Actually, we are #1

[Sinatra]

Where U.S. Health Care Ranks Number One
Isn't 'responsiveness' what medicine is all about?


Last August the cover of Time pictured President Obama in white coat and stethoscope. The story opened: "The U.S. spends more to get less [health care] than just about every other industrialized country." This trope has dominated media coverage of health-care reform. Yet a majority of Americans opposes Congress's health-care bills. Why?

The comparative ranking system that most critics cite comes from the U.N.'s World Health Organization (WHO). The ranking most often quoted is Overall Performance, where the U.S. is rated No. 37. The Overall Performance Index, however, is adjusted to reflect how well WHO officials believe that a country could have done in relation to its resources.[/B]

The scale is heavily subjective: The WHO believes that we could have done better because we do not have universal coverage. What apparently does not matter is that our population has universal access because most physicians treat indigent patients without charge and accept Medicare and Medicaid payments, which do not even cover overhead expenses. The WHO does rank the U.S. No. 1 of 191 countries for "responsiveness to the needs and choices of the individual patient." Isn't responsiveness what health care is all about?


Full article here:


Mark B. Constantian: Where U.S. Health Care Ranks Number One - WSJ.com

 

[Sinatra]

Same article goes on to outline the following very interesting facts:

Data assembled by Dr. Ronald Wenger and published recently in the Bulletin of the American College of Surgeons indicates that cardiac deaths in the U.S. have fallen by two-thirds over the past 50 years. Polio has been virtually eradicated. Childhood leukemia has a high cure rate. Eight of the top 10 medical advances in the past 20 years were developed or had roots in the U.S.

The Nobel Prizes in medicine and physiology have been awarded to more Americans than to researchers in all other countries combined. Eight of the 10 top-selling drugs in the world were developed by U.S. companies. The U.S. has some of the highest breast, colon and prostate cancer survival rates in the world. And our country ranks first or second in the world in kidney transplants, liver transplants, heart transplants, total knee replacements, coronary artery bypass, and percutaneous coronary

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world; England has one of the longest. In Canada, a country of 35 million citizens, 1 million patients now wait for surgery and another million wait to see specialists.


Full article here:


Mark B. Constantian: Where U.S. Health Care Ranks Number One - WSJ.com

 

[Joe Steel]

Same article goes on to outline the following very interesting facts:

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

 

[Sinatra]

Same article goes on to outline the following very interesting facts:

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

No - read the actual acticle prior to attempting comment.

America's healthcare system is #1

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Same article goes on to outline the following very interesting facts:

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

AKA Obamacare.

 

[Sinatra]

Same article goes on to outline the following very interesting facts:

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

AKA Obamacare.

People asking stupid questions like that obviously failed to even read the article, indicating they know so little on said subject they should just shut up and let the adults talk...

 

[Joe Steel]

Same article goes on to outline the following very interesting facts:

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

AKA Obamacare.

Well that was stupid.

Current attempts to reform health care include serious attempts to reduce its cost and to furnish care to those who won't be able to afford it under any circumstances. CorporateCare, by design, rations care by ability to pay.

 

[Joe Steel]

Same article goes on to outline the following very interesting facts:

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

No - read the actual acticle prior to attempting comment.

America's healthcare system is #1

I see. You insist on cherry-picking the data to support a misleading assertion. That's unfortunate but not unexpected. The only way CorporateCare can achieve anything but a shameful and embarrassing ranking is with the help of dishonest commentators.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Same article goes on to outline the following very interesting facts:

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

Oh, spare me. Homeless people get medical care in the US faster than the average citizen of Canada or the UK does, so save your horror stories of poor people dying in the streets.

I drive a cab to make extra money during the slow seasons in my process serving business. I picked up a homeless man at University Medical Center on New Year's Day. He had been attacked and beaten up the previous evening. The hospital not only did a beautiful job of treating him (his stitches were as nice and neat as they would have given anyone), they also found him new clothes to replace the ones they had to cut off of him, and they let him stay overnight so he'd have a place to sleep, instead of releasing him that night as soon as he was patched up. To top it off, the hospital staff convinced Medicaid to pay for his cab ride back to where he had been picked up (despite the fact that he wasn't on Medicaid when he came in) AND arranged with the city bus system to get him a month-long bus pass so he could get around town.

So don't talk to me about how only rich people get taken care of in this country, all right?

 

[sole survivor]

Obama and the libs cry wolf about health care

As a working poor bus driver I found myself looking to social services for help. Both of my children were delivered and top notch care provided for the 1st 5 years of their life(had i needed it). My wife a recent legal immigrant was ineligible for means tested benefits fell through the cracks and was caught by a nice little mediciade safety net provided by the county. This covered her pre natal, both deliveries and any care for 2 months after each birth. During this time I took a DOT phgysical to keep my CDL and job but tested high blood sugar and was told in order to keep my job I would have to see my doctor and stabalize this diabetic condition. With no insurance and looking at least $3000 in consultations and labs I went to the case worker and she told me to sign up for a medicaide spendown. This program evaluates your income and sets a monthly deductible based on you ability to pay. My monthly deductible would have been $800 which was steep for me at the time. The case worker told me to seek help from hospital assistance who picked up the entire deductabel. A year later when I had a cardiac episode while shoveling snow it was the same thing. Several thousand in MRIs, blood tests consutations and stress tests picked up by medicaide with the spendown covered by hospital assistance. For 3 years whil putting my wife through school with a full pell (shes knocking down big bucks now) the delivery and care for my children, myself and my wife was


FREE!!!


There is no crisis its a political power grab by the liberal elite in an attempt to further shackle their constituents. Sad really

 

[Joe Steel]

Same article goes on to outline the following very interesting facts:

We have the shortest waiting time for nonemergency surgery in the world

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

Oh, spare me. Homeless people get medical care in the US faster than the average citizen of Canada or the UK does, so save your horror stories of poor people dying in the streets.

I drive a cab to make extra money during the slow seasons in my process serving business. I picked up a homeless man at University Medical Center on New Year's Day. He had been attacked and beaten up the previous evening. The hospital not only did a beautiful job of treating him (his stitches were as nice and neat as they would have given anyone), they also found him new clothes to replace the ones they had to cut off of him, and they let him stay overnight so he'd have a place to sleep, instead of releasing him that night as soon as he was patched up. To top it off, the hospital staff convinced Medicaid to pay for his cab ride back to where he had been picked up (despite the fact that he wasn't on Medicaid when he came in) AND arranged with the city bus system to get him a month-long bus pass so he could get around town.

So don't talk to me about how only rich people get taken care of in this country, all right?

I have a hard time believing you as ignorant as you're making yourself seem. By this point, you should know federal law requires emergency treatment for everyone. That's not the same thing as having health care.

 

[Joe Steel]

Obama and the libs cry wolf about health care

As a working poor bus driver I found myself looking to social services for help. Both of my children were delivered and top notch care provided for the 1st 5 years of their life(had i needed it). My wife a recent legal immigrant was ineligible for means tested benefits fell through the cracks and was caught by a nice little mediciade safety net provided by the county. This covered her pre natal, both deliveries and any care for 2 months after each birth. During this time I took a DOT phgysical to keep my CDL and job but tested high blood sugar and was told in order to keep my job I would have to see my doctor and stabalize this diabetic condition. With no insurance and looking at least $3000 in consultations and labs I went to the case worker and she told me to sign up for a medicaide spendown. This program evaluates your income and sets a monthly deductible based on you ability to pay. My monthly deductible would have been $800 which was steep for me at the time. The case worker told me to seek help from hospital assistance who picked up the entire deductabel. A year later when I had a cardiac episode while shoveling snow it was the same thing. Several thousand in MRIs, blood tests consutations and stress tests picked up by medicaide with the spendown covered by hospital assistance. For 3 years whil putting my wife through school with a full pell (shes knocking down big bucks now) the delivery and care for my children, myself and my wife was


FREE!!!


There is no crisis its a political power grab by the liberal elite in an attempt to further shackle their constituents. Sad really

Is this a joke?

Are you seriously saying we have no health care crisis because some low income persons can get it under some circumstances? What about all those who earn too much for Medicaid and too little to buy health insurance?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

Oh, spare me. Homeless people get medical care in the US faster than the average citizen of Canada or the UK does, so save your horror stories of poor people dying in the streets.

I drive a cab to make extra money during the slow seasons in my process serving business. I picked up a homeless man at University Medical Center on New Year's Day. He had been attacked and beaten up the previous evening. The hospital not only did a beautiful job of treating him (his stitches were as nice and neat as they would have given anyone), they also found him new clothes to replace the ones they had to cut off of him, and they let him stay overnight so he'd have a place to sleep, instead of releasing him that night as soon as he was patched up. To top it off, the hospital staff convinced Medicaid to pay for his cab ride back to where he had been picked up (despite the fact that he wasn't on Medicaid when he came in) AND arranged with the city bus system to get him a month-long bus pass so he could get around town.

So don't talk to me about how only rich people get taken care of in this country, all right?

I have a hard time believing you as ignorant as you're making yourself seem. By this point, you should know federal law requires emergency treatment for everyone. That's not the same thing as having health care.

By this point, you should know that the federal government already provides health care to the poor and indigent. All they have to do is apply. Not applying is not the same as not having available health care.

By the way, all that hospital had to do was stop his bleeding and toss him to the curb. Everything else they did - which you apparently didn't bother to read, because you were so busy "knowing" that I didn't know what I was talking about - was extraneous to the federal law requiring emergency care.

The problem here is that I think society will rise to the occasion, because I would do so, and you think people will be lazy and selfish if not forced to help, because that's what YOU would do.

 

[Joe Steel]

I have a hard time believing you as ignorant as you're making yourself seem. By this point, you should know federal law requires emergency treatment for everyone. That's not the same thing as having health care.

By this point, you should know that the federal government already provides health care to the poor and indigent. All they have to do is apply. Not applying is not the same as not having available health care.

By the way, all that hospital had to do was stop his bleeding and toss him to the curb. Everything else they did - which you apparently didn't bother to read, because you were so busy "knowing" that I didn't know what I was talking about - was extraneous to the federal law requiring emergency care.

No. I read it It was irrelevant; as was the whole story. Emergency treatment is not health care reform. Nor is Medicaid. Between the Medicaid eligible and CorporateCare beneficiaries are huge numbers who don't earn enough for health insurance and too much for to qualify for Medicaid. What about them?

 

[American Horse]

Does this ranking reflect all those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare?

Oh, spare me. Homeless people get medical care in the US faster than the average citizen of Canada or the UK does, so save your horror stories of poor people dying in the streets.

I drive a cab to make extra money during the slow seasons in my process serving business. I picked up a homeless man at University Medical Center on New Year's Day. He had been attacked and beaten up the previous evening. The hospital not only did a beautiful job of treating him (his stitches were as nice and neat as they would have given anyone), they also found him new clothes to replace the ones they had to cut off of him, and they let him stay overnight so he'd have a place to sleep, instead of releasing him that night as soon as he was patched up. To top it off, the hospital staff convinced Medicaid to pay for his cab ride back to where he had been picked up (despite the fact that he wasn't on Medicaid when he came in) AND arranged with the city bus system to get him a month-long bus pass so he could get around town.

So don't talk to me about how only rich people get taken care of in this country, all right?

I have a hard time believing you as ignorant as you're making yourself seem. By this point, you should know federal law requires emergency treatment for everyone. That's not the same thing as having health care.

This person could've availed himself of Medicaid, if he so desired. Anyone so poor would qualify. No one can be denied medical insurance. All states have assigned risk pools which makes insurance available to those with incurable pre-existing medical conditions. All the things that are supposedly being corrected right now could've been done by being willing to make some reasonable adjustments instead of taking over the whole system wholesale. All the innovative ways Rs attempted to fix the system were blocked or hampered by Ds. All the innovations which have been applied to the basic system have come through the Rs with great D resistance. The Ds did not want it fixed until they could get their hands on it with a 60 vote majority in the Senate, exactly the situation that was always denied to Rs though they were and are held to a standard as if they had had that kind of Fillibuster proof majority.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have a hard time believing you as ignorant as you're making yourself seem. By this point, you should know federal law requires emergency treatment for everyone. That's not the same thing as having health care.

By this point, you should know that the federal government already provides health care to the poor and indigent. All they have to do is apply. Not applying is not the same as not having available health care.

By the way, all that hospital had to do was stop his bleeding and toss him to the curb. Everything else they did - which you apparently didn't bother to read, because you were so busy "knowing" that I didn't know what I was talking about - was extraneous to the federal law requiring emergency care.

No. I read it It was irrelevant; as was the whole story. Emergency treatment is not health care reform. Nor is Medicaid. Between the Medicaid eligible and CorporateCare beneficiaries are huge numbers who don't earn enough for health insurance and too much for to qualify for Medicaid. What about them?

"Irrelevant" is not defined as "I missed the point". The point is, you keep chanting this mantra of "only the rich get health care now; we must take care of the poor". I gave you an example to the contrary, and it was NOT just federally-mandated emergency care. Contrary to the apocalyptic visions you want to evoke of poor people dropping like flies in the gutter, necessitating an immediate and wholesale gutting of our health care system in favor of a wholly socialized one, we DO provide for our poor.

I never said Medicaid was "health care reform", so spare me your false standard of "It must be REFORM or it doesn't count". It doesn't. What Medicaid is is a safety net already in place that you and your ilk fraudulently try to ignore in favor of pretending that millions of people are totally uncared-for.

Kindly prove to me that there are "huge numbers who can't get insurance or Medicaid". Be specific and show your work, because I don't answer questions predicated on the assumption that your assertions about the world are automatically true.

 

[Sinatra]

The QUALITY of care is outstanding in America - the world leader in fact.

The system of delivery can and should be tweaked - not thrown out. A single payer sytem will greatly endanger the innovation that makes the quality of our medicine the envy of the world.

Enhance state-to-state insurance competition and aggressive tort reform as has been done in Texas, and costs will go down while availability will increase.

As it is now, there are narrow choices for consumers state to state- a near monopoly that has driven up costs and reduced access. This can be remedied.

But why has the government not done these simple measures?

Simple - such measures would not increase the role of government, nor enlarge the pool of the dependent population.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The QUALITY of care is outstanding in America - the world leader in fact.

The system of delivery can and should be tweaked - not thrown out. A single payer sytem will greatly endanger the innovation that makes the quality of our medicine the envy of the world.

Enhance state-to-state insurance competition and aggressive tort reform as has been done in Texas, and costs will go down while availability will increase.

As it is now, there are narrow choices for consumers state to state- a near monopoly that has driven up costs and reduced access. This can be remedied.

But why has the government not done these simple measures?

Simple - such measures would not increase the role of government, nor enlarge the pool of the dependent population.

Personally, I always liked the idea of personal medical accounts. Rather than having people just blithely assume it'll be "handled" with no idea of or concern for how much things cost, put them directly in contact with and in charge of the expenses.

 

[Old Rocks]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVgOl3cETb4[/ame]

 

[Joe Steel]

No. I read it. It was irrelevant; as was the whole story. Emergency treatment is not health care reform. Nor is Medicaid. Between the Medicaid eligible and CorporateCare beneficiaries are huge numbers who don't earn enough for health insurance and too much for to qualify for Medicaid. What about them?

"Irrelevant" is not defined as "I missed the point". The point is, you keep chanting this mantra of "only the rich get health care now; we must take care of the poor". I gave you an example to the contrary, and it was NOT just federally-mandated emergency care. Contrary to the apocalyptic visions you want to evoke of poor people dropping like flies in the gutter, necessitating an immediate and wholesale gutting of our health care system in favor of a wholly socialized one, we DO provide for our poor.

I never said Medicaid was "health care reform", so spare me your false standard of "It must be REFORM or it doesn't count". It doesn't. What Medicaid is is a safety net already in place that you and your ilk fraudulently try to ignore in favor of pretending that millions of people are totally uncared-for.

Kindly prove to me that there are "huge numbers who can't get insurance or Medicaid". Be specific and show your work, because I don't answer questions predicated on the assumption that your assertions about the world are automatically true.

Your rant reflects a false premise. I never said "only the rich get health care." I said "those who will wait forever because they can't afford CorporateCare." Many who aren't poor and can't qualify for Medicaid, working and middle class Americans, can't afford CorporateCare. Fewer than 70% of US jobs include health benefits and those are often minimal. That means about a third of American workers have to get health care on their own. Considering the high cost health insurance, assuming a large number of persons can't afford it is not unreasonable.