Does anyone know the reason we love our existing healthcare??

As we continue to water down our revised healthcare bill, the US falls further and further behind other industrialized countries. The US is the richest country in the world. Countries such as Germany, Japan, Italy, France and England that we bailed out after WWII now provide superior healthcare to the US.

Why shouldn't the US lead the world in how well we treat our people?

Don't settle for triage | APP.com | Asbury Park Press
Few would argue that the United States doesn't have some of the best hospitals, specialists and technology in the world. Most people like their doctors. Most people who have never had to battle their health insurers or hospitals over bills or coverages find little fault with them.

But a 2000 World Health Organization study of health care in 191 countries ranked the United States 37th, behind most advanced Western democracies. A 2007 Commonwealth Fund study comparing health care in the U.S., Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand and Great Britain ranked us last or next to last on most measures of performance, including quality of care and access to it.

A 2008 mortality study in the journal Health Affairs found the U.S. had the highest rate of deaths among 19 countries from conditions that could have been prevented or treated successfully. The Urban Institute released a study this month that found the U.S. performed better than other advanced nations in some areas and worse than in others. The study noted that only 45 percent of Americans thought the U.S. had the world's best health care.
The American system does some things well, and others not so well. We are the only advanced nation in the world without universal coverage. Access to care and the quality of care are far more uneven than in western Europe and some Asian nations. We have high rates of infant mortality, rank near the bottom of industrialized nations in healthy life expectancy at age 60, fare poorly in coordinating the care of the chronically ill and have a higher incidence of fatal surgical and medical mistakes.

At the very least, the American health care system has considerable room for improvement. And that's before we begin to talk about access to care, cost of care — the U.S. spends twice more per-capita on health care than any other nation — and the mind-numbing bureaucratic waste.

The debate needs to get beyond the fear-mongering and the belief that to look to European models for answers moves us toward socialized medicine. That is patent nonsense. There are nearly as many different models in Europe as there are countries, and many of those nations — Germany, France, Italy, to name a few — have features worth emulating. And almost all of them are built around private insurers.

Our health care system is broken. The reforms on the table today don't go far enough to repair the damage. And given the tenor in Washington and the belief that more compromises to what's on the table now will be needed to get any bill passed, it's likely any reforms will be weak medicine at best.
Citizens need to do their homework. They need to take a hard look at our system, compare it with others and insist our politicians come up with a patient-centered model rooted in improved access and care, reduced bureaucracy and transparency in billing and health outcomes. The system should build on what we do well and borrow from what others do better.


Something that I find interesting about this debate is that the USA has one of the lowest rates of Smoking among adults in the industrialized world and is lagging behind the rest of the world in outcomes of sickness.

What is it about smoking that promotes better health?


Do you not read?
 
That person trying to raise a family on $20K per year in England or Canada only needs to show his healtcare card and receives top level treatment. In this country, he can go to an emergency room and claim poverty.

Yes, they will receive top level tratment for thier standards, only after waiting in line for months.
 
Remind me again, which country did Multimillionaire Ted Kennedy go to for treatment?

Ok, so let's concede that the US is a great place to get healthcare if you're a multi-millionaire,

then we can move on to the 99 plus percent of the population who aren't mulit-millionaires and talk about their healthcare.

im far from a mulit-millionaires but im set for life. wonder how that happened????
 
Remind me again, which country did Multimillionaire Ted Kennedy go to for treatment?

Ok, so let's concede that the US is a great place to get healthcare if you're a multi-millionaire,

then we can move on to the 99 plus percent of the population who aren't mulit-millionaires and talk about their healthcare.

As an American who makes substantally less than the swimmer did, I can tell you I get great treatment... I definitely fall in your 99 plus percentage...

Seems like a lot of Americans who make substantially less than the swimmer did are equally satisfied with their care and don't want the gubmint making decisions about such care for them...

You're just pissed off your carrier won't pay for your liposuction...
 
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.

Scott W. Atlas, M.D., is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor at the Stanford University Medical Center. A version of this article appeared previously in the February 18, 2009, Washington Times.

NEJM -- Quality of Care in U.S. Hospitals as Reflected by Standardized Measures, 2002-2004

I'll give you one thing, Americans seems to be much better informed - on average I mean - about health issues than in some other countries. That's only from personal observation though. Awareness is a great idea because the earlier a condition is detected the better the chances it can be resolved. That may, just may, account for the information in Allie's post. For example, the amount of medical type advertising on television in the US seems to me to be far greater than that I've seen in many other countries. But as I said, that's only a personal observation.

But all in all your system sucks.
 
Remind me again, which country did Multimillionaire Ted Kennedy go to for treatment?

Ok, so let's concede that the US is a great place to get healthcare if you're a multi-millionaire,

then we can move on to the 99 plus percent of the population who aren't mulit-millionaires and talk about their healthcare.

im far from a mulit-millionaires but im set for life. wonder how that happened????

Dunno, do tell! :lol:
 
Remind me again, which country did Multimillionaire Ted Kennedy go to for treatment?

Ok, so let's concede that the US is a great place to get healthcare if you're a multi-millionaire,

then we can move on to the 99 plus percent of the population who aren't mulit-millionaires and talk about their healthcare.

And this is the important part of the debate. The big end of town is fine, it will get what it wants, when it wants it. But that doesn't mean the system, such as it is, is good, it simply means that the wealthy and the privileged will be treated like they are anywhere else. It's how the poor and the needy are treated that marks the worth of a system. I don't think that idea has sunk in with some people.
 
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.

Scott W. Atlas, M.D., is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor at the Stanford University Medical Center. A version of this article appeared previously in the February 18, 2009, Washington Times.

NEJM -- Quality of Care in U.S. Hospitals as Reflected by Standardized Measures, 2002-2004

I'll give you one thing, Americans seems to be much better informed - on average I mean - about health issues than in some other countries. That's only from personal observation though. Awareness is a great idea because the earlier a condition is detected the better the chances it can be resolved. That may, just may, account for the information in Allie's post. For example, the amount of medical type advertising on television in the US seems to me to be far greater than that I've seen in many other countries. But as I said, that's only a personal observation.

But all in all your system sucks.

You must have missed the parts that I bolded, highlighted, and enlarged in case you have bad eyesight.

Sounds like our system has the others beat all to hell to me.

And perhaps you missed the author of the piece as well:

Scott W. Atlas, M.D., is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor at the Stanford University Medical Center.
 
It proves nothing about the efficacy of the system Allie. Those are statistics out of context. How many people in the US are not covered by health care insurance? That's a system issue.
 
Last edited:
No, they aren't out of context. The fact that we have ppl who are uninsured has nothing whatsoever to do with the care they get, the ease with which they get it, or the health statistics. The fact that we have better care, better results, essentially no wait time for treatment, and more advanced equipment and research puts the lie to the belief that our system sucks. It doesn't.
 
Last edited:
And it's also misleading to imply that ppl don't get care because they're uninsured. That's the biggest and most obnoxious lie out there.
 
As I said, "system."

There's a fundamental disagreement here, which is why I'm referring to the system and not the quality of care available in the US. Of course it's world class care. I mean it's self-evident that some of your hospitals will cater for the wealthy from around the world who can afford to fly to the States and pay for the care. Believe it or not the same is true for other countries. I don't know if any single country is pre-eminent in health care but there are a number which have world class care and the US is one of them.

But when it comes to the general availability of care, through a health care system, it's a different issue. Americans seem to hold the view - and I know this is a generalisation but I'll use it anyway - that health care must be bought by the end user, the patient. That worldview sees health care as a commodity. That commodity is either purchased or is made affordable by insurance. Insurance itself has to be purchased. By definition that means that some people will not be able to afford insurance and therefore health care. And also health care being a commodity which is paid for by insurance companies who want to minimise their expenditures and maximise their profits, it will be regulated by insurance companies.

From a system point of view that's a failure Allie. People will end up not getting proper health care. That's not to say that system failures don't exist in other countries systems either. If a universal health care system isn't funded to meet need then some people will not get proper health care or will have to wait too long for it. That's not a system fault, that's directly traceable to lack of proper funding. The delivery mechanism works, the funding is insufficient.
 
Its not just the quality of healthcare. We have quality care if you can afford it. Its the impact on American families when you have a major health crisis be it you, your spouse or your children. 62% of bankruptcies involve healthcare not spending above your means. 80% of those had insurance.

People don't lose their homes in Canada or England because they got sick. The US is the richest nation in the world. We can do a better job of taking care of our people

NCHC | Home

The Impact of Rising Health Care Costss

Economists have found that rising health care costs correlate with significant drops in health insurance coverage, and national surveys also show that the primary reason people are uninsured is due to the high and escalating cost of health insurance coverage.
A recent study found that 62 percent of all bankruptcies filed in 2007 were linked to medical expenses. Of those who filed for bankruptcy, nearly 80 percent had health insurance.
According to another published article, about 1.5 million families lose their homes to foreclosure every year due to unaffordable medical costs.
Without health care reform, small businesses will pay nearly $2.4 trillion dollars over the next ten years in health care costs for their workers, 178,000 small business jobs will be lost by 2018 as a result of health care costs, $834 billion in small business wages will be lost due to high health care costs over the next ten years, small businesses will lose $52.1 billion in profits to high health care costs and 1.6 million small business workers will suffer “job lock“— roughly one in 16 people currently insured by their employers.
 
One, the media tells people how good the HC system is, and America in general, especially FAUX, and their extreme nationalism, or fascism, or corporatism. And most people are still under the misperception that our media is free, instead of corporate. And, they repeat.

Second, the statistic I hear most often is "80 percent of our people say they are happy with their insurance." Yea, to start off with, this omits the nearly 50 million, with a bullet, that don't even have insurance. So, yea, it's nice to be able to just exclude, or omit, a major part of the people in your little statistic. Second, eighty percent, you know, that sounds about like the number of people who have insurance, but have never had to actually USE IT!!

Those are a couple of pretty good reasons.
 

Forum List

Back
Top