TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

UnitedHealth hired a defamation law firm to go after social media posts

240 点作者 taimurkazmi3 个月前

22 条评论

mitchellst3 个月前
I want to complain a little about the journalism (not) being done here. Because I read this article, and I read the (better, but still lacking) Bloomberg Law article it links&#x2F;rewrites, and I still have no idea what&#x27;s happening.<p>The law firm says the surgeon made false claims. (Which claims? Were they false?)<p>The surgeon reacted with some twitter grandstanding saying she was on the side of the women she cares for who are battling cancer. (Noble, but irrelevant. She can tell the truth for a good cause or lie for a good cause. Which did she do?)<p>UHC&#x27;s spokesperson makes a big show of saying there are &quot;no insurance-related circumstances that would ever require a physician to step out of surgery&quot; and they would &quot;never ask or expect that.&quot; Happens all the time actually, in part because if you don&#x27;t work on the insurance company&#x27;s schedule and answer their calls, you may not be able to talk to them for weeks, and your patient is denied in the meantime. But is that what was happening here? Apparently nobody thought to ask or include that information.<p>The implication of this news item is that UHC has hired a shakedown operation to chill criticism on social media. Big if true. But it seems to really matter whether the people on either side are telling the truth. Somebody should report that out. Alas, I guess &quot;big company vs plucky surgeon in social media spat&quot; is a simple script that requires no work, we don&#x27;t need to be curious about who the hero(ine) and the villain are.
评论 #43016681 未加载
评论 #43016548 未加载
评论 #43017359 未加载
评论 #43016865 未加载
评论 #43020263 未加载
评论 #43016645 未加载
评论 #43017887 未加载
评论 #43017595 未加载
评论 #43017618 未加载
perihelions3 个月前
Also discussed on &#x2F;r&#x2F;medicine if that piques anyone&#x27;s curiosity,<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;medicine&#x2F;comments&#x2F;1igp35p&#x2F;follow_up_the_doctor_who_was_pulled_out_of&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;medicine&#x2F;comments&#x2F;1igp35p&#x2F;follow_up...</a> (<i>&quot;Follow up: The doctor who was pulled out of surgery to call UHC because they were denying her patient’s stay got a threatening letter from UHC for talking about it on social media&quot;</i>, 181 comments)
评论 #43016561 未加载
surfpel3 个月前
Naturally. I&#x27;d say they&#x27;d be willing to kill to keep their reputation up, but that&#x27;s already their business model so...
SteveNuts3 个月前
There&#x27;s also a lot of rumblings of massive layoffs coming at UNH, with senior leadership setting goals to be 50% offshore across the board.
评论 #43016341 未加载
评论 #43016102 未加载
sam0x173 个月前
This is their strategy to improve their public image??
评论 #43016579 未加载
评论 #43016447 未加载
kinjba113 个月前
My company recently switched to UHC for 2025. My regular monthly out of network claim was fine with Aetna. With UHC? After I filled out a long form with information in a PDF, they <i>mailed</i> me a letter saying they needed more information. The exact information I had already given them, except for one thing trivially looked up, the provider&#x27;s phone number. They asked that I mail them more information. I don&#x27;t have a printer. So I had to get PDFs, go to the library, print them, buy envelopes (yes they did not provide one) and stamps, and mail it. I have yet to hear back anything. I am going to have to follow up myself. Is it worth it to me to spend this much time? The frustration is real. Even if the doctor here is technically in the wrong, UHC deserves every negative press possible. What they pull should be illegal, companies like these are a big part of why our healthcare system is a joke.
lencastre3 个月前
That is the fourth D, or?
wesselbindt3 个月前
Depose
ChrisArchitect3 个月前
Earlier source: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=42954798">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=42954798</a><p>and Related:<p><i>UnitedHealth Is Sick of Everyone Complaining About Its Claim Denials</i><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=42992121">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=42992121</a>
评论 #43017239 未加载
legitster3 个月前
Obviously nobody in their right mind would defend the bean-counters at UHC. But also picking a side with the hospitals and making this a &quot;them vs us&quot; issue is pretty naive. Hospitals and providers are complicit in their own fair share of awful dealings, and you shouldn&#x27;t automatically take their side.<p>In this case, the irony is baked right in. UHC was calling the provider <i>because the provider</i> legitimately screwed up the billing codes and was trying to overcharge the patient!
fiftyfifty3 个月前
Why can&#x27;t they just put this money towards rejecting fewer claims?
评论 #43016316 未加载
评论 #43016423 未加载
评论 #43016064 未加载
tim3333 个月前
Musk was on TV from the oval office yesterday saying a &quot;significant part of this presidency is to restore democracy&quot;...&quot;what meaning does democracy actually have if the people cannot vote and have their will be decided by their elected representatives&quot;.<p>That was referring to bureaucracy but it seems where America really needs to restore democracy is with things like health insurance where everyone hates it but the consensus is it&#x27;ll never change because of the money spent lobbying politicians? (Musk thing <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;gAuTb-yMNk4?t=63" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;gAuTb-yMNk4?t=63</a>)
throwway1203853 个月前
Why don&#x27;t they review the phone records and recordings of their phone calls regarding the patient? They were able to do that for my partner. They record all of their phone calls &quot;for quality assurance purposes.&quot; I&#x27;m not surprised they&#x27;re gaslighting now. It&#x27;s how they always operate in these cases.<p>I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised if the person they talked to actually worked for Optum which is why UHC is denying that they would ever do anything so insensitive as call a doctor to deny a claim mid-surgery.
评论 #43016409 未加载
评论 #43017744 未加载
more_corn3 个月前
“Our bad behavior is causing public backlash. Wat do?”<p>Maybe stop behaving badly?<p>“Naw, we’ll lawyer up and crush those peasants.”
hsuduebc23 个月前
They will do anything in their power to not look bad except stop acting like complete garbage.
benatkin3 个月前
Keep in mind that this is enshittification and that tech enshittifiers are doing the same thing. At one time UnitedHealth was competitive in quality of coverage, while still along with most or all of their competitors being awful by any absolute standard. Now they’re capturing extra money at the expense of their reputation, and aren’t trying to bring their reputation back but merely to slow its decline. If it causes their market share to shrink there are bankruptcies and tax write offs to pursue and their investors can invest in other firms and the deadly grift continues.
评论 #43016264 未加载
tzs3 个月前
UHC even manages to be shady with their Medigap plans. Medigap should be the hardest kind of medical insurance for a company to be shady with, but they manage.<p>Brief background for people who have had no reason to know what the hell Medigap is: in the US if you choose traditional Medicare at 65 [1] it is pretty simple. Various preventative services are covered 100% with no deductible, and other services are covered with a $257 deductible and a 20% copay.<p>You can buy &quot;Medigap&quot; insurance from private companies that help cover your Medicare copay and sometimes other things Medicare doesn&#x27;t pay. Medigap plans are standardized by the government named Plan A through Plan N which vary in what they cover and how much they cover it.<p>It should be hard to be a shady Medigap insurer because they are almost completely out of the loop. You go to your doctor, the doctor says you need say an MRI, you go get that done and the bill is $500. The MRI place sends the bill to Medicare, Medicare pays 80% ($400), and also notifies your Medigap insurer. The Medigap insurer then pays the remaining 20% ($100).<p>The Medigap insurer doesn&#x27;t have a say in whether or not they have to cover it. If Medicare approves covering their 80% then the Medigap plan has to cover it too. No saying that you should have went to a cheaper MRI place, or your doctor should have done some other cheaper test instead of an MRI.<p>So if they can&#x27;t be shady when it comes to coverage, what can they be shady on? They can be shady when trying to get you to sign up.<p>Suppose you are in Texas and are turning 65 and are shopping for a Medigap plan. You decide you want plan G. On Medicare.gov for zip code 75002 (first zip code I found when searching for &quot;Texas zip codes&quot;) there are 44 plan G Medigap plans available from 33 different insurance companies.<p>30 of these companies are using &quot;attained age&quot; pricing. Premiums are low for younger buyers and go up as a function of age.<p>2 of them use &quot;issue age&quot; pricing. Your initial premium depends on your age when you buy, but does not then go up as a function of age.<p>Finally, one company, UHC, uses &quot;community&quot; pricing. With community pricing the premiums are not a function of age. If you buy a community priced plan with a $200&#x2F;month premium at 65 you might be paying say $300 at 75, but that won&#x27;t be because of your age. It will be because of inflation. In particular when you are paying $300 at 75 that is also what someone signing up at 65 that year will be paying. Hence why it called &quot;community&quot; pricing--everyone on that plan pays the same.<p>For someone at 65 typically an attained age plan will be cheaper than a community plan. So why would you ever buy a community plan? Buy an attained age plan, and a few years later when the price rises above the price of community plans switch plans, right?<p>The problem with that is that in most states if you are joining a Medigap plan other than in a window around when you turned 65 (and some other exceptional situations) the insurer is allowed to take age and pre-existing conditions into account. They can refuse to sell you a plan, or charge higher premiums, or exclude your pre-existing conditions from coverage.<p>That means if you are in such a state and either have expensive pre-existing conditions or will be unfortunate enough to develop some later you may be stuck with the Medigap plan you first buy. Then a community rated plan can make a lot of sense. If you are going to be stuck with your plan a $200&#x2F;month community plan may be more attractive than an attained age plan that is $150&#x2F;month now that will be rising to $350&#x2F;month over the next say 20 years.<p>OK, so now imagine you are 65. You&#x27;ve entered 65 as your age in the plan finder at Medicare.gov. You see all those plan G attained age plans which start at $133&#x2F;month, and the issue age plans that start at $166&#x2F;month. And then there are the UHC community plans starting at $166&#x2F;month.<p>That sure looks attractive. $166&#x2F;month that doesn&#x27;t change as a function of age will in a few years be a better deal than $133&#x2F;month that goes up as a function of age.<p>When you follow the link to the plan website and fill in your information you will indeed be told it is $166&#x2F;month (or close). But under that there is a line that says &quot;$308.39 standard premium&quot; with the $308.39 struck out. And below that it says &quot;Includes $138.78 in discounts&quot;.<p>They are apparently claiming it is a community priced plan because everyone has a standard premium of $308.39, but then they give an age based discount. If you are 65-67 it is 45%. Then it goes down 2% a year through age 79. Then it goes down 3% a year until reaching 0 at age 86.<p>I fail to see how this is not in fact an attained age plan. Based on what I&#x27;ve read on &#x2F;r&#x2F;medicare and other forums where people new to Medicare seek advice I&#x27;m sure that there are people who will not notice this and buy that plan thinking the premium won&#x27;t be going up as a function of age.<p>I believe that there are other insurers doing this same disguising of an attained age plan as a community plan, but is particularly scummy in the case of UHC because UHC has a deal with AARP to provide these plans under the AARP name.<p>Medicare.gov does know that the price actually does depend on age. If you change you info on Medicare.gov&#x27;s plan search to say you are 75 it does show a higher price for the UHC plan just like it does for the attained age and issue age plans, so if you think to do that you might catch that something is fishy.<p>But if you are already predisposed toward UHC because of the AARP association and because you want community pricing, you might not see a need to try other ages since you would not expect that to matter.<p>I&#x27;m in a state where they don&#x27;t do those shenanigans. In my state all plans are community rated and if you signed up for Medigap when you turned 65 you can later freely change plans and providers and the new provider has to accept you with no exclusions for pre-existing conditions and with the same premium they charge everyone else.<p>If UHC tried that discount trick here what would happen is people would sign up with them at 65 to get the 45% discount, and as soon as that discount has declined enough to where what they were actually paying was more than the plans of the other plan G providers they would switch to one of those.<p>More and more states are liberalizing their rules for Medigap plan switching. Only a few are as liberal as mine (Washington) but several do allow you to easily switch between providers of the same letter plan with no penalties for pre-existing conditions and no higher premiums, and that should be enough to make the discount trick a losing deal for them. It&#x27;s currently I think around 16 or 17 states that do this. It&#x27;s a mix of red and blue things so this doesn&#x27;t seem to be a partisan thing.<p>[1] In &quot;traditional&quot; Medicare the government is the insurance provider. The alternative is &quot;Medicare Advantage&quot; where the government pays a private company to be your provider. Think of Medicare Advantage as a lot like what you get from plans with employer provided insurance or with plans bought on the ACA marketplace.
hsuduebc23 个月前
And people should feel any compassion for architects of this. Lol
miah_3 个月前
Scumbag companies continue to be scum.
throw_a_grenade3 个月前
This is the &quot;defend&quot; part, right?
评论 #43016068 未加载
Mistletoe3 个月前
This should help things a lot. I’ve completely forgotten about Barbra Streisand’s house!
评论 #43016433 未加载
cess113 个月前
It&#x27;s absurd that a corporation can claim to have been defamed. It&#x27;s like Harry Potter bringing a defamation case against some author of erotic fanfic.