The US has the best health care in the world?

[mheslep]

Seems that if these wait times are correct, there should be a noticeable difference in life expectancy...but the https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html" that the US system results in longer life.

Uncorrected numbers (CIA) include many things having nothing to do with health care. US has the highest health related life expectancy in the world by a slight margin.
http://www.aei.org/docLib/20061017_OhsfeldtSchneiderPresentation.pdf
Table 1-5

Obviously it's because so many of my fellow citizens don't have health insurance. Maybe the title of the thread should be, Insured citizens of the US have the best health care in the world (http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/567737" ).

I wonder if there are any data available that show life expectancy of insured vs. uninsured in the US, to compare to those who live with socialized medicine.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=3&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aei.org%2FdocLib%2F20071120_3522443OTIMankiw_g.pdf&ei=2n5uSt2JEJGCtgeRnKiKBQ&usg=AFQjCNH7WPvMC2We26sjZMYDbFzG7y_xNw&sig2=e6e0xs5JHU7PpPGpCQopSA" , 10m are illegals and no policy on the table will cover them socialized or otherwise. Millions more are eligible for Medicaid but don't sign up. 18m of the uninsured earn more than $50k/year but decline coverage.

We can get health care to everybody, but it doesn't require socializing everything to do it.

 

[Evo]

I thought that the ER costs in the end are mainly picked up by the government and that was one of the reasons of our out of control government health care spending. Or am I mistaken? That is what my wife has told me. Could someone in the health field give us some expert input?

It depends, in inner city trauma centers, it might be picked up by government, but out in the suburbs, it's customary that either the hospital write it off, and/or get the balance paid through local charities.

 

[mheslep]

You don't think that a company that sells health services to Canadians to go out of country would have any sort of bias in their reporting, now do you?

I could give you a step-by-step account (But anecdotal evidence doesn't count for much, right? Except for the fact that I live here and live with the system.) of the time-line of a good friend of mine being diagnosed with colorectal cancer at the end of May as a result of a colonoscopy to the various further diagnostic tests he had, and radiation treatments performed, and surgery to remove the growth in the second week of June. There's no way a system could have moved any faster or better. And my friends didn't have to mortgage their home to care for him.

But, that's anecdotal from my home last week and the above are stats from a "company".

As I understand it the wait lists work as follows: If you get hit by a bus and have immediate life threatening injuries, there's no wait to speak of at all, treatment is also essentially immediate. Same with Cancer. If you get hit by a bus and sustain severe injury but the injury is not immediately life threatening, i.e., your condition is stable, then regardless of how debilitating or painful the injury, the surgery is considered elective and you are placed on the queues, with numbers like the earlier post.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

I was hit by a car and had knee problems. I did not have insurance but nor was I applying for assistence. Got an appointment to see a doctor in private practice, had to wait about a month to get in. All he did was take a look at my knee and order an MRI. Got an appointment for an MRI on a date about a month after that day. Got the MRI and waited for the doctor to call me and let me know when they received the MRI. I wound up calling them until they told me they had it about a month later. I was then able to set up another appointment to see the doctor slated for about a month later. I went into the office for my appointment and it turned out that the doctor decided to take the day off and I would have to reschedule for about a month later. When I got into see the doc again I waited hours to see him for him to breeze in, show me the MRI, say "you need surgery" and breeze out five minutes later.

Going to see a doctor in private practice just to get a scan and a diagnosis took approximately half a year. After that it only got worse. It was a year and a half after the accident before I was able to get my surgery and that was with a lawyer getting me into see doctors and setting up payment deals with them.

When anyone anywhere says they are able to get into see a doctor and get taken care of in a matter of weeks it blows my mind.

 

[j93]

I was hit by a car and had knee problems. I did not have insurance but nor was I applying for assistence. Got an appointment to see a doctor in private practice, had to wait about a month to get in. All he did was take a look at my knee and order an MRI. Got an appointment for an MRI on a date about a month after that day. Got the MRI and waited for the doctor to call me and let me know when they received the MRI. I wound up calling them until they told me they had it about a month later. I was then able to set up another appointment to see the doctor slated for about a month later. I went into the office for my appointment and it turned out that the doctor decided to take the day off and I would have to reschedule for about a month later. When I got into see the doc again I waited hours to see him for him to breeze in, show me the MRI, say "you need surgery" and breeze out five minutes later.

Going to see a doctor in private practice just to get a scan and a diagnosis took approximately half a year. After that it only got worse. It was a year and a half after the accident before I was able to get my surgery and that was with a lawyer getting me into see doctors and setting up payment deals with them.I think the long wait times are problem for most of the population either way for those with a long approval process it is stalled to a process and for those with decent HMO's it can be stalled by doctors trying to milk your insurance.
When anyone anywhere says they are able to get into see a doctor and get taken care of in a matter of weeks it blows my mind.

I had a similar experience with a cyst in a finger in which I was passed on from specialist to specialist for a few months with appointments where I would go to appointments where a specialist would just look at my finger in one appointment, take an x-ray and pass me to another specialist. I felt like they were passing me around because I had an HMO so that they could all get a piece of the pie.

 

[drankin]

I was hit by a car and had knee problems. I did not have insurance but nor was I applying for assistence. Got an appointment to see a doctor in private practice, had to wait about a month to get in. All he did was take a look at my knee and order an MRI. Got an appointment for an MRI on a date about a month after that day. Got the MRI and waited for the doctor to call me and let me know when they received the MRI. I wound up calling them until they told me they had it about a month later. I was then able to set up another appointment to see the doctor slated for about a month later. I went into the office for my appointment and it turned out that the doctor decided to take the day off and I would have to reschedule for about a month later. When I got into see the doc again I waited hours to see him for him to breeze in, show me the MRI, say "you need surgery" and breeze out five minutes later.

Going to see a doctor in private practice just to get a scan and a diagnosis took approximately half a year. After that it only got worse. It was a year and a half after the accident before I was able to get my surgery and that was with a lawyer getting me into see doctors and setting up payment deals with them.

When anyone anywhere says they are able to get into see a doctor and get taken care of in a matter of weeks it blows my mind.

In this country, you have to pay for a service rendered. If you get yourself runover, then you are responsible for your recovery. Which means that you either get yourself insured or have some money saved for the likelyhood that you might step in front of an icecream truck. Typically, a motorist is required to be insured in the event they runover someone, among other mishaps. That would be another avenue of compensation.

How can you complain about getting shoddy services from a business that you cannot compensate? Is a private business requried to give you a service based on YOUR terms of payment?? It sounds like they gave you some basic services to help you out figuring that they were not going to be compensated for their trouble.

Sounds a lot like my mother-in-law inviting herself over for a week and then complaining how poorly she was served, she may just quit frequenting our establishment (crossing fingers).

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

In this country, you have to pay for a service rendered. If you get yourself runover, then you are responsible for your recovery. Which means that you either get yourself insured or have some money saved for the likelyhood that you might step in front of an icecream truck. Typically, a motorist is required to be insured in the event they runover someone, among other mishaps. That would be another avenue of compensation.

How can you complain about getting shoddy services from a business that you cannot compensate? Is a private business requried to give you a service based on YOUR terms of payment?? It sounds like they gave you some basic services to help you out figuring that they were not going to be compensated for their trouble.

Sounds a lot like my mother-in-law inviting herself over for a week and then complaining how poorly she was served, she may just quit frequenting our establishment (crossing fingers).

I was hit while crossing the street in the cross walk by a guy in an oversized pickup who was probably busy talking on his cellphone. I refused the ambulance ride to the emergency room in hopes that I could just walk it off because I knew that I could not afford the medical bills.

I got money from the claim with the insurance company after they hassled me, tried to pressure me into a lowball figure, and even seemingly influenced a witness to call me a belligerent liar in her deposition. The bills were paid with that money.

I'll remember that next time though, that its really my fault for being a schmuck who can't afford medical insurance and deciding to get myself hit by a truck.

 

[Count Iblis]

No one is contesting the fact that the US has very remote, poor areas that have little in the way of medical facilities. But this is a miniscule drop in the bucket of people in the country. What, in all of these areas around the country we're talking about a few thousand people, out of a population of over 303 million?

Yes, but as long as the system is not fixed, this is the only help some people can get.

 

[Count Iblis]

I think fixing the health care system is a complicated issue, which requires a pragmatic debate. If you have a polarized debate on ideological grounds in Congress, where one side really does not want to do much at all and brings in bogus arguments to try to torpedo a health care bill, then you may end up with a bad compromize.

 

[turbo]

I think fixing the health care system is a complicated issue, which requires a pragmatic debate. If you have a polarized debate on ideological grounds in Congress, where one side really does not want to do much at all and brings in bogus arguments to try to torpedo a health care bill, then you may end up with a bad compromize.

One of the factors that is most overlooked in the polarized debates is a critical one. Preventive care can catch problems earlier, while they are more treatable and/or offer the chance of a better outcome. People with no insurance often are not diagnosed until their condition(s) have become serious, more expensive to treat, and often with more radical interventions. In one way or another, we all end up paying more for health care because so many people lack access to regular check-ups and preventative care. Another significant waste arises when patients do not have a primary care physician, and when they need to be seen by a doctor, the doctor is unfamiliar with the patient's medical history, responses to certain classes of drugs, etc. Having a long-established relationship with a doctor you trust saves him/her and you time and effort on each visit, and the doctor knows you well enough to know if you'll understand what he has to say about how a certain drug acts, how to monitor your progress, etc.

Letting uninsured people resort to ER visits for medical care is wasteful in many, many ways - not just lost or reduced income on the part of the providers.

 

[drankin]

I was hit while crossing the street in the cross walk by a guy in an oversized pickup who was probably busy talking on his cellphone. I refused the ambulance ride to the emergency room in hopes that I could just walk it off because I knew that I could not afford the medical bills.

I got money from the claim with the insurance company after they hassled me, tried to pressure me into a lowball figure, and even seemingly influenced a witness to call me a belligerent liar in her deposition. The bills were paid with that money.

I'll remember that next time though, that its really my fault for being a schmuck who can't afford medical insurance and deciding to get myself hit by a truck.

I apologize for being insensitive about your injury but my point is that ultimately we are responsible for our own welfare. If a particular private doctor does not give you the service that you expect, FIRE him/her. I've done it myself. I'll walk out of the office if a doctor does not attend to me within 20min after an appointment time. If the gov't begins dictating who we go to then we can't FIRE them for poor service.

 

[madness]

I actually laughed when i saw this thread. Even Cuba has better healthcare than America. In fact one of the American officials involved in the assassination of Che Guevarra recently went to Cuba to get medical treatment on his eyes. I find it really sad that a country like America is unwilling to provide healthcare for its poorer citizens. I suppose it's a kind of cultural difference that in America privatisation and completely free markets are seen as a good thing, whereas where I live they mostly aren't.

 

[mgb_phys]

Insured citizens of the US have the best health care in the world

I suppose you could claim that the US has the best public transport in the world - because it has a space shuttle and everywhere else just has trains.

 

[Office_Shredder]

I suppose you could claim that the US has the best public transport in the world - because it has a space shuttle and everywhere else just has trains.

If there were space shuttles for 250 million Americans, then yeah, it probably would be the best public transport system in the world. Admit it, you'd move just to ride one.

I actually laughed when i saw this thread. Even Cuba has better healthcare than America. In fact one of the American officials involved in the assassination of Che Guevarra recently went to Cuba to get medical treatment on his eyes. I find it really sad that a country like America is unwilling to provide healthcare for its poorer citizens. I suppose it's a kind of cultural difference that in America privatisation and completely free markets are seen as a good thing, whereas where I live they mostly aren't.

And there are stories of Canadians going to America to get treatment. Therefore...?

If you have a healthcare system that can't treat the wealthiest members of society well, how can it possibly treat ANYBODY well? Besides, it's not the poorest members of society who don't have access to medical coverage, it's the people who are just above the government subsidisation line that get screwed

 

[madness]

Unless you live in a communist society, then you will most likely have the option of going private if you aren't satisfied with your national health care. I don't think wealthy people ever have a problem getting good healthcare. At least with the NHS everyone can get a decent level of healthcare no matter how much they earn (and the NHS really isn't that bad). I once had a conversation with an American where I asked him what he thought about not having government healthcare, and he told me he liked the fact that if a homeless guy broke his arm who had contributed nothing to society then he wouldn't be treated. I really thought that was a terrible way to look at things and I hope it's not a common point of view in America.

 

[mgb_phys]

If there were space shuttles for 250 million Americans, then yeah, it probably would be the best public transport system in the world. Admit it, you'd move just to ride one.

I'd move to somewhere with the Holywood health care system where a team of 5 doctors is devoted just to me if I have more than one symptom.

I would also like the police system where half a dozen detectives, an entire forensic lab (and for some reason a mossad agent) + lots of helicopters are involved the next time my bike gets stolen.

 

[turbo]

And there are stories of Canadians going to America to get treatment. Therefore...?

Generally glossed over is the fact that much of Canada is VERY rural, and if there is more sophisticated diagnostic equipment, etc, available nearer in by crossing to the US instead of traveling the half-way across Canada, Canada's public health care system picks up the tab for the US medical care. The incidence of Canadians being treated in the US is NOT a clear case of rich Canadians choosing to come to the US. Very often (perhaps a majority - I don't know) are ordinary Canadians who live in very rural areas and the Canadian health care system willingly pays for care in the nearest US facility if there are no nearby Canadian facilities with equivalent resources.

This is not a reason to claim that the Canadian insurance system is inferior. It is actually more efficient and superior to a private carrier in that advanced diagnostics, etc, are not rationed by your location. We should realize that there are places in the US, as well, that can be many hours of travel from the nearest MRI facility, for example, and it doesn't make economic sense to set up MRI facilities in every little farming town of more than a couple of thousand people. Here in Somerset Country, in Maine, we have had to address that by contracting with a portable MRI service that brings a self-contained tractor trailer "lab" to the regional hospital on a scheduled basis. The hospital is located in the county seat - a "city" of less than 7000 and serves towns from at least 75 miles away, most of which have populations of several hundreds to a couple of thousand or so. There is no way that our regional hospital could finance and support a full-time MRI lab. I doubt that the population density in Canada's wheat-belt could support such advanced equipment either. US diagnostics can be the least-expensive and most effective option in that case.

 

[Count Iblis]

If you have a healthcare system that can't treat the wealthiest members of society well...

They can only get the same treatment everyone else can get, while they have the financial resources to pay for more. But I don't see this becoming a problem in the US.

 

[Count Iblis]

I'd move to somewhere with the Holywood health care system where a team of 5 doctors is devoted just to me if I have more than one symptom.

And then you'll die of cardiac arrest due to over-medication like Michael Jackson.

 

[madness]

I have friends studying political sciences who were told in lectures that America is in line with many third world countries in terms of health care. I imagine this refers to how much of the population can access good health care, since the rich in America do have access to good health care.

 

[drankin]

I have friends studying political sciences who were told in lectures that America is in line with many third world countries in terms of health care. I imagine this refers to how much of the population can access good health care, since the rich in America do have access to good health care.

I'm American, I'm not rich, and I get excellent health care. If I don't feel like I get good treatment at one facility I can go to another provider. The "rich" can pay for their health care and of course it's going to be as good as they are willing to pay for. If you are a bum on the street you will get basic health care but you won't much of a choice as to what you get. As it should be. Health care is free market service here, just like most everything else.

It's not typical in American towns but even the police where I live had to compete and win the contract to work in our town. If they didn't provide a good service we have the ability to hire different police when their contract is up.

 

[mgb_phys]

It's not typical in American towns but even the police where I live had to compete and win the contract to work in our town. If they didn't provide a good service we have the ability to hire different police when their contract is up.

So you collect money from everybody in the town, rich and poor, and force them to use the same single police force without any choice in which cop arrests them - sounds awfully socialist to me.

 

[madness]

Sounds anarcho-sydicalist to me haha

 

[mgb_phys]

Sounds anarcho-sydicalist to me haha

Only if you take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.
But all the decision of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting--
By a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs,--
But by a two-thirds majority in the case of more major--

 

[drankin]

So you collect money from everybody in the town, rich and poor, and force them to use the same single police force without any choice in which cop arrests them - sounds awfully socialist to me.

It is, I don't need no stinkin poh-leese.

A free market system allows you to have the best services. When there is no competition the quality of a service suffers, of course.

 

[madness]

If a free market system allows the best services then why is Sweden at the top of the UN human development chart especially in terms of healthcare, when it has national healthcare and a socialist government?

 

[mheslep]

I was hit by a car and had knee problems...

Where?

 

[Astronuc]

Interesting article that points to some of the problems with US healthcare.
Health Care in Crisis: Needless Costs, Needless Deaths
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20090728/bs_bw/jul2009db20090727675410

. . . .
Heart Operations: Most "Are at Best Unnecessary"

It is operations such as these that have sent U.S. health-care costs soaring out of control, certainly when compared to those of other industrialized nations. Dr. Ralph Rashbaum, a renowned back specialist with the Texas Back Institute in Plano, frequently speaks on this issue. Rashbaum is a physician who believes surgery should always be the last resort to correct medical problems -- often counter to what the public wants to believe. People are convinced that somehow the miracle of modern surgery can cure all ills.

Rashbaum also knows the other key reason why U.S. health-care costs are so outrageously high. Some 80% of all spending on health care goes to only 20% of the public -- in the last two years of their lives. Representative Michael Burgess (R-Tex.), a physician, seemed to agree with Rashbaum's analysis of the problematical costs for health care: "I hope we could use this opportunity to educate patients and families of risks before and after illnesses."

As for the costs and risks involved in heart operations, Dr. Michael Ozner, author of The Great American Heart Hoax, lays out the problem: "More than 1.5 million Americans undergo angioplasties and coronary bypass surgeries annually in the U.S." While in many cases these operations save the lives of the patients, he estimates that "70% to 90% of these procedures are at best unnecessary."
. . . .

When there is no competition the quality of a service suffers, of course.

And I've seen when the is competition the quality of service or product suffers - because people underbid, then cut costs, and provide less service, often at poorer quality. Competition also produces redundancy.

Quality is dependent on the integrity of the provider/produce/seller, and as we've seen in the meltdown of the economy, integrity is sorely lacking in many cases.

 

[Astronuc]

I was hit by a car and had knee problems...

Where?

The knee.

 

[mheslep]

... where one side really does not want to do much at all..

One reason the debate is polarized is repetition of bogus talking points like that. See, e.g., Wyden(D)-Bennett(R). My money is on WB as the legislation that will really happen.

Senate:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123931859150606821.html"
http://theglitteringeye.com/?p=7409"

House-Senate
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124286548605041517.html"

Called the Patients' Choice Act, it would eliminate the tax break that employers receive for providing health-insurance benefits to their workers. Instead, it would give an annual tax credit of $2,300 to each individual and $5,700 to each family that they could use to offset the cost of their health insurance. Low-income families would get extra money to buy into private insurance plans.

McCain Plan
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba629

 

[mheslep]

The knee.

Jeez I always fall for those.

 

[Evo]

The things that I agree with in Obama's plan, and are critical, IMO, is the coverage of pre-existing illness and catastrophic illness. We obviously need to provide healthcare to cover illness before it becomes life threatening or debilitating. I think his idea to tax the wealthy at the same rate that the middle class and poor pay is essential. Obama claims that making the wealthy, (I think that is people making over $250k annually) pay the same percent of tax would pay for the entire health plan. And this was shot down. Why aren't we screaming and raising hell to get the politicians to approve this? Looks like a great solution to me.

 

[mheslep]

The things that I agree with in Obama's plan, and are critical, IMO, is the coverage of pre-existing illness and catastrophic illness. We obviously need to provide healthcare to cover illness before it becomes life threatening or debilitating. I think his idea to tax the wealthy at the same rate that the middle class and poor pay is essential. Obama claims that making the wealthy, (I think that is people making over $250k annually) pay the same percent of tax would pay for the entire health plan. And this was shot down. ..

Could you explain? Obama's repeatedly stated he will place no additional taxes whatsoever on the middle class. The 'rich' will pay it all - 5% surtax or so. What do you mean by 'the same rate'?

Edit:
Should the rich finance healthcare reform?

Choosing to finance health care reform by taxing the rich is bad economic policy, bad health policy, bad budget policy and poor leadership.

It is bad economic policy because, coupled with the scheduled expiration of the Bush tax cuts, it would raise marginal tax rates by 10 percentage points for high-income households. While I object to the general hue and cry that occurs anytime anyone discusses any potential tax increase for the rich, it is nevertheless quite fair to say that a 10 percentage point increase in taxation on the return to labor and capital income is a lot and shouldn’t be the first choice. (But please spare me the small business arguments.) ...

 

[turbo]

Another thing that bothers me about all the "either-or" wrangling in DC is that the most conservative option is rejected by the "conservatives". If you own a car, and it's not running well, or is smoking, or the brakes are spongy, you don't wait until a castastrophic failure occurs, perhaps ruining your car, perhaps resulting in a loss of property or life. You get the vehicle maintained properly to protect your investment and to protect the safety of the public and your family and yourself.

The fact is, that if everybody had access to periodic check-ups, and preventive care, lots of very expensive interventions could be avoided, and the total cost of health-care could come down. If people are unable to get regular care because they can't get insurance (perhaps because of pre-existing conditions, perhaps due to a lack of money) and then present themselves at an ER after their problems have become too severe to ignore, treatments can be expensive, and outcomes can be sub-optimal, just like when you refuse to maintain your vehicle. Providing reliable regular exams and preventive care should be a goal of all conservatives if they truly want to reduce the cost of health-care in the US.

 

[Office_Shredder]

I'd move to somewhere with the Holywood health care system where a team of 5 doctors is devoted just to me if I have more than one symptom.

I would also like the police system where half a dozen detectives, an entire forensic lab (and for some reason a mossad agent) + lots of helicopters are involved the next time my bike gets stolen.

First, someone said that the US healthcare system apparently works great except for the 47 million uninsured Americans. That leaves some 250 million insured Americans. Then the 47 million uninsured Americans were compared to all the people who don't fly around in space shuttles. I pointed out the absurdity of this comparison, and I guess you missed it

Generally glossed over is the fact that much of Canada is VERY rural, and if there is more sophisticated diagnostic equipment, etc, available nearer in by crossing to the US instead of traveling the half-way across Canada, Canada's public health care system picks up the tab for the US medical care. The incidence of Canadians being treated in the US is NOT a clear case of rich Canadians choosing to come to the US. Very often (perhaps a majority - I don't know) are ordinary Canadians who live in very rural areas and the Canadian health care system willingly pays for care in the nearest US facility if there are no nearby Canadian facilities with equivalent resources.

This is not a reason to claim that the Canadian insurance system is inferior. It is actually more efficient and superior to a private carrier in that advanced diagnostics, etc, are not rationed by your location. We should realize that there are places in the US, as well, that can be many hours of travel from the nearest MRI facility, for example, and it doesn't make economic sense to set up MRI facilities in every little farming town of more than a couple of thousand people. Here in Somerset Country, in Maine, we have had to address that by contracting with a portable MRI service that brings a self-contained tractor trailer "lab" to the regional hospital on a scheduled basis. The hospital is located in the county seat - a "city" of less than 7000 and serves towns from at least 75 miles away, most of which have populations of several hundreds to a couple of thousand or so. There is no way that our regional hospital could finance and support a full-time MRI lab. I doubt that the population density in Canada's wheat-belt could support such advanced equipment either. US diagnostics can be the least-expensive and most effective option in that case.

So your argument is... people from Canada go to the US because there aren't any Canadian specialists near enough to their homes... and the Canadian system is superior because you don't have problems like having to travel far to get health service. I'll buy it, but only if it comes with a 30 day money back guarantee