Ted Kennedey is a Ded Kennedey

[Kratos]

On Hong Kong,

October 2007
Hong Kong, arguably one the jewels of Asia, is world renowned as a city that is both extremely affluent and cosmopolitan. With a large number of multinational corporations making Hong Kong the location of their Asian headquarters, the city’s proximity to China, and the veritable cornucopia of tourist sights (including all the discount markets, and historic locations), it is no wonder that Hong Kong has become one of the world favorite destinations. In the years immediately following the city’s transfer back to China (1997), there was, justifiably, some concern as to Hong Kong’s future; however with the city bouncing back from the Asian financial crisis, weathering the dual medical emergencies of both SARS and Avian Flu Hong Kong has again resumed its position as the worlds freest economy and one of the major players in the international development of Asia as a whole.
As Hong Kong continues its development more and more individuals are choosing to either visit or permanently relocate to the city, and one of the main issues that concerns the ever increasing number of foreign nationals and expatriates who are moving to Hong Kong is the state of the city’s healthcare service. Hong Kong departed from the UK style National Health Service in 1990 with the creation of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. The Hong Kong hospital authority, in conjunction with the Department of Health, oversees the management of all public healthcare facilities in the City.

It has been argued, recently that having these two departments working on the same problems (i.e. healthcare oversight) has caused more problems that not. The Public healthcare system in Hong Kong has been criticized in terms of the quality of service that it is able to provide. While there are a number of Public hospitals in the city, more often than not, these medical facilities are continually packed with patients. The large number of individuals who seek treatment at these facilities has lead to increased need for qualified doctors and nurses who, unfortunately, are not being trained fast enough. This has lead to more and more patients choosing to receive their treatment at the city’s many private healthcare facilities. However, it must be stated that while the private medical facilities in Hong Kong (hospitals such as the Adventist or Matilda) are able to offer treatment options and care levels that are much higher than those found in public hospitals, these medical facilities are much more expensive.



Even though Hong Kong diverted from the UK system of healthcare in 1990, the Hong Kong government remained committed to offering low cost healthcare to its citizens. Typically individuals possessing a Hong Kong permanent identity card will only have to pay a fee of around HK$ 60 per night if they are hospitalized into a public ward at a public hospital. Now while this figure may seem extremely low from a USA or UK viewpoint it must be remembered that this “hospitalization” fee does not include the costs of any surgeries or treatment outside of the individual merely occupying a bed. Local and foreign patients alike quickly discover that receiving treatment in a “cheaper” public hospital will often end up costing the same amount as a shorter stay, with better care, at a private medical facility.
Hong Kong is notorious for having some of the highest healthcare costs in the world. The city is ranked, along with Israel, as having the second highest costing healthcare system in the world behind the USA. This ranking includes both the private and public healthcare facilities and in this case it becomes evident that paying for medical treatment in Hong Kong is not something you would want to do out of pocket. This situation has only worsened further since the start of 2007. With an increased number of mainland Chinese opting to use the city’s superior healthcare services the hospitals and clinics around Hong Kong have had an entirely new level of stress placed on them. Because of this the government of HKSAR is in the process of instituting new price reforms, and some of these have already been put into place.

Due to the large number of mainland (People’s Republic of China) women who are entering the city in order to give birth the Hong Kong Hospital Authority has implemented a blanket price rise for maternity costs around the region. Since 1997 Hong Kong has seen a huge rise in the number of Chinese women crossing the border from China for one reason; to give birth. This can be attributed to a number of factors, but the leading reason for this trend is the fact that any child who is born in Hong Kong receives the right of abode in the city and the chance of a much better life than they would have on the mainland. Every year thousands of Chinese mothers cross the border to give their children the chance of a better life or to avoid the PRC’s strict one child policy.

In response to this influx of pregnant women the Hong Kong government raised the minimum delivery cost in the city to almost US$ 6000. It is important to remember that this is the basic cost and does not take into account any anesthetics or “complication of pregnancy” charges. Obviously this price tag is beyond the means of many mainland families, and even local Hong Kongers, but it extends further than that. This general increase in maternity costs apply to any woman who has not had pre-natal check ups with a Hong Kong doctor or who have not booked a bed at a local hospital; so rather than just targeting women from mainland China, this cost rise affects any pregnant woman entering the territory.

As one would expect, many foreign expats living in the city, and even Hong Kong nationals, turn to insurance to help them cope with the high costs associated with quality medical treatment. In this regard people usually have two options; Local or International health insurance. While these options may seem, at first glance, remarkably similar they are extremely different. A local Hong Kong insurance plan will adjust premiums according to the current medical costs in the city, as well as penalizing any claims that an individual makes by increasing the plan’s premium accordingly. In addition to this local health insurance plans will not work outside of the country in which they were obtained. In the modern world, where people are prone to more international travel than ever before, this poses a difficult problem, as they can never be guaranteed the coverage that they need while overseas without purchasing an additional travel policy. Local health insurance policies will also usually have a date whereby they can no longer be renewed, this means that the policyholder is not guaranteed coverage in the future in the event that they contact a serious illness or suffer from a major injury.

International health insurance plans are more versatile in their nature, and while they are not specifically designed with the Hong Kong market in mind they will typically afford a policyholder higher levels of coverage than are usually associated with a local health insurance policy. International health insurance plans are community rated; this means that premiums are not calculated on an individual basis but rather on the rate of global medical inflation. By providing plans that are community rated, international health insurance plans are guaranteeing their policyholder that they will always be paying the same premium as everyone else in their age group, regardless of the individuals claims history. In addition to this international health insurance plans are globally portable, so even if the policyholder relocates away from Hong Kong their coverage will travel with them.

Hong Kong is an extremely modern and fascinating city; this however does not stop the healthcare service there being extremely broad, complex, and expensive. In reality all the issues that are currently inherent in the Hong Kong healthcare system are far too varied for a single article and require that large amounts of attention be paid to them. If you are planning on moving to or visiting Hong Kong, you should consult a professional and understand what options you have in regards to protecting your health and the health of your loved ones.

http://www.escapeartist.com/efam/96/HK_insurance.html

[BgMc31]

^^^I got my info from the same source Kratos. I concede there are problems with their system but no system is perfect. But the two do coincide with each other much better than the US's current healthcare system.

[Kratos]

The Aussie system has it's problems as well.

It isn't really a public and private system. There are tax incentives for the wealthy to get insurance...but the insurance only is for elective procedures done in private facilities.

Do we really want the gvmt owning most of the hospitals? Idk, I find it strange though.

almost 70% of all healthcare expense is gvmt.

They have a gross shortage of doctors as well.

[Kratos]

1. Information sharing is burden on the US healthcare system. Streamlining the process would be cost effective. This has been proposed by Obama. A more efficient system could save as much as 360 billion.

2. The underinsured and no insurance people are a drain on the system. These people tend to shy away from preventative care and end up in emergency rooms with ailments anywhere from minor headaches to major illness. These emergency room visits are 10 times more costly than normal doctor visits and the average tax payer ends up paying the enormouse expenses. Insuring more people and emphasizing preventative care (which Obama has proposed) will lead to lower costs.

3. Unnecessary care. Because of the pay per service system currently employed, a whopping 500-700billion (according to the AARP) annually is spent on unnecessary services. A reform of this type program is necessary. A happy medium can be found.

Seems I didn't read your last post, Kratos. My apologies, but we see the same problems and the three I listed do have reform measures in Obama's plan. Whether or not other bills proposed by the Congressional Dems and Republicans include these reforms, I'm not quite sure.

1. Plenty of work is already being done to computerize patient records.

2. There is a lot of research on “preventative care” over the last couple of decades. With the exception of vaccination and smoking cessation, its almost all nonsense. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...cut-costs.html

3. And how do you eliminate those unnessicary procedures...by denying more claims?

[TITANIUM]

I Agree that the health care system needs some reform.

I often wonder what happened to the 850 billion dollars that the US borrowed from abroad.

I know that we are somewhat in the range of 3 to 4 trillion dollars in deficit.

I know Ninja had made a point of the banks and other needless loans made.

Maybe some of that $$$ should have been used to help out the health care system.

My personal belief is that to stimulate the economy, you need to ramp up consumer spending.

Maybe if everyone received, say $5000.00 for a stimulus incentive, that would in return, put money back into the system.

But it needs to be put back at the taxpayers level.

Which is what helps recessions and worse, depressions.

Let's do some fuzzy math:


There are approximately 300 millon people in the US.

850 billion dollars was borrowed.

300,000,000 X $5,000 == 1.500000000e+12

I think that's right.

So, if you just do the math, they could have gave $5000 to every tax payer and still have a extra $$$.

In fact, it would be a very small dent in comparison.

OK, I went off on a tangent, but you see my point.

Governments do not handle things well.

Especially money.

Best

T

[wantmoremass]

Can you plz cite examples of countries where gvmt healthcare and private insurance co-exist?

They do co-exist here in Canada. Although the health system is funded and administered by government, anyone with a job with decent benefits has private sector insurance. I guess you could say the lowest common denominator support of the system is the government model, so regardless of what private insurance covers, if there is no surgery booking available, you're fvcked. Private insurance is mostly for topping up the basics (e.g. private room instead of shared in hospital, some level of coverage of pharmaceuticals - i get 90% coverage, paramedical expenses like optometry, massage, chiropractic, etc.). Some procedures can be administered privately (e.g. my mom sped up her knee replacement by paying privately). It's really a mixed bag here.

[BgMc31]

The Aussie system has it's problems as well.

It isn't really a public and private system. There are tax incentives for the wealthy to get insurance...but the insurance only is for elective procedures done in private facilities.

Do we really want the gvmt owning most of the hospitals? Idk, I find it strange though.

almost 70% of all healthcare expense is gvmt.

They have a gross shortage of doctors as well.

Like I said before, no system is perfect. You asked for examples of private and public systems co-existing and I provided them. Now obviously fault can be found with any system, but surely you cannot argue that our system is best. Even a flawed system like australia's is better than our current system.

[BgMc31]

1. Plenty of work is already being done to computerize patient records.

2. There is a lot of research on “preventative care” over the last couple of decades. With the exception of vaccination and smoking cessation, its almost all nonsense. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...cut-costs.html

3. And how do you eliminate those unnessicary procedures...by denying more claims?

The answer to no 3 isn't denying more claims, it putting in place practical processes for implementing those procedures. Sure some people will cheat the system as no system is fool proof, but clearly defining needs is the 1st step in the process without using the scare tactic of "death panels"

[MuscleScience]

Our system is the best in the world hands down. We put out the best research, we attract the best health care providers from around the world. We also have the best schools, and also attract the best students from around the world. We spend many times the amount of money on biomedical research than any other country. Our trouble centers around that we focus on treatment and not prevention.

We do need some sort of reform, what exactly that reform should be is a matter of debate. Certainly I do not want to pay for the 20% of Americans that dont have health insurance. Right now I do when they cant pay for care. I also do not want to pay the Federal Government to take care of these people. Its really a no win situation because I am certain that the way it is now is better than what the Government could do.

[Kratos]

Like I said before, no system is perfect. You asked for examples of private and public systems co-existing and I provided them. Now obviously fault can be found with any system, but surely you cannot argue that our system is best. Even a flawed system like australia's is better than our current system.

so clearly defining needs and deciding more people don't meet those requirements...aka denying more claims.

[BgMc31]

Our system is the best in the world hands down. We put out the best research, we attract the best health care providers from around the world. We also have the best schools, and also attract the best students from around the world. We spend many times the amount of money on biomedical research than any other country. Our trouble centers around that we focus on treatment and not prevention.

We do need some sort of reform, what exactly that reform should be is a matter of debate. Certainly I do not want to pay for the 20% of Americans that dont have health insurance. Right now I do when they cant pay for care. I also do not want to pay the Federal Government to take care of these people. Its really a no win situation because I am certain that the way it is now is better than what the Government could do.

If our system is the best 'hands down' then why do we rank 37th worldwide with shorter life expectancy and higher costs than just about any other industrialized country on the planet?

[Kratos]

If our system is the best 'hands down' then why do we rank 37th worldwide with shorter life expectancy and higher costs than just about any other industrialized country on the planet?

This for staters

I'll get you started BgMc

1. Our medical personnel cost vastly more than their counterparts abroad in almost every category. And nurses are still in shortage, and we need to import 25% of our doctors from abroad already.

2. American hospitals staff at very high levels. Doctors conduct an inordinate amount of tests. We use an expensive machine rather than watchful waiting. And often, those expensive machines catch conditions that never would have turned into anything, which we then treat.

3. We pay for procedures, not wellness...this is a huge problem because often we waste huge amounts of resources on people who are going to die anyway and the focus is not on preventitive care.

4. All medical decisions have to be made by a doctor because of medical regulations. Where often times a nurse would be good enough.

5. Doctors have their fees set by insurance companies and Medicare, so they can’t advertise low prices. Nor can they advertise higher prices but better service.

6.Bureaucratic medical billing. Each doctor has to hire people to submit his bills to the insurance companies, who have their own people who look for reasons to reject the claims. As someone on the inside of the cash for clunkers program, I can tell you the gvmt isn't going to change that. Most dealerships have only been paid on about 5% of deals so far and spent up to 1 day submitting just one claim.

7. Malpractice insurance. Many doctors have to pay more than $100,000/year for malpractice insurance. In fact many of the Neuro surgeons I knew personally had to pay up to 300k per year before they even did their first procedure.

8. Emergency medical treetment act. Often hospitals have to pass that on to paying customers. I know one hospital where they have a permanent resident that is too unhealthy to get discarged and has been there for 2 + years. They will have to eat that cost. The problem is not that medical care should be unavailible...but the law was made with no promise of compensation. Ie, you must take care of these people but we won't be paying you for it, you have to do it cause it's the law.

Care to explain where Obama's plan will have any impact on these costs or any other costs?

If our system is the best 'hands down' then why do we rank 37th worldwide with shorter life expectancy and higher costs than just about any other industrialized country on the planet?

You want more reasons?

Look down about 2 posts about fried butter being featured at the texas fair.

Adults in the United States have one of the highest obesity rates in the world. Nearly a third of U.S. adults 20 years and older are obese, while about two-thirds are overweight, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

Shit hole states in the South where hicks chew tobacco and bang each others sisters have a much lower life expectancy then average (about 5 years).

Lowest life expectancy state is DC where black people offing each other.
In fact Black people are pulling down the average quite a bit.
Black American males have a life expectancy of 69.8 years, about the same as if you were born in Iran. Infant mortality is quite high for blacks too. The U.S. rate was 6.8 deaths for every 1,000 live births. It was 13.7 for Black Americans. It just shows the harsh circumstances blacks are born into. Insurance isn't going to change that.

But as far as medical care, being a white male in the northeast, I can be confident knowing I'll outlive my Euro counterparts, at least statistically.

[bass]

LMAO!

Ted Kennedy was a ****ing cockroach piece of shit..good ****ing riddance!

Exactly...

[MuscleScience]

If our system is the best 'hands down' then why do we rank 37th worldwide with shorter life expectancy and higher costs than just about any other industrialized country on the planet?

Because vs Europe our population has a lot more uneducated and impoverished people. China for example under reports its infant death rate. In England A person is 4 times more likely to die of breast cancer in females and prostate cancer in males than their American counter-parts. The doom and gloom about our medical system is based of bias and mis-representation of the overall facts. Most people in the know laugh at the rating our system gets of 37th because they know its nothing more than BS.

Its also like saying our educational system is failing, Even though we pump out many more scientist, doctors, professionals ect. Everyone comes here to study and all the top Universities by any measure of ranking are all here.

The sky is not falling is all I am saying.

[TITANIUM]

This for staters







You want more reasons?

Look down about 2 posts about fried butter being featured at the texas fair.

Adults in the United States have one of the highest obesity rates in the world. Nearly a third of U.S. adults 20 years and older are obese, while about two-thirds are overweight, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

Shit hole states in the South where hicks chew tobacco and bang each others sisters have a much lower life expectancy then average (about 5 years).

Lowest life expectancy state is DC where black people offing each other.
In fact Black people are pulling down the average quite a bit.
Black American males have a life expectancy of 69.8 years, about the same as if you were born in Iran. Infant mortality is quite high for blacks too. The U.S. rate was 6.8 deaths for every 1,000 live births. It was 13.7 for Black Americans. It just shows the harsh circumstances blacks are born into. Insurance isn't going to change that.

But as far as medical care, being a white male in the northeast, I can be confident knowing I'll outlive my Euro counterparts, at least statistically.

I was actually going to write a thread about this. But you beat me to it.

It's true. We have more diseases and other afflictions due to the diets of certain people, and the preservatives they put in the food we eat.

I have an excellent diet, as I'm sure everyone that's into BB has the same type of diet.

I'm enjoying these posts, and find them very interesting.

I don't always believe in statistics, do to the fact that they may be squed to a certain degree.

But it seems that we are all on the same page, for the most part.

Interesting post this turned out to be.

Best

T

[j4ever41]

people are going to live the way they want and that means eating a crappy diet,smoking,drinking in excess then after doing this for years will be demanding treatment for the consequences of their actions,when they get discharged following their quadruple bypass they will pick up where they left off,you are not going to change behavior.