Of Ivan Cavicchi | 2 May 2013 | The fact Economy & Lobbying
I recently had the opportunity to discuss with two opposing points of view regarding the profit in healthcare: the first defended it, the second condemned it as such as immoral (Health newspaper”April 26: Health and profit. What if instead we talked about “profitability”? http://www.quotidianosanita.it/studi-e-analisi/articolo.php?articolo_id=14612).
For me the discussion should be about the difference that exists between speculation/non-speculation, meaning by speculation a disproportionate and unreasonable remuneration both in relation to the costs incurred and in relation to the benefits produced, and taking into account what matters most in health care, and in relation to the state of need of those who are ill. “speculate” on illnesses of people is immoral for me and this applies both to the profit of Lombard clinicians and to the income of great professionals in the private practice of the profession. In order not to be speculative, both those who take a profit and those who take an income should be remunerated in a reasonable way taking into account that "reasonable” towards those with lethal diseases, could also mean relative gratuity. “Relative” means that in a market made up of income inequalities it is possible to calculate remunerative values such as to cover those who cannot with those who can.
This is especially true eg
