Thread: What do you think will happen when...

Originally Posted by MichaelP

Worse than the vast majority of industrialized countries. #1 in cost and #37 in quality of healthcare. Yes, I know you are #1 in survival rate for a specific cancer... read the original paper in its entirety, you'll see that's almost the only sample survival rate in which America looks good amongst industrialized countries.

Before you repeat the media-fed "long waiting lines, bureaucrat between the patient and the doctor, dieing in the waiting room", what your media is spouting flies in the face of the first-hand experience of every single person I know in Europe... and I have been working all over Europe in the last 17 years.

Up to date, the only time I had to wait in a European hospital is when a soldier got his legs crushed in an accident on the closest military ground. The hospital stabilized my injury and treated that guy first, I had no issue with that... his condition was more life-threatening than mine. If they hadn't done it automatically, I'd have volunteered to give him priority.


I don't know if it is still the case, but a few years back there was a lot of specialized medical tourism... Dental work in Mexico being one example.

Yes, I know that people from many other countries do flock to America for treatment. It would be interesting to see the split on treatment type, a non-random guess: cosmetic surgery, cosmetic surgery on minors (forbidden in Europe), experimental treatments.

I had a friend once who's grandmother was suffering from some illness, I can't remember what it was. I went with them once to one of those "clinics" in Mexico. After seeing just that one, personally, I'd never go to one for myself.

I would agree for regular hospitals, the dental hospitals for gringos on the other hand... top rate care.

We have the same thing happening now with dental work in Hungary being advertised to Germans.

Originally Posted by honedright

What evidence is there that the system is failing?

The fact that about 15% of our population is uninsured should be evidence enough, but just in case:

In 2007, amongst Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Sweden and the UK, America had:
· the lowest life expectancy (78.1)
· the highest infant mortality rate (6.7)
· the highest per capita expenditure on health care ($7,290)

WellPoint, Inc., the largest U.S. insurer, recently announced that it was cutting its own employees' health benefits. WellPoint's CEO received about $10M worth of compensation in 2008.

We spend the most money yet have the worst results. Where is the evidence to support that this system is working, or somehow better than that of other industrialized nations?

Country stats source
WellPoint, Inc. source
CEO compensation source

Originally Posted by commiecat

The fact that about 15% of our population is uninsured should be evidence enough, but just in case:

In 2007, amongst Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Sweden and the UK, America had:
· the lowest life expectancy (78.1)
· the highest infant mortality rate (6.7)
· the highest per capita expenditure on health care ($7,290)

WellPoint, Inc., the largest U.S. insurer, recently announced that it was cutting its own employees' health benefits. WellPoint's CEO received about $10M worth of compensation in 2008.

We spend the most money yet have the worst results. Where is the evidence to support that this system is working, or somehow better than that of other industrialized nations?

Country stats source
WellPoint, Inc. source
CEO compensation source

If 15% are uninsured then 85% are insured. That's failing?

All you've done is point out that the system has problems. No one is denying that.

But having problems is not the same as failing.

Originally Posted by honedright

If 15% are uninsured then 85% are insured. That's failing?

All you've done is point out that the system has problems. No one is denying that.

But having problems is not the same as failing.

Are you suggesting that a health care system follow the same guidelines as educational grading to determine what failing is? What would you say about our postal service if 45.7M citizens couldn't get mail? What would you say about our police/fire departments if 45.7M citizens couldn't get emergency response? Call me crazy, but I'd say those would undoubtedly be failures.

It doesn't get much more simple than "we pay the most yet have the least to show for it." Our health care system right now is like a $250 Zeepk disposable.

Interesting also that people in this country mindlessly parrot these lies about "rationed care" without realizing that our current system already "rations" in the form of denials, dropping coverage, etc.

Just food for thought...

Originally Posted by honedright

That's a vague statement.

yes it is - I'm not sure if he's saying we pay the most for coverage, but get the least coverage, or if we pay the most for health care, but get the least healthcare (quality? availability? not sure)

stop deleting your posts scott!!

Originally Posted by commiecat

...
We spend the most money yet have the worst results. Where is the evidence to support that this system is working, or somehow better than that of other industrialized nations?

Country stats source
WellPoint, Inc. source
CEO compensation source

You are probably right, to a point. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are all on the verge of bankruptcy. Every U.S. Government health care system in America is incredibly poorly run so how can we expect the U.S. Government can effectively run another.

I have experience with government run health care in the the U.S. My wife is a teacher and we have our insurance through the State Health Insurance System. Not that it is better than what is available through my employer, but her employment is more stable and secure than mine. I suffer migraines. The medication that was covered eight years ago under our health insurance was Imitrex. The prescription was "Follow the directions enclosed". Those instructions said to take one tablet at the onset of symptoms. It further said that some patients did not receive relief with one dose and found relief taking two tablets. But none received additional benefit with more than two tablets. At first one tablet was sufficient, but over time it wasn't effective. I went to two tablets and that was effective for a few months. But get this, I was limited to one package per month under the State health insurance plan. There are twelve tablets per package so I was limited to six migraines per month...at a time when I was having them every day! Yes folks, my government run health care was being rationed. This was eight years ago. It got to the point that Imetrex was no longer effective in treating my migraines. My doctor switched me to Flova. It didn't work very well and, by the way, was not covered by the State Insurance Plan. My Doctor of Internal Medicine refereed me to a Neurologist. He prescribed Maxalt, but again this was not covered by the State Insurance Plan. I have to pay $60/refill (out of $113/refill cost) until I have met my $500 deductible before the State insurance will pay more. All medicines in their "formulary" have a $10 co-pay. And up until recently there was no generic equivalent on the market period so I had to pay the higher co-pay of $30/refill. And again, I am limited to one refill of 12 tablets per month. So for all of that, I am limited to 12 migraines per month now. But, not being in the formulary, I have to pay that same $60/month until I meet the $500 deductible and then I pay $15 deductible. Fortunately, my neurologist has been able to prescribe a daily regiment of three different drugs to prevent migraines. Oh, and by the way, until less than a year ago none of those three drugs were available in generic form and none are in the "formulary".

The clincher on all of this, the last time I checked about five years ago the State Insurance Plan was LOOSING $760,000,000/year! This has resulted in progressively fewer benefits in the State Health Insurance and higher deductibles (it went from $250 to $300 to $500 about nine years ago). And what does this cost on an individual basis: The county pays the equivalent of individual insurance premium for coverage for my wife, we pay the difference of approximately $210/month for family coverage. The State chips in approximately $800/month. So at more than $12,000/year for our family we are receiving rationed health care from "the" government. Don't tell me that we won't receive rationed health care under any of the proposed Universal Health Care options on the table in Washington.

My point is if government can't manage the health care systems it now has in place why give them another one to manage? If I am receiving rationed health care from a government entity, why should we expect anything else from the Federal Government? I say fix what's wrong with the current system first and then try and bring another one on board when the Fed's prove they can run health care effectively.

I grew up in a small county of about 11,000 people. We had a community health clinic that anyone could go to for free medical care. It was staffed by a real doctor and a staff of nurses. This was the source for school required vaccinations and it is where I got mine. My solution is simple. Increase the staff and facilities of all the county health clinics and provide health care to those not covered by health insurance. This would be way cheaper than reinventing health care in America. This would be more cost affective and, since all parties involved would be local, there would be more accountability for the quality of health care received.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

stop deleting your posts scott!!

Sorry, I keep changing my thoughts....

Originally Posted by commiecat

Are you suggesting that a health care system follow the same guidelines as educational grading to determine what failing is? What would you say about our postal service if 45.7M citizens couldn't get mail? What would you say about our police/fire departments if 45.7M citizens couldn't get emergency response? Call me crazy, but I'd say those would undoubtedly be failures.

It doesn't get much more simple than "we pay the most yet have the least to show for it." Our health care system right now is like a $250 Zeepk disposable.

I was having some problem with your 45.7 million citizens number. Did some checking and yes, the U.S. Census reported that number, but there seems to be less than a consensus about the validity of that number.

Still, 85% or greater insured is not a failure. Not perfect, but nothing ever is.