “No!” to everything. The even-remotely-ethical firms just get fleeced by the for-profit industry until they get bought out or go bankrupt. That, or you’re Medicare/Medicaid and you have an infinite wallet backstopped by the US Treasury. You don’t care if you’re paying multiples of whatever any other clinic anywhere else in the world would charge on an enormous population of poor and elderly patients, because you have an unlimited money cannon to mow it all down with.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Shouldn’t that patent have expired by now?

      This kind of thing is why it bothers me when people complain about “free market medicine”.

      A market where only one entity is allowed to build MRI machines, or license the tech to others to build, is not a free market. That’s a government-enforced monopoly.

      Even the fact that a patient can’t just go get their own MRI at Scans-R-Us, but needs to get a doctor’s referral first, is a huge departure from what an actually free market for medicine would look like.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Shouldn’t that patent have expired by now?

        It’s an evolving technology. We get new patents with every iteration.

        A market where only one entity is allowed to build MRI machines, or license the tech to others to build, is not a free market.

        If you spend a few years in Business School getting your MBA, you get an earful about how and why patent law exists. The core argument is that private investment is predicated on returns and we can’t have nice things unless we have men with guns come for the property and freedom of anyone who “steals an idea”.

        But more practically, this shit is just a racket. Lots of lobbyist money changes hands to make sure the decks at the casino are properly stacked. Medical treatment is just another opportunity to apply leverage through debt to control other people.

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          I understand the value of a patent system, but patents should expire.

          Is there some reason why previous-generation technology, like the tech being used for MRIs in the 90s, can’t be used to manufacture more competitively-priced machines?

          Like, is there a law specifying that the new technology must be used for an MRI to be usable as a diagnostic tool?