dividendium

Maybe we need to redefine the problem. Some of the suggestions below were about automating the paperwork. Why not automate the treatment? I mean consider how unscalable it is to have a doctor, an actual person, see each patient. At most they can get through one patient every 15 minutes.

A doctor normally looks at a patient, asks them a few questions to rule out certain conditions and then prescribes a pill or requests a test for more information.

Sounds like the perfect kind of job that software can do if it knew the parameters.

The hard part is training the software, so you'd need doctors to perform treatments in a way that a computer can understand it (codified in some way) and then you need patients to report back on whether or not that treatment worked.

There's your business opportunity and a real opportunity to help people, both the doctors and the patients.

"Strnagely enough, insurance companies are part of the gatekeepers for this, since they don't want to pay out of their pockets to provide expensive care for things that don't work."

Consider the economics here. If something is not expensive, you don't need insurance. So it's in the insurance companies' interests to inflate the prices so more people will need health insurance and can't pay for procedures out of pocket. The insurance companies just have to raise their premiums to compensate, and the larger the amounts of money passing through their hands, the easier it is for them to keep some of it.

I'm not attacking insurance companies, just pointing out that it's not entirely logical to assume that their interests are aligned with yours.