Originally Posted by B-Large
There is mixed evidence that screenings such as Mammograms are good practice (Irradiating 1000 women in the US to detect 1 case of BC- I guess if you are the 1 case of Cx, then you would say yes, worht it!- but does that justify increasing 999 women's risk of cancer now??)... there is mixed evidence that PSA's on men are good practice... So the case is still to be determined whether annual exams really prevent enough disease to justify the cost. I get an annual exam every year, I pay for it, rarely does it tell me anything we don't already know. Providers are compiling more and more data that will determine what testing is valuable, and what testing is wasteful.
In the end, does a $200 exam and bloodwork makes sense? Probabaly. But I think people should have to pay for it out of their pocket, it gets the invested in their health and give them perpective on cost.
CBO has basically flat out said that preventative medicine overall costs more money, it doesn't save money.
That's not to say the health and peace-of-mind benefits aren't worth anything. But once the 'it saves us all money' argument is off the table, there's no reason that Joe should be forced to pay for Jim's annual physical just because Jim feels better about his health afterwards.
Insurance is meant for dealing with the unpredictable. Not for the routine. If it's used for routine stuff, the only purpose it serves is hiding true costs from consumers, which is never a good thing.