I am not from the US. Had my close relative fight with cancer. If not for the government which sponsored it almost fully, excluding a couple of procedures like PET, it would cost our family a lot. Just for the scale: pial for one infusion of one out of three drugs would cost us $8k and my relative would’ve needed 16 infusions.

  • vivalapivo@lemmy.todayOP
    5·
    22 hours ago

    are you asking how we treat, or what do we pay?

    Both actually.

    cheapest…they are not mandated to cure

    So even the stabilization requires paying the bill? Isn’t it like an emergency medicine where doing nothing just kills?

    • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
      10·
      21 hours ago

      yes, there is no free healthcare.

      those with the lowest incomes qualify for government assistance in the form of medicare/medicaid but this is fairly minimal and specifically excludes most novel treatments. our republicans/conservatives continually find ways to reduce this funding. they are truly awful human beings despite being the ‘pro life’, ‘pro god’ block of our electorate.

      the united states sucks donkey balls for poor people considering its wealthy status otherwise. all that money is at the top, and its getting worse.

        • hallettj@leminal.spaceEnglish
          8·
          21 hours ago

          Hospitals are required to provide emergency treatment - what we call ED or ER visits - regardless of ability to pay. Patients are expected to pay for that treatment. It’s just that the hospital isn’t supposed to deny treatment based on whether they think patients will or won’t pay the bill. This is getting-stabilized treatment.

          This is an important point in arguing for universal healthcare: if people can’t afford treatment, they’re more likely to go to the ED where they won’t be turned away. ED visits tend to cost more than non-emergency, so that drives costs up.