9 Crucial Ways Denmark is Superior to the US

[2aguy]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

The costs are higher because of the developmental cost outlays before you make one penny from the miracle device or drug......and for all the ones you finally get to market, dozens or more don't, which means millions of dollars lost.....if not hundreds of millions of dollars.

Too many people fail to realize the costs involved in medical innovation and miracle drugs....

The Cost Of Developing Drugs Is Insane. That Paper That Says Otherwise Is Insanely Bad

A primer: The amount spent to develop any individual drug depends mostly on what it costs to conduct studies to prove it is safe and effective and secure regulatory approval. That can range from $10 million to $2 billion, depending on what the drug is for. But what really drives up costs is the fact that 90% of medicines that start being tested in people don’t reach the market because they are unsafe or ineffective. The $2.7 billion figure includes the cost not only of these failures, but also of not putting the money spent on them into something that would give a more reliable return.

And Britain pays for the end result, not the costs of research, development and initial failure...

 

[WillMunny]

The evidence is quite compelling. Repubs like to think that both they, and the US, is superior to anyone else in the world but the truth is countries like Denmark are really just laughing at them.

1) Unemployed workers get 90% of their previous salary for two years.

Denmark has a tremendous social safety net for unemployed workers — any worker who worked at least 52 weeks over a three-year period can qualify to have 90 percent of their original salarypaid for, for up to two years. The Danish government also has plentiful training programs for out-of-work Danes. As a result, 73 percent of Danes between 15 and 64 have a paying job, compared to 67 percent of Americans.

2) Denmark spends far less on healthcare than the US does.

According to the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), the US spends twice as much per capita on healthcare than in Denmark, where taxpayer-funded universal healthcare is available for all citizens.2009 OECD data shows that the U.S. spent an average of $7,290 per person on healthcare. Denmark spent just $3,512. World Bank data, as seen in the chart above, shows Danish healthcare costs are about $3,000 less per capita than in the US.

3) Denmark is the happiest place on Earth

The World Happiness Report, which determines which nation’s population is the “happiest” using criteria like life expectancy, GDP, social safety nets, as well as factors like “perception of corruption” and “freedom to make life choices,” found that Denmark was the happiest country. The US, in the meantime, ranked #17 on the same list.

4)Denmark has the shortest work week on average.

Denmark leads every other OECD nation in work-life balance. Danes work an average of 37 hours a week, earn an average of $46,000 USD annually, and have the right to 5 weeks of paid vacation per year. Here in the US, the average worker puts in an average of 47 hours a week, and only takes 16 days of vacation a year. This is largely due to a more stressful work climate, in which wages are stagnating while costs are rising. Combine that with a highly-competitive job market, and that means more Americans are willing to chain themselves to their desk then to risk taking vacation days and coming back to find someone else took their job.

5) Denmark pays students $900 per month to attend college.

Here in the US, the cost of going to college has soared by over 500 percent in the last 30 years. But in Denmark, not only is college free, but students are actually paid $900 USD per month to go to school, provided they live on their own. And this funding lasts up to six years. By contrast, the average US student pays over $31,000 a year in tuition to attend a private university, out-of-state residents at public universities pay $22,000 a year in tuition, and tuition costs for in-state residents at those same universities is still over $9,000.

6) Denmark has one of the highest per capita incomes in the world.

In Denmark, despite a short work week and a generous social safety net, workers make more than enough to meet basic needs. According to per capita income data from the World Bank, Denmark’s per capita income is roughly $5,000 higher than in the US.

7) Denmark has one of the lowest poverty rates. The US has one of the highest.

The benefits of living in Denmark are far-reaching — out of all OECD countries, Denmark has the second-lowest poverty rate at 0.6 percent. To compare, the OECD average of 11.3 percent is still lower than the 14.5 percent poverty rate in the US.

8) Denmark is rated #1 for best country for business

In 2014, Forbes ranked Denmark as the #1 best country for business.

Forbes used 11 different criteria to rank countries — innovation, property rights, red tape, taxes, investor protection, stock market performance, technology, corruption, personal freedom, freedom of trade, and monetary freedom.

Under the same criteria, the US ranked #18.

9) New parents in Denmark get 52 weeks of paid leave. US parents don't get shit.

The Danish government gives new parents an average of 52 weeks — a full year — of paid time off after having a child. Those 52 weeks can be allocated however the parents wish. In addition to the 52 weeks, new moms get 4 weeks of maternity leave before giving birth and 14 weeks after. Even new fathers get 2 additional weeks after the birth of their child. But here in the US, 1 in 4 new mothers go back to work within two weeks of having a child.

This is what Democratic Socialism really looks like. Is this the dystopian nightmare that Republicans are making it out to be, or an ideal vision of what Americans could have if we came together and demanded it from our government?


Here are 9 reasons Denmark's socialist economy leaves the US in the dust

Then go move the fuck to Denmark, you self-hating-American fuck! Europeans are able to spend huge amounts of money on social programs BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN DEFENSE BECAUSE THEY HAVE AMERICA'S MILITARY PROTECTING THEM! THIS AMERICAN IS NOT IMPRESSED BY PARASITES WHO USE THIS COUNTRY FOR EVERY ADVANTAGE THEY CAN WHILE CURSING OUR VERY EXISTENCE AT THE SAME TIME! Arrogant little liberal asshole.

 

[Markle]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

Thanks, stealing this for future discussions with socialist medicine asshats...

You are most welcome. The Socialist Medicine fools never have a response, they usually just ignore it and pretend it was never mentioned. Like everything with them, they just imagine these things, like money, just magically appear.

 

[Markle]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

Show us that the facts I posted are wrong.

We are a wealthy nation, we can afford to spend more on our health.

You accept inferior healthcare and sky-high taxes and want to believe that your healthcare is free. I have some ocean front property to show you! Oh, it's in Arizona but, TRUST ME!

 

[forkup]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

The costs are higher because of the developmental cost outlays before you make one penny from the miracle device or drug......and for all the ones you finally get to market, dozens or more don't, which means millions of dollars lost.....if not hundreds of millions of dollars.

Too many people fail to realize the costs involved in medical innovation and miracle drugs....

The Cost Of Developing Drugs Is Insane. That Paper That Says Otherwise Is Insanely Bad

A primer: The amount spent to develop any individual drug depends mostly on what it costs to conduct studies to prove it is safe and effective and secure regulatory approval. That can range from $10 million to $2 billion, depending on what the drug is for. But what really drives up costs is the fact that 90% of medicines that start being tested in people don’t reach the market because they are unsafe or ineffective. The $2.7 billion figure includes the cost not only of these failures, but also of not putting the money spent on them into something that would give a more reliable return.

And Britain pays for the end result, not the costs of research, development and initial failure...

Simply bullshit. The reason I know this is the simple fact that I know that some treatments are insanely expensive in some cases. We had a report here just the other day that a big pharmaceutical company was charging around 350 thousand dollar per year for the treatment of some little girl who suffered from some rare genetic disease. If you're gonna claim that cost does not include development cost you are dishonest.

 

[forkup]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

Show us that the facts I posted are wrong.

We are a wealthy nation, we can afford to spend more on our health.

You accept inferior healthcare and sky-high taxes and want to believe that your healthcare is free. I have some ocean front property to show you! Oh, it's in Arizona but, TRUST ME!

First facts don't have to be wrong to be misleading. I'll illustrate. One of your facts cited waiting lines. My wait for filling a script is zero. Yours isn't because some pharmacy tech has to call your health insurance. I've never.. not ever had to wait for longer then an hour in an ER. In fact the longest I've ever waited for medical procedure is a bit over a month. For a CT scan that was to check my neck because it was tight. I'm not saying that the wait in Canada and the UK isn't longer, frankly I don't know but the point is that drawing conclusions on waits in socialized medicine on the bases of the UK and Canada is useless. It works the other way too. The reason I use percentage of GDP to express Healthcare cost is because using absolute cost doesn't take relative income in consideration.

As to my Healthcare being inferior. I know of not a single case here of someone having to travel to the US for treatment. Nor do I know of a single case of someone not receiving treatment because they couldn't afford it. I do however have a case in my immediate family of someone who didn't receive treatment in the US because of financial constraints.

As to we believe something is free. In case you've missed it I've made the point a few times in this OP that taxation Is a way to pay for services

 

[skye]

Denmark was ok some years ago....I lived there so i can tell....but today stupid Denmark is finished.... too many Islamics lunatics have been allowed in there ....too much politically correct crap there...too sad


oh well.....Danes will go the same way shaking Merkel has gone.

 

[Wyatt earp]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

VAT tax

US drug companies make 99% of the new drugs and R&D, the top 100 hospital's are mostly all in the United States.

The WHO stats are skewed , country's report their own biased stats, Socialist country's don't have down syndrome baby's they kill them.


.

.

 

[Markle]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

VAT tax

US drug companies make 99% of the new drugs and R&D, the top 100 hospital's are mostly all in the United States.

The WHO stats are skewed , country's report their own biased stats, Socialist country's don't have down syndrome baby's they kill them.

.

One hundred percent true! The Progressives aren't going to like this!

 

[2aguy]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

VAT tax

US drug companies make 99% of the new drugs and R&D, the top 100 hospital's are mostly all in the United States.

The WHO stats are skewed , country's report their own biased stats, Socialist country's don't have down syndrome baby's they kill them.


.

.

And now they have moved on to killing the old and infirm too......does wonders for your statistics if you simply murder the young and the old...I wonder how many of these left wing asshats grew up admiring the system in "Logan's Run."

 

[forkup]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

VAT tax

US drug companies make 99% of the new drugs and R&D, the top 100 hospital's are mostly all in the United States.

The WHO stats are skewed , country's report their own biased stats, Socialist country's don't have down syndrome baby's they kill them.


.

.

And now they have moved on to killing the old and infirm too......does wonders for your statistics if you simply murder the young and the old...I wonder how many of these left wing asshats grew up admiring the system in "Logan's Run."

So we not only kill people with down syndrome but the old and the infirm as well??? I think the level of stupidy shown by you here warrants nothing more than this.

 

[Wyatt earp]

-So we now have. Belgium is less diverse. Belgium has less population. Belgium doesn't develop as much medical hardware.
Of course when I ask why any of it explains the massive difference between relative healthcare cost the explanations become fussy if provided at all. As to this last one. This is how development works. A company develops a medicine. After which they are granted the exclusive rights to SELL (as in for profit) that medicine. It works the same for me as for you. So I don't see how it helps your argument at all.
- I also find it increasingly funny how different people provide different excuses to explain the difference but fail to state the obvious. For-profit healthcare has as it's the end goal, providing profit. Government run healthcare has as its goal, providing care. This means that your system tries to take as much money out of the healthcare system as they feel they can get away with. Mine, however, is publicly funded and politicians do well to give the best care possible for the least amount of money if they want to get reelected.

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

VAT tax

US drug companies make 99% of the new drugs and R&D, the top 100 hospital's are mostly all in the United States.

The WHO stats are skewed , country's report their own biased stats, Socialist country's don't have down syndrome baby's they kill them.


.

.

And now they have moved on to killing the old and infirm too......does wonders for your statistics if you simply murder the young and the old...I wonder how many of these left wing asshats grew up admiring the system in "Logan's Run."

So we not only kill people with down syndrome but the old and the infirm as well??? I think the level of stupidy shown by you here warrants nothing more than this.

So you don't know facts?

You guys will pay the price as it says in Mathew 7:21

https://lejeunefoundation.org/denmark-down-syndrome-abortion/


Why Down syndrome in Iceland has almost disappeared - CBS News



.

 

[forkup]

Cute try, a feeble effort to diminish the importance of developing new medical procedures, technology, and drugs. Without a profit motive, why would a government spend billions of dollars only to have nothing to show?

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care
Brief Analyses | Health
No. 649
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
by Scott Atlas

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

• Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
• Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
• More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
• Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

VAT tax

US drug companies make 99% of the new drugs and R&D, the top 100 hospital's are mostly all in the United States.

The WHO stats are skewed , country's report their own biased stats, Socialist country's don't have down syndrome baby's they kill them.


.

.

And now they have moved on to killing the old and infirm too......does wonders for your statistics if you simply murder the young and the old...I wonder how many of these left wing asshats grew up admiring the system in "Logan's Run."

So we not only kill people with down syndrome but the old and the infirm as well??? I think the level of stupidy shown by you here warrants nothing more than this.

So you don't know facts?

You guys will pay the price as it says in Mathew 7:21

https://lejeunefoundation.org/denmark-down-syndrome-abortion/


Why Down syndrome in Iceland has almost disappeared - CBS News



.

I know the facts. I have eyes and those eyes regularly see people with down syndrome. Choosing to have an abortion tough unless you live in Alabama that is, is not only not murder, it is perfectly legal in the US as well. Choosing to ha that would require care for the rest of its life is a better reason than most to have an abortion in my view. It might be a good idea to actually visit Europe before you assert things about Europe to a European. It would prevent you from looking silly.

 

[basquebromance]

its as cold as a witch's tit in Denmark, in America the climate is better!

 

[Billy000]

The evidence is quite compelling. Repubs like to think that both they, and the US, is superior to anyone else in the world but the truth is countries like Denmark are really just laughing at them.

1) Unemployed workers get 90% of their previous salary for two years.

Denmark has a tremendous social safety net for unemployed workers — any worker who worked at least 52 weeks over a three-year period can qualify to have 90 percent of their original salarypaid for, for up to two years. The Danish government also has plentiful training programs for out-of-work Danes. As a result, 73 percent of Danes between 15 and 64 have a paying job, compared to 67 percent of Americans.

2) Denmark spends far less on healthcare than the US does.

According to the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), the US spends twice as much per capita on healthcare than in Denmark, where taxpayer-funded universal healthcare is available for all citizens.2009 OECD data shows that the U.S. spent an average of $7,290 per person on healthcare. Denmark spent just $3,512. World Bank data, as seen in the chart above, shows Danish healthcare costs are about $3,000 less per capita than in the US.

3) Denmark is the happiest place on Earth

The World Happiness Report, which determines which nation’s population is the “happiest” using criteria like life expectancy, GDP, social safety nets, as well as factors like “perception of corruption” and “freedom to make life choices,” found that Denmark was the happiest country. The US, in the meantime, ranked #17 on the same list.

4)Denmark has the shortest work week on average.

Denmark leads every other OECD nation in work-life balance. Danes work an average of 37 hours a week, earn an average of $46,000 USD annually, and have the right to 5 weeks of paid vacation per year. Here in the US, the average worker puts in an average of 47 hours a week, and only takes 16 days of vacation a year. This is largely due to a more stressful work climate, in which wages are stagnating while costs are rising. Combine that with a highly-competitive job market, and that means more Americans are willing to chain themselves to their desk then to risk taking vacation days and coming back to find someone else took their job.

5) Denmark pays students $900 per month to attend college.

Here in the US, the cost of going to college has soared by over 500 percent in the last 30 years. But in Denmark, not only is college free, but students are actually paid $900 USD per month to go to school, provided they live on their own. And this funding lasts up to six years. By contrast, the average US student pays over $31,000 a year in tuition to attend a private university, out-of-state residents at public universities pay $22,000 a year in tuition, and tuition costs for in-state residents at those same universities is still over $9,000.

6) Denmark has one of the highest per capita incomes in the world.

In Denmark, despite a short work week and a generous social safety net, workers make more than enough to meet basic needs. According to per capita income data from the World Bank, Denmark’s per capita income is roughly $5,000 higher than in the US.

7) Denmark has one of the lowest poverty rates. The US has one of the highest.

The benefits of living in Denmark are far-reaching — out of all OECD countries, Denmark has the second-lowest poverty rate at 0.6 percent. To compare, the OECD average of 11.3 percent is still lower than the 14.5 percent poverty rate in the US.

8) Denmark is rated #1 for best country for business

In 2014, Forbes ranked Denmark as the #1 best country for business.

Forbes used 11 different criteria to rank countries — innovation, property rights, red tape, taxes, investor protection, stock market performance, technology, corruption, personal freedom, freedom of trade, and monetary freedom.

Under the same criteria, the US ranked #18.

9) New parents in Denmark get 52 weeks of paid leave. US parents don't get shit.

The Danish government gives new parents an average of 52 weeks — a full year — of paid time off after having a child. Those 52 weeks can be allocated however the parents wish. In addition to the 52 weeks, new moms get 4 weeks of maternity leave before giving birth and 14 weeks after. Even new fathers get 2 additional weeks after the birth of their child. But here in the US, 1 in 4 new mothers go back to work within two weeks of having a child.

This is what Democratic Socialism really looks like. Is this the dystopian nightmare that Republicans are making it out to be, or an ideal vision of what Americans could have if we came together and demanded it from our government?


Here are 9 reasons Denmark's socialist economy leaves the US in the dust

Then go move the fuck to Denmark, you self-hating-American fuck! Europeans are able to spend huge amounts of money on social programs BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN DEFENSE BECAUSE THEY HAVE AMERICA'S MILITARY PROTECTING THEM! THIS AMERICAN IS NOT IMPRESSED BY PARASITES WHO USE THIS COUNTRY FOR EVERY ADVANTAGE THEY CAN WHILE CURSING OUR VERY EXISTENCE AT THE SAME TIME! Arrogant little liberal asshole.

I even ordered Danish snacks off the Internet!

 

[Wyatt earp]

-First what struck me about this list is how highly specific it was. Why use lower cancer rates as your data point in one case but use common cancers when talking about Europeans? Why compare one data point to Canadians other data points to just the UK? Still, other data point to all developed countries? Why use self-reporting as a data point at all? They call it cherry picking data. And using those kinds of tactics anybody can substantiate any point it so chooses. In fact, every single "fact" except the last falls into that category of highly specific little tidbits of data.
-As to the last bit. Again doesn't help your case at all. Since once your innovation is developed it still has to be paid for by those wanting to use it. This enriches your country and therefore can not be a reason for the costs being higher.
-Want to throw facts at me go right ahead. I applaud it. But if you use as your source something that is a known conservative think tank. And try to cherry pick data. I WILL notice.
-Fact. All developed countries have significantly cheaper health care.
Fact for most of those developed countries life expectancy is comparable, if not higher.
What does it say when you pay at least 40 percent more for that result?
The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
Current health expenditure (% of GDP) | Data
Please note my sources.

VAT tax

US drug companies make 99% of the new drugs and R&D, the top 100 hospital's are mostly all in the United States.

The WHO stats are skewed , country's report their own biased stats, Socialist country's don't have down syndrome baby's they kill them.


.

.

And now they have moved on to killing the old and infirm too......does wonders for your statistics if you simply murder the young and the old...I wonder how many of these left wing asshats grew up admiring the system in "Logan's Run."

So we not only kill people with down syndrome but the old and the infirm as well??? I think the level of stupidy shown by you here warrants nothing more than this.

So you don't know facts?

You guys will pay the price as it says in Mathew 7:21

All Danish babies with Down syndrome aborted but 4 in 2016 - Jerome Lejeune Foundation USA


Why Down syndrome in Iceland has almost disappeared - CBS News



.

I know the facts. I have eyes and those eyes regularly see people with down syndrome. Choosing to have an abortion tough unless you live in Alabama that is, is not only not murder, it is perfectly legal in the US as well. Choosing to ha that would require care for the rest of its life is a better reason than most to have an abortion in my view. It might be a good idea to actually visit Europe before you assert things about Europe to a European. It would prevent you from looking silly.

What does Alabama have to do with socialist country's acting like Nazis and aborting down syndrome babies?

And it is murder no matter how you justify it captain Klink..




.

 

[forkup]

VAT tax

US drug companies make 99% of the new drugs and R&D, the top 100 hospital's are mostly all in the United States.

The WHO stats are skewed , country's report their own biased stats, Socialist country's don't have down syndrome baby's they kill them.


.

.

And now they have moved on to killing the old and infirm too......does wonders for your statistics if you simply murder the young and the old...I wonder how many of these left wing asshats grew up admiring the system in "Logan's Run."

So we not only kill people with down syndrome but the old and the infirm as well??? I think the level of stupidy shown by you here warrants nothing more than this.

So you don't know facts?

You guys will pay the price as it says in Mathew 7:21

All Danish babies with Down syndrome aborted but 4 in 2016 - Jerome Lejeune Foundation USA


Why Down syndrome in Iceland has almost disappeared - CBS News



.

I know the facts. I have eyes and those eyes regularly see people with down syndrome. Choosing to have an abortion tough unless you live in Alabama that is, is not only not murder, it is perfectly legal in the US as well. Choosing to ha that would require care for the rest of its life is a better reason than most to have an abortion in my view. It might be a good idea to actually visit Europe before you assert things about Europe to a European. It would prevent you from looking silly.

What does Alabama have to do with socialist country's acting like Nazis and aborting down syndrome babies?

And it is murder no matter how you justify it captain Klink..




.

It is relevant considering they have just passed a law that makes about all abortion illegal. The first state to do so I think. It was me being thorough when I assert stuff. You should try it, it prevents people from making claims about what you say. And it's not just socialist countries who do so. In the US its been a matter of established law too for quite some time. As it should be.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The evidence is quite compelling. Repubs like to think that both they, and the US, is superior to anyone else in the world but the truth is countries like Denmark are really just laughing at them.

1) Unemployed workers get 90% of their previous salary for two years.

Denmark has a tremendous social safety net for unemployed workers — any worker who worked at least 52 weeks over a three-year period can qualify to have 90 percent of their original salarypaid for, for up to two years. The Danish government also has plentiful training programs for out-of-work Danes. As a result, 73 percent of Danes between 15 and 64 have a paying job, compared to 67 percent of Americans.

2) Denmark spends far less on healthcare than the US does.

According to the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), the US spends twice as much per capita on healthcare than in Denmark, where taxpayer-funded universal healthcare is available for all citizens.2009 OECD data shows that the U.S. spent an average of $7,290 per person on healthcare. Denmark spent just $3,512. World Bank data, as seen in the chart above, shows Danish healthcare costs are about $3,000 less per capita than in the US.

3) Denmark is the happiest place on Earth

The World Happiness Report, which determines which nation’s population is the “happiest” using criteria like life expectancy, GDP, social safety nets, as well as factors like “perception of corruption” and “freedom to make life choices,” found that Denmark was the happiest country. The US, in the meantime, ranked #17 on the same list.

4)Denmark has the shortest work week on average.

Denmark leads every other OECD nation in work-life balance. Danes work an average of 37 hours a week, earn an average of $46,000 USD annually, and have the right to 5 weeks of paid vacation per year. Here in the US, the average worker puts in an average of 47 hours a week, and only takes 16 days of vacation a year. This is largely due to a more stressful work climate, in which wages are stagnating while costs are rising. Combine that with a highly-competitive job market, and that means more Americans are willing to chain themselves to their desk then to risk taking vacation days and coming back to find someone else took their job.

5) Denmark pays students $900 per month to attend college.

Here in the US, the cost of going to college has soared by over 500 percent in the last 30 years. But in Denmark, not only is college free, but students are actually paid $900 USD per month to go to school, provided they live on their own. And this funding lasts up to six years. By contrast, the average US student pays over $31,000 a year in tuition to attend a private university, out-of-state residents at public universities pay $22,000 a year in tuition, and tuition costs for in-state residents at those same universities is still over $9,000.

6) Denmark has one of the highest per capita incomes in the world.

In Denmark, despite a short work week and a generous social safety net, workers make more than enough to meet basic needs. According to per capita income data from the World Bank, Denmark’s per capita income is roughly $5,000 higher than in the US.

7) Denmark has one of the lowest poverty rates. The US has one of the highest.

The benefits of living in Denmark are far-reaching — out of all OECD countries, Denmark has the second-lowest poverty rate at 0.6 percent. To compare, the OECD average of 11.3 percent is still lower than the 14.5 percent poverty rate in the US.

8) Denmark is rated #1 for best country for business

In 2014, Forbes ranked Denmark as the #1 best country for business.

Forbes used 11 different criteria to rank countries — innovation, property rights, red tape, taxes, investor protection, stock market performance, technology, corruption, personal freedom, freedom of trade, and monetary freedom.

Under the same criteria, the US ranked #18.

9) New parents in Denmark get 52 weeks of paid leave. US parents don't get shit.

The Danish government gives new parents an average of 52 weeks — a full year — of paid time off after having a child. Those 52 weeks can be allocated however the parents wish. In addition to the 52 weeks, new moms get 4 weeks of maternity leave before giving birth and 14 weeks after. Even new fathers get 2 additional weeks after the birth of their child. But here in the US, 1 in 4 new mothers go back to work within two weeks of having a child.

This is what Democratic Socialism really looks like. Is this the dystopian nightmare that Republicans are making it out to be, or an ideal vision of what Americans could have if we came together and demanded it from our government?


Here are 9 reasons Denmark's socialist economy leaves the US in the dust

Then go move the fuck to Denmark, you self-hating-American fuck! Europeans are able to spend huge amounts of money on social programs BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN DEFENSE BECAUSE THEY HAVE AMERICA'S MILITARY PROTECTING THEM! THIS AMERICAN IS NOT IMPRESSED BY PARASITES WHO USE THIS COUNTRY FOR EVERY ADVANTAGE THEY CAN WHILE CURSING OUR VERY EXISTENCE AT THE SAME TIME! Arrogant little liberal asshole.

I even ordered Danish snacks off the Internet!

When are you moving?

 

[Billy000]

The evidence is quite compelling. Repubs like to think that both they, and the US, is superior to anyone else in the world but the truth is countries like Denmark are really just laughing at them.

1) Unemployed workers get 90% of their previous salary for two years.

Denmark has a tremendous social safety net for unemployed workers — any worker who worked at least 52 weeks over a three-year period can qualify to have 90 percent of their original salarypaid for, for up to two years. The Danish government also has plentiful training programs for out-of-work Danes. As a result, 73 percent of Danes between 15 and 64 have a paying job, compared to 67 percent of Americans.

2) Denmark spends far less on healthcare than the US does.

According to the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), the US spends twice as much per capita on healthcare than in Denmark, where taxpayer-funded universal healthcare is available for all citizens.2009 OECD data shows that the U.S. spent an average of $7,290 per person on healthcare. Denmark spent just $3,512. World Bank data, as seen in the chart above, shows Danish healthcare costs are about $3,000 less per capita than in the US.

3) Denmark is the happiest place on Earth

The World Happiness Report, which determines which nation’s population is the “happiest” using criteria like life expectancy, GDP, social safety nets, as well as factors like “perception of corruption” and “freedom to make life choices,” found that Denmark was the happiest country. The US, in the meantime, ranked #17 on the same list.

4)Denmark has the shortest work week on average.

Denmark leads every other OECD nation in work-life balance. Danes work an average of 37 hours a week, earn an average of $46,000 USD annually, and have the right to 5 weeks of paid vacation per year. Here in the US, the average worker puts in an average of 47 hours a week, and only takes 16 days of vacation a year. This is largely due to a more stressful work climate, in which wages are stagnating while costs are rising. Combine that with a highly-competitive job market, and that means more Americans are willing to chain themselves to their desk then to risk taking vacation days and coming back to find someone else took their job.

5) Denmark pays students $900 per month to attend college.

Here in the US, the cost of going to college has soared by over 500 percent in the last 30 years. But in Denmark, not only is college free, but students are actually paid $900 USD per month to go to school, provided they live on their own. And this funding lasts up to six years. By contrast, the average US student pays over $31,000 a year in tuition to attend a private university, out-of-state residents at public universities pay $22,000 a year in tuition, and tuition costs for in-state residents at those same universities is still over $9,000.

6) Denmark has one of the highest per capita incomes in the world.

In Denmark, despite a short work week and a generous social safety net, workers make more than enough to meet basic needs. According to per capita income data from the World Bank, Denmark’s per capita income is roughly $5,000 higher than in the US.

7) Denmark has one of the lowest poverty rates. The US has one of the highest.

The benefits of living in Denmark are far-reaching — out of all OECD countries, Denmark has the second-lowest poverty rate at 0.6 percent. To compare, the OECD average of 11.3 percent is still lower than the 14.5 percent poverty rate in the US.

8) Denmark is rated #1 for best country for business

In 2014, Forbes ranked Denmark as the #1 best country for business.

Forbes used 11 different criteria to rank countries — innovation, property rights, red tape, taxes, investor protection, stock market performance, technology, corruption, personal freedom, freedom of trade, and monetary freedom.

Under the same criteria, the US ranked #18.

9) New parents in Denmark get 52 weeks of paid leave. US parents don't get shit.

The Danish government gives new parents an average of 52 weeks — a full year — of paid time off after having a child. Those 52 weeks can be allocated however the parents wish. In addition to the 52 weeks, new moms get 4 weeks of maternity leave before giving birth and 14 weeks after. Even new fathers get 2 additional weeks after the birth of their child. But here in the US, 1 in 4 new mothers go back to work within two weeks of having a child.

This is what Democratic Socialism really looks like. Is this the dystopian nightmare that Republicans are making it out to be, or an ideal vision of what Americans could have if we came together and demanded it from our government?


Here are 9 reasons Denmark's socialist economy leaves the US in the dust

Then go move the fuck to Denmark, you self-hating-American fuck! Europeans are able to spend huge amounts of money on social programs BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN DEFENSE BECAUSE THEY HAVE AMERICA'S MILITARY PROTECTING THEM! THIS AMERICAN IS NOT IMPRESSED BY PARASITES WHO USE THIS COUNTRY FOR EVERY ADVANTAGE THEY CAN WHILE CURSING OUR VERY EXISTENCE AT THE SAME TIME! Arrogant little liberal asshole.

I even ordered Danish snacks off the Internet!

When are you moving?

I’m not! I’m bringing the Danish lifestyle here! It’s gonna take over the south!

 

[Terri4Trump]

I’m not! I’m bringing the Danish lifestyle here! It’s gonna take over the south!

Why don't you move the Denmark then you dumb fucking bitch. You can be a subject of Queen Margrethe II and bow down when she passes by like the bitch you are.

America fought a revolutionary war because we don't believe in royalty. But if you love Denmark so much then go be their subject. They will be happy to have another bitchass queer like you.