Once again, the health insurance industry, represented by United Health Care’s Colleen Van Ham’s recent letter, is misleading. Health care services are fundamentally different than, say, hiring somebody to mow your lawn or repair a vehicle. These are services for which we’re capable of making price/benefit comparisons.

Health care consumers are at a fundamental disadvantage. We don’t have “consumer sovereignty” — that is, consumers capable of making informed decisions about health procedures or necessary actions. We have physician sovereignty. Doctors decide whether that ache in our chest is a heart problem, lung cancer or belly gas, and doctors prescribe the appropriate treatment options. We require physicians to spend years in medical schools and pass licensing tests to make that decision.

Second, whatever the price, a rational patient wants effective beneficial care, and relies on the doctor-patient relationship, referred to as a “Sacred Trust,” to make the right diagnosis and prescribe effective treatment regardless of cost.

No rational patient says: “You know, Doc, that chemotherapy is too costly, can’t I take a couple aspirin and wait for a summer sale?”

Americans pay over $1 trillion annually for private health insurance, with 15 percent to 20 percent going for insurance overhead and profits. Medicare overhead is around 2 percent. If we phased-in a Medicare-for-All program we could save over $100 billion annually, which is more than Ms. Van Ham proposes we could save in 10 years with transparent pricing.

It doesn’t require a Harvard MBA to tally up which is the better deal.

Liam McDonnell

Springfield