[BadKosh]

Is ther ANY working socialist medical plan that IS RUN efficiently?

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Is ther ANY working socialist medical plan that IS RUN efficiently?

That is irrelevant to them. They don't give two shits how efficient it is run as long as they are covering every single person. Costs, waste, corruption…none of that means jack ****. Just cover the people.

All this talk about "doing something" to bring down costs is just part of the sales gimmick. So is this bullshit about "competition". Wiping out the evil health insurance companies is the GOAL right from the start.

The "great" thing is that once it is in place it is an instant third rail. They can mismanage, misappropriate, or otherwise "mis" with this program and no one will dare to try to "fix" it. Joke another yoke around our necks.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Just peruse a small sampling of headlines from the UK and Canadian systems, put together by liberty-page.com.

THIS crap, on a much bigger, costlier and more corrupt scale is what the Obamaniacs want to saddle the US with. Can't you just wait until your 'free' healthcare boondoggle brings you this?

From the UK:
* Kidney cancer patients denied life-saving drugs by NHS rationing body NICE
- April 29, 2009 [Daily Mail (UK)]

* Girl, 3, has heart operation cancelled three times because of bed shortage
- David Rose, April 23, 2009 [Times Online]

* Number of children going to hospital to have teeth pulled soars by 66% since 1997
- Daniel Martin and Cher Thornhill, April 12, 2009 [Daily Mail (UK)]

* NHS 'failings' over elderly falls
- March 25, 2009 [BBC]

* Learning disabled 'failed by NHS'
- Nick Triggle, March 24, 2009 [BBC]

* Cancer survivor confronts the health secretary on 62-day wait
- Lyndsay Moss, March 21, 2009 [The Scotsman]

* Culture of targets prevents nurses from tending to patients
- Claire Rayner, President of the Patients Association, March 21, 2009 [Telegraph UK]

* Children being failed by health system, says head of watchdog
- Sarah Boseley, March 21, 2009 [Guardian Unlimited]

* Our cancer shame: Survival rates still lag behind EU despite spending billions
- Jenny Hope, March 20, 2009 [Daily Mail(UK)]

* Failing hospital 'caused deaths'
- March 17, 2009 [BBC]

* Health gap drive 'wasted money'
- Nick Triggle, March 14, 2009 [BBC]

* Longer GP opening hours branded wasteful 'PR exercise' by doctors
- Lyndsay Moss, March 13, 2009 [The Scotsman]

* "Political meddling" threatens general practice, warns GP leader
- March 13, 2009 [Management in Practice (UK)]

* Children at risk through lack of training for doctors and nurses, report warns
- Rebecca Smith, March 13, 2009 [Telegraph UK]

* Chocolate should be taxed to control obesity epidemic, doctors are told
- Simon Johnson, March 13, 2009 [Telegraph UK]

* 1,000 villagers wait for a dentist after just one NHS practice opens
- March 10, 2009 [Daily Mail(UK)]

* Study that proves the folly of NHS Alzheimer's drug ban
- Jenny Hope, March 7, 2009 [Daily Mail(UK)]

* NHS charges to rise in England
- March 5, 2009 [BBC]

* Disabled children wait up to two years for wheelchairs
- March 4, 2009 [Guardian Unlimited]

* NHS under fire over waiting times
- February 25, 2009 [The Scotsman]

* Government procrastination blamed for HIV-contaminated blood tragedy
- February 23, 2009 [Guardian Unlimited]

* Specialist nurses 'vastly overworked'
- February 20, 2009 [Harwich & Manningtree Standard]

* Hundreds of operations cancelled at Lothian hospitals
- Adam Morris, February 19, 2009 [The Scotsman]

* Stop asking for antibiotics to cure coughs and colds, Government tells patients
- Daniel Martin, February 17, 2009 [Daily Mail(UK)]

* Stroke services are 'UK's worst'
- February 17, 2009 [BBC]

* Hospitals curb caesarean births
- Sarah-Kate Templeton, February 15, 2009 [The Times]

* Only five out of 51 hospital trusts pass hygiene test, say inspectors
- Sarah Boseley, November 24, 2008 [Guardian Unlimited]

* Top doctors slam NHS drug rationing
- Sarah-Kate Templeton, August 24, 2008 [The Times]

* Heart patients dying due to poor hospital care, says report
- Sarah Boseley, June 8, 2008 [Guardian Unlimited]

* NHS dentistry loses almost a million patients after new dentists' contract
- David Rose, June 6, 2008 [The Times]

* Private healthcare managers could be sent to turn round failing NHS hospitals
- Philip Webster, Political Editor, and David Rose, June 4, 2008 [The Times]

* Cancer patients ‘betrayed’ by NHS
- Sarah-Kate Templeton, June 1, 2008 [The Times]

* NHS scandal: dying cancer victim was forced to pay
- Sarah-Kate Templeton, June 1, 2008 [The Times]

* Pensioner, 76, forced to pull out own teeth after 12 NHS dentists refuse to treat her
- Olinka Koster, March 26, 2008 [Daily Mail(UK)]

* Dental patients face care lottery
- March 26, 2008 [Metro(UK)]

* Lung patients 'condemned to death as NHS withdraws their too expensive drugs'
- Jenny Hope, March 24, 2008 [Daily Mail(UK)]

* Women in labour turned away by maternity units
- John Carvel, March 21, 2008 [Guardian Unlimited]

* Health inequality has got worse under Labour, says government report
- Andrew Sparrow, March 13, 2008 [Guardian Unlimited]

* Angry GPs reluctantly accept plan for weekend and evening surgeries
- John Carvel, March 7, 2008 [Guardian Unlimited]

* NHS chiefs tell grandmother, 61, she's 'too old' for £5,000 life-saving heart surgery
- Chris Brooke, February 28, 2008 [Daily Mail(UK)]

* Patient 'removed' from waiting list to meet target
- January 31, 2008 [The Scotsman]

* NHS patients told to treat themselves
- James Kirkup, January 4, 2008 [Telegraph UK]

* NHS is 'failing patients' despite record funding
- Rebecca Smith, October 4, 2007 [Telegraph UK]

* NHS rationing rife, say doctors
- September 24, 2007 [BBC]

* One in eight patients waiting over a year for treatment, admits minister
- John Carvel, June 8, 2007 [Guardian Unlimited]

* Audit Office asked to investigate record £500m NHS underspend
- John Carvel, May 30, 2007 [Guardian Unlimited]

* The drugs the NHS won't give you
- May 11, 2007 [Telegraph UK]

* UK lagging behind on cancer drug access, study finds
- May 10, 2007 [Guardian Unlimited]

* One in six trusts is still putting patients on mixed-sex wards
- Daniel Martin, May 10, 2007 [Daily Mail(UK)]

* Specialist stroke care 'lottery'
- May 9, 2007 [BBC News]

* Smokers and the obese banned from UK hospitals
- May 2, 2007 [Healthcare News]

* Cancer patients told life-prolonging treatment is too expensive for NHS
- Lyndsay Moss, February 13, 2007 [The Scotsman]

* UK health service "harms 10 percent of patients"
- Kate Kelland, July 7, 2006 [Reuters]

* 5,000 elderly 'killed each year' by lack of care beds
- June 26, 2006 [Telegraph UK]

* Dental Socialism in Britain
- Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., May 9, 2006 [LewRockwell.com]

* Pay for nurses and surgeons doubles NHS overspend
- Beezy Marsh, Patrick Hennessy and Nina Goswami, April 23, 2006 [Telegraph UK]

* The money addicts: it's your cash they are gambling with
- Patience Wheatcroft, April 23, 2006 [Telegraph UK]

* NHS chiefs get luxury car deals
- Daniel Foggo and Steven Swinford, April 9, 2006 [The Times]

* Secret NHS plan to ration patient care
- Nigel Hawkes, April 7, 2006 [The Times]

* British Healthcare To Be Rationed
- April 7, 2006 [United Press International]

* British body rejects EPO drugs for cancer patients
- March 17, 2006 [Reuters]

* National Health Service - Grappling with Deficits
- March 9, 2006 [Economist.com]

* Hundreds wait to register as another dentist quits the NHS
- Martin Williams, September 23, 2005 [The Herald (Scotland)]

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

From Canada:



* Surgery postponed indefinitely for 1,000 Kelowna patients
- Cathryn Atkinson, April 8, 2008 [Globe and Mail]

* Majority of Que. dentists quit health-care system
- March 27, 2008 [CTV.ca]

* Why Ontario keeps sending patients south
- Lisa Priest, February 22, 2008 [Globe and Mail]

* Will Socialized Health Care in the US Kill Canadians?
- Don Surber, March 3, 2008 [Acton Institute]

* Wait times for surgery, medical treatments at all-time high: report
- October 15, 2007 [CBC News (Canada)]

* The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care
- David Gratzer, Summer 2007 [City Journal]

* Cancer patients question why PET scan not covered
- May 28, 2007 [CBC News]

* BC Medical Association: Waiting Too Long for Hip and Knee Surgery Costs $10,000 Per Patient-Maximum Wait Times Should Be No Longer Than 6 Months
- June 28, 2006 [CCN Matthews]

* Ont. physician turns away patient for being 55+
- March 17, 2006 [CTV.ca]

* Canada inches toward private medicine
- Rebecca Cook Dube, August 8, 2005 [CS Monitor]

* Doctor defends private cancer clinic
- Gillian Livingston, July 15, 2005 [Canadian Press]

* Dogma trumps truth in health-care issues
- D’Arcy Jenish, July 7, 2005 [Ontario Business News]

* Why Canadians Purchase Private Health Insurance
- Walter Williams, June 20, 2005 [Capitalism Magazine]

* Doctor welcomes health ruling
- June 9, 2005 [CBC Montreal]

* Patients shouldn't wait more than 8 weeks for cardiac defibrillator: experts
- May 24, 2005 [Canadian Press]

* Grads fail to slow doctor shortage
- Jennifer O'Brien, May 21, 2005 [London Free Press]

* Free Canadian health care comes at cost
- April 10, 2005 [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette]

* Canada's drug tab reaches $22 billion, report suggests
- Sheryl Ubelacker, CP, April 6, 2005 [London Free Press]

* Canadian health care is free and first-class -- if you can wait
- Beth Duff-Brown, March 19, 2005 [The Associated Press]

* Pediatricians, parents warn of shortage of community-based care for children
- Colin Perkel, March 4, 2005 [The Canadian Press]

* Access to specialists difficult: study
- February 16, 2005 [CBC Calgary]

* Doctor shortages, frustrations vary from region to region, survey shows
- February 15, 2005 [Canada.com]

* Montreal leads the country in offering private health care
- Aaron Derfel, February 12, 2005 [Montreal Gazette]

* Canada falling short on medical imaging
- February 9, 2005 [Macleans.ca]

* Creative incentives required to retain older doctors
- Dr. Charles Shaver, January 20, 2005 [Toronto Star]

* MRI gap defies cash fix
- Mark Kennedy, January 14, 2005 [National Post (Canada)]

* A boy's plight, a nation's problem
- Lisa Priest, January 13, 2005 [The Globe and Mail]

* Where's proof private clinics cost more?
- Tom Brodbeck, December 4, 2004 [The Winnipeg Sun]

* Surgery backlog tops 5,500 at kids' hospitals; One-year waits common
- Aaron Derfel, December 3, 2004 [The Gazette (Montreal)]

* Hospital wait lists to get worse, Carriere says
- Chris Traber, November 14, 2004 [Yorkregion.com]

* Frustrated patients can't handle ER waits
- Jennifer Stewart and Jeffrey Simpson, October 28, 2004 [The Halifax Herald Limited]

* Private medical clinic opens in Montreal
...it answers, "an ever-increasing demand from the public for greater accessibility and quality of health services." - October 13, 2004 [CTV.ca]

* Canadians have higher death risk than Americans after heart attack: study
- Sheryl Ubelacker, September 20, 2004 [Canada.com]

* Canadian medical tourists in India
- Jeremy Copeland, September 20, 2004 [CBC News]

* Doctor shortage cripples Canada's free health care
- Clifford Krauss, September 18, 2004 [Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune]

* Canada's Once-Proud Public Health System in Crisis
- David Ljunggren, September 14, 2004 [Reuters (Ottawa)]

* Hospitals to cut, again
- September 5, 2004 [Toronto Star]

* Canada's Medical Nightmare
- Robert J. Cihak, M.D., September 1, 2004 [Health Care News]

* Canada faces shortage of doctors
- August 19, 2004 [MSNBC]

* Canadians losing faith in health system: poll
- August 16, 2004 [CTV.ca]

* Ontario hospitals a health risk
- Michael Hurley, August 8, 2004 [Toronto Star]

* Need surgery? Here's how long you'll wait
"It's inhuman. The quality of my life is horrible and there's absolutely nothing I can do about it." - Jason Fekete, July 28, 2004 [Calgary Herald]

* Docs, nurses fed up
Canadian doctors and nurses are fed up with inter-governmental "bickering" that is dragging out wait times and causing more pain and suffering for patients. - July 28, 2004 [Winnipeg Sun]

* Free Health Care?
...in some cases, patients die on the waiting list because they become too sick to tolerate a procedure. - Walter E. Williams, July 24, 2004 [CATO]

* The truth about Canada's ailing health-care system
All the major candidates in Canada's recent national election acknowledged that the country's health-care system is failing Canadians. - Robert J. Cihak, July 13, 2004 [The Seattle Times]

* Health-care crisis looms, even with new money
Canada's health-care system is "five to 10 years" from the breaking point -- even with cash injections from government, says the new president of the B.C. Medical Association. - Doug Alexander, July 5, 2004 [Vancouver Sun]

* Emergency room delays a strong campaign factor
"Go into the emergency room — it is the most pitiful piece of work you ever seen in your life." - David Bruser, June 22, 2004 [Toronto Star]

* Canadian Health Care in Crisis
Analyst visits NC to describe how single-payer health care really works in practice. - Donna Martinez, June 17, 2004 [Carolina Journal]

* Quebec cancer patients sue over wait
Women waited months for radiation; lawsuit could cost system $50-million. - Ingrid Peritz, March 11, 2004 [The Globe and Mail]

* Health care: no waiting lists
'You get knee surgery within two days ... try and get that in human hospitals.' Canada's [private] pet health-insurance industry is projected to grow at roughly 50 per cent a year... - Robert Scalia, November 30, 2003 [Montreal Gazette]

* For some, surgery abroad a welcome answer
- Daniel Girard, November 29, 2003 [Toronto Star]

* Canadian Doctors Eyeing United States
- Clifford Krauss, October 17, 2003 [The New York Times]

* The Top Ten Things People Believe About Canadian Health Care, But Shouldn’t
- Brian Lee Crowley, October 9, 2003 [Mackinac Center for Public Policy]

* Canadians' health at risk, CMA says
- Valerie Lawton, September 26, 2003 [Toronto Star]

* Burnout is now doctors' ailment
Almost half of Canadian doctors say they're burned out, emotionally exhausted and blame medicine for putting a drain on their family life. - Karen Palmer, August 20, 2003 [Toronto Star]

* New MRI clinic in row over poaching
While she insists she's not making any money off the venture, she says it provides an income allowance for her and her husband, the other principal in the company. - Theresa Boyle and Robert Benzie, July 28, 2003 [Toronto Star]

* Price Controls and Overall Drug Spending
The Canadian system, however, tends to push up overall spending on prescription drugs, despite the low prices for some brand name ones. - John Melby, July 2, 2003 [Buckeye Institute]

* Gore Endorses Canada's Medical System
- William L. Anderson, November 29, 2002 [Mises]

* How Good is Canadian Health Care?
- August 2002 [Fraser Institute]

* Canadian Health-Care System Is No Model for Prescription Drug Reform
- May 1, 2001 [Mackinac Center for Public Policy]

* The Ghost of America's Health Care Future Lives in Canada Today
- James Frogue and Robert Moffit, December 25, 2000 [Capitalism Magazine]

* Socialized Medicine: The Canadian Experience
Explores several lessons that can be drawn from the Canadian experience with socialized medicine:
o Socialized medicine, although of poor quality, is very expensive;
o Political compromise is the result;
o Socialized medicine is both a consequence and a great contributor to the idea that economic conditions should be equalized by coercion. - Pierre Lemieux [The Freeman]

* Canadian Health Care
...if Canadians knew as much as they think they do about the economic and moral workings of Medicare, they might not be as enthusiastic as they are about their cherished right to 'free' health care. - Andrei Kreptul, August 30, 2000 [Mises]

* When Patients Become Victims - The Crime of Government-Run Health Care
- Merrill Matthews Jr., Ph.D. and Kerri Houston, May 1, 2000 (PDF format)

* Socialized Medicine Leaves a Bad Taste in Patients' Mouths
- Lawrence W. Reed, February 23, 2000 [Mackinac Center for Public Policy]

* Canadians Dissatisfied With Socialized Medicine
- January 26, 2000 [NCPA]

* Memo to Al Gore: Canadian Medicine Isn't Cheap or Effective
- William McArthur, former chief coroner for British Columbia, January 28, 2000

* Loved to Death: America's Unresolved Health-Care Crisis
As Canada's national government slashes spending on medical care in order to reduce the deficit, local provinces are reducing medical staff. In Ontario, pregnant women are being sent to Detroit because no obstetricians are available. Specialists of all kinds are in short supply. Patients have to wait eight weeks for an MRI, ten weeks for referral to a specialist, and four months for heart bypass surgery. - Michael J. Hurd, November 1997 [Liberty Haven]

* Is Canadian Health care a Good Model for the U.S. to Follow?
- Michael Walker, August 1994 [Liberty Haven]

* Health of the State (commentary by a cancer survivor)
I tell you this not to alarm you, to elicit sympathy, or to bore you. I tell you because the episode has been, for me, a salutary lesson (just in case I needed one) in why the government should not be allowed anywhere near a syringe, a dressing, a scalpel, an oxygen mask, a tissue sample — anything to do with health.

* Michigan Shouldn't Copy Canada's Health System
- Lawrence W. Reed, July 29, 1991 [Mackinac Center for Public Policy]

* Life-saving cancer drugs 'kept from NHS patients by red tape'
- Sam Lister, September 20, 2005 [The Times]

* NHS slides into the red despite record increases in health care spending
- September 20, 2005 [Telegraph UK]

* Alzheimer's sufferers hit by further delay in NHS approval for vital drugs
- Michael Day, September 18, 2005 [Telegraph UK]

* We all pay a price for our 'free' NHS
- John Smith, August 19, 2005 [The Scotsman]

* 2,000 British doctors out of work
- August 14, 2005 [The Washington Times]

* UK health 'unsustainable'
- August 14, 2005 [Finance24]

* NHS faces rising bill for negligence claims
- Ben Hall, August 8, 2005 [Financial Times]

* British boy to go to India for operation
- August 5, 2005 [United Press International]

* NHS failed to stop doctor raping scores of women
- Lois Rogers and Jonathon Carr-Brown, July 31, 2005 [The Times]

* Top crimewriter funds drugs for cancer victim refused by NHS
- Martyn Halle, July 8, 2005 [Telegraph UK]

* Report says NHS is mired in huge debts
- David Simms, June 25, 2005 [ABC Money (UK)]

* U.K. set to restrict smoking
- June 21, 2005 [The Associated Press]

* NHS ‘fund bias’ against men may cost 2,500 lives a year
- Sarah-Kate Templeton, June 19, 2005 [The Times]

* Doubts on funding NHS 'monuments'
- Nicholas Timmins, June 10, 2005 [Financial Times]

* 17 million reasons why we must improve hospital meals
- June 7, 2005 [Cambridge Evening News]

* Figures show more patients waiting for operations
- June 3, 2005 [Guardian UK]

* Scarcity of NHS dental treatment is revealed
- Celia Hall, May 19, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]

* Why NHS Opposes 'Treatment by Demand' for the Dying
- Stephen Howard and Jan Colley, PA, May 18, 2005 [Scotsman]

* 800 queue for NHS dentists
- May 5, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]

* Hundreds more heroin addicts to be given a fix on the NHS
- Nic Fleming, April 25, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]

* British health service facing nurse exodus
- April 25, 2005 [United Press International]

* About 400 patients a year in Scotland succumb to MRSA
- April 25, 2005 [Scotsman]

* NHS debts soar to over £1bn
- Karyn Miller, April 24, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]

* British taxpayers foot $26.5 million bill for abortion tourists
- April 18, 2005 [Catholic World News]

* U.K. Liberal Democrats Would Raise Taxes to Pay for Health Care
- Reed Landberg, April 14, 2005 [Bloomberg]

* Number of NHS Bureaucrats 'Rising Faster Than Health Staff'
- Joe Churcher, March 22, 2005 [Scotsman]

* '£500m hole' in hospital budgets
- Celia Hall, March 21, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]

* 1,000 Scots desert NHS every week
- Murdo Macleod, March 5, 2005 [Scotsman]

* British NHS facing financial crisis
- March 3, 2005 [Washington Times]

* NHS drugs regulator to withdraw approval of Alzheimer's treatment
- Nicholas Timmins, March 2, 2005 [FT.com - Financial Times]

* NHS waiting list rises
- February 11, 2005 [Guardian UK]

* Tumour patients hit by NHS shortages
- Jo Revill, February 6, 2005 [Guardian UK]

* NHS financial crises set to outlast winter
- Mike Waites, February 4, 2005 [Yorkshire Post]

* NHS 24 'priority' callers wait four hours for advice
- Caroline Wilson, January 14, 2005 [Evening Times (UK)]

* 'No strategy' on NHS waiting time
- January 14, 2005 [BBC]

* Output figures show NHS decline
- John Carvel, October 19, 2004 [Guardian UK]

* Heart patients die on waiting lists
- Peter Sharples, October 18, 2004 [Manchester Online]

* £25bn overspend feared for NHS computer network
- Karen Attwood, October 12, 2004 [telegraph.co.uk]

* Gaps in care cost £7bn, says charity
- John Carvel, October 4, 2004 [Guardian UK]

* NHS excluding poor people, UK
- September 15, 2004 [Medical News Today]

* Smokers 'should not get NHS care'
- September 6, 2004 [BBC News]

* Waiting list row blights Brighton
- John Carvel, September 4, 2004 [Guardian UK]

* Patients are denied the last rites under data protection law
- Elizabeth Day, July 25, 2004 [telegraph.co.uk]

* Shortage of dentists to double by 2011
- John Carvel, July 24, 2004 [Guardian UK]

* Britain's stiff upper lip gives way to a snarl
- Sarah Lyall, July 18, 2004 [The New York Times]

* Hospital Overcrowding A Cause of Superbug Infections
- John von Radowitz, July 1, 2004 [Scotsman.com]

* Hospital Crisis: Fallen Angels
- Lindsay Mcgarvie, May 23, 2004 [Glasgow Sunday Mail]

* Study finds British hospitals are still austere, cold, smelly and poorly maintained
- May 6, 2004 [News-Medical.net]

* Hospital bathrooms and showers: a continuing saga of inadequacy
- Andy Monro, MRCP & Graham P Mulley, DM, FRCP, May 2004 [Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine]

* Majority back public smoking ban
- March 24, 2004 [BBC]

* Discrimination Rampant In British Health Care
- Peter Moore, November 17, 2003 [365gay.com]

* PERIPATETICS—To the Medical Socialists of All Parties
- Sheldon Richman, September 2003 [FEE.org]

* Creeping Privatization?
Shortages of skilled workers, low morale, long queues for services, crumbling facilities and corrupt practises. - Roland Watson, August 6, 2001 [LewRockwell.com]

* The World's Worst HMO
- Stephen D. Moore, November 24, 1999 [Random Thoughts]

* Socialized Medicine in Great Britain: Lessons for the Oregon Health Plan
- Professor John Spiers, March 18, 1999 [Cascade Policy Institute]

* The Sickbed Which is Socialized British Medicine
- December 23, 1997 [NCPA]

* The British Way of Withholding Care
- Harry Schwarz, March 1989 [FEE.org]

Of course, if all this comes to pass in a socialized US system, we've already seen the excuses we'll get.

"No one guessed it would be this bad."
"There is no measure of success or failure."
"B-but, it's free! My paycheck keeps shrinking... b-but it's free!"
"B-but CRASH, it's for the children...!"
"So what if it sucks? Everyone is covered!"

The full links are here- read up on the realities of the 'panacea' you're buying into.

[DBursey]

The Latest Statistics on America’s Obesity Epidemic
The recent IHRSA/ASD Obesity/Weight Control Report publishes “real” research statistics on America’s growing obesity epidemic. These alarming statistics reveal a dangerously overweight U.S. population.

Obesity in proliferating in the United States: 3.8 million people are over 300 pounds, over 400,000 people (mostly males) carry over 400 pounds and the average adult female weighs an unprecedented 163 pounds!

Top Ten Reasons Why American Health Care is So Bad

1. We spend the most. We spend more than any other country in the world. In 2005, our per capita -- so, per person -- spending was $6,697. The next highest in the study was Canada, at $3,326. And remember -- that's "mean" spending, so it's the amount we spend divided by our population. But unlike in Canada, about 16 percent of our population doesn't have insurance, and so often can't use the system.

2. We don't pay doctors according to the quality of their care. One of the first questions is "percent of primary care practices with financial incentives for quality" -- in other words, how many doctors are paid, in part, according to the quality of the care they deliver. In the United Kingdom, the number is 95 percent. In Australia, it's 72 percent. The U.S. scores lower than anyone else, at 30 percent. Similarly, electronic medical records -- which both increase the quality of care and lower its cost -- have 89 percent penetration in the U.K., 79 percent in Australia, 98 percent in the Netherlands, and 28 percent in America. On both these metrics, we perform miserably.

3. Our wait times are low because many of us aren't getting care at all. It's true, Americans do have short waits for non-elective surgeries. Only 4 percent of us wait more than six months. That's more than in Germany and the Netherlands, but considerably less than the Canadians (14 percent) or the Britons (15 percent). But our high performance on the waiting times only account for individuals who get the care they need. Our advantage dissipates when you see the next question, which asks how many patients skip care due to cost. And here, America is far worse than anywhere else.
In just the past year, a full 25 percent of us didn't visit the doctor when sick because we couldn't afford it. Twenty-three percent skipped a test, treatment, or follow-up recommended by a doctor. Another 23 percent didn't fill a prescription. No other country is even close to this sort of income-based rationing. In Canada, only 4 percent skipped a doctor's visit, and only 5 percent skipped care. In the U.K., those numbers are 2 percent and 3 percent. Few of our countrymen are waiting for the care they need, that much is true. But that doesn't mean they're getting it quickly. Rather, about a quarter of us aren't getting it at all.

Indeed, 19 percent of Americans were unable, or had serious problems, paying medical bills in the last year. Comparatively, no other country was even in the double digits. This is part of why we perform well on the waiting-times metric. In other countries, the disadvantaged wait longer for their care, and so show up in the data tracking wait times. In our country, they disappear from that measure, because they never get the care at all. You don't wait for what you're not receiving. So their wait times show up as "zero," when they should really be something akin to infinite. And would you prefer to wait four months for your surgery, or never get it at all?


4. Most of us don't have a regular physician. One might expect, given what we pay, that our care would at least be more central and convenient. But it's not so. Of everyone surveyed, Americans were the least likely to report a doctor or general practitioner they routinely saw. As a result. Americans are the most likely to say their doctor doesn't know important information about their medical history, which has obvious implications for care quality, medical errors, etc.

5. Our care isn't particularly convenient. Nor is medical service more convenient for Americans to access. On such questions as whether your doctor has early morning hours, evening availability, or weekend slots, we're not trailing the pack, but we're not in the lead, either. On evening hours, for instance, we lag behind Australia, Canada, Germany, and New Zealand. On same day appointments, Only 30 percent of Americans report that they can access a doctor on the very day they need one, as opposed to 41 percent of Britons and 55 percent of Germans. And a full 67 percent of Americans -- more than in any other country -- say it's difficult to get care on nights, weekends, or holidays with resorting to the emergency room, where care is costlier and, if your injury is not grievous, less efficient.

6. Our doctors don't listen to us. But maybe the amount we're paying comes in customer service -- maybe our doctors spend more time with us, are more reassuring, are more attentive to our cases. After all, we basically like the care we get. Our overall self-evaluation of the treatment we receive is solidly in the middle of the pack, with 70 percent expressing satisfaction -- which means we're less satisfied than the Canadians, Australians, and New Zealanders, but 5 percent above the Britons, and well above the Germans or Dutch. But when you ask for specifics, we do a bit worse.
Americans are the least likely to report that their doctors explain things in ways they understand (though the spread on this question is rather small) or say doctors spend enough time with them (56 percent of us say they do, as compared to 70 percent of Germans). We're the most likely to report that test results or medical records were unavailable during our scheduled appointments and, along with the Germans, the most likely to say that our doctors ordered tests that we'd already had done. On the bright side, 78 percent of us say our regular doctor was "informed and up-to-date" about follow-up care after a hospital visit.


7. We have high rates of chronic conditions. Aside from the surprisingly unhealthy Australians, Americans have the highest rate of chronic disease. And this isn't only a comparative problem; our high rates of chronic disease are a massive cost-driver, attributable, according to the research of Ken Thorpe, for about 2/3rds the rise in health spending over the past few decades.

8. … But we're not treating them properly. So given the high prevalence of such diseases, and the pressures they exert on our system, you'd hope our system had evolved so as to treat these diseases more effectively.
Not so. One of the big issues with chronic disease is coordination of care. Illnesses like diabetes and kidney failure have so many manifestations, and require so much maintenance, that it's critical for care providers to have a full picture of what treatments are being received, what the patient's medical history is, what therapies they will and will not follow, etc. And for that reason, it's critical for the patients to have a single medical home – a regular care center where their case is understood, tracked, and treated. Sadly, we're tied with the Canadians for the lowest percentage reporting a single "medical home."

Worse,we're far and away the likeliest to report spending more than $500 out-of-pocket on prescription drugs annually. That's a problem, as higher out-of-pocket costs mean more of us going without prescriptions, which means less maintenance of conditions and, thus, more cost when our chronic illnesses balloon into catastrophic health events. Indeed, 42 percent of Americans with chronic conditions -- the exact same percentage who report paying more than $500 for drugs -- report skipping care, drug doses, or doctor's appointments due to cost. That's cheaper for them in the short-term, as they can spend some of the money on food or rent. It's more expensive for us, however, as we pick up the huge bill when they end up in the hospital in full cardiac arrest.


9. We're frequent victims of medical, medication, and lab errors. Along with Australians, Americans are the most likely to report a medical, medication, or lab error, with 20 percent saying they've experienced one of the above over the past year. For those of us with chronic diseases, the rates are even higher. There are many reasons for this, ranging from our low adoption rate of electronic medical records to our splintered care system. But the effects are bad for our health and, needless to say, bad for our insurance rates. Conservatives make a huge deal out of medical malpractice claims, but studies show that our high rate of lawsuits is due to our high rate of medical error. The crisis isn't just in the courtrooms, it's on the operating tables.

10. Most of us are dissatisfied with our current system. In health polling, happiness with the system is generally measured through a three-answer question: Does your system merely need minor changes, as it works pretty well? Does it need fundamental changes? Or does it need to be rebuilt? Of all the countries surveyed -- including the supposedly dystopic U.K. and Canada -- Americans are the least likely to report relative satisfaction, and the most likely to call for a fundamental rebuilding. Only 16 percent of us are happy. In Canada and the U.K., that number is 26 percent. In the Netherlands, it's 42 percent. Meanwhile, 34 percent of Americas want to completely rebuild. Only 12 percent of Canadians say the same, and only 15 percent of U.K. residents want a new system. So paying more than twice as much as anyone else, we have the lowest satisfaction with our health care system. Lower than the countries with waiting lines. Lower than Germany, and Australia, and New Zealand.

Amazing how much stuff one can find online to support ones suppositions - whatever they may be.

I'll be back periodically to paste a few more volumes in a manner worthy of the great Rash Harddrive

[BadKosh]

But you provided mostly opinions about opinions.....

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Of course, if all this comes to pass in a socialized US system, we've already seen the excuses we'll get.

"No one guessed it would be this bad."
"There is no measure of success or failure."
"B-but, it's free! My paycheck keeps shrinking... b-but it's free!"
"B-but CRASH, it's for the children...!"
"So what if it sucks? Everyone is covered!"

Game, set and match. Pwned. Smackdown. Etc., etc..

[DBursey]

U.S. healthcare lies Part II - Financial Post May 13, 2009

Universal health care is a cornerstone of smart economic policy. Take, for example, the effect of guaranteed health care on economic activity, business expansion or the public's sense of wellbeing.

If a worker in Canada or Europe or Japan has lost his or her job this recession, it’s a psychological and financial blow.
But if an American worker loses his or her job, the family faces financial ruin if sickness strikes any member because they are without healthcare coverage. Bridge coverage is available but unaffordable for anyone but the wealthy.
Worse yet, if a major illness is diagnosed during unemployment, a workers becomes unemployable, bringing about a life sentence of poverty.
Little wonder, then, that consumer spending has ground to halt in the United States which makes the economic meltdown that much harder to combat or ever solve.
This underscores the fact that universal health care is not just smart and fair social policy but it is also smart economic policy.

But there are many other economic advantages to universal health care which makes one wonder why the Republicans, conservatives and business interests haven’t been pushing for it. Instead, they are gearing up for a battle against President Obama which is, frankly, acting against their own best long-term interests. Here’s why:
1. The U.S. spent 16.2% of its GDP on health care plus up to 3% more on litigation concerning medical bills while other countries spend 10% and nothing on litigation because bills are paid by everyone. This is America’s number one competitive disadvantage going forward.
2. People with serious illnesses are uninsurable and are stuck in jobs they cannot leave or remain unemployed because they are unemployable.
3. Tens of millions of uninsured people in the U.S. end up with health problems that become a drain on the society and economy in the long run.
4. Doctor, nursing, hospital and drug costs are out of control in the U.S. because of the profit motive, compared to countries where universal health care provides the basic underpinning. (By the way, in Canada only 50% of total healthcare expenditures are covered by governments and the rest by individuals such as eyewear, dental or elective surgeries.) U.S. costs are higher because doctors can over-service those with health insurance, and patients can over-demand. Litigation also leads to over-doctoring (too many tests or too many days in hospitals) as well as high expenses in the form of malpractice insurance, an overhead which, in comparison, is negligible in Canada or Europe.
5. Detroit’s three automobile companies have gone bust in large measure due to “legacy” or gold-plated healthcare promises at America’s excessive prices that made that were unaffordable. This is not unique to the auto sector and has driven many jobs offshore in manufacturing.

Canada has a better health care system than does America. So does Europe and Japan. Even developing nations, such as Ecuador or Mexico, look after all the basic needs of its population better than America looks after its hard-working citizens.
As an American living in Canada, I find it embarrassing that America – rich and smart – has such a mediocre health care system.
I find it embarrassing that even educated and financially astute Americans buy the lies that the AMA and others spew about Canada and other “socialized” medical schemes.
Facts are that governments in the U.S. are suckers. They cover the high-risk populations – indigent, elderly and veterans – and leave the gravy to the private-sector health insurers. These companies, by the way, make profits off their operations which are the same size as Canada’s entire health care tab for 32 million people.
It’s pretty shameful, but delusions persist and the medical myth-makers are girding for battle. But Americans are capable of skepticism and change and deep down most realize that their health care system is sick, maybe terminal, and needs treatment as soon as possible.

[ctt1wbw]

Just because something seemingly is free, doesn't mean it's better. Who pays for all that "free" health care in Canada? Docs don't work for free, they have to bring home the bacon, right? So who pays for it? Taxes. That's who. Does Canada have a military the size of the US? Is Canada a world leading economic superpower like the US? And why not? Because the government is undoubtedly spending every dime on health care that you think is far superior to that of the US.

Remember that queen or whoever that died on a skiing trip? Was she flown to Canada or the US?

[ctt1wbw]

Plus, when you are talking health insurance, you are not talking about health CARE. They are two different beasts. Yes, the health insurance system is screwed up, but the health care system is the best in the world.

[besson3c]

We are already spending every dime on health care in Medicare, far more than any other country. You cannot simply state that public health would be more expensive without looking at the whole picture including the administrative overhead of what we have now, personal bankruptcies, increased costs due to lack of preventative care, etc. This isn't a given, there is so much to look at.

As always, these issues are far more complicated and have many more variables than many in here want to allow them to be. It is nearly impossible to have a fulfilling discussion without delving into this complexity.

[DBursey]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

Just because something seemingly is free, doesn't mean it's better. Who pays for all that "free" health care in Canada?

If you'll read the article or any of many comparative studies you'll note the percentage GDP spent in Canada - as funded via federal taxes - to be significantly less than that of the US. The single payer insurance model costs significantly less overall.

[DBursey]

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw 

Plus, when you are talking health insurance, you are not talking about health CARE. They are two different beasts. Yes, the health insurance system is screwed up, but the health care system is the best in the world.

for the very few who can afford it?

Canada has provided me and my family with the very best in health care over the years ... no complaints anecdotally. That and the fact that as a Canadian male I stand a better chance for a longer, healthier life than you or Smash Hagdrive provides me with a more smug sense of satisfaction than any pendantic post you might possibly pretzel yourself to postulate!!

[Chongo]

Here is the org chart for the current (D) plan

[BadKosh]

Forcing small businesses to pay for health care for workers means either fire 1/2 the employees or go out of business. Where do the idiot Dems think the money will come from that these little companies are to pay?

Larger small businesses get hammered with higher taxes and have to pay, which still means someones gonna get fired.

I guess working for political entities doesn't educate the libs as to how real world businesses work.

[Chongo]

Looks like a good time to move out of New York!

[BadKosh]

CBO Chief: Health Bills To Increase Federal Costs
By David Clarke and Edward Epstein, CQ Staff

The health care overhauls released to date would increase, not reduce, the burgeoning long-term health costs facing the government, Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf said Thursday.

That is not a message likely to sit well with congressional Democrats or the Obama administration, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif., said Thursday she thinks lawmakers can find ways to wring more costs out of the health system as they continue work on their bills.
Click here for a free demo!

The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Democrat Max Baucus of Montana, who has not yet released a bill, said his panel is acutely aware of the long-term cost concern. “Clearly our committee will do what it can,” he said. “We are very seriously concerned about that issue. We very much want to come up with a bill that bends the cost curve.”

But Baucus suggested the White House is making the task difficult with opposition to one cost-cutting approach Elmendorf cited — limiting or even ending the tax exclusion for employer-provided health benefits.

The Democrats and President Obama have cited two goals in their overhaul proposals — expanding coverage to the estimated 47 million Americans who currently lack it and bringing down long-term costs because the growth in Medicare and Medicaid spending threatens to swamp the federal budget in coming years.

Under questioning from Chairman Kent Conrad , D-N.D., Elmendorf told the Senate Budget Committee that the congressional proposals released so far do not meet that second test.

“In the legislation that has been reported, we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount and, on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs,” he said.

Elmendorf was not addressing the narrow question of whether the Democrats’ legislation would be budget-neutral over 10 years. Congressional Democrats and the White House have promised to offset the cost of health care legislation over that period.

But budget analysts and some members fear the legislation will not slow the growth of health care spending enough to prevent it from overwhelming the federal budget after that 10-year window.

Earlier this week, House leaders introduced their overhaul plan, which is being considered by three committees this week.

Elmendorf said that CBO has not completed its evaluation of the House plan, but what it has seen so far does not represent “the sort of fundamental change, the order of magnitude necessary to offset the direct increase in federal health costs from the insurance coverage proposals.”

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Okay, let's do this!

Canadian per capita spending on health care in USD: $3,678
US per capita spending on health care: $6,714

Canadian life expectancy: 80.4
US life expectancy: 77.8

Firstly, much of our additional cost is due to constant development of innovative, cutting-edge medical technologies. The rest of the world freeloads off us in this respect.

Also, factor in the time for treatment. In the US patients may pay more, but they receive much faster care. This is a huge reason why we lead most of those other socialized countries in cancer survival rates. I'll gladly pay a thousand or two more dollars for cancer treatment tommorrow than save the money and wait 6 months to begin treatment.

As for life expectancy, take away murders and highway deaths (in which the US far outnumbers Canada), and our life expectancy is higher. Even Michael Moore in his interview with John Stossel acknowledged this fact.

[BadKosh]

More from the CBO....

The Long-Term Budget Outlook

Today I had the opportunity to testify before the Senate Budget Committee about CBO’s most recent analysis of the long-term budget outlook.

Under current law, the federal budget is on an unsustainable path, because federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run. Although great uncertainty surrounds long-term fiscal projections, rising costs for health care and the aging of the population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly under any plausible scenario for current law. Unless revenues increase just as rapidly, the rise in spending will produce growing budget deficits. Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress economic growth in the United States. Over time, accumulating debt would cause substantial harm to the economy. The following chart shows our projection of federal debt relative to GDP under the two scenarios we modeled.

[spacefreak]

Now, if a treatment is not covered by private insurance, and it is too expensive, I know that at the very least I can beg, borrow, or steal to somehow get the treatment. Perhaps I can finagle my way into a trial, or whatever. There's still possibilities.

With the government plan, once they say "no", that's the final word, by law.

I dread the day that I or a loved one needs a treatment, and is told "no", and to take it up with the government.

[stumblinmike]

I don't WANT an insurance hack between me and my doctor!

[Chongo]

What happened to this idea of Dear Leader?

"I'm going to have all the negotiations around a big table. We'll have doctors and nurses and hospital administrators. Insurance companies, drug companies -- they'll get a seat at the table, they just won't be able to buy every chair. But what we will do is, we'll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies. And so, that approach, I think is what is going to allow people to stay involved in this process.

[BadKosh]

Um..."Dear Leader" is a liar, and a politician.

[Chongo]

An interesting exchange. The Senator doesn't say yes or no to the $2500 no insurance penalty.
WUSA9.com | Washington, DC | Cardin Town Hall Meeting On Health Care Gets Angry

"I decided not to get the health insurance. That's working out for me because I'm able to save that extra money and give it to my family members and use it on myself. Senator Cardin, I want to know are you going to tell me an individual...that I have to buy health care or else you're going to fine me $2,500 every year I don't get it? Our founding fathers assured us we have a Bill of Rights and I want to see you uphold that," Broadus said in an increasingly emotional voice and to scattered applause.

Cardin responded by asking Broadus what would happen if he became sick, broke a bone, had a car accident and ended up in an emergency room.

"You don't pay. You are part of the population that shifts its costs over to a person who does pay, and they're paying for you," Cardin said.

Explaining how hospitals have often to absorb those costs, Cardin said many hospitals would chose simply to leave the community.

"I just think the overriding public interest is to require you and everyone in this country to have health insurance," Cardin said

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Game, set and match. Pwned. Smackdown. Etc., etc..

Crash, those posts were things of beauty.

How DARE YOU bring facts into this discussion? That's not FAIR. Facts don't count.

As for the "How health care in the US sucks" rant, people from all over the f*cking globe cut backflips every day to get to the US for healthcare. Some even swim the Rio Grande while pregnant so their babies can have US healthcare. So those who say "it sucks" must have at least some portion of their heads up their a$$es. As with the green stuff, this is insanity.

Medicare doesn't work, so why would "Medicare for EVERYBODY, by law" work better? Everyone gets substandard healthcare b/c Washington wants to control it? Nope, no thanks. Stupid, again.

Crash gives us some evidence on why it won't work here. Most of that is pretty damning, not just "it's inconvenient." The partisans are never going to let go (it's all they've got left right now), but most of the sheep are snapping out of it. Even though we're too busy having lives to care about this stuff in the short run, the long run under the current "ram it through" bunch is starting to look scary, and people are glancing up from their desks.

I hope the Lefties like running the show now, b/c this is likely to be their last chance for a while. Torches and pitchforks, take one down and pass it around.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by stumblinmike 

I don't WANT an insurance hack between me and my doctor!

You'd rather have a government hack instead, I see. Insurance people can be forced into action, the feds can't.

[stumblinmike]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

You'd rather have a government hack instead, I see. Insurance people can be forced into action, the feds can't.

Yes, it would be a refreshing change. The poor insurance "industry" has been collecting record receipts, while coverage shrinks and premiums soar! I think America could stand a change. As for being forced into action, they sure can, their lobbying efforts have increased many fold, trying to protect their golden goose from the inevitable "public option". Anyone supporting these thieves are either in cahoots with them or just plain ignorant. Pity the poor insurance "industry", indeed!

[stumblinmike]

Crash's "facts" are from a wingnut bloggers site. I could refute each with some Daily Kos "facts", but we all know two wrongs don't make a right!

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by stumblinmike 

Crash's "facts" are from a wingnut bloggers site. I could refute each with some Daily Kos "facts", but we all know two wrongs don't make a right!

The source of each headline is right next to it, and the links to each article are on the linked to site. Your need to dismiss many collected sources of information in favor of one actual wingnut site is pretty much exactly what I'd expect from you.

[stumblinmike]

Like I said, the lefts propaganda could meet or EXCEED the horror stories you collected from an obviously slanted source....

[Chongo]

Speaking of slanted sources. From Naked Emperor News.
YouTube - SHOCK UNCOVERED: Obama IN HIS OWN WORDS saying His Health Care Plan will ELIMINATE private insurance

[BadKosh]

And even though the uncut video file is there, the liars in the White House are claiming it's been horribly altered as they try to spin this away. The video clips of the clown hall meetings (named for the politicians giving the thing) show irate crowds that seem to know more about the healthcare sham than the congressmen know. This is showing everybody just how inept and poorly planned this whole thing has been. Did you actually think Democrats had improved in 8 years?

Finally, looks like Rahm got hammered for his "Chicago Politics" if you see the report on Drudge.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

Finally, looks like Rahm got hammered for his "Chicago Politics" if you see the report on Drudge.

The local radio stations were all over this when it happened.

[Athens]

Its amazing how so many people here posting seem to be so clueless about the topic.

Lets start with a couple things. First the US does not have a health care system, it has 3 health care systems mixed together into a Health Care Market place. When referring to the US Health Care system, most people are referring to the market not the system. The US Health Care market place is made up of System called Medicare which is based on Canada's Medicare which operates very similar. It has the lowest cost of the American health care systems when compared to Medicad and the Private Insurance Models. Then there is the Medicad system which mirrors more of the British NHS system and the final one the Private Insurance model. No other country in the world has 2 or more systems let alone 3.

The second misconception is Canada's Medical System. A lot of media outlets and propaganda groups are calling it a Socialized communist system which is so far out base its not even funny and absolutely wrong. The system is a single payer system which means only one insurance company (technically 13 because every province runs its own system under the health care act that sets minimum standards across the country) The doctors are not government employees, the hospitals are not government controlled. Doctors, specialists, and facilitates are all private companies free to do as they please under the guide lines of the law. All services provided by all these private businesses are billed to the Government run insurance provider. This is where the US and Canada differs is the Insurance aspect of it. In the US you have tons of private for profit insurance companies that the health care providers have to deal with. Some HMOs restrict there policy holders to facilities they have negotiated rates with. If you end up in a hospital not approved by your HMO you might be stuck with the bill even though you have insurance. If you need treatment that is costly, you have to make sure your insurance company approves it first or your out of luck. On the care givers side, having to deal with dozens of different companies, with different negotiated prices, with different sets of paperwork, permissions, rules, authorizations adds to there administrative costs. One stat i read today was that since the 1980s health care professionals numbers have increased by 40%, in that same time administrative related employment has gone up 3000%. On top of that if you already have some sort of medical issue chances are you will have a hard time finding any one to insure you because you will not be very profitable. In Canada there is only one insurance company, provided by the government (technically 13, one for each province) and the federal law requires all Canadians to be insured. This means if you already have a condition, it wont matter because the law requires you the same access. You don't have to worry about going to the wrong hospital and being denied coverage because all health care facilities deal with the one government insurance system. So already Canadians have more freedoms of doctors, specialists and hospitals right there. On the health care providers front, one set of rules, one set up paperwork, one way of doing things which makes administration simpler, more efficient and cheaper. The tax payer benefits because the prices for procedures are negotiated and set the same across the board. You dont have a heart procedure in one hospital costing 40 000 more then the other hospital. Doctors dont have pre-check with insurance companies to see what is covered and what isnt for a individual because the coverage is the same across the board.

So how does this make things cheaper?
1) All people pay into the one system with monthly medical premiums (some provinces like Alberta dont even have that)
2) Tax money

So there is a large collected pool of money to pay for these services. In the US the private for profit companies cheery pick the best and healthiest people to insure to avoid the cost of pay outs. This allows for nice profits for them. Those not insured because of medical problems or are poor so they cant afford it (income does have a affect on peoples health which is why poor people tend to cost the system more) end up being cared for by the tax payer. With the well off healthy peoples contributions going to profits, this creates larger demand on tax payers to make up the difference.

Actual Health Results in Care

If your Rich or insured well in the US, your healthy. If your poor or not insured chances are every trip to the doctor duly considered like a car purchase. Can I really afford this, can I wait. In Canada there is none of that. If your ill and your not lazy you see the doctor. Go once a year, go twice a year, go every month in the end there is no cost to the individual. This means overall the entire population is more healthy. Back in the US that dude that decided to wait because he couldn't afford it might now require care that will be triple the cost due to not dealing with the problem while it was minor early on. That adds overall cost, and results in overall less quality of care.


THE REAL FIX FOR THE US MEDICAL CARE PROBLEMS

1) New federal law that requires all people to be insured, and make it illegal for a insurance company to deny insurance.
2) A min standards law that says all people have this as the min coverage. This is to prevent the insurance company from denying coverage for specific illnesses of people with pre existing conditions when they get there insurance which the insurance company is now required to accept as customers.
3) Set cost standards on procedures. A kidney transplant at one hospital should be the same price at every other hospital. This removes the limitation on where some one can go for help. Otherwise insurance companies will only approve the places with the cheapest rates. This also will reduce administration costs.
4) Strip profit from the insurance. All insurance companies must be break even on there medical portions of insurance coverage. They can make profit on secondary insurance products like Home insurance, auto insurance, procedures not covered under the min standards law. Insurance companies will still compete for health clients to sell the secondary products to.

These changes give universal coverage, reduces administrative costs, increases access, does not increase any taxes or costs, reduces complications and still lets insurance companies make profits.

[Athens]

Oh to be far our system has problems to but different problems. Figured I post this before some one screams Canada's system isnt perfect. Its not, no system is.

- Government is cheap, we spend way less on health care as a percentage of our GDP
- Not enough doctors (this is affecting the US too)
- Wait times for some elective procedures that are longer then they should be

Fixes for our system would include
1) Upping spending a little, say 1% more of the GDP to add more equipment like CT scanners.
2) Cover 50% of the educational costs of being a doctor with a 5 year work in Canada commitment or 100% of the educational costs for a 10 year work in Canada commitment to slow the brain drain.
3) Reduce red tape for Doctors from other countries who come here to be doctors. Current system requires them to do 4 years of school here. I think there is better ways to insure they are up to our standards which gets them being doctors quickly. Its amazing when a qualified doctor from Germany is stuck working a regular job because hes not allowed to practice with out going through a 4 year certification program here.
4) NHS in the UK ( a real socialized system because doctors are government employees) has elements that should be adopted here in North America on the preventative health care front. Doctors there that help patients get healthier such as quitting smoking, losing weight get bonuses. That gives financial incentives to make people healthy which reduces the burden of health care for all.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

From Canada:

The graphic needs to say

Wealthy Americans and those with the right Insurance coverage have quick access to advance medical Technologies. Every one else is out of luck.

In Canada the graph should say, All Canadians have access to Advanced medical Technologies.

I love the headlines you found for the NHS and the 13 implementations of Single payer Health Care in Canada, but where is the headlines for the US?

Litigation Examples

Beatrice Hospital accused of negligence!
Justice News Flash - ‎Aug 6, 2009‎
Beatrice Community Hospital and Health Center sued for improper treatment of a patient. Nebraska medical malpractice attorney's alert- Beatrice Community ...

Family claims man suffers downward spiral after going to Danbury ...
Danbury News Times - Olivia Victoria Andrzejczak - ‎3 hours ago‎
The family sued Danbury Hospital for damages and in an effort to learn what, exactly, went wrong. The family did find out what went wrong, but only because ...

Lutheran Hospital sued over leaving sponge inside patient
Fort Wayne Journal Gazette - Rebecca S. Green - ‎Jul 21, 2009‎
An Allen County couple sued Lutheran Hospital this month because the wife became seriously ill after a surgical sponge was left inside her abdomen more than ...


I would love to show examples of US wait times, and US limited access to care because of no insurance but the news is JUST FULL of articles about this debate about health care reform making it hard to find anything. Well except law suits, since that seems to be a American only issue

Some older headlines

MENTAL HOSPITAL FAILS INSPECTION
Pay-Per-View - South Florida Sun - Sentinel - ProQuest Archiver - Oct 21, 1995
The only state-run accredited mental hospital neglects patients, focuses too little on rehabilitation and has a filthy kitchen, according to a report based ...

Hospital fails to aid dying boy
Gainesville Sun - Google News Archive - May 19, 1998
CHICAGO Shot while play— basketball just steps away from a hospital, a 15-year-old boy ay bleeding to death in an alley as emergency room workers refused o ...
Policy Is Revised After Staff Fails to Help Shot... - Los Angeles Times - ProQuest Archiver (Pay-Per-View)

You can find headlines in the news about health care for every system in every country. Try talking to real people who actually live in these places and there experiences.

Im going through a possible cancer scare myself right now. I had a pain in my neck and I went to the hospital ER late at night 3 weeks ago. From walking into the ER room to being checked by a doctor was all in 30 minutes, with vitals being checked in 5 minutes of walking in and no wait in any waiting room. (Very impressive experience because for a broken arm I waited for 2 hours once just to get looked at)

Went to book a appointment with my regular GP but he was on vacation so a couple days later I went to a walk in clinic. The doctor there ordered up a ton of blood tests and a ultrasound for my neck so the results would be ready for my GP when he got back.

Saw my GP for the blood result tests when he got back 5 days later, but my ultrasound results where not in yet. Next day my GPs office calls me to come in that day for the ultrasound results, I couldnt so I scheduled for the next day.

He goes over my ultrasound results and there is something on my thyroid but the blood results are normal. Will be ordering a CT Scan (waiting to find out date for that) later that day my GP office calls me to say I have a appointment with a neck specialist the next day in the morning. Normally that would have been a week or 2 wait but because some one had cancelled I lucked out with a next day appointment.

See the specialist, sends me for one more blood test for something not asked on my first blood test, also sets me up for a sleep monitor and a 24 hour heart monitor to rule out a blood disorder.

So in the span of 3 weeks
- ER Trip that and was seen in minutes by the ER doctor because I was having neck issues leading to being light headed
- a TON of blood tests already done
- A Sleep monitor, a heart Monitor both ordered for me (just have to go get them) another blood test ordered (just have to go do it)
- Ive seen 4 doctors with one being a specialist
- Ive had a ultrasound scan
- Im going for a CT scan (might be a few weeks though)

And if I lived in the US, I wouldn't have health care so all this would have been out of pocket. I cringe at the thought of the bill. I imagine I would already be up to $20 000 assuming I had the money at all.

So forget the news headlines, talk to real people who live in the UK, who live in Canada and ask for real experiences. My Monthly Medical premium is $54.00 a month, whats yours?

[Chongo]

How much is the copay for Advance Care Planning Consultation?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Athens 

The graphic needs to say

Wealthy Americans and those with the right Insurance coverage have quick access to advance medical Technologies. Every one else is out of luck.

In other words, what, 90% of Americans? A great number of 'everyone else' is either eligible for insurance but haven't enrolled, or feel they don't need it, are here illegally and shouldn't qualify anyway. A very small amount legitimately have no access- something the free market can address, and an efficient, fiscally responsible government could address.

In Canada the graph should say, All Canadians have access to Advanced medical Technologies.

The graph clearly shows what the graph clearly shows- that Canadians have fewer of the shown technologies than Americans. That you may not like that fact, tough.

I love the headlines you found for the NHS and the 13 implementations of Single payer Health Care in Canada, but where is the headlines for the US?

Litigation Examples

Those are your examples? 3 examples of litigation? Is there no ability of people in your country to sue for malpractice? Would that somehow be a good thing?

And more to the point- why not address the issues raised regarding your own country and system enstead of the boringly predictable tact of trying to bring up faults with the US healthcare system? No one here pretends our system is perfect- what we get tired of is people like you pretending YOUR system is, and pretending that your system (or others like it) can scale up to cover 300,000,000+ people, when there's simply no evidence to support it.

I would love to show examples of US wait times

Any study I've ever seen shows clearly that US wait times are far less than Canada's, but by all means continue trying to distract from the point. Your system has problems, as all systems do. Sane people here in the US don't want the problems of your system combined with the colossal ineptness of our government, times the size of our population. It's a recipe for disaster.

and US limited access to care because of no insurance

This has been gone over a million times- people aren't denied the healthcare they need due to lack of insurance, and insurance isn't that hard to get for the majority of legal residents. All this aside from the fact that we need to move away from an insurance-scam based system in the first place.

Some older headlines

Again, rather than post a decade old attempt at distraction, address the CURRENT headlines coming out of your own country.

And if I lived in the US, I wouldn't have health care

Oh complete bull. Maybe if you come as a total freeloader- but even then you could just hang the bill on the taxpayer. Otherwise if you have a job and an actual legit reason to be here, you can get healthcare. The propaganda some of you people subscribe to is far worse than anything you accuse people in the US of.

I'm glad you get the care you need- but really, nothing you outlined is all that earth shattering. For me personally, I'd consider a few of the wait times you listed as unacceptable, and most of the ones you're somehow amazed by as pretty ho-hum.

I have stellar employer-provided health insurance and don't find any government crap from any country impressive.

[Chongo]

I can go online and change my PCP every 24 hr if I want to. Is that possible under the Canadian plan?

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Athens 

Its amazing how so many people here posting seem to be so clueless about the topic.
...
THE REAL FIX FOR THE US MEDICAL CARE PROBLEMS

1) New federal law that requires all people to be insured, and make it illegal for a insurance company to deny insurance.
2) A min standards law that says all people have this as the min coverage. This is to prevent the insurance company from denying coverage for specific illnesses of people with pre existing conditions when they get there insurance which the insurance company is now required to accept as customers.
3) Set cost standards on procedures. A kidney transplant at one hospital should be the same price at every other hospital. This removes the limitation on where some one can go for help. Otherwise insurance companies will only approve the places with the cheapest rates. This also will reduce administration costs.
4) Strip profit from the insurance. All insurance companies must be break even on there medical portions of insurance coverage. They can make profit on secondary insurance products like Home insurance, auto insurance, procedures not covered under the min standards law. Insurance companies will still compete for health clients to sell the secondary products to.

These changes give universal coverage, reduces administrative costs, increases access, does not increase any taxes or costs, reduces complications and still lets insurance companies make profits.

And they'll shut the market down. There won't be any health insurance providers if they can't deny coverage or make profit. Besides, the auto insurance customers won't be happy subsidizing the healthcare.

Etc.

It IS amazing how many people don't understand the problem. Even those that may think they understand it.

The REAL problem is all of those folks who don't understand basic elements of human nature and think good wishes will change it.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

I can go online and change my PCP every 24 hr if I want to. Is that possible under the Canadian plan?

Whats a PCP?

[Athens]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

In other words, what, 90% of Americans? A great number of 'everyone else' is either eligible for insurance but haven't enrolled, or feel they don't need it, are here illegally and shouldn't qualify anyway. A very small amount legitimately have no access- something the free market can address, and an efficient, fiscally responsible government could address.

Where do you get 90% from, your forgetting about those who have insurance but there insurance companies wont "allow" access to expensive techologies just because they dont have the "RIGHT" insurance. Or cant make use of said advance equiptment due to high co-pays. A lot less people have access to those Advance technologies then 90%.

The graph clearly shows what the graph clearly shows- that Canadians have fewer of the shown technologies than Americans. That you may not like that fact, tough.

Couldn't care less, don't affect me. Every time I've needed a xray, CT scan and other advance "technologies" its been delivered promptly.

Those are your examples? 3 examples of litigation? Is there no ability of people in your country to sue for malpractice? Would that somehow be a good thing?

No Canadians are not as sue happy as Americans.

And more to the point- why not address the issues raised regarding your own country and system enstead of the boringly predictable tact of trying to bring up faults with the US healthcare system? No one here pretends our system is perfect- what we get tired of is people like you pretending YOUR system is, and pretending that your system (or others like it) can scale up to cover 300,000,000+ people, when there's simply no evidence to support it.

Your pollitions, your lobby groups are the ones bringing Canada into this. With advertisements and stories full of half truths and lies about our system.

Any study I've ever seen shows clearly that US wait times are far less than Canada's, but by all means continue trying to distract from the point. Your system has problems, as all systems do. Sane people here in the US don't want the problems of your system combined with the colossal ineptness of our government, times the size of our population. It's a recipe for disaster.

HAHA you didnt even read anything I posted did you. Our government does not control our medical, our wait time problems are not the system itself its a shortage of Doctors and I did list what it would take to fix ours.

This has been gone over a million times- people aren't denied the healthcare they need due to lack of insurance, and insurance isn't that hard to get for the majority of legal residents. All this aside from the fact that we need to move away from an insurance-scam based system in the first place.

People are not denied life or death medical treatment, like a person in a car crash. But lets see some one no insured get a knee replacement or some one with the flu to see a doctor before its life threatening.

Again, rather than post a decade old attempt at distraction, address the CURRENT headlines coming out of your own country.

I did, you didn't read my post. Like your lobbiest your cheery picking bits and peices of my post for your own advantage discarding everything else.

Oh complete bull. Maybe if you come as a total freeloader- but even then you could just hang the bill on the taxpayer. Otherwise if you have a job and an actual legit reason to be here, you can get healthcare. The propaganda some of you people subscribe to is far worse than anything you accuse people in the US of.

Ha more propaganda, you really are clueless.

I'm glad you get the care you need- but really, nothing you outlined is all that earth shattering. For me personally, I'd consider a few of the wait times you listed as unacceptable, and most of the ones you're somehow amazed by as pretty ho-hum.

I have stellar employer-provided health insurance and don't find any government crap from any country impressive.

And it prob costs you and your employer a arm and a leg. Isnt $1500 bucks of every GM car the value of GM's costs for medical. Thats more then the steal that makes up the car.

[Athens]

BTW Crash, its cool your one of the few Americans with a good job, good health care, a general good life, the American dream. To bad your to ignorant to understand that isnt the case for a lot of Americans.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Athens 

Whats a PCP?

Primary Care Physician AKA Family Doctor

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Primary Care Physician AKA Family Doctor

YES https://www.cpsbc.ca/find-a-family-physician

Oh, we call them GP's, General Practitioner. ya medical has absolutely nothing to do with GP's. There is no restrictions of any kind. Can go to any hospital, any clinic, any laboratory, any surgical center, and can pick any GP we want. We don’t have to call our insurance for any procedures, for any appointments, for any ambulances, for any hospital stays. Canadians don't communicate to the insurance company in any way at all because its not needed. All procedures, lab tests, advance scanning, specialists are dictated by our GP's. At least in BC anyways. Every province runs its own form of Medical based on the national standards.

This is how it works in BC
MSP Website http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/msp/

Every one living in BC is required to register with MSP. MSP would be the equivalent of a Medical Insurance company. You get a BC Care Card in the mail. Monthly billing is as follows:

$54 for one person
$96 for a family of two
$108 for a family of three or more

Depending on your income you get a subsidy. Some one making less then $20 000 a year pays Zero.

The current adjusted net income thresholds are:
$20,000 - 100 percent subsidy
$22,000 - 80 percent subsidy
$24,000 - 60 percent subsidy
$26,000 - 40 percent subsidy
$28,000 - 20 percent subsidy

For actual care, you either find a doctor accepting new patients (sometimes difficult because there are doctor shortages depending on the community your living in.) I have 2 friends who have moved here in the last couple years, one found a GP in a couple days accepting patients the other just uses walk in clinics. He says he cant find one but he’s never looked either. If im unhappy with my GP, i can just go to another doctor and ask him to be my GP and he will have my medical files transferred to his office. Its that simple.

Making doctor appointments consist of calling the doctors office and making a appointment. I can make one for as many times as I want there is no limits.

The GP isn’t limited to how many tests he can order up and how often either. Just fills out a Laboratory Requisition and gives it to me, then I go to a Lab to have what ever work is ordered up for me. Labs don’t need appointments unless its a very special test. Generally you go to the lab take a number and between 5 to 30 minutes your called in. You give them your carecard, they type some stuff into the computer and that’s that. No bills. Results are sent to the GP. The same goes for X-Rays and Ultrasounds. I needed a Ultrasound a couple weeks ago, I was given a requisition form from my GP and the first place I called had a 6 week wait to get in. The second place I called had a 5 day wait so I booked my appointment there. Show up for my ultrasound appointment, give my carecard, they type some stuff up in the computer, I go in get my neck scanned and leave. Results are sent to my GP. If you don’t have a GP the results get sent to the walkin clinic doctor who ordered the test and keeps a file for you.

In my most recent case my GP was on vacation when I developed a pain in my neck so I went to a walkin clinic to get checked and the doctor there ordered up the blood tests, ekg, and ultrasound so the results would be back when my GP was back from vacation.

Because all our medical records are digital as well, any doctor I see can see anything that my GP has the records for.

On the drug side of things, when I get prescription drugs ordered, the doctor gives me a prescription form and I go to any drug store to fill it out. There is always a 10-30 minute wait for having them filled because the pharmacist goes through our current perception records to make sure the drugs prescribed do not interact with other possible drugs prescribed. I don't have any Additional medical through work so I pay full price for drugs. A 2 week run of Antibiotics will cost me $12.00, 40 T3s $10.00 so that’s just about $25.00 out of pocket for that. If I did have Additional medical through work drugs would be totally free as long as its covered and approved by the private insurance company.

Say I accidently took to many pills, I dont even have to rush to the hospital, I can dial 8-11 to reach a 24/7 nurse line and talk to a nurse or registered pharmacist to find out if it even requires a trip to the hospital.

Emergency Ambulance Care, this is the only thing that’s odd, is how this is priced. If I call a ambulance for trip to the hospital I get a bill for $50.00 later. If some one else calls a ambulance for me, there is no bill or if I was in a car accident there is no bill. I never figured out this one. When you dial 911 for a ambulance unless its a non emergency call which means up to 30 minutes for the ambulance, 2 will be sent for redundancy and the fire department responds as well. Response times every time I've been involved for the first responders have been under 5 minutes. The Ambulance crew fills out there paperwork with your carecard number and deliver you to the hospital. Depending on what brought you in, if its serious life threatening you are taking by ER immediately. If its not life threatening, just like if you walked in your in a que some times waiting 10 minutes to a hour. It all depends on how serious your condition is. If your brought in by ambulance and are waiting the paramedics remain with you until your next providing you with care. With something serious your looked at right away, the hospital will do what ever tests they need to do, scans they need to do and admit you or discharge you. No bills, no paperwork. All you ever give in all cases is your medical card. If you called a ambulance you get a bill in the mail for it. (Again the logic for that escapes me but I bet its to keep people from calling for a Ambulance weekly just for a ride to the hospital)

Everything done at the hospital goes to your GP.

At no point in time do you ever see a bill, get told you cant have something because insurance wont pay for it. The only restrictions to scans, drugs, tests are from the doctor themselves. If they don't feel its needed they wont order it. If they don’t order it then you have to go to the lab and pay out of pocket with out a requisition from the GP.

In our system the doctors control what you get and don’t get, not the insurance. Everything I listed above from tests, emergency care, doctor visits all get billed to MSP from the facility and services you used.

The biggest thing that keeps me from seeing my GP more often is his office hours which is Monday to Friday 9 - 4. I basically have to leave work when ever I want to see him or use a walkin clinic on the weekend. Most doctors are closed at night so any kind of care needed at night means a trip to the hospital. Last year I busted a tooth and was in absolute agony which sent me to the hospital for a pain shoot, and pain killers. Was around 1am on the weekend. I waited for about 3 hours to be seen but there was a heart attack victim, and a couple car crash victims ahead of me. The pain sucked but compared to those people it was not important. If I was having a heart attack or was a kid I would be ahead of every one and thats what counts.

Air Ambulance I believe is $150.00.

Basically the things that MSP does not cover are the same things most private companies don’t cover either because there is limited success or no proof of success, extreme costs for very limited results and reasons like that.

I like to add a procedure or service or drug not normally covered by MSP will be covered if the doctor deemed it medically necessary with no alternatives.

So thats how it works in BC. You get a BC Medical Card and you just use the medical services with no thoughts to costs or limitations. If you think you need something your doctor doesn’t, see a second doctor. All doctors are private, they render services and bill MSP for it. A commission made up of Doctors negotiate prices and rates with MSP for all doctors and services. I imagine this is similar in all the provinces. In Alberta you don't even pay any premiums at all.

[Chongo]

Does this change once a person has gone passed the return on investment point?

[stumblinmike]

Athens, what you describe is at TOTAL nightmare!!! How on earth is the insurance industry to survive in that heckhole of a system??? Are the insurance execs in BC homeless and destitute? Oh, the humanity..

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Does this change once a person has gone passed the return on investment point?

What do you mean?

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Athens 

What do you mean?

When someone reaches the age at which there is no longer a return on the investment to treat them. (no longer a tax revenue producer)
personal example.
My 80 year old retired grandmother fell and broke her hip. She went into the hospital and had a hip replacement and lived another 19 years. (less than one week from fall to replacement)

[Athens]

There is no age limit to care, elderly are the largest single cost group for medical. Doctors have no reason to limit care to any one because that’s there business. Doctors do not report to MSP to get permission. If a patient, even 95 years old needs an expensive procedure the doctor orders it, and prioritizes it. Urgent classification jumps ahead of the line, and the lesser priorities get put in the middle or next at the end of the line. The Doctor bills MSP. The Doctor gets paid. That said, a hip replacement here would be a month or 2, sometimes immediate because of a life threatening issue and sometimes longer in some parts of the country. Elective surgeries are quicker in the US provided your insured or have the money to pay for it.