Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by gpvos on Friday April 13, 2018 @05:04AM
(#16828184)
The story goes that in China, doctors used to be paid for keeping you healthy. When you got sick, they didn't get any money anymore. This sounds to me like a system with the proper incentives.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by algo646464 on Friday April 13, 2018 @05:37AM
(#16828351)
Isn't this just like paying insurance premiums ?
Whenever you are sick, the doctor / insurance company loses money curing you.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by gpvos on Friday April 13, 2018 @10:59AM
(#16830569)
It's similar, but it wouldn't be profitable anymore for doctors to prescribe more medicines or other treatments. Probably the doctors would need to take out insurance instead of the patients.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by polskibus on Friday April 13, 2018 @05:29AM
(#16828323)
By that logic, developer should not be paid if there is a bug in the systems. Besides formal methods that is always the case.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by nabla9 on Friday April 13, 2018 @05:41AM
(#16828373)
With subscription model bugs don't generate income.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by Thriptic on Friday April 13, 2018 @09:44AM
(#16829891)
Really? Because then I would just take on young healthy patients and refuse to take on sick ones.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by d0lph on Friday April 13, 2018 @10:00AM
(#16830021)
So you would need to restrict Drs ability to turn people away.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by lotsofpulp on Friday April 13, 2018 @07:04AM
(#16828804)
That sounds like the stupidest idea, unless doctors are given the right and ability to control your activities and diet, and who you breed with or are bred from to avoid genetic defects.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by frockington on Friday April 13, 2018 @11:12AM
(#16830693)
I would just lie and say all of my patients were healthy. This may be even more flawed
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by rectang on Friday April 13, 2018 @07:08AM
(#16828838)
Cute, but problematic when you need palliative care for a chronic condition.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by gpvos on Friday April 13, 2018 @11:03AM
(#16830608)
Yes, once you got a really terminal disease the doctor would probably drop you like a brick. But you could fix that by having a contract from the beginning that says they are still obligated to treat you. Either that, or a separate solution would be needed.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by bilkoo on Friday April 13, 2018 @11:26AM
(#16830860)
Sounds like doctor-as-insurer, financially speaking.
Re:Goldman Sachs questions whether curing patients is a sust...
by cousin_it on Friday April 13, 2018 @05:38AM
(#16828354)
Healthy people are less willing to pay :-(