Cities With Uber Have Lower Rates Of Ambulance Usage (npr.org) 165
An anonymous reader shares a report: Many potential emergency room patients are too sick to drive themselves to a hospital. But an ambulance can cost hundreds or thousands of dollars without insurance. This where a popular ride-sharing app can step in, while also freeing up the ambulances for those who need them most. With demand for ambulances decreased by available Uber drivers, emergency personnel have been able reach critical patients faster while also applying necessary treatment on the way to the hospital, according to a new economic study from the University of Kansas: "Given that even a reduction of a few minutes can drastically improve survival rates for serious conditions, this could be associated with a substantial welfare improvement." The study investigated ambulance rates in 766 U.S. cities from 43 different states. Taking into account the timelines of when Uber entered each city, the researchers found that the app reduced per capita ambulance usage rates by around 7 percent.
Free advertising for Uber! They must be rejoycing. (Score:3)
Uber must be rejoicing over this "free advertising."
You see, when it comes to "ride sharing" all media talk about is "Uber," "Uber" and more "Uber."
It's as if the other more than 10 ride sharing companies/services just do not exist!
Re: (Score:2)
It's as if the other more than 10 ride sharing companies/services just do not exist!
People use "Uber" as a generic term, sort of like when you google using Bing, people also uber using Lyft.
Free business advice: Don't use a common generic word as your company name. Even if you do something cute with the spelling, it will still sound awkward to say "I am going to lift a ride". If people don't say it, they don't think it, and if they don't think it, they don't use it. This mistake likely cost Lyft more business than their stupid pink mustaches (at least that was fixable).
Uber ~= Taxi (or Lyft) (Score:2)
Uber must be rejoicing over this "free advertising."
You see, when it comes to "ride sharing" all media talk about is "Uber," "Uber" and more "Uber."
It's as if the other more than 10 ride sharing companies/services just do not exist!
Doesn't everyone know that Uber is the "kleenex" or "coke" of their respective market?
meaning, it's a name brand that belies the actual choice made (Uber could mean "taxi" if that happens to be less friction - like ride from the airport).
Wow! (Score:5, Insightful)
"But an ambulance can cost hundreds or thousands of dollars without insurance. "
I'm European and I can't believe my eyes.
First, here _everybody_ is insured, even the bums living under a bridge.
Second, an ambulance ride costs around 150$ if some uninsured foreigner ordered one.
I guess you're doing it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
well you need to pay for the deadbeats that just show up at the ER and don't pay. For some that is there only doctor other then the jail / prison ones that do cover stuff that the ER does not.
Re: (Score:2)
Second, an ambulance ride costs around 150$ if some uninsured foreigner ordered one.
No. It costs much more than that. There is no way you can pay for for EMTs and equipment for $150 a ride.
I'm not saying this because I oppose the idea that society should pay for healthcare. I am in favor of a strong social safety net. But a strong safety net doesn't magically make ambulance rides cost less by helping to pay for it.
Re:Wow! (Score:5, Insightful)
But if you look at the total cost to society, if 50 people made a grand total of 10 bids each on it trying to win that TV, the total cost to all of them to purchase that TV is actually $10 + 50*10*$0.75 = $385. And the company makes a tidy $85 profit even though the winner only paid $17.50 for a $300 TV.
That's what you have to remember when you socialize costs. The price the individual user pays is only a fraction of the actual cost. The rest is distributed over society, paid for with your taxes. So the cost of your ambulance ride is actually $150 + whatever general tax revenue is needed to fund the system. (The price the uninsured foreigner pays is probably the marginal cost [wikipedia.org] - most of the fixed costs like purchasing the ambulance has already been paid for by your citizens, and the foreigner is only paying for a few minutes of the EMT's time and equipment depreciation, and the gas.)
This is why the cost to operate an ICE vehicle isn't just the gas you buy put into it. It's the cost of the gas + the cost of the pollution caused by the emissions. Likewise, it's why EVs aren't zero emissions. All they do is displace the emissions to the power plant which generates the electricity they use. Which means if your electricity is mostly generated by coal, the overall EV efficiency (after factoring in generation, transmission, and charging losses) is about the same as for a gasoline vehicle.
You have to look at the total cost of something to all of society, not just to the individual user or in an individual instance. You can criticize the U.S. for having 2x the health care costs of the OECD average. But criticizing it on the basis of a single ambulance ride cost to the end-user is naive.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do I have to look at the total cost? Or, to be more blunt, you're making a case that the ambulance ride is subsidized. To which the answer is... duh . It's subsidized because non-US countries decided that saving lives is the government's job.
Re: (Score:2)
You are comparing a scam where people pay for nothing (a failed bid) to socialised healthcare where all taxes paid into the system result in some benefit for the payee.
We know exactly what it costs, where the money comes from. We have endless debates about it. But the question is always "how much should web pay?", not "should we pay?" because when we need medical care we don't want to be checking our wallets first.
And I'm not sure how you think insurance works, but that's the healthy subsiding the sick too
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, but you pay 55% income tax and 21% sales tax. The ambulances still have to run, still cost (more expensive) gas. So basically any foreigner that pays $150 is subsidized by you.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm totally fine with that. Foreigners represent a tiny proportion of the users, and I'd rather the ambulance crew didn't have to check my ID and tax status before administering care.
More over, I want foreigners to feel safe in my country, and to bring their tourism money here.
Re: (Score:2)
There has never been a case in the US where ambulances checked your ID and tax status before administering care.
What did happen pre-Obamacare was they would take you to a hospital, treat you and then worry about your insurance/costs. If you had no insurance, then you would have to pay for it, which is why you choose not to pay for insurance after all, although pretty much everywhere you didn't have to if you were poor enough. Also, your medical debts couldn't be collected upon and would just sit there until
Re: (Score:2)
And in the US, every dollar your company pays for your corporate health insurance plan is a dollar they can't add to your paycheck.
As with everything in life, you pay for it one way or another.
Re: (Score:2)
*Pre-Obamacare I mean, of course.. when your only real option for health insurance was through your workplace.
Re: (Score:2)
> Welcome to GOPcare
This has nothing to do with the GOP. This is how it was when a black democrat was still in the White House and even when he had a democrat house and senate.
This is how it's always been.
This is simply paying for what you use rather than turning it into a (underfunded) government monopoly that looks "free" but really isn't.
He had a Congress full of Republicans (Score:2)
Google the phrase "Wallet Biopsy". Look up the cost of Single Payer Health Care vs our current system. You've been had (assuming you're not an insurance company shill). No joke, we could pay off the national debt in 10 years with the savings from Single Payer Health Care.
Re: (Score:2)
what does Obama's skin color got to do with any of this?
Its the Trump era.. blatant racism is the only argument you need in any discussion!
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
You can't get chemotherapy at the ER (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know, one thing I learned over the last 20-30 years is that one of society's purpose is that those who are better off help those who aren't.
I live in Germany and make a decent living. I don't go to the doctor very often (last time, apart from dental, was about 5 years ago and that because I had a very bad infection after a dental surgery). But I think it ok that I pay 6.5% of my gross income (and my employer another 6.5% of my gross income) into a health care system where everybody participates. This is
Re: (Score:3)
In Germany, everybody is required to carry health insurance. Most insurance companies are run by states, but private ones exist.
It is a much better system than England's.
Re: (Score:2)
In Germany, everybody is required to carry health insurance.
Why not just require that nobody get sick or injured?
Re: (Score:2)
Basically you are labeling all the pros of both socialized and privatized healthcare as "because sicialized" while leabeling on he cons of both socialized and privatized healthcare as "because privatized."
You are another dishonest lefty fuck.
Ambulances are expensive (Score:2)
In other words (Score:2)
Backwards (Score:2)
Community services a) are meant to be used; and b) get better, cheaper, and more effective the more we use them.
This 7% signifies three things:
1) that some people were calling for ambulances when they didn't need any medical care en-route to the hospital. Ambulances aren't taxis. These people should have been taking taxis or asking a neighbour to drive them. You don't need to pay a stranger to help you. You live with others.
2) that there are some people calling uber when they should be calling an ambula
Re: (Score:2)
Your ambulance doesn't cost $45. That $45 is just your "copay". The price is much more and you are paying for it in some fashion.
You're just charged for it in a manner that makes it easier to kid yourself that it's free. You're the proverbial slowly boiled frog.
Re: (Score:2)
If I use an ambulance ten times a month, it'll cost me $450. If I use it zero times, it'll cost me $0.
Nothing else is variable. My taxes are lower than yours -- I promise.
Re: (Score:2)
You're very correct. In your country, healthcare isn't a right, it isn't a luxury. It's a status symbol.
That would be all fine, in theory. I can accept the concept that not dying in the streets is a status symbol -- hey, it would certain motivate me to work harder.
The problem is that, in practice, you pay more taxes than we do. You get far less out of those taxes too. And, overall, while you have far more "control" over what you do and don't get, and over what you do and don't deserve, you wind up all
Re: (Score:2)
1) that some people were calling for ambulances when they didn't need any medical care en-route to the hospital. Ambulances aren't taxis. These people should have been taking taxis or asking a neighbour to drive them. You don't need to pay a stranger to help you. You live with others.
2) that there are some people calling uber when they should be calling an ambulance. Medical issues can get worse en-route, especially with added delays and random things that can happen -- accidents, weather, traffic, jostling, tripping, indigestion, et cetera. Expert medical professionals are a good idea when there's already something seriously wrong with you (serious enough for a hospital visit) simply to ensure that nothing else happens to you also. Like my doctor says, once you're sick, you can still get another sickness too.
So we should blame the people who lack medical degrees and are not licensed by the state to practice medicine for misdiagnosing their own condition? That makes as much sense as blaming people who rely on the expertise of banks to approve their home loans.
Maybe...maybe not. (Score:2)
Since when is correlation causation?
Re: (Score:2)
Since journalists weren't scientists so.. basically always, assuming you only ever read the newspaper stories and don't care to dig into the actual papers and whatnot for yourself. It probably doesn't help that the major publishing organizations for research papers call themselves "journals," even though they have nothing to do with journalism in the newspaper sense of the word. I'm sure there's some historical reason for that but its certainly a bit weird by today's common usage of the words.
Do Uber drivers want sick people in their car? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> Would you want someone with a communicable disease in your back seat? Do you want to be the next passenger?
We have Measles outbreaks at Disneyworld and Noro outbreaks on cruise ships. International airports are an international germ exchange. You have annual flu season. If you think you only have to worry about people going to the hospital, you're really kidding yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Would you want someone with a communicable disease in your back seat?
The vast majority of Ambulance patients do not have communicable diseases. They have things like severe sprains, fractures, maybe blood sugar problems, or any of the most of the other things that people can have affect their health which they are unable to pass on to others.
But... (Score:2)
Back in the day (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lower capability ambulances? (Score:2)
Doesn't this scream out for some kind of service for non-life-threatening conditions that's significantly less capable (and cheaper) than our existing ones?
I mean, I can understand why it's not socially optimal to send two trained EMTs and a ambulance full of cutting edge equipment for a caller that cut his hand while slicing a bagel [latimes.com] and needs to go to the ER for stitches. The caller isn't going to die in the next 2 hours (note: if the ER is busy they'll logically wait while more dire cases are handled firs
Re: (Score:2)
Trouble with that is that it then places the burden on the 911 operators to determine whether you need a "high capability" or "low capability" ambulance, and all they have to go on is whatever you tell them so there's a very high chance that they'll make the wrong call given that some people freak out over a hang nail while others have half a limb chopped off and think it'll be fine and finish whatever they were doing before they even bother calling.
To some degree of course, the same argument could be made
Re: (Score:2)
But they already need to know that because they need to know whether to send a high capability ambulance right the fuck away or whether it might have to wait.
The entire emergency medicine system is critically centered around triaging each patient in order to have a clear sense of priorities.
911 / Hospital also don't push ambulance (Score:2)
I've had to call 911 or Hospital emergency line a few times over the past several years (elder parent who's prone to issues + kid injuries). In most cases, they don't push you to get an ambulance. In one case, the ambulance arrived and said it'd be cheaper if we drove our daughter in (they took a look and determined it wasn't a critical injury), so that's what we did.
Uber/Lyft/Taxi instead of ambulance makes a lot of sense if you've talked with the appropriate folks to make sure there isn't a need for bl
That's gogin to be a lot of fucking use. (Score:2)
Re:Interesting. (Score:4, Insightful)
A lot of Emergency Visits that someone would ask for Uber would be a problem that isn't life or death, but can't be put off for the next day, and such conditions may make it unsafe for someone to drive themselves.
Extreme Pain, If they are on Meds that makes it unsafe for them to drive, or physically unable to drive. The ambulance is often overkill transpiration for a lot of cases. And with people taking uber to get to the hospital, can make sure the ambulances that are on standby can be closer by to handle a real emergency.
Re:Interesting. (Score:4, Insightful)
Add to these the people who have just had a medical procedure that they have been instructed not to drive themselves home from. If you have no second driver in the family and you live in a place where taxi service is sparse and expensive, you will tend to fudge on the instructions and drive anyway. Ridesharing can improve public safety here too.
Re: (Score:2)
That's where Urgent care is supposed to come in. Something really an emergency but unable to wait for a dr. appt.
Re: Interesting. (Score:3)
But what if you can't drive? I recently had kidney stones and live alone. I had to take an ambulance.
Actually I probably would have not gone Uber as I was pretty sure I was dying. Kidney stones are way worse than gall stones.
Re: (Score:2)
Kidney stones are way worse than gall stones.
Do they treat kidney stones by removing an organ? They sure do with gall stones.
Women who are in a position to compare the pain between kidney stones, gall stones, and childbirth say that gall stones are the worst. I can only personally compare gall stones to being shot or having a hand mangled and gall stones were by far much more debilitatingly painful.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem I see with this reasoning is that taxis provide the same service, so a shift from Taxi to Uber shold not make any change here.
If anything, depending on location, taxis often have first aid kits and basic first aid training for all the drivers. Or (again depending on locality) laws preventing them from turning down a fare because a person is leaking.
I am very suspicious of the conclusion drawn that Uber causes lower ambulance usage. I would suggest looking at whether something else could be cau
Re: (Score:2)
I am not sure what it is like in your place, but have you tried to order a regular licensed taxi recently? I managed to do it, but it is much more difficult and takes much longer than just hailing an uber. And if you want to go to the emergency room, I guess you have a feel of urgency, that most taxi companies just do not cater for. ("We have one driver free tomorrow at 10am, is that ok"?)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. I found myself in hospital recently due to Anemia via an ambulance and ended up in fairly serious debt as a result. Since I know the anemia thing isnt immediately life threatening (Its something Ive had a long time and I know once the fainting starts I do have a bit of time before it becomes truly dangerous) I would genuinely refuse to do the ambulance again. Ubers are perfect (Cabs too. but ubers half the price, assuming its not surge fee oclock)
Re: (Score:2)
As to your claim about br
Re: (Score:2)
In practice, the improved outcome from ambulances is usually lost as you can often be in the ER well BEFORE the ambulance even gets to you.
Ambulances are for times when the injury is so bad, you can't move the victim. If the victim is mobile, get moving. Consider having an ambulance meet you on the way, if it's that bad. Do get on the phone so the ER knows you're coming, but if the choice is drive or call, drive.
Uber drivers should be safe from liability in these cases, unless they're medically trained
Re: (Score:2)
It depends. Providing med. care w/o compensation is usually covered. With or with out training. These are know as "Good Samaritan Laws". Even if a trained doctor provides assistance the Doc. is usually covered if the Doc. does *not* bill for the service.
Re: (Score:2)
Uber drivers should be safe from liability in these cases, unless they're medically trained. Perversely: If trained, they're risking their net worth by helping (some states protect them, but not most).
It depends on where you are. Where I am, only people with current emergency/first aid training credentials are covered by good samaritan laws. Untrained people or those who haven't paid the troll to renew are not. Unsurprisingly, those who provide emergency services for profit are also those who have lobbied those laws through.
Where I originally came from, it was a duty to provide first aid, regardless of skills. Not attempting to provide assistance to someone in dire need was a felony
Re: (Score:2)
In practice, the improved outcome from ambulances is usually lost as you can often be in the ER well BEFORE the ambulance even gets to you.
The improved outcome for either is lost if you have to wait in the ER for hours.
Re: (Score:2)
So glad I live in the UK, ambulances are free for everyone and anyone, no one has to think about cost when calling an ambulance for themselves or for complete strangers.
I was unconscious, came around concussed with (very) temporary memory loss when a couple of people called an ambulance for me, would I also have had to pay for an ambulance in the US if I didn't have insurance?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Taxi service has always been piss-poor, much of that being due to the medallion system. It is one of the few real examples of bad regulation.
It is one of the many examples of good regulation ... for the industry being regulated once it captures the regulators.
Re: (Score:2)
An obvious question is "why Uber".
Uber/Lyft is more responsive than a taxi, and since they are depending on a good review, they are more likely to be helpful and patient.
Most Uber/Lyft customers are not former taxi customers. People see "ride-sharing" as something new and different, not as a drop-in replacement for taxis.
I use Lyft mostly when I travel on business, whereas 5 years ago, I would rent a car at the airport.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget the impact of decentralization
Re: (Score:3)
From finnish point of view, where ambulance costs something like 20-30 Euro (rest paid by the government), you get not only the unit but trained personnel. These people can quickly assess the nature of your medical emergency and treat it on site when possible. Many smaller traumas or sudden bouts of illness benefit significantly from quick identification and application of correct treatment.
As a result, here you call an ambulance, and they'll often arrive, diagnose and treat the problem and leave you treate
Re: (Score:2)
It is in fact fairly common around here. Here in the Northern Europe, common sense still rules supreme over "cover my ass, always" attitude.
It's one of the main reasons why we can offer as wide of a social security net as we do in comparison to most of Western Europe.
Re:Interesting. (Score:5, Insightful)
We have Socialized medicine in the United States, We buy insurance. where we pay for everyone on that companies healthcare.
You don't, really.
See, with socialized health care, there isn't a company involved. There's a government-run health organization which exists to serve people, not to make a profit. How you pay for it isn't key. How the services are delivered is.
I know there's a hypothetical where it's asked, "well, what if I want to pay more for service which is even better" and it's not a horrible question, but it presupposes that the baseline health-care is sub-par, which is - in most cases - not the case. Yes, here in Canada we've had periods where emergency-room wait times have been excessive, but with triage, true emergencies are handled immediately while "I've got a cough" is back-burnered. As it should be. And yes, there are occasions where some specific procedures are back-logged, and patients are even sometimes shuttled to our nearby American neighbors because they needed to be. But by and large, the vast, vast, majority of us are cared-for properly, promptly, efficiently, and... with disregard for the depth of our pockets.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm pretty sure the doctors, nurses, medical equipment manufacturers, drug manufacturers, disposable sterile supply manufacturers, various supply distributors, etc. are all part of some sort of organization (even as small as a family) that expects to turn a profit.
The healthcare system in the US is not cost effective, private (about 2/3 of our healthcare costs are paid by the government), nor particularly "better" than any other reasonable alternative. The US government pays more per-person for healthcare
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of the medical procedures, equipment and medicine Americans now rely on were developed in non-profit universities and research centres in countries with socialized medicine. I'm fairly certain that American medicine depends more on the rest of the world than the other way around.
What's special about the US system is that you pay not only the medical staff, but lawyers, insurance companies, more lawyers, patent holders, more lawyers, stock holders, and a few lawyers too. The $50 hospital aspirin is $
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Interesting. (Score:2)
Yeah I always wonder about that. Wait times at hosptials in the USA are huge if it is not life threatening.
Re: (Score:2)
While this was true in my area 40 years ago today hospitals pride themselves on short wait times. In Orlando one hospital has a large billboard by I-4 with a wait time clock displayed, usually it is 15 minutes or less. A Jacksonville hospital advertises wait time on the radio, again usually less then 15 minutes. The last three times I have taken my wife to our small town hospital emergency room she was the only patient.
Florida is in a building boom with much of it fueled by retirees who bring their Medicare
Re: (Score:2)
In many suburban and rural areas, Taxi service is unavailable or prohibitively expensive. A Taxi company cannot profitably operate in such areas, however a lone Uber or Lift driver can. With the big name of Uber and Lift to back them up so they don't need to advertise and sell themselves. They can just drive.
Not Magic, but franchising.
Re: (Score:2)
That leaves you with somewhat of a split though. You have cities where Taxi service is useful and those where it is not. Even for something that is not immediately life threatening, even a 45 minute wait for a Taxi may be perfectly acceptable.
It all depends on the nature of the "emergency".
For the use case where Uber or a Taxi works, the 45 minute wait is probably not a problem.
I would't expect the "Uber effect" to be as great in places like New York City or London. Also in some of those places, the Taxis h
Re: (Score:2)
If you can wait for 45 min. you can go to urgent care instead of an ER. Urgent care can then triage you.
Re: Not "Uber" (Score:2)
Your comment about "nature of the emergency" made me think that the self driving Ubers in Pittsburgh can say "please state the nature of the emergency".
Re: (Score:2)
Upstate NY.
Re: (Score:3)
Presented with a transportation option previously depressed by the city overlords
So these cities refused to allow taxis to operate prior to Uber? I doubt it. Even though they may be more expensive than Uber, they would still be far cheaper than an ambulance ride. So is Uber truly the savior of humanity this study wants us to believe, or are there maybe other factors that they missed/ignored in their effort to show Uber in a good light?
Re: (Score:2)
So these cities refused to allow taxis to operate prior to Uber?
The cities set the price and restrict entry to the market. The obvious response from taxi drivers is to focus on the core urban area where they can get the most fares and ignore suburbs and outlying areas. If you need a taxi from a suburban area, you may have to wait for an hour or more for a taxi doing a dropoff from the city or airport, and looking for a return fare.
Uber provides a solution to this problem: Prices based on supply and demand.
If you are interested in reading more about this concept, try
Re: (Score:2)
I've only used Uber twice for work, though I've tried to use it more. Getting an Uber home from a major international airport takes about 5 minutes (so longer than walking right up to a cab) and costs within a few dollars of what a taxi costs for the same trip. I use Uber because my company has some connection to them so the rides feed our expense system. The local cabs don't take our corp Amex (also directly feeding our expense system), so that it's less hassle for me doing my expenses is the only reason I
Re: (Score:2)
Taxis have the ability to stop to pick up someone, when they're already on the way to pick up someone else. Hence, they're unreliable (even if they're not supposed to do that, they still do it). In the most populated American cities, their total numbers were/are artificially limited, which means they were almost impossible to hail during peak hours (unless you're waiting for one at a very nice hotel, where the doorman has some leverage with taxi drivers because he can blacklist them if they do not show up).
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Because you aren't using a mobile ICU for something that's not an immediate matter of life and death? Resources like that should be reserved for people that actually need them.
This goes equally well for "civilized" countries with socialized medicine.
Just because something is free, it doesn't mean it's an open excuse for abuse.
Re: (Score:2)
Not having to pay for an ambulance doesn't elevate you from 3rd world to 1st world. It just puts you at the top of the 3rd world. First world countries have along with covered ambulances for emergencies, house doctors, or emergency doctors who can go treat people who don't need an ambulance but who are otherwise unable to get themselves to care.
Why is everything so black and white with Americans?
Re: (Score:2)
Apologies to the Canadians, I mean to say: People who live in the United States.
Re: (Score:2)
We're not the one making up a private definition of 'first world' to make things seem simple.
Re: (Score:2)
> One way or another you pay for public services. "There is no such thing as a free lunch."
Did anybody claim that public services just happen? No, of course they are paid for, but they are (or can be) free at the point of delivery. That means everybody can afford them, whether rich or poor. It is part and parcel of what most countries consider to be part of "a minimum standard of living". And it seems hard to argue with that, because dying for lack of medical care can hardly be called any standard of liv
Re: (Score:2)
Then the Uber drivers should be trained to ask them to go to the Urgent Centers, which may be closer by, and cheaper. As they are Doctors offices without an appointment. Who can treat most issues.
Here in Canada, taxi drivers are required to have first aid (Class A or C) before they can drive for a company. Class A is CPR+emerg first aid+AED training on individuals aged 8+, Class C is the above + infant CPR. While taxis don't carry AED's, almost all municipal buildings have an AED that anyone can get to in an emergency.
Uber pushes that it's not a taxi company, it pushes that it doesn't have to follow the rules that taxi drivers are required to have. They don't want to play by the same rules that
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Canada, taxi drivers are required to have first aid
That seems like a silly requirement. How often is this skill actually used in a way that makes a difference?
Sure, it is possible that a taxi driver could use first aid skills, but you could make the same argument for requiring that plumbers or barbers or accountants learn first aid.
Disclaimer: When I was a cub scout, I earned the 1st aid merit badge.
Re: (Score:2)
That seems like a silly requirement. How often is this skill actually used in a way that makes a difference?
Considering it only costs $150(or less) and 6hrs of your time to get the training? Recerts every 3-5 years run about $75. Ask yourself the question, for a person who's on the road nearly all the time how is it not worthwhile to have people with that training everywhere. The belief is that it's better for people to have the ability to treat those in need, then not having those in need not being treated.
Sure, it is possible that a taxi driver could use first aid skills, but you could make the same argument for requiring that plumbers or barbers or accountants learn first aid.
Those plumbers, barbers, or accountants aren't traveling on the roads and carrying people in their vehic
Re: The problem is scheduled Doctor visits. (Score:2)
He's right; it's a stupid requirement. The fact that the course is cheap, or that the training is useful, does not change the fact that it's a stupid requirement.
It's also not an "in Canada" thing since regulation is done primarily by cities and provinces, so some places require first aid and some do not. Toronto used to require it, but no longer does. St. Johns doesn't require it but wants to make it a requirement, and is trying to get the province to do it for them.
The people trying to bring in first a
Re: (Score:2)
Emergencies don't always happen in a vehicle. Though driving is still a risky enterprise.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Germany, if you want to get your driving license, you have to have a 1st-Aid training first. Without a 1st-Aid-training you can't get a driving license. I don't know how it is in other countries, though. Maybe it is the same in all of European Union.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with people going to the ED, is the fact that they are not going for a real emergency, but an urgent visit or just see a doctor without a schedule.
Obviously you are a learned doctor that knows all the the possible health conditions and how they should be managed and treated. Please enlighten us more...
There are plenty of issues that are not life threatening which can not be treated by urgent care. There are also plenty of conditions that complicate less severe issues which make having access to a full hospital's resources the better choice. There are also plenty of areas where urgent care facilities don't exist (or are run by a specific group that do
Re: (Score:2)
I am not a doctor, but I see their data, and I am involved in the policies and procedures.
Normally unless the person is showing signs of trauma, hear attack or stroke in the ED, they will be placed in a lower priority queue. And the doctor will not see them often for about an hour, while they treat the real emergency cases. Where these people will be treated by the Mid-Levels. At the urgent care facilities. The doctor will normally see you right away. Urgent care often have X-Ray and access and authoritie
Re: (Score:2)
We as a culture cannot afford the one size healthcare for all problems.
You'll get no argument there from me just as you'll get no argument that ERs get overcrowded with those that have no business there. Your original assertion, however, was that someone's ability to drive to the ER and their decision to call an Ambulance was the deciding factor of if they are a valid ER patient. That is demonstrably not true.
One of the factors that this study doesn't seem to take into account is Obamacare. That, I think, has had far more impact in overuse of the ER than Uber. Many ERs were us
Re: The problem is scheduled Doctor visits. (Score:2)
It's the other way around. Pre-Obamacare people would go to the ER for non emergencies since they have to treat them, and walk out on the bill.
Granted the implementation is so fucked up this probably happens anyhow and nothing has changed.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not a doctor, but I see their data, and I am involved in the policies and procedures.
So you are completely unbiased... oh wait... you are actually being a self-absorbed pretentious fuck right now? ..and your opinion on this is probably completely entirely selfish because you are a lefty? yeah...
Re: (Score:2)
What health care really needs though is the return of home visiting doctors.
Actually, home visiting nurses would make more sense. 90% of health problems are totally routine, and we do not need an expensive MD to treat every sniffle or cough. We only use doctors for everything because of legal concerns, and this is a major inflator of medical costs in America.
In other countries, with far lower medical costs than America, when you "go to the doctor" you are much more likely to actually be seeing a nurse or PA.
Re: (Score:2)
In other countries, with far lower medical costs than America, when you "go to the doctor" you are much more likely to actually be seeing a nurse or PA.
I am pretty sure you are quite mistaken. For France, I know you are.
In France, the official fee is 25€, minus 16.50€ reimbursed by the Sécurité sociale. I do not find on the web stastics on how many doctors follow the official fee (“conventionnés secteur 1”), but partial statistics seems to indicate they are the huge majority of general practitioners. At least I can say that I had no trouble finding several of them in my neighborhood.
And they are actual medical doctors,
Re: (Score:2)
Too risky. See the great influenza epidemic as an example. Can you say "disease vector"?
Re: (Score:3)
In a country where not all Emergency visits are life threatening, but the patient cannot drive. We don't need a Semi truck to move a single chair. We don't need an ambulance to move every person who needs to go to the ED.
It is about efficiency. And saving resources for those who need it.
Re: (Score:2)
Taxis are not as available in non-urban areas, while Uber and Lift are.