This post is a reflection on the talk “The Cure That Works: How to Have the World’s Best Healthcare” given by Dr. Sean Flynn at Oklahoma State University in 2020. Dr. Flynn uses Singapore’s 3M healthcare system structure to compare to examples—seen in the current United States—that prove that change towards a system like Singapore’s is possible and would be beneficial.
MediSave, MediShield, MediFund
The United States spends approximately 18% of GDP on healthcare, opposed to the 4.5% spent on healthcare in Singapore. The main difference in what constitutes the large gap between these two percentages lies in the structures of the two healthcare systems.
In the United States, consumers go into medical procedures blind to the cost. This is due to the uniqueness of the “third-party payer” healthcare system it currently functions under. This means that hospitals, clinics, and pharmacies do not always directly bill customers. Instead, the first point of contact for payment is insurance agencies who will cover a certain amount of medical expenses with leftover costs being billed to customers at a later time.
However, in Singapore, not only are consumers presented with costs of care up front but they are also encouraged to shop around for the best quality and price. The ability to offer this is largely due to their 3M system.
The three parts of the 3M system are MediSave, MediShield, and MediFund. MediSave refers to government-required savings that all working citizens contribute to. MediShield is Singapore’s “high deductible insurance plan” in which citizens are given a premium of $2000 to cover all medical expenses every year. What is not spent from the $2000 can be saved and any medical expenses incurred past this only require a citizen to cover 10% of the extra cost. MediFund is essentially a government mutual fund that donates earnings to hospitals every year. Therefore, if citizens are unable to pay medical costs, they can apply for a grant that will cover the extra expenses incurred.
This 3M system has helped lower the cost of medical procedures across the board due to increasing competition in the medical field. Additionally, making medicine competitive has provided an incentive for consumers to find good deals while producers feel pressure to perform high-quality services, leading to an overall better medical system.
Is it Possible in the U.S.?
Dr. Flynn gives some examples of how these practices are functioning, on small scales, in the United States. Firstly, the practice of surgical cosmetic procedures is competitive. This allows people to shop around and has driven down the price of most procedures through time, the opposite of what has been seen for other surgical operations in the U.S.
Additionally, both the chain Wholefoods and the State of Indiana have enacted an incentive system, much like MediShield, that gives their employees cash under the condition that they will pay medical expenses out-of-pocket to a point and then the organization helps cover any additional costs.
My Thoughts
I really enjoyed the arguments presented by Dr. Flynn for what cheaper health care can look like and examples of how it has worked on a small scale in the United States. My biggest takeaway was that I am slightly shocked that the successes Wholefoods, the State of Indiana, or Singapore have seen are not more widespread knowledge when it seems to have been mutually beneficial. Additionally, it is overall frustrating to know that there might be better alternatives out there, that would be beneficial to U.S. citizens, but that they are not widely discussed or understood.
I think that most people in the United States know that the health care system could use a realignment for the betterment of the people and hopefully spreading the word about alternatives like this will provide a movement towards change.
Works Cited
Flynn, S. M. (2020, September 13). The cure that works: how to have the world’s best healthcare at a quarter of the price [Video]. OState TV. https://ostate.tv/media/1_i7w9ngz8