Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Maybe, but not any significant part. As evidenced by this post, only a small portion of the costs are attributable to the work performed by the surgeon. The majority of costs are allocated to facility costs (whose increases in price are not related to tuition costs) and equipment.

Indeed, if there was such a direct correlation between the two, the easiest way to control healthcare costs would be to reduce doctoral school tuition rates. Clearly, this is not a viable solution here because the two are not directly correlated.

Now, it is true that Tuition Costs have risen at a much higher rate since 1960 than Health Care costs on a percentage basis compared to inflation [1] [2] [3], but in aggregate the actual health care costs on a per-individual basis dwarf total tuition costs as part of household income [4].

[1] https://lh3.ggpht.com/-dqm5PIPoC58/Ti8HKy2jjrI/AAAAAAAAPgU/W...

[2] http://chartingtheeconomy.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/hea...

[3] http://cdn.theatlanticwire.com/img/upload/2011/08/aw-chart-c...

[4] http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4d775519ccd1d571150...



To be fair, comparing the costs of ACL surgery to Ron Paul's costs for 'making house calls' isn't exactly an apples-to-apples comparison either.

I'm merely pointing out that this is a complex beast with many contributing factors:

- The money/time investment to become a medical professional.

- The increase in the number / complexity of procedures over the years. Our medical knowledge keeps increasing we keep getting more and more ways to fix things.

- Comparisons without details. For example, people like to compare how cheap MRIs are in Japan, but the MRIs that people get in Japan aren't as powerful/accurate as the ones that are charged for in the US. Does this justify the cost difference? Maybe, but maybe not.


When an ACL costs $68k in California and $20k in Illinois and $32K in Delaware, you know that it's not an issue with simply the cost of getting medical training. Something else (I agree, something a lot more complicated than simply the cost of education or differencies in country-specific medical practices) is at work.

I think we actually agree here - the dramatic rise in health care costs doesn't have a single root cause, or even perhaps a readily identifiable root cause. It's systemic, rather than simplistic. Education is a factor, but a small one. Insurance and health liabilities are probably an equal factor. But neither explain disparities in cost within the US (no need to look at comparisons between Japan for that). See my [1] reference two comment posts up for the chart on cost disparities intra-US.

It's quite possible that medical suppliers are using information asymmetry to overcharge in some instances and properly charge in others. Could it be as simple as that? Why is it that the same procedure with the same equipment using similarly trained staff in similar hospitals with similar liability exposures would have such different costs? The only thing I can think of is that medical purchasing is sufficiently complex and with such little visibility and transparency between different establishments that medical suppliers and providers can get away with pricing them "as much as the market can support". But that's just an unsubstantiated theory and maybe there is a reason why the same procedure is cheaper in another state, county, or city.


It's difficult to see which factors are contributing without a similar breakdown for a similar procedure from somewhere else.

Are doctor's costs more expensive in CA due to the increased cost of living? Ditto for administrators, driving up the hospital costs? Is it due to a scarcity of hospital beds / operating tables that the hospital charges 'what the market will bear' in more densely populated regions?


Sounds like a study worth funding - if that data doesn't already exist!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: