> Your ignorance is not as valid as my knowledge and to assume that in your version of this myth that insurance companies (but in the more common version of this myth, Doctors, Pharmaceutical Companies etc) are primarially interested in keeping the population teetering on the edge to milk them dry is disingenuous.
You really know how to talk to people haha. It seems like you were triggered by something I said even though it did not apply to you.Take a breath. It is okay for other people to have different viewpoints on the medical industry in the United States.

>This is an absurd and oft-repeated claim that taps into variations of the conspiracy thinking around 'doctors keeping the cure for cancer (or insert other condition here) secret' because powerful lobby groups insist that there is more money to be made in 'treating' than 'curing'. It is patently untrue.

Where are your sources? I never stated that they are hiding the cure for cancer? It is a fact that treating vs curing is a business model in the United States. The U.S outspends everyone yet gets them same results
>https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/04/20/5247741...

It is also true that privacy data laws and business models are impeding the impact of disruption in healthcare where technology is disrupting every other field.
(https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-28/alphabet-...)

I never mentioned anything about Australia, I was talking about the United States. I cannot speak for Australia.

>Please inform yourself and don't just trumpet that which you hear on the internet.

The fact that medical records are not electronic being a standard is laughable. I cannot speak for anyone else but the United States. HIPA laws are one of the reasons which makes it harder for researchers and doctors to actually get data they need to develop cures because of the need an individual signature for everyone.

Regarding Supply of Doctors
>In the United States, the supply of doctors is tightly controlled by the number of medical school slots, and more importantly, the number of medical residencies. Those are both set by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, a body dominated by physicians’ organizations. The United States, unlike other countries, requires physicians to complete a U.S. residency program to practice. (Since 2011, graduates of Canadian programs have also been allowed to practice in the U.S., although there are still substantial obstacles.) This means that U.S. doctors get to legally limit their competition. As a result, U.S. doctors receive higher pay, and like anyone in a position to exploit a cartel, they also get patients to buy services (i.e., from specialists) that they don’t really need.
(https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/10/25/doctors-sal...)

Limits on the supply of doctors a conspiracy?
>https://mises.org/library/how-government-helped-create-comin...
>https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/4561/does-the-a...
>https://www.quora.com/Who-or-what-controls-the-number-of-med...

It is also a fact that insurance companies are the most powerful lobby in the United States.
>https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-dea-agent-opioid-crisis-fuel...

Business Model Point
>Imagine a portable, low-intensity X-ray machine that can be wheeled between offices on a small cart. It creates images of such clarity that pediatricians, internists, and nurses can detect cracks in bones or lumps in tissue in their offices, not in a hospital. It works through a patented “nanocrystal” process, which uses night-vision technology borrowed from the military. At 10% of the cost of a conventional X-ray machine, it could save patients, their employers, and insurance companies hundreds of thousands of dollars every year. Great innovation, right? Guess again. When the entrepreneur who developed the machine tried to license the technology to established health care companies, he couldn’t even get his foot in the door. Large-scale X-ray equipment suppliers wanted no part of it. Why? Because it threatened their business models.
(https://hbr.org/2000/09/will-disruptive-innovations-cure-hea...)