Text 4
Could money cure sick health-care systems in Britain, which will be the place to look for proof in 2003. The National Health Service (NHS), which offers free health care financed by taxes, is receiving an emergency no-expense-spared injection of cash. By 2007, total health spending in Britain will reach over 9 % of GDP——the same share France had when it was rated the world’s best health service by the World Health Organization in 2000.
The Labor government’s response was not to conduct a fundamental review about how best to reform health care for the 21st century. Rather, it concluded that shortage of money, not the form of financing or provision, was the main problem. In 2002, Gordon Brown, the powerful chancellor of the exchequer, used a review of the NHS’S future financing requirements to reject alternative funding models that would allow patients to sign up with competing insurers and so exercise greater control over
A. the Labor government conducted a review about how to cut down on costs.
B. the money pouring into the NHS did bring with it productivity and quality.
C. the problem of funds put into medical care should be thoroughly reexamined.
D. the health-care systems in Britain will become the envy of the rest of the world.
The health-care economy is filled with unusual and even unique economic relationships. One of the least understood involves the peculiar roles of producer of "provider" and purchaser of "consumer" in the typical doctor-patient relationship. In most sectors of the economy, it is the seller who attempts to attract a potential buyer with various inducements of price, quality, and utility, and it is the buyer who makes the decision. Such condition, however, does not prevail in most of the health-care industry.
In the health-care industry, the doctor-patient relationship is the mirror image of the ordinary relationship between producer and consumer. Once an individual has chosen to see a physician—and even then there may be no real choice—it is the physician who usually makes all significant purchasing decisions: whether the patient should return "next Wednesday", whether X-rays are needed, whether drugs should be prescribed, etc. It i
A. Few patients are reluctant to object to the course of the treatment prescribed by a doctor or to question the cost of the services.
B. The more serious the illness of a patient, the less likely it is that the patient will object to the course of treatment prescribed or to question the cost of services.
C. The payer, whether insurance carrier or the government, is less likely to acquiesce to demands for payment when the illness of the patient is regarded as serious.
D. The payer makes the final decision as to whether the patient should receive expensive treatment.
Text 3
Could money cure sick health-care systems in Britain, which will be the place to look for proof in 2003. The National Health Service (NHS), which offers free health care financed by taxes, is receiving an emergency no-expense-spared injection of cash. By 2007, total health spending in Britain will reach over 9% of GDP--the same share France had when it was rated the world’s best health service by the World Health Organization in 2000.
The Labor government’s response was not to conduct a fundamental review about how best to reform health care for the 21st century. Rather, it concluded that shortage of money, not the form of financing or provision, was the main problem. In 2002, Gordon Brown, the powerful chancellor of the exchequer, used a review of the NHS’s future financing requirements to reject alternative funding models that would allow patients to sign up with competing insurers and so exercise greater control over their own he
A. the Labor government conducted a review about how to cut down on costs.
B. the money pouring into the NHS did bring with it productivity and quality.
C. the problem of funds put into medical care should be thoroughly reexamined.
D. the health-care systems in Britain will become the envy of the rest of the world.
我来回答:
