Ladies, are you receiving better healthcare in the United States?

[ECOCKS]

Hmmmm, getting back on track, with the European obesity problem and love-affair with fast food, I wonder what the healthcare impact will be over the next 10 years?

[55North]

A couple of our Euro forum brethern apparently think we should be like them right down to their wonderful healthcare 

Too damn right.  Probably 1000s, including many Americans, all of whom are very wisely keeping quiet, lest they have their names taken and get the 'patriots' coming round.
 

Some of this weekend's funnies.......

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/cartoon/2009/aug/14/martin-rowson-us-healthcare-cartoon

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Fund-Reports/2007/May/Mirror--Mirror-on-the-Wall--An-International-Update-on-the-Comparative-Performance-of-American-Healt.aspx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/13/internal-memo-confirms-bi_n_258285.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/16/michael-crowley-barack-obama

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/16/obama-rightwing-extremist-fears

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/aug/14/ministers-doctors-defend-uk-nhs

[Lonewing]

I'm now so confused over the whole issue I think the President needs to have Congress work on it in LITTLE bites.

This week, we organize just the legislation that centralizes medical records.
Next week, we set up something liek FICA-MED to cover all doctor liabilitis and removing liability insurance costs.
The week after that, we go after another piece...

But this whole "Do it all at once NOW!" is just not cutting it.  Hit me over the head with french bread already, wake me up in three years...

[ECOCKS]

We can only hope it will be over in three years and someone who actully has a clue how to be an executive will be running things.

For now though it looks like sanity will prevail and this is losing its momentum.

[Ade]

Why am I not surprised you couldn't be specific? It's because SJ you don't know the facts or patently false propaganda. It's a safe bet you don't know sh!t from shinola about Americans. You seem to find joy in being a sheep and parroting anything you perceive as negative about America.

How many Americans is this? Where do you know these Americans from? Your newscasts?

You always sound like a broken ultra-patriotic record that takes offence at any criticism no matter how justified.

Why on earth would I go to the trouble of repeating what has already been said here numerous times only for you, blues and other die-hard right wing republicans to demonstrate your republican head in the sand trick again?

FWIW, I couldn't care less what health system the US health system chooses to use, I just hope the governments on this side of the Atlantic continue to show more sense.

I can see you finding this funny I just have no idea why but I'll chalk it up to "cultural differences"

It doesn't surprise me that you can't understand why this is funny. No matter, that just adds to my amusement.

[Lonewing]

We haven't had a good executive for so long I think we might need to find an alternative system for picking out our leaders.  I don't have much faith in the current common intelligence of the American Status Quo, and I do believe these scammers are getting too good at their election scam.

Seems it's just as hard to find a good executive as it is to find a good woman.  But alas, both are pure fantasy.

[BC]

I think what bothers me the most, is not hefty discourse regarding whether or not the proposed legislation is good, bad, or ugly..

It's the scare tactics used by individuals, interest groups and political parties that is really saddening, using words like "Death Panels", "Rationing", "Obama is going to kill my baby" etc etc. in the hopes that the wider population will believe it.

Unfortunately, many seem to do so, even evidenced by some posts here.

I can only hope that the majority is smarter than that and can see through the BS.

[Blues Fairy]

Why on earth would I go to the trouble of repeating what has already been said here numerous times only for you, blues and other die-hard right wing republicans to demonstrate your republican head in the sand trick again?

Perhaps because we're still waiting (head in the sand, apparently) for at least one argument based on reason and not emotions?  Believe me, rationing is NOT scare tactics, in fact it's happening as we speak in most countries with socialized health care only you people prefer not to speak of it (head in the sand), just as you prefer not to admit other serious issues plaguing your European paradise.

[Faux Pas]

You always sound like a broken ultra-patriotic record that takes offence at any criticism no matter how justified.

Who has taken offense? Not moi. I just pointed out the absurdity of your statement and you want to pretend it is some kind of attack on you. You are not qualified to make such statements SJ. You are not American, you don't live here and you don't pay taxes or buy healthcare here. Most Americans don't care about your opinion or your perception of Americans.
 

Why on earth would I go to the trouble of repeating what has already been said here numerous times only for you, blues and other die-hard right wing republicans to demonstrate your republican head in the sand trick again?

Because YOU made the statement of "ignoring facts" and "patent false propaganda". Back up your statement SJ or admit that you are intellectually lazy and a hack. It's the Ultra-Liberal left wing wackos  that attempt to demonize and silence anyone who's thought process doesn't march lockstep with theirs.

FWIW, I couldn't care less what health system the US health system chooses to use, I just hope the governments on this side of the Atlantic continue to show more sense.

Then why make absurd statements and attempts to denigrate an entire citizenry over something you "couldn't care less" about? You are happy with your socialist government fine, enjoy your little version of Utopia. I know the thought that you may not actually know "everything" hasn't ever crossed your mind but, you should give it some consideration this time.

It doesn't surprise me that you can't understand why this is funny. No matter, that just adds to my amusement.

I suppose this is where only the intellectually  superior and enlightened can have a sense of humor and "get it"? One wonderful trait "we over here" have over "you over there" is that we question authority. We don't blindly accept that our government or other governments of the world are going to do what is in our best interests. You do, just as you are doing now. How has that history and line of thought worked out throughout time for you guys "over there"?

[Faux Pas]

Too damn right.  Probably 1000s, including many Americans, all of whom are very wisely keeping quiet, lest they have their names taken and get the 'patriots' coming round.
 

Some of this weekend's funnies.......

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/cartoon/2009/aug/14/martin-rowson-us-healthcare-cartoon

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Fund-Reports/2007/May/Mirror--Mirror-on-the-Wall--An-International-Update-on-the-Comparative-Performance-of-American-Healt.aspx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/13/internal-memo-confirms-bi_n_258285.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/16/michael-crowley-barack-obama

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/16/obama-rightwing-extremist-fears

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/aug/14/ministers-doctors-defend-uk-nhs

The cartoons are cute but the stories you referenced more specifically, the Pharma story doesn't exactly support your position. The lists of which you are referring 55North are actually being generated by the left wing administration in the White House. Dissenters of heath care reform are being identified, listed and label right-wing extremist by the media, democratic party and the Obama administration. Not the other way around.

[BC]

Perhaps because we're still waiting (head in the sand, apparently) for at least one argument based on reason and not emotions?  Believe me, rationing is NOT scare tactics, in fact it's happening as we speak in most countries with socialized health care only you people prefer not to speak of it (head in the sand), just as you prefer not to admit other serious issues plaguing your European paradise.

Rationing?  Haven't seen any limits at pharmacies or treatment centers.  They have what the doc prescribes and if they don't it's there you can pick it up in the afternoon.  At the pharmacy, when a generic brand is available for the product prescribed, the customer is advised that he/she can have the generic without having to pay the 2 EUR surcharge.  That's rationing?  In Germany to visit the doctor you have to pay 10 EUR per quarter if you visit (a feeble attempt at making you decide if your cold is worth that amount before seeing the doctor).  That's rationing?  If I want, I can go to the doctor every day!  That's rationing?  The amount of hospital beds per-capita is two to three times what it is in the US.. That's rationing?  We can choose the doctor we want to treat us (as long as his patient load is not overbooked)  That's rationing?

Can you please explain what rationing you are talking about?  I fail to see the connection.

[docetae]

Rationing?  Haven't seen any limits at pharmacies or treatment centers.  They have what the doc prescribes and if they don't it's there you can pick it up in the afternoon.  At the pharmacy, when a generic brand is available for the product prescribed, the customer is advised that he/she can have the generic without having to pay the 2 EUR surcharge.  That's rationing?  In Germany to visit the doctor you have to pay 10 EUR per quarter if you visit (a feeble attempt at making you decide if your cold is worth that amount before seeing the doctor).  That's rationing?  If I want, I can go to the doctor every day!  That's rationing?  The amount of hospital beds per-capita is two to three times what it is in the US.. That's rationing?  We can choose the doctor we want to treat us (as long as his patient load is not overbooked)  That's rationing?

Can you please explain what rationing you are talking about?  I fail to see the connection.

You forget to tell that doctor can come at your home but this system is so socialist....It is mandatory bad.
From what I see now by reading the press is that you have a big lobby of insurance in US who will lose a lot of money from this reform. And they don't want this to happen. The cost will be probably the same in the hand but the money will go in Government pocket instead of private interests.

[SANDRO43]

Rationing?  Haven't seen any limits at pharmacies or treatment centers.  They have what the doc prescribes and if they don't it's there you can pick it up in the afternoon.  At the pharmacy, when a generic brand is available for the product prescribed, the customer is advised that he/she can have the generic without having to pay the 2 EUR surcharge.  That's rationing?  In Germany to visit the doctor you have to pay 10 EUR per quarter if you visit (a feeble attempt at making you decide if your cold is worth that amount before seeing the doctor).  That's rationing?  If I want, I can go to the doctor every day!  That's rationing?  The amount of hospital beds per-capita is two to three times what it is in the US.. That's rationing?  We can choose the doctor we want to treat us (as long as his patient load is not overbooked)  That's rationing?

Can you please explain what rationing you are talking about?  I fail to see the connection.

And one can always go private, if willing to pick up the tab directly or covered by some auxiliary health insurance plan/fund .

Public health is not necessarily a monopoly, and does not mean public institutions only, either, here - quite a lot of private clinics/labs are 'accredited' with their regional health system - regions were handed over the responsibility for public health some years ago - meaning that as far as public patients are concerned, they are handled in the same way as in public institutions.   

A difference I noticed is that 'accredited' institutions tend to have shorter occupancies - although bed time is one of the items on their bills - hence quicker turnarounds and shorter waiting lists. If they can perform the same procedure and dismiss a patient earlier, his bed will be available for another patient sooner.

[Blues Fairy]

What about the QALY system we've been talking about above?  Honestly, I don't see how the fact that it's widely used makes it any less controversial.  A state monopoly on a vital resource and its rationing by bureaucrats based on a pseudo-scientific scale of life values imposed from the society's perspective rather than individual - is no different from fascism as far as I am concerned.  

BC and Sandro, I would like to believe that public option does not equal monopoly and private insurance will be able to survive in the US with the introduction of state-sponsored insurance.  I can't find a decent argument in favor of this apart from your anecdotal evidence.  Which I can counterpoise with other anecdotal evidence (Sweden, Russia etc) of either private insurance being poorly accessible, or the health system itself being grossly inadequate, or both.  The existence of non-rationed public health AND easily accessible private insurance simply defies logic.  

The issue is not really rationing; it's freedom; trying to avoid statism.  You may be comfortable with your taxation level and your state paternalism; I am not.  I hate paternalism in all forms, therefore I have a natural aversion to all these attempts to install an all-caring, all-embracing system that relieves citizens of the responsibility for their own lives.  I guess it's just a difference in mindsets and we'll never agree.

[BC]

You forget to tell that doctor can come at your home but this system is so socialist....It is mandatory bad.
From what I see now by reading the press is that you have a big lobby of insurance in US who will lose a lot of money from this reform. And they don't want this to happen. The cost will be probably the same in the hand but the money will go in Government pocket instead of private interests.

Yes, house calls.. we average maybe one or two every couple years, mostly when one of the kids is sick with a high fever.  Need an IV? (shots we do ourselves) the doc will arrange for someone qualified to come by.  Can't get to the hospital, the ambulance will pick you up. A doctor even available in town nights and weekends. Even Psychiatric services and family counseling. Easy to forget what you take for granted.  As Sandro stated private hospitals get paid the state rate and want your business.

All for half the per-capita costs in the US, even if you consider GDP.

Yes, very bad..

[docetae]

The issue is not really rationing; it's freedom; trying to avoid statism.  You may be comfortable with your taxation level and your state paternalism; I am not.  I hate paternalism in all forms, therefore I have a natural aversion to all these attempts to install an all-caring, all-embracing system that relieves citizens of the responsibility for their own lives.  I guess it's just a difference in mindsets and we'll never agree.

This is opposing dogmatism to practical working solutions. This is true we will never agree.

[SANDRO43]

BC and Sandro, I would like to believe that public option does not equal monopoly and private insurance will be able to survive in the US with the introduction of state-sponsored insurance.

I don't know much about Obama's proposed system, but I don't think it includes outlawing private insurance , although its downsizing can be a likely result. Isn't the US system all about competition? Unless you consider competition in this case to be unfair.   

The existence of non-rationed public health AND easily accessible private insurance simply defies logic.

Dunno, really. If by easily accessible you mean affordable, maybe competition from the public side could force them to lower premiums to stay in business. Anyway, it's mostly speculation from both of us, I'd say.     

The issue is not really rationing; it's freedom; trying to avoid statism.  You may be comfortable with your taxation level and your state paternalism; I am not. I hate paternalism in all forms, therefore I have a natural aversion to all these attempts to install an all-caring, all-embracing system that relieves citizens of the responsibility for their own lives.  I guess it's just a difference in mindsets and we'll never agree.

Fair enough, although I think you see a much worse bogey man than actually is there .

[Lonewing]

I think what bothers me the most, is not hefty discourse regarding whether or not the proposed legislation is good, bad, or ugly..

It's the scare tactics used by individuals, interest groups and political parties that is really saddening, using words like "Death Panels", "Rationing", "Obama is going to kill my baby" etc etc. in the hopes that the wider population will believe it.

Unfortunately, many seem to do so, even evidenced by some posts here.

I can only hope that the majority is smarter than that and can see through the BS.

The same tactics are being used in elections in general, though.  The fear mongering is proving, to me at least that the general brain trust might not be so smart afterall.

[BC]

What about the QALY system we've been talking about above?  Honestly, I don't see how the fact that it's widely used makes it any less controversial.  A state monopoly on a vital resource and its rationing by bureaucrats based on a pseudo-scientific scale of life values imposed from the society's perspective rather than individual - is no different from fascism as far as I am concerned.  

In the health profession, QUALY decisions are made all the time.. lets take one for example..  a patient has a complex condition, speaks to his/her doctor, doc says 'There is a 40% chance you will not make it off the operating table', or 'Yes, this treatment may slow or even stop the disease for a time, but has side effects that will make you miserable.. Your choice, 6 months of good life and a couple more in a bad way, or 12 months with these side effects'.  In itself, not bad but the most often it's a case where economics plays a role.. "Yes, I'm quite sure we can put you back on your feet again to live a productive life but it will cost you $250.000 for the treatment".. Under the government insurance plan, the latter would a viable situation.

BC and Sandro, I would like to believe that public option does not equal monopoly and private insurance will be able to survive in the US with the introduction of state-sponsored insurance.  I can't find a decent argument in favor of this apart from your anecdotal evidence.  Which I can counterpoise with other anecdotal evidence (Sweden, Russia etc) of either private insurance being poorly accessible, or the health system itself being grossly inadequate, or both.  The existence of non-rationed public health AND easily accessible private insurance simply defies logic.  

Anecdotal?  Just google a bit and ask others living in one of many countries providing universal health care.

The issue is not really rationing; it's freedom; trying to avoid statism.  You may be comfortable with your taxation level and your state paternalism; I am not.  I hate paternalism in all forms, therefore I have a natural aversion to all these attempts to install an all-caring, all-embracing system that relieves citizens of the responsibility for their own lives.  I guess it's just a difference in mindsets and we'll never agree.

Most governments mandate auto insurance and set minimum levels of insurance needed to drive your car.  First, since everyone driving a car must have it private insurance companies compete for your business, keeping costs low.  Keep in mind though that driving habits are voluntary with most accidents avoidable..

With health insurance in the US it's a whole other story..  Don't forget that most insurance is resold to higher level financial organizations who assume the risk for a payback.  Right now since health insurance is optional insurance companies are going to pick and choose who to cover, who to drop, and there are no mandatory minimum standards.  Once the playing field is leveled true competition will begin, not only with the insurance companies but associated industries as well i.e. pharma.

It's a 2.5 Trillion (soon to be 3.0T) annual free for all eating up almost 20% of GDP.. just think about it.. Is the current system 'healthy' and requires that nothing be done?

[Blues Fairy]

This is opposing dogmatism to practical working solutions.

Many, if not most, dictators have started out as pragmatists.  Sometimes it pays to stick to a principle.  

Although I certainly see why this thought may appear alien to the Europeans whose society was not, like the US, predicated on the principles of individual freedom and limited government.

I don't know much about Obama's proposed system, but I don't think it includes outlawing private insurance , although its downsizing can be a likely result. Isn't the US system all about competition? Unless you consider competition in this case to be unfair. 

The current bill has provisions designed to bring private plans under gov't control, up to specification of their benefit packages, and to penalize citizens and businesses for using private insurance.  Besides, no company can sue the government for price-fixing and bring it under any judicial review.  Is that fair competition?

[BC]

Many, if not most, dictators have started out as pragmatists.  Sometimes it pays to stick to a principle.  

Although I certainly see why this thought may appear alien to the Europeans whose society was not, like the US, predicated on the principles of individual freedom and limited government.

The current bill has provisions designed to bring private plans under gov't control, up to specification of their benefit packages, and to penalize citizens and businesses for using private insurance.  Besides, no company can sue the government for price-fixing and bring it under any judicial review.  Is that fair competition?

I fear you are again starting to claw at thin air..

[WmGO]

I agree with this 100% :

What about the QALY system we've been talking about above?  Honestly, I don't see how the fact that it's widely used makes it any less controversial.  A state monopoly on a vital resource and its rationing by bureaucrats based on a pseudo-scientific scale of life values imposed from the society's perspective rather than individual - is no different from fascism as far as I am concerned.  

BC and Sandro, I would like to believe that public option does not equal monopoly and private insurance will be able to survive in the US with the introduction of state-sponsored insurance.  I can't find a decent argument in favor of this apart from your anecdotal evidence.  Which I can counterpoise with other anecdotal evidence (Sweden, Russia etc) of either private insurance being poorly accessible, or the health system itself being grossly inadequate, or both.  The existence of non-rationed public health AND easily accessible private insurance simply defies logic.  

The issue is not really rationing; it's freedom; trying to avoid statism.  You may be comfortable with your taxation level and your state paternalism; I am not.  I hate paternalism in all forms, therefore I have a natural aversion to all these attempts to install an all-caring, all-embracing system that relieves citizens of the responsibility for their own lives.  I guess it's just a difference in mindsets and we'll never agree.

[WmGO]

This is opposing dogmatism to practical working solutions.

1. it is principle not dogmatism.

2. WADR, alledged "working solutions" are none of your Canadian business.
   
3. Rationed medical care and thousands of Canadians traveling to USA for superior
   and quicker medical care is a fact of life and has been for a long time.



 

[WmGO]

Many, if not most, dictators have started out as pragmatists.  Sometimes it pays to stick to a principle.  

Although I certainly see why this thought may appear alien to the Europeans whose society was not, like the US, predicated on the principles of individual freedom and limited government.

The current bill has provisions designed to bring private plans under gov't control, up to specification of their benefit packages, and to penalize citizens and businesses for using private insurance.  Besides, no company can sue the government for price-fixing and bring it under any judicial review.  Is that fair competition?

Good response BF - unfortunately you are trying to reason with wimpy socialist
Euro and Canadian wusses..........you're wasting your time.... 

[BC]

1. it is principle not dogmatism.

2. WADR, alledged "working solutions" are none of your Canadian business.
   
3. Rationed medical care and thousands of Canadians traveling to USA for superior
   and quicker medical care is a fact of life and has been for a long time.

WmGO,

Facts please..

Canada has entered the medical tourism field. In comparison to US health costs, medical tourism patients can save 30 to 60 percent on health costs in Canada.[47] Canada's quality of healthcare is cited by the World Health Organization as equal to if not better than that of the US in most categories.

United States

Although much attention has been given to the growing trend of uninsured Americans traveling to foreign countries, a report from 2008 found that a plurality of an estimated 60,000 to 85,000 medical tourists were traveling to the United States for the purpose of receiving in-patient medical care.[56] The availability of advanced medical technology and sophisticated training of physicians are cited as driving motivators for growth in foreigners traveling to the U.S. for medical care. Also, it has been noted that the decline in value of the U.S. dollar is offering additional incentive for foreign travel to the U.S. However, costs differences between the US and many locations in Asia far outweigh any currency fluctuations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism


My read on this:

Higher income Canadians are going to the US for specialized treatment while under insured middle class folks are trying to save a small bundle by going to Canada for treatment.  Nothing to do with 'rationed' services in Canada.