Preventive maintenance: Works on the principle of prevention is better than cure. Fair enough. But what one needs to know is, in this school of thought, each time you take your car to a workshop for check up and service...in the quest for keeping all it's systems near perfect...to avoid any big breakdown issue, almost every time there will be some thing discovered that isn't working quite right - something that needs to be repaired.
It would be extremely rare to come out of such a check up with a clear result that everything is working just fine.
From a finance perspective, this potentially involves small, frequent expenses.
Reactive repairs: In this school of thought, you go to a car workshop when you as the owner of the car notice something strange and want to get it checked.
In this mode, you remain indifferent to all the small things that keep cropping up and only take action when you believe that the problem is not really going away and you make a decision on seeking expert check up.
From a finance perspective, this potentially involves larger infrequent expenses.
What would you pick?
This is the basic difference between a scenario where there is public health and there is no 'real, mainstream' public health system involved.
In Germany, having a public health insurance works on the preventive maintenance model. Since the money involved is a pool of tax payer's money, the aging population to look after etc. The public health system really tries to identify health issues in people early on - when treatment from this pool is relatively cheaper and lesser. They discourage waiting for the last minute because that will mean potentially higher costs.
But how can one live peacefully with the FYI given to you by the doctor about a list of things that are wrong in your body? Knowing is the first part - taking action on this is a loooooong drawn process that can span many years until some real actionable insight is arrived. This is how the public health insurance system works here.
It's a painful process, but at a macro level, it works on ensuring a certain standard of healthcare for all people regardless of their ability to pay etc.
In India, we do not visit a doctor unless we feel something is really wrong with us...unless all home remedies have failed. Recently, in the IT industry, our employers made it mandatory to do check ups annually. But this is a small segment of the population. Most of us do not think of a doctor unless we feel we need to. Most often we pay money directly to the doctors for our treatment. General, mainstream health issues are still relatively cheap for the middle class.
In this case, the longer we wait, the more the doctors and medical institutions benefit. Sometimes waiting becomes quite an expensive affair for the patients too (even middle class) because one has to pay for it completely out of one's savings.
I am not sure I know which model I prefer. From a peace of mind perspective, I prefer the Indian - reactive approach. I believe the body is capable of healing itself. I am sure there are some things that are not working optimally. But as long as they do not impact my day-to-day life, I do not bother. However, who knows when something potentially small can turn into something big? Should I be thankful of things that are identified?
I don't know. Do you? What would you prefer?
It would be extremely rare to come out of such a check up with a clear result that everything is working just fine.
From a finance perspective, this potentially involves small, frequent expenses.
Reactive repairs: In this school of thought, you go to a car workshop when you as the owner of the car notice something strange and want to get it checked.
In this mode, you remain indifferent to all the small things that keep cropping up and only take action when you believe that the problem is not really going away and you make a decision on seeking expert check up.
From a finance perspective, this potentially involves larger infrequent expenses.
What would you pick?
This is the basic difference between a scenario where there is public health and there is no 'real, mainstream' public health system involved.
In Germany, having a public health insurance works on the preventive maintenance model. Since the money involved is a pool of tax payer's money, the aging population to look after etc. The public health system really tries to identify health issues in people early on - when treatment from this pool is relatively cheaper and lesser. They discourage waiting for the last minute because that will mean potentially higher costs.
But how can one live peacefully with the FYI given to you by the doctor about a list of things that are wrong in your body? Knowing is the first part - taking action on this is a loooooong drawn process that can span many years until some real actionable insight is arrived. This is how the public health insurance system works here.
It's a painful process, but at a macro level, it works on ensuring a certain standard of healthcare for all people regardless of their ability to pay etc.
In India, we do not visit a doctor unless we feel something is really wrong with us...unless all home remedies have failed. Recently, in the IT industry, our employers made it mandatory to do check ups annually. But this is a small segment of the population. Most of us do not think of a doctor unless we feel we need to. Most often we pay money directly to the doctors for our treatment. General, mainstream health issues are still relatively cheap for the middle class.
In this case, the longer we wait, the more the doctors and medical institutions benefit. Sometimes waiting becomes quite an expensive affair for the patients too (even middle class) because one has to pay for it completely out of one's savings.
I am not sure I know which model I prefer. From a peace of mind perspective, I prefer the Indian - reactive approach. I believe the body is capable of healing itself. I am sure there are some things that are not working optimally. But as long as they do not impact my day-to-day life, I do not bother. However, who knows when something potentially small can turn into something big? Should I be thankful of things that are identified?
I don't know. Do you? What would you prefer?
