News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by skuzye on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:08PM (#49333284)
Same here in the UK. If you need to see a specialist, you regularly have to wait months, assuming you can even get a referral in the first place.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by cpuguy83 on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:18PM (#49333478)
The US is not much different. We don't have a wealth of specialists available to see people right away.

I've flat out been rejected from a specialist because they had no availability at all. I actually tried again and got to be seen, but an appointment is months out, always.

Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by otterley on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:11PM (#49333348)
This is frequently true in the USA as well. My provider's dermatology department is pretty backed up and couldn't make me an appointment for an excision until November. Fortunately it's not urgent.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by nxm on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:14PM (#49333405)
Do you have any more evidence than this anecdote - pretty much any specialist is available this week in my area. Did you check ZocDoc?
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by otterley on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:18PM (#49333483)
I'm a Kaiser member, so I have to use their providers. The same restriction would hold for any HMO that has a closed provider list.

You should see how long their surgery departments are backed up!

Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by dpkirchner on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:25PM (#49333607)
Are all of those specialists "in-network"? Have you tried contacting them to see if they truly have availability? It's common for providers (or the insurance carrier), at least in my area, to claim they take new patients when in fact they do not.

(For those not in the know, out of network means costs to the patient are much higher).

Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by ElProlactin on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:28PM (#49333678)
https://healthjournalism.org/blog/2024/08/in-the-u-s-wait-ti...

https://www.chiefhealthcareexecutive.com/view/hoping-to-see-...

ZocDoc isn't reflective of availability as a whole. It has a lot of depth in certain areas, like dentistry, dermatology, and primary care, and less in other specialties. Many of the providers are not physicians, they're NPs and PAs. Perfectly qualified for certain kinds of issues but not others.

ZocDoc is also, obviously, working only with the providers who are willing to pay for new patients, such as newer practices trying to build a patient base. An established practice that is booked out for the next two months obviously isn't going to use such a service.

Finally, you're not considering insurance and continuity of care.

So yeah, in an urban area, you can probably find someone to see you sooner than later if they're in network or you can afford to pay, and you're okay with seeing someone you might never see again or with whom there might not be continuity of care.

Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by slibhb on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:25PM (#49333616)
Anecdotes aside, here's some data:

https://benchmarkcanada.org/Governing_Healthcare-Wait-Times....

The US does far better than the UK and Canada.

Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by otterley on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:28PM (#49333679)
That's AI slop published by a think tank, not to be trusted. It's not primary source data.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by slibhb on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:36PM (#49333802)
I'd love to see some other data. But afaik it's basically not contested that the US has shorter wait times than the UK and Canada
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by otterley on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:39PM (#49333853)
I agree with the main point. The thing is, in the US, wait times are a function of how much you're willing to spend. You can always pay for priority. But most people won't pay more, and the reality is that most healthcare systems have far less provider supply than demand, particularly in dense urban areas where most people live.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by linsomniac on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:34PM (#49333768)
Agreed, it was 2-3 months wait to get to see an ENT for me last year. My daughter's regular eye check identified a problem and it's 3 months to get her into an eye specialist to review it.

Somewhat related: a couple years ago my spouse had cancer, and the doctor could do surgery either 5 days after our insurance was changing companies, or 2 months after that, those were the next two openings. The insurance said that if we proceeded with the surgery, without the new insurance company giving us approval, but they couldn't start approving it until the insurance started, and the pre-approval from the other company didn't give us anything. We finally decided to go ahead with it and take on the risk of ~$70K if it was denied. Which we decided to do rather than my spouse spending a few months worrying. Turned out that was a really good call, because when they did the surgery it turned out that instead of the expected slow growth, it was actually growing extremely fast. That was probably the difference between it being fatal and it being treatable.

The US system is far from smooth.

Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by FireBeyond on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:15PM (#49333436)
Hah, even with "platinum" healthcare in the US, urology referral, 4 months. "You should start PT immediately" after a car accident, "we can see you in 5 months".

"Oh, your septum is deviated ~90% on the right. Surgery? No, first you need to go on these nasal sprays for a few months so we can decide they didn't reshape the cartilage in your nose before your insurance will decide whether they want to "allow"[1] surgery."

[1] Insurers will always say, and have won in court, saying "We don't allow or deny anyone any care they need. We are just saying we won't pay for it."

Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by jayess on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:18PM (#49333489)
I got my urology referral last week and had an appointment this morning...
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by missedthecue on Monday August 17, 2026 @02:27PM (#49335494)
This was my experience too. GP referred me to a gastroenterologist and the appointment they offered was so soon it was almost inconvenient.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by otterley on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:31PM (#49333742)
Lucky you. Maybe they had a last-minute cancellation, or you live in an area in which supply of urologists exceeds demand.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by FireBeyond on Monday August 17, 2026 @03:29PM (#49336374)
Yeah, I think we have a lack in our area. Years ago when I had a kidney stone, the L3 Trauma Center hospital a few minutes from me had to load me up on dilaudid and ship me from their ER across town via ambulance.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by ses1984 on Tuesday August 18, 2026 @11:25AM (#49347084)
It depends on your region, insurance company, and plan.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by BeetleB on Monday August 17, 2026 @12:28PM (#49333671)
> If you need to see a specialist, you regularly have to wait months, assuming you can even get a referral in the first place.

Two months can be a luxury. With my insurance in the US, it usually takes longer for me to see an in-network specialist. For my kid, it has often taken over 6 months.

Of course, none of these were urgent, so it was fine. If it really was urgent as deemed by a medical professional, I likely could get a quicker appointment.

But my friend, who has even worse insurance, developed a condition and was having trouble getting a diagnosis. He got referred to neurology, and none of the in-network specialists had an appointment for over 2 months. His condition made it hard to sleep every night (averaging about an hour of sleep a night). Due to the lack of sleep, he couldn't function at work. Took a leave of absence, got a plane ticket to go to a relative's country, got to see a neurologist the next day, got treatment that day and had his first good night of sleep in a long time.

Lost his job because of it, though. Unsure what his medical insurance situation is while living on welfare...

Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by Merad on Monday August 17, 2026 @01:46PM (#49334877)
That's not at all unusual in the US. My dad saw a neurologist for chronic severe headaches. It was very common for us to go to an appointment, have the doctor request a follow up appointment in 3 months, then be told during checkout that the earliest available time was in 5-6 months.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by avgDev on Monday August 17, 2026 @04:54PM (#49337504)
My mother needed to see a Alzheimers specialist. I called around large metro area....wait times were 6 months minimum.
Re:Universal Health Coverage Could Save $1T and 114,000 Live... by bean469 on Monday August 17, 2026 @05:56PM (#49338242)
That is absolutely the case for many private healthcare providers as well. It depends on where you are and what care you need