Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

These are different and called “preventative screening” and usually not done at a physical. Your GP isn’t going to do a colonoscopy or do a skin check. The article is taking issue with the standard physical, which for heathy people is mostly a few questions to ask if you feel alright and some routine blood tests.



Let's not kid ourselves: Americans are terrible about looking out for their health. If an annual physical is what it takes for PCPs to effectively route people to the necessary screenings, so be it. That saves lives.


Under most insurance plans you also can't see a specialist unless your primary care doctor writes you a referral. If nothing else the Free Annual Checkup is a way to get a referral without incurring additional primary care copays. (If you have a PPO, that's not a problem, but you're paying higher premiums to compensate.)


See figure E, HMO and the old style plans are far in the minority in terms of population covered.

https://files.kff.org/attachment/Summary-of-Findings-Employe...

I would bet most insureds in the US can see a specialist without seeing their primary care doctor (if they even have one).


But if they're not done at the physical, the physical is where the doctor asks whether you've been screen/checked for things and when, and then schedules them.

If I didn't go in for an annual physical, I'd never get tested or screened for a single thing. I'd never have blood work done. Because when else do I go to a doctor? How else would I know?

That's what baffles me here. Your annual physical is the launching point for everything preventative. It's the only time you ever see your doctor if you're otherwise healthy. Saying no to annual physicals means saying no to literally all screening, or am I missing something?


That's just completely wrong. You can get preventative care including screening tests without an annual physical.

https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/preventive-care-benefits...


Of course you can but that requires knowing what you need and when.

I certainly don't. The person who knows is my doctor. And the time they're going to tell me is my annual checkup.


Sample size of one, but I don't get any tests or exams of any kind. This thread makes me suspect that I should. Not really sure where to start.


If you can find a primary care physician near you and ask for a standard "just checking to make sure everything's good" blood test, they'll probably order you something called a Complete Blood Count panel and maybe another that measures blood glucose. The CBC panel isn't used to diagnose anything particular, it's more of a general snapshot that gives you insight into all kinds of potential issues (or, more likely, tells you everything is fine). Mine always come back saying that I'm a bit anemic, but iron supplements don't agree with me so I just live with it.

Another benefit of semi-regular blood testing (and I'm talking once every year or two) is that it provides a good baseline for what your body is like. Then if you ever start having specific medical issues that warrant more tests, you know what your Healthy Levels are and can compare accordingly. For example, my MCH tends to dip just slightly below normal thanks to the anemia, so I know not to take that as an ill omen in itself. Conversely, I've never had abnormal blood glucose levels, so if that starts wavering I'll know something's up.


Thank you. I actually have a primary care physician, although I just don't remember ever seeing him. I'm pretty sure I did at least once though.


A lot of health providers just email or call about the preventative screenings these days.


The standard physical is where your GP teaches you about those things and has you schedule them as needed based on your age and the things they notice during the annual physical.


If that is what the annual is, then it's probably no wonder why they aren't helpful.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: