Originally Posted by JSLTIGER
The doctor justifies the $373 because when he submits that bill to a health insurance company, he'll get maybe $20. The prices aren't really set for those with insurance versus those without insurance because the doctors then get slammed for bias against those with insurance if they make the non-insured prices lower. However, in order to make any money with insured patients, the prices have to be that high. Medicine is the only industry where the doctor says the price is one thing and those paying can say, no...we'll pay you 10%. It's like walking into a supermarket, buying $500 worth of groceries, ringing it up and telling the cashier that regardless of the total you'll pay $50 and then walking out the door with all of the groceries.
Additionally, if you don't follow his directions, you could potentially turn around and sue him for multiple millions for malpractice, and thus he needs to charge to cover the costs of insuring himself from these lawsuits (which requires that he pay the now-exorbitant rates for malpractice insurance as a result of all the frivolous lawsuits that have gone through the system and actually won).
As far as the cost of the pills go, that is not the doctor's fault, but the pharmaceutical company. The doctor is simply prescribing the medication that will get the job done based on what's available on the market. The pharmaceutical company is charging out the nose for each pill because: 1) they can get away with it because they're likely the only ones with that medication on the market and 2) they need you to fund the R & D on both this and their next drug.
I learned a lot from just one post ... Your alright tiger
I thought they charged more if you had insurance ... Why?
Just because insurance was paying ... Don't some doctors pile it on if you have insurance and perhaps let you slide on a couple of test if you don't?
I have met a couple of medical mal-practice under cover agents and they are tough.