comment
Yes, the German health system is undoubtedly one of the best in the world. Yes, most doctors prefer to be treated in Germany as elsewhere. And yes, cash patients may hope for a good and secure supply, which has to do mainly with the fact that the statutory insurance usually pay only for those pills, ointments or medical devices, the benefits of which is scientifically proven. Patients can be sure that a treatment will help them, that it is not superfluous and above all does not harm them.
In this system, homeopathy is a foreign body. Although their benefits can not be proven, many health insurances are paying the cost of treatment with globules - sugar globules with no measurable effect. Naturopathy does not belong to the official service catalog of the health insurance funds. However, the health insurances may voluntarily compete for customers with so-called statutory benefits, including homeopathy. They spend the money on it, even though they know it has no medical benefit. "Money for nothing" to say it with a well-known song title of "Dire Straits". There has been a dispute for years.
Everything is not so bad, is the Federal Minister of Health now mutatis mutandis. At the "Berlin Salon" of the editorial network Germany, Jens Spahn argued that one could ask oneself whether the entire scale was worth an emotional debate at all. In the case of medical expenses of around 40 billion euros, the statutory health insurance funds spend around 20 million on homeopathy each year. He decided it was "so okay". And that's exactly where Spahn is wrong.
Spahn must not just turn a blind eye here
It's about more than 20 million euros, it's about a principle. And so back to the beginning: Yes, the German health system is one of the best in the world. But it also holds up to the insured for impositions. In the Fifth Social Code, the unofficial Bible of the health system, this is very clear. The benefits of the health insurance "must not exceed the measure of what is necessary," it says. They must be "adequate, appropriate and economical". "All-encompassing" is expressly not there.
MORE ON THE SUBJECT
Because it is about the money of the contributors, only therapies are paid, the effect of which is proven. Even more: cash registers should act cost-conscious. They must critically review any claim or write off rebate contracts that have had some dubious effects in the past.
The fact that the policy in the pursuit of efficiency in the health system is sometimes overshoot the target, patients were already feeling uncomfortable: There were seniors with incontinence problems, whose cash only leak because cheaper diaper panties conceded. And there are Parkinson's patients who report problems because they have to switch to a cheaper drug, which is considered to be effective. However, both groups found themselves in politics late or not at all.
It was never an argument that these austerity measures did not involve large amounts of money. Conversely, the fact that homeopathy does not cost much overall should not be a reason for the Minister of Health to simply turn a blind eye. Even if the followers of naturopathy are numerous. And even if the funds are still so much pressure because they want to keep the reimbursement for the beads for customer loyalty.
Neighboring countries such as France have already decided to discontinue the cost of homeopathic medicines from 2021 onwards. Even with protracted tests, the supreme health authority was unable to determine effectiveness.
Everyone is free to treat colds or sore throats with globules and gentle healing methods. But a reimbursement by the coffers not only wastes the money of the contributors. Worse, it weighs patients in the mistaken belief that taking globules can relieve more serious suffering.
