Living in Thailand with no health insurance

[Jingthing]

An article which relates to this topic. Thailand is mentioned as having decent quality health care, but the "cheapness" of it is predictably exaggerated.

https://www.cuencahighlife.com/health-care-becomes-a-pivotal-issue-for-those-retiring-overseas-it-also-poses-problems-for-insurance-companies/

Some retirees forgo health insurance. That’s what Kristin Cunningham and her husband, Joel, opted to do. Ms. Cunningham was a registered nurse in the United States before they retired to David, Panama. Her medical knowledge, plus low health care prices there, led the Cunninghams to choose to pay out of pocket. “We looked around for international health insurance, but it was more than we wanted to pay,” she said.

[suzannegoh]

I think that you have that backwards. When you hit 50 the average person has about 30 years left and the odds of having a major (expensive) medical problem go up by the year. At age 20, odds are you won't many major medical conditions in the near future. So it makes a lot more sense to go without medical insurance when young than when old.

I won't argue with your '30 years left' (although none of my family ever made 70 and I'm already over 60).

But what I will question is the worth of that 30 years.

I've never seen ANYONE over 70 with a life worth living.

They merely survive, because they can't face dying.

I'm going to guess that you are considerably younger than 50 and are in good health. Without a doubt people's average quality of life would be improved if everyone was euthanized when they reached 65.

Edited April 10, 2016 by suzannegoh

[BritManToo]

I'm going to guess that you are considerably younger than 50 and are in good health. Without a doubt people's average quality of life would be improved if everyone was euthanized when they reached 65.

Nope, as I said, I'm 60+, hoping for another 5 years.

Don't have unrealistic plans for the future.

[SpokaneAl]

I think that you have that backwards. When you hit 50 the average person has about 30 years left and the odds of having a major (expensive) medical problem go up by the year. At age 20, odds are you won't many major medical conditions in the near future. So it makes a lot more sense to go without medical insurance when young than when old.

I won't argue with your '30 years left' (although none of my family ever made 70 and I'm already over 60).

But what I will question is the worth of that 30 years.

I've never seen ANYONE over 70 with a life worth living.

They merely survive, because they can't face dying.

I'm going to guess that you are considerably younger than 50 and are in good health. Without a doubt people's average quality of life would be improved if everyone was euthanized when they reached 65.

BritManToo, now see what you've started?

[khunPer]

I think that you have that backwards. When you hit 50 the average person has about 30 years left and the odds of having a major (expensive) medical problem go up by the year. At age 20, odds are you won't many major medical conditions in the near future. So it makes a lot more sense to go without medical insurance when young than when old.

I won't argue with your '30 years left' (although none of my family ever made 70 and I'm already over 60).

But what I will question is the worth of that 30 years.

I've never seen ANYONE over 70 with a life worth living.

They merely survive, because they can't face dying.

What a sad vision of the future – then I'm lucky knowing numerous folks over 70 with an outstanding active and good life.

Must admit, I'm planning to carry on for many more years – at least, so I hope – hope it's in my genes...

My dad for example, had a life worth living when he was over 70. When he booked an airticket from a North European country to Turkey, the airline wished to have a statement that my dad was fit for flight, and asked for the name of his medical doctor? My dad replied, that he did not know, as he had never had a doctor. When the airline realized he was going to play a tennis show-match in a ATP-tournament, they presumed he was "fit for flight" – they had been concerned, because he was 101 year old...

Edited April 10, 2016 by khunPer

[theguyfromanotherforum]

Oh geez....here we go with fitness grandpa's. Funny thing is that I am yet to see a single guy over 55 in Thailand who doesn't start panting and sweating his chang wifebeater after 2 minutes in the sun.

Where are you all hiding?

[sirineou]

I was always a healthy active 5'10 165 lb male , never sick in 55 years, the during a routine medical , that I might add I might not have if I did not have medical insurance to pay for.

a heart murmur was detected, upon further investigation, a bi-cuspid aortic heart valve was discovered to be the cause, a condition I was born with.

If gone undiscovered and or untreated , I could have died from it. Open heart valve replacement surgery, at one of the best hospitals in the world, subsequent followup, an arrhythmia developed,

One of the problems with 'routine medicals', they make money from finding problems.

The problems may be real but no treatment needed, or they may be fictitious.

The outcome is always the same, loads of money spent, and a new victim proclaiming how he was saved.

You had lived a healthy life for 55 years, I suspect you would have continued to live without any doctor intervention.

I agree that it may not have been necessary to immediately replace the heart valve, but it is ABSOLUTELY necessary for someone to know they have this condition. It's a congenital defect that exists in 1 - 2% of the population, with men much more likely to have it. It's a silent killer and is usually the reason that seemingly healthy athletes suddenly die of heart failure during performance. You see, the condition can cause enlargement of the aorta and sudden aortic dissection upon exertion. Someone with this condition should:

• Patients with known BAV should undergo:
  • An echocardiogram to evaluate the aortic valve for stenosis or regurgitation and to assess for any other structural heart problems
  • A chest CT scan to make measurements of the diameter of the aorta at various points along its length.
• Cardiac CT scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are alternatives if echocardiography is not available or possible for some reason
• If there is enlargement of the beginning portion of the aorta to greater than 4.0 cm, the individual should have a yearly assessment of the diameter of the aorta
• Medical therapy may be useful to slow or halt the progression of aortic valve disease and aortic enlargement by reducing the blood pressure and the blood pressure across the aortic valve. Beta-blockers (eg, metoprolol) are recommended for this purpose.
• Because BAV may be an inherited condition, first-degree relatives of individuals with BAV should undergo evaluation.

Source: http://www.athletesheart.org/2013/09/more-on-athletes-and-bicuspid-aortic/

I'm sorry BritManToo, but you're not making a good argument for ignoring one's health and failing to have routine health screenings. However, Sirineou probably should have sought a second opinion and asked if there were non-surgical ways to manage his condition. Someone can live a long time with heart valve issues that are managed with medications and periodic screenings.

As I said I have top of the line medical insurance, provided by my lob.

All the tests Nancy mentioned were done, second and third opinions were taken measurements of the stenosis were conducted over the period of a couple of a year,

and the degree of calcification monitored.

The conclusion, I could live many years or could have a cardiac episode at any time

Regardless If I was to be re-certified and continue to do the work I love I had to do it.

As a vested member of two Trade unions I could have gone out on disability and collect full SS disability also , but that meant that I could never work again, and I love working.

Anyway, this is not about me or my medical condition. It is about the need for medical insurance.

I am not claim to be holier than thou , I had insurance because of my job, as I said, I was in good physical condition, I did not fit the profile, never being sick in my life, dont smoke, and only drink for medicional purposes and if I had to pay for it personally, I might have gone the cheap Charley way, I am certainly not above that.

But I am glad I had the insurance, if I did not, I could have died, I would certainly have had an increasingly decreasing quality of life. and I would have had to give up my job.

Point , you never know what life will throw at you

PS: some one in this thread, said if God is calling you.... Me and God have always had a difficult relationship. She can call all she wants, I will go when I am good and ready

Edited April 10, 2016 by sirineou

[MadMac]

I'm just back from Central Airport and I tried to figure out the terms and conditions for the vCare Savings accident insurance. Pretty disappointing and incompetent. I have to put my recommendation for UOB on hold unless I eventually get some useful information.

They do not know anything about it. The only thing certain is that a beneficiary will get paid in case of death. That they only know, because one has to name this beneficiary. That's however not what an accident insurance should cover.

I pointed the lady to their own website and she was obviously surprised what was written there, new for her. They do not have any T&Cs but instead of saying so, she tried to sell me another vCare debit card. <deleted>?! After talking to the boss they could at least figure out that the insurance provider is Thaivivat. I will try to get better information through the UOB hotline.

Wife says there are many cases launched withe the customer protection agency where banks sell insurances but do not honor them. So the only recommendation for now is stay away from banks and get a real insurance, if you need one.

[SpokaneAl]

Oh geez....here we go with fitness grandpa's. Funny thing is that I am yet to see a single guy over 55 in Thailand who doesn't start panting and sweating his chang wifebeater after 2 minutes in the sun.

Where are you all hiding?

He started it first!

[suzannegoh]

I'm going to guess that you are considerably younger than 50 and are in good health. Without a doubt people's average quality of life would be improved if everyone was euthanized when they reached 65.

Nope, as I said, I'm 60+, hoping for another 5 years.

Don't have unrealistic plans for the future.

If that's the case (that you are 60+ yrs old) then definitely you shouldn't buy medical insurance and if you encounter an expensive medical problem you should just kill yourself. But that's not the outlook that most people have on life.

[fey]

Oh geez....here we go with fitness grandpa's. Funny thing is that I am yet to see a single guy over 55 in Thailand who doesn't start panting and sweating his chang wifebeater after 2 minutes in the sun.

Where are you all hiding?

hard to do it when its viewed as not normal by the thais. no way would i bike around like i used to daily in home country.

part of its just me, the other part is social pressure. expectations are to stay out of the sun and sit around drinking. even my maid got weird when i tried to break down some boxes outside myself.

one of the things i never got used to in thailand. i still do some of my own laundry, when others arent watching though. ill walk in the rain sometimes too if there arnt to many thais watching

Edited April 10, 2016 by fey

[suzannegoh]

Oh geez....here we go with fitness grandpa's. Funny thing is that I am yet to see a single guy over 55 in Thailand who doesn't start panting and sweating his chang wifebeater after 2 minutes in the sun.

Where are you all hiding?

Oh geez.... another gamer.

[JLCrab]

I have been fully been fully insured health insurance-wise for 12 years since arriving full-time in Thailand. After reading all the information here and elsewhere on ThaiVisa, as to the health insurance rip-offs and that anyone who could afford to pay cash for their own medical expenses should not buy insurance, and that there are much better things that one could do with the money that they would save on annual premiums, etc., I have decided:

I will renew my policy for the 13th year when it comes due in a few months.

Edited April 10, 2016 by JLCrab

[fey]

I have been fully been fully insured health insurance-wise for 12 years since arriving full-time in Thailand. After reading all the information here and elsewhere on ThaiVisa, as to the health insurance rip-offs and that anyone who could afford to pay cash for their own medical expenses should not buy insurance, and that there are much better things that one could do with the money that they would save on annual premiums, etc., I have decided:

I will renew my policy for the 13th year when it comes due in a few months.

did you use it during those 12 years? if not, its hard to argue thst it was a good investment

[JLCrab]

I have been fully been fully insured health insurance-wise for 12 years since arriving full-time in Thailand. After reading all the information here and elsewhere on ThaiVisa, as to the health insurance rip-offs and that anyone who could afford to pay cash for their own medical expenses should not buy insurance, and that there are much better things that one could do with the money that they would save on annual premiums, etc., I have decided:

I will renew my policy for the 13th year when it comes due in a few months.

did you use it during those 12 years? if not, its hard to argue thst it was a good investment

Yes -- and unlike some others on here, I was not smart enough to know in advance whether I was going to need it or not.

[suzannegoh]

I have been fully been fully insured health insurance-wise for 12 years since arriving full-time in Thailand. After reading all the information here and elsewhere on ThaiVisa, as to the health insurance rip-offs and that anyone who could afford to pay cash for their own medical expenses should not buy insurance, and that there are much better things that one could do with the money that they would save on annual premiums, etc., I have decided:

I will renew my policy for the 13th year when it comes due in a few months.

did you use it during those 12 years? if not, its hard to argue thst it was a good investment

Calculating whether it's a good investment is not always straight forward. We've had an expensive policy with worldwide coverage for several years and the insurance company has paid out somewhat more in medical bills than what we have paid in premiums. But a big part of the reason that the insurance company has paid out so much is that they will pay the full cost (less an annual deductible) for medical care at any hospital, including Bumrungrad. Therefore we go to Bumrungrad for just about everything, but if we didn't have that policy we probably would have shopped around for cheaper care and found it.

[theguyfromanotherforum]

Why do you need insurance in Thailand when there is gofundme?

[JLCrab]

I would say calculating whether health insurance is a good investment is easy: If you get real sick and your medical costs greatly exceed your cumulative premiums, it was good investment. If you don't get real sick and your medical costs do not exceed your cumulative premiums, it was not a good investment.

So as long as you know that you are not going to get real sick, don't buy it.

[Naam]

i can only shake my head when i read/hear that health insurance is an "investment"; good when one gets sick and bad when one stays healthy.

oh dear...

[suzannegoh]

I would say calculating whether health insurance is a good investment is easy: If you get real sick and your medical costs greatly exceed your cumulative premiums, it was good investment. If you don't get real sick and your medical costs do not exceed your cumulative premiums, it was not a good investment.

So as long as you know that you are not going to get real sick, don't buy it.

Agreed, but my point is that because we have a highend insurance policy we have no incentive to minimize our medical expenses and hence we don't. There have been quite a few things that we could have had done for half the price if we shopped around for the best deal, but instead we head straight to Bumrungrad because the insurance will pay. If we didn't have insurance our medical bills would have been lower than what the insurance company paid.

[sirineou]

i can only shake my head when i read/hear that health insurance is an "investment"; good when one gets sick and bad when one stays healthy.

oh dear...

What are you talking about? When you buy medical insurance you should want to get really really sick so you would get your monies worth.

I know I get pissed off every day I wake up healthy.

[Naam]

i can only shake my head when i read/hear that health insurance is an "investment"; good when one gets sick and bad when one stays healthy.

oh dear...

What are you talking about? When you buy medical insurance you should want to get really really sick so you would get your monies worth.

I know I get pissed off every day I wake up healthy.

[chiang mai]

I would say calculating whether health insurance is a good investment is easy: If you get real sick and your medical costs greatly exceed your cumulative premiums, it was good investment. If you don't get real sick and your medical costs do not exceed your cumulative premiums, it was not a good investment.

So as long as you know that you are not going to get real sick, don't buy it.

Agreed, but my point is that because we have a highend insurance policy we have no incentive to minimize our medical expenses and hence we don't. There have been quite a few things that we could have had done for half the price if we shopped around for the best deal, but instead we head straight to Bumrungrad because the insurance will pay. If we didn't have insurance our medical bills would have been lower than what the insurance company paid.

You will pay for your choice eventually through higher premiums, it makes little sense to me to pay X for a procedure when far cheaper cost Y can be easily obtained elsewhere with same level of risk, case in point a coronary PCI. Selecting the higher cost option every time, just because the insurance company will pay, does nothing more than drive prices ever upwards.

[mania]

i can only shake my head when i read/hear that health insurance is an "investment"; good when one gets sick and bad when one stays healthy.

oh dear...

What are you talking about? When you buy medical insurance you should want to get really really sick so you would get your monies worth.

I know I get pissed off every day I wake up healthy.

Come now this is Thailand ...for a fee we can arrange you wake tomorrow unhealthy or ??

[SpokaneAl]

Back to the subject of aging . . .

[suzannegoh]

I would say calculating whether health insurance is a good investment is easy: If you get real sick and your medical costs greatly exceed your cumulative premiums, it was good investment. If you don't get real sick and your medical costs do not exceed your cumulative premiums, it was not a good investment.

So as long as you know that you are not going to get real sick, don't buy it.

Agreed, but my point is that because we have a highend insurance policy we have no incentive to minimize our medical expenses and hence we don't. There have been quite a few things that we could have had done for half the price if we shopped around for the best deal, but instead we head straight to Bumrungrad because the insurance will pay. If we didn't have insurance our medical bills would have been lower than what the insurance company paid.

You will pay for your choice eventually through higher premiums, it makes little sense to me to pay X for a procedure when far cheaper cost Y can be easily obtained elsewhere with same level of risk, case in point a coronary PCI. Selecting the higher cost option every time, just because the insurance company will pay, does nothing more than drive prices ever upwards.

That's a pooled cost though, not an individual one. By selecting expensive care I am indirectly causing insurance rates to go up overall but it does not have a direct effect on my rates. Though some policies might be that way, my annual premiums are not a function of my actual medical expenses, they are determined by demographics and statistics. Edited April 10, 2016 by suzannegoh

[sirineou]

i can only shake my head when i read/hear that health insurance is an "investment"; good when one gets sick and bad when one stays healthy.

oh dear...

What are you talking about? When you buy medical insurance you should want to get really really sick so you would get your monies worth.

I know I get pissed off every day I wake up healthy.

Come now this is Thailand ...for a fee we can arrange you wake tomorrow unhealthy or ??

It's the "Or" I worry about. Nothing worst than waking up dead.

It is not the dead part I worry about , but the stigma associated with being dead,

People stop calling you, they cross the street and pretend not to see you, They don't invite you to parties as much as they used to and when they do, no one wants to talk to you.

I tell you, If I wake up dead, I would hide it as best as I can.

[chiang mai]

I would say calculating whether health insurance is a good investment is easy: If you get real sick and your medical costs greatly exceed your cumulative premiums, it was good investment. If you don't get real sick and your medical costs do not exceed your cumulative premiums, it was not a good investment.

So as long as you know that you are not going to get real sick, don't buy it.

Agreed, but my point is that because we have a highend insurance policy we have no incentive to minimize our medical expenses and hence we don't. There have been quite a few things that we could have had done for half the price if we shopped around for the best deal, but instead we head straight to Bumrungrad because the insurance will pay. If we didn't have insurance our medical bills would have been lower than what the insurance company paid.

You will pay for your choice eventually through higher premiums, it makes little sense to me to pay X for a procedure when far cheaper cost Y can be easily obtained elsewhere with same level of risk, case in point a coronary PCI. Selecting the higher cost option every time, just because the insurance company will pay, does nothing more than drive prices ever upwards.

That's a pooled cost though, not an individual one. By selecting expensive care I am indirectly causing insurance rates to go up overall but it does not have a direct effect on my rates. Though some policies might be that way, my annual premiums are not a function of my actual medical expenses, they are determined by demographics and statistics.

"they are determined by demographics and statistics", of which your actual medical expenses form a part - Bumrungrad is one of the the most expensive private hospitals in the country. If you lived in the US you wouldn't automatically have al your health care issues taken care of at North Okaloosa Medical Center (FL), so why do similar in Thailand.

http://www.menshealth.com/health/50-most-overpriced-hospitals

Edited April 10, 2016 by chiang mai

[suzannegoh]

Agreed, but my point is that because we have a highend insurance policy we have no incentive to minimize our medical expenses and hence we don't. There have been quite a few things that we could have had done for half the price if we shopped around for the best deal, but instead we head straight to Bumrungrad because the insurance will pay. If we didn't have insurance our medical bills would have been lower than what the insurance company paid.

You will pay for your choice eventually through higher premiums, it makes little sense to me to pay X for a procedure when far cheaper cost Y can be easily obtained elsewhere with same level of risk, case in point a coronary PCI. Selecting the higher cost option every time, just because the insurance company will pay, does nothing more than drive prices ever upwards.

That's a pooled cost though, not an individual one. By selecting expensive care I am indirectly causing insurance rates to go up overall but it does not have a direct effect on my rates. Though some policies might be that way, my annual premiums are not a function of my actual medical expenses, they are determined by demographics and statistics.

"they are determined by demographics and statistics", of which your actual medical expenses form a part - Bumrungrad is one of the the most expensive private hospitals in the country. If you lived in the US you wouldn't automatically have al your health care issues taken care of at North Okaloosa Medical Center (FL), so why do similar in Thailand.

http://www.menshealth.com/health/50-most-overpriced-hospitals

You're not the first farang to object to my spending habits and I doubt that you will be the last. It's not just me that is causing this problem, everyone with insurance is contributing to rising medical costs to some degree. If no one had insurance there is no way that private hospitals would be able to charge as much money as they do.

[naammanow]

Wow, this is some thread. What is insurance anyway? For me it is just one thing: "peace of mind" That's why one has car insurance (first class) house insurance, and yes health insurance. Cost yes an "arm and a leg" It buys you "that you will never ever will be a burden to your family, relatives or friends" For that I will pay every year and hope every year as well that I do not need to use it. The comfort of knowing that you will be taken care of, not be a drain on the family as well as getting the best treatment if and when, is worth it every time and every Baht.