Medicare and Kaiser permanente are leading the charge with this style of insurance and have already shown it to be cost effective while not reducing the quality of outcomes.
Capitation is admittedly a much more complicated way to administer health care, but fixing the incentives is absolutely worth the pain we may face in the short term. Which we might not considering how well these programs have been shown to work.
As an incremental step forward bundled payments are a good approach. For common interventions like a hip replacement the insurer gives the provider a single lump sum for everything instead of having separate line items for surgery, anesthesia, medical device, antibiotics, hospital stay, physical therapy, etc.
For example, if you knock out your front row of teeth, not only do you look weird to people (a pirate), but also you can no longer easily bite into a hamburger, and your speech is impacted. You will have trouble pronouncing words that contain 'v', 'th', or 'f'.
Getting implants is not going to increase your life expectancy, unless you live in a society devoid of knives (our external teeth). But the increase in quality of life is often worth it.
That being said, in the US dentists seem to take way too many X-rays. They take X-rays before the doctor even sees you. Then the doctor tells you what you could have told them.
Source: personal experience.
This essay set may superficially appear to be another repetitive salvo in the interminable US healthcare political conflict, but I recommend reading a bit deeper. I think the perspective these essays offer (that, at the margin, medical spending doesn't affect people's wellspan much, at least not in the US) is both quite important and underrepresented in most discussions of healthcare.
There are new discoveries in diabetes medicines recently but again, you will do much better by not getting diabetes in the first place.
The same goes for smoking which can cause, for example, lung cancer. Roughly speaking, once you get diagnosed with lung cancer you only have 40% chance living more than 1 year. Costly novel medicines often prolong the life by few months only.
We really need better health economy education for everyone.
It's the same for the processed food industry. It's time will come, soon, too, as healthcare systems everywhere are failing because of it.
I can go in further details if people ask, but lifestyle intervention has DRAMATIC results for many people, myself included, and results not provided by drugs or any commonly available medical intervention
Let me give you an example, RE: cancer and diet, look up "Andrew Scarborough brain cancer" and you'll find a detailed account of someone treating incurable brain cancer with diet and lifestyle; and this is someone working in the medical field (actually, precisely in oncology)
Well, yes, even a crackpot can claim to be working in the field.
This in no way supports your claim of “routine” cures through diet. There is no evidence that a fucking keto diet will cure cancer* and it doesn’t pass any sniff test as at the end of the day your body still runs on glucose. This is pretty much an insult to anyone not fortunate enough for their cancer to go spontaneously into remission - and looking at the loon you posted, both he and a family member had some amount of treatment before diet, confounding any claim that diet was responsible for remission.
* whether such a diet can have some survivability benefits or some better or worse outcome is an open question, which has nothing to do with your crackpot claims.
