People vote with their wallets (and their feet) on matters of life and death all the time. People choose what car they buy (with crash ratings and cost being significant factors), what dentist they go to (in places where they pay for dental), and many (but not all) Canadians choose to pay for medical care to avoid long waits. People also choose what neighborhood they live in (both safety and pollution are significant concerns), what job they do, how much to spend on food, what airplane to fly on (, the DC-10 was doomed by its safety record), and any number of other health-critical, financial decisions.

I thought it was obvious, but I'm sure OP meant that if you have an accident, you can't shop for providers - an ambulance or a helicopter takes you to a hospital, and you wake up with a gigantic bill. Not exactly "voting with your wallet", is it?

Perhaps there is some misunderstanding, but that (parent to my comment) was responding to a comment which indicated that there is too much government intervention, which is not allowing people to feel the direct financial impact of their medical decisions. People using epipens are not buying them 'just-in-time', they are planning ahead.

The great grandparent comment also seemed to be speaking to the way the government has incentivized employer-provided health insurance, which insulates people from making cost/benefit decisions. I think that if individuals had to pay $100 per juice box their insurer gets billed, they would likely find a way to cut costs.