Hip Replacement? Try India | Arthritis Information

More who need major surgery are leaving U.S.

Overseas treatments sometimes carry extra risks, but can come at fraction of the expense

Victoria Colliver, Chronicle Staff Writer

Sunday, May 4, 2008

Robert Lupo of Santa Rosa had never been on an airplane until last month, when he flew to India to get his hip replaced.

The 45-year-old self-employed contractor had dropped his Kaiser coverage before an uninsured driver hit him last summer while he was riding his motorcycle. A ,000 settlement covered those medical bills and living expenses while he was unable to work, but Lupo later learned he needed a hip replacement - a ,000 price he couldn't afford.

With pain as his primary motivator, Lupo started researching his options online. He eventually found his way to WorldMed Assist, a 2-year-old Concord company that is part of a growing industry that makes arrangements for Americans to get medical care abroad.

Lupo's hip surgery and hospital stay cost ,880 at Wockhardt Hospital in Bangalore. Even with the ,300 airfare, the procedure totaled about a third of what it would have cost Lupo at a local hospital.

Rest of article see:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/04/BURS10BARG.DTL

A friend of mine went to India a few months ago because her brother had a disc replacement in his cervical spine. I asked her how it was. She stated, fantastic doctors, nurses, care was excellent, hospital was the cleanest she had ever been in. They were super pleased with the results. I'm glad to hear that your friend's brother had such a positive experience. Surgery is always scary, and to be in another country could add to anxiety, but if cost is an issue and as long as the hospital is accredited, then that may be a person's best and only option.

I posted the story not only cuz its just simply interesting but because often when discussing reforming our health care system, people critical of universal health care retell stories of how Canadians and Brits come to our country for care; well, here's a story of Americans going to India, Singapore, Thailand, Costa Rica and Turkey for medical care!

I know American residents who come to Canada for health care to save money. Also, a lot of Americans buy their prescriptions in Canada. You can have the very best healthcare in the world but if you don't have access to it because of financial reasons it doesn't do you much good.And Canadiens come to the USA to fullfil their medical needs also. I too have met them. I think if your situation dictates you do whatever you deem best. The thing is Joie, I think most Americans agree that our healthcare system needs to be adujsted. It isn't that we think it's fine as it stands, we just don't see evidence that universal, taxpayer supported healthcare is the thing that will work. [QUOTE=Linncn]The thing is Joie, I think most Americans agree that our healthcare system needs to be adujsted. It isn't that we think it's fine as it stands, we just don't see evidence that universal, taxpayer supported healthcare is the thing that will work.[/QUOTE]

BAM! You hit the nail on the head.

I'm a little embarassed by the fact that the richest country in the world cannot provide health care for its citizens, and that some resort to going to developing countries for medical care. The US spends the most in the world on health care but 47 million, something like 1 out 6, do not have health insurance. Whether one thinks health care is a right or a privilege, a moral issue or not, it's just bad economics -- we're getting a bad return on our dollar, and its only getting worse, health care spending is projected to double by 2016 and the number of uninsured and underinsured grows, and our health care outcomes compared to other industrialized countries fall short.

Health care reform is not just above covering more Americans, but about creating a health care system that is more efficient, effective, equitable and affordable. Despite the challenging economic times we face, because of these economic times with more employers not offering health insurance, we need to insist that our political leaders implement health care reform. Many other democratic, capitalistic countries provide health care to all their citizens, why can't we?

Linn and Jr,

Change is scary. Confidence in our political leaders is not at an all time high, but we can't afford to do nothing.

I'm not an expert historian, but after the Depression, Americans were in bad shape, but Franklin Roosevelt, with his New Deal, implemented many programs, like Social Security, that helped people. BIG change, but FDR, through his radio program, "Fireside Chat," talked directly to Americans, explaining his programs, instilling confidence. We have lacked that type of political leadership.

Health care is a big money industry, and for those that profit, health care reform would mean less money, so they use their scare tactics, misinformation, to paralyze the public from demanding change.

I believe we can have a workable, better health care system, it won't be without its problems in the beginning, but its possible. We voters, along with our political representatives, must stand up to those corporations, pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, that stand in the way of affordable health care.

My family is witnessing first hand the changes in our insurance over the last decade. We went from having one of the best insurance programs available to one of the worst. And get this, it's the same company! Seriously, every year they change policies that cross off more and more help. My Minocin is not covered even tho my MDs have written letters that I need the brand because of a history of GERD. My diflucan - gone. Hubbys test strips - gone. Certain pain pills - gone. Which makes it damn convenient I don't need most of them anymore. I'm talking pain control here people!

For profit hasn't worked in America. We need to look at non-profits.

Also, Joy posted about "Sick Around the World" on Frontline. One line in that show just got my knickers in a twist. They were talking about Switzerland and the 'non-profit' system and the original fear that the pharmaceutical companies wouldn't be able to say in business. Well, here it was 10 years later and they were all doing fine. Why? The off hand comment was 'well, we can sell our meds to the less regulated American market". And I'm thinking - great - the Swiss think we're patsy's.

Pip

[QUOTE=wendyr] Ya know I just don't know that I would go to India for healthcare, they have one of the highest HIV populations but then they have one of the highest populations anyway. I've seen things on TV for going to Brazil for plastic surgery, they do it even more often than Americans do.[/QUOTE]

Wendy, are you still living in the 80's? We don't do anything different for HIV. It falls under universal precautions. Unless you plan on having unprotected sex or share a dirty needle with an HIV positive person, I think your pretty safe. I'm sure these hospitals are needle less like here. The chances of a patient getting HIV from another patient is very low. Our perceptions are not always reflections of reality. We think of India as a third world country with inferior health care, yet they have quality, accredited hospitals that Westerners seek out. We think of the US with all its wealth and innovation as having the best of the best, yet unattended people die in crowded, overused emergency rooms.

In talking about health care reform, criticism of Canada's system is often brought up, but, there a lot of other countries, capitalistic, democratic countries, that provide health care to all its citizens. I wasn't aware of some of them until I saw the program "Sick Around the World" which looks at the health care systems of the UK, Switzerland, Germany, Taiwan and Japan. These countries cover all their citizens, spending 6.3 to 11.6 percent of their economy on health care -- the U.S. , that leaves out 47 million, spends 16% of their economy on health care and its expected to grow to 20%, out of , in 2016.

The link below is to the website for "Sick Around the World." No one goes bankrupt in these countries because of medical bills, no one is denied insurance because of a preexisting condition. Please have a look, and see how other countries take care of their citizens.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/

Joie. Thank you for the link. I will be looking at it. Some of these people are opposed to a different system because they have no idea and have not researched other systems to see what works. As long as they have their insurance, they are ok and tuff for everyone who does not.

I wonder if Lorster has the capacity to say what she thinks without attempting to insult people who disagree with her. Hmm, time will tell, but so far I'm guessing not.

Anyway, some people think that their are ways to change things so that everyone can be insured without costing them an arm and a leg. Of course we don't want to see people go without. My own brother was in that situation a couple of years ago. He did manage to get himself out of it though without government dole. I guess he's rather an exceptional person that he could do that. I always knew that though. :) [QUOTE=lorster]Joie. Thank you for the link. I will be looking at it. Some of these people are opposed to a different system because they have no idea and have not researched other systems to see what works. As long as they have their insurance, they are ok and tuff for everyone who does not. [/QUOTE]

Yep - screw everyone less fortunate than me. You got me.

I guess that's why I spend almost all my free time volunteering at my church to support our food pantry, soup kitchen, homeless shelter and school (many underprivileged children are given free tuition at our school). And why I have given thousands of $$$ to local charities (where I can verify they spend the money wisely, unlike our government).

We all admire and respect those who are able to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" but some have no boots.

Health care reform is not about free health care or being on the "government dole" but about affordable health care, a more efficient system, that provides access to more citizens and also controls escalating costs. Other democratic countries do it, why can't we?

Many are critical of the idea of the government subsidizing health care, but we do that already: Medicare, Medicaid, VA care, SCHIP, public employees that include county, state, federal workers -- which includes Congress. Instead of this patchwork system of public and private programs that isn't working, can't we do better?

[QUOTE=JasmineRain]
[QUOTE=lorster]Joie. Thank you for the link. I will be looking at it. Some of these people are opposed to a different system because they have no idea and have not researched other systems to see what works. As long as they have their insurance, they are ok and tuff for everyone who does not. [/QUOTE]Yep - screw everyone less fortunate than me. You got me.I guess that's why I spend almost all my free time volunteering at my church to support our food pantry, soup kitchen, homeless shelter and school (many underprivileged children are given free tuition at our school). And why I have given thousands of $$$ to local charities (where I can verify they spend the money wisely, unlike our government).[/QUOTE]

Where I live, children go to public school. That is the way it is. We, the people pick up the tab.

Joie, socialized medicine is just a different set of problems. Do you really want our government who seriously complicates everything to be in charge of your healthcare? What do they do that runs smoothly and consistantly? Why do you think the typical red tape and nasty attitude (think Secretary of State employees ;) ) would not find it's way into healthcare? Add to that that anything government runs traditionally the costs skyrocket.

Either way, no matter which way you lean, I think for the most part people want good healthcare for all, we just disagree on the best way to acheive that.

[QUOTE=lorster] [QUOTE=JasmineRain]
[QUOTE=lorster]Joie. Thank you for the link. I will be looking at it. Some of these people are opposed to a different system because they have no idea and have not researched other systems to see what works. As long as they have their insurance, they are ok and tuff for everyone who does not. [/QUOTE]Yep - screw everyone less fortunate than me. You got me.I guess that's why I spend almost all my free time volunteering at my church to support our food pantry, soup kitchen, homeless shelter and school (many underprivileged children are given free tuition at our school). And why I have given thousands of $$$ to local charities (where I can verify they spend the money wisely, unlike our government).[/QUOTE]

Where I live, children go to public school. That is the way it is. We, the people pick up the tab. [/QUOTE]

We also have free public schools, and they are overcrowded and unbelievably mismanaged. Children in junior high school (who are old enough to drive themselved to school) cannot read and write. In our town, the private schools hold about 800 elementary and junior high school students. What would the public schools do if suddenly presented with 800 more students (about 10% of their total)?
JasmineRain2008-05-06 13:44:26Actullay, from being on this message board the last couple of years I've been amazed at how complicated the American system is, and kind of appalled that health decisions get made by insurance beureaucrats. From what I've read on here and experienced in the Canadian healthcare system, I would venture socialised medicine is much more streamlined and less complicated.

I speak not only from my experience with RA, but from my Mother's terminal lung cancer experience as well.

I think a lot of people imagine socialised health care to run like privatised health care, but with the government replacing the insurance companies, approving or not approving each case individually and trying to deny coverage when possible. This simply is not the case. I am 42 years old, have a chronic illness, have had several (not RA related) surgeries, and I have never, ever once had to speak to any government official in regards to my healthcare, other than to change my address or deal with an overdue MSP bill, and as far as I know neithr has my doctor had to speak to any official on my behalf.
[QUOTE=Linncn]

Either way, no matter which way you lean, I think for the most part people want good healthcare for all, we just disagree on the best way to acheive that.

[/QUOTE]

Ah, socialized medicine. That word comes up a lot. What does it imply? What buttons does it push? I think the days of red-baiting and Joe McCarthy are over. This term is often used to denigrate any forward discussion of health care reform and is used without precise knowledge of its meaning.

Socialized medicine is a health care system totally funded by the government (taxpayers), administered by the government, and delivered by government workers -- hospitals and doctors work for the government. None of our presidential candidates are advocating that. Their proposals would still allow for choice, choice between a public or a private plan. Private health insurance companies would still exist. Health care would still be delivered by private doctors and hospitals. Health care would be funded by government, employer and individual contributions.

I asked my doctor what he thought of a single payer system (would do away w/private insurance companies, be administered and funded by the gov). I mistook his hesitancy for disapproval, so asked, "You think you'd lose control?" He then quickly responded, "I have no control now, I have to get permission and referrals for practically everything." Its estimated that 20% or more of health care dollars goes toward administrative costs, paperwork, how much money could be saved if we had a simpler system and not the myriad of public and private plans we now have.

I don't blame you for lack of oonfidence in, and skepticism of, our government, given these last seven years under this current administration. The disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina was a result of bad reorganization, burying FEMA within the bureaucracy of Homeland Security, and an inept FEMA Director, hired because of who he knew, not what he knew, which wasn't much. This is just one of the examples of bad governance under this Administration.

Your last comment was "Add to that that anything government runs traditionally the costs skyrocket" Health care costs are skyrocketing now. 16% of our economy now goes to health care. Health care costs are expected to double by 2016. Families are paying more for health insurance and getting less coverage. More employers are not offering health insurance. Prescription costs are going up.

We agree there is a need for change, and a need for reform now. If there is the political and public will, and the boldness, imagination and confidence to create a better health care system, then we could take our place amongst all the other democratic, industrialized nations that provide universal health care to all their citizens.

Please take the time to look at the website for "Sick Around the World." You'll be surprised, in 4 of the 5 countries examined, the private sector still plays a role in health care -- its not socialized medicine.