France is healthcare leader, US comes dead last: study - Yahoo! News
France is healthcare leader, US comes dead last: study
Absolutley pathetic. Even the UK beat us :(
Printable View
France is healthcare leader, US comes dead last: study - Yahoo! News
France is healthcare leader, US comes dead last: study
Absolutley pathetic. Even the UK beat us :(
WASHINGTON (AFP) - France is tops, and the United States dead last, in providing timely and effective healthcare to its citizens, according to a survey Tuesday of preventable deaths in 19 industrialized countries.
The study by the Commonwealth Fund and published in the January/February issue of the journal Health Affairs measured developed countries' effectiveness at providing timely and effective healthcare.
The study, entitled "Measuring the Health of Nations: Updating an Earlier Analysis," was written by researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. It looked at death rates in subjects younger than 75 that could have been prevented by timely and effective medical care.
The researchers found that while most countries surveyed saw preventable deaths decline by an average of 16 percent, the United States saw only a four percent dip.
The non-profit Commonwealth Fund, which financed the study, expressed alarm at the findings.
"It is startling to see the US falling even farther behind on this crucial indicator of health system performance," said Commonwealth Fund Senior Vice President Cathy Schoen, who noted that "other countries are reducing these preventable deaths more rapidly, yet spending far less."
The 19 countries, in order of best to worst, were: France, Japan, Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Some countries showed dramatic improvement in the periods studied -- 1997 and 1998 and again between 2002 and 2003 -- outpacing the United States, which showed only slight improvement.
White the United States ranked 15th of 19 between 1997-98, by 2002-03 it had fallen to last place.
"It is notable that all countries have improved substantially except the US," said Ellen Nolte, lead author of the study.
Had the United States performed as well as any of the top three industrialized countries, there would have been 101,000 fewer deaths per year, the researchers said
It is pathetic and won't be remedied until the politicians get the balls to take on the AMA and the Pharmaceuticals. Until then we will all keep listening to the BS from the medical establishment thinking how incredibly wonderful our health care system is.Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown
Don't have to go far for it either, Boon Mee usually posts it all on here. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Norton
"Dead" last is fairly apt.
What I don't consider apt is that to get medical coverage for a trip to the states I'd have to double my yearly premium. Of course I ticked the box which said no thanks.
So how can the developed worlds worst health care system also be it's most expensive ? (Rhetorical question).
Not really sure how that works out, But prices of doing business do have something to do with it.
Here if you go to a hospital they do have a bunch of nurses, not sure how many are required and have no idea how many they have here or in the hospitals in the USA, but here to be in a hospital, at least the one I was in, you have to have your own care person as a nurse will not do it, They will bring your meds and leave them somewhere in your room, they might be the ones your doctor told you to take, or they might be the ones that he told you not to take anymore after his visit yesterday, so you better stay on top of it.
I have never heard of a Mal practice suit or case here, if they make a mistake with your meds or treatment then it is just tough shit, you will have to fight them right down the line to ever get any further treatment or treatment to rectify any mistakes that were made. And I do have a friend that had eye surgery that went a little wrong, he fought with the doctor for a year before anything was done and he was damn near blind.
Meds that are made in the UK and sold here and in the states do sell for a large difference in price, most are cheaper by 60% to 80% here than the same brands sold in the states.
I am on some meds that should be checked with frequent blood tests to see what they are doing in the blood, I am given overly high doses of them, as to what is listed for my age, have been on them for almost a year and have never had a blood test, have never been warned or cautioned by anyone as to what to watch out for or told about side effects.
As to what I have seen in the states, Mexico and Here, you get about the same care in Mexico and Thailand, and far superior care in the states, but you do pay more for it.
But I think that Medical care is similar to buying food for your horse,
If you want first class, clean oats right out of the sack with no dirt,mold or spoiled oats then you should expect to pay top price for top quality feed.
But if you are willing to settle for oats of lesser quality that have already been thru a horse, then you can expect to get them for less money..
Up To You.:)
Canada ranks high does is it? 55555555555555555555555555
Canadian Healthcare:
My Sis's oncologist rang TONIGHT (oh, and this doc is never available) to say she arranged surgery for my Sis's new-found brain tumour TONIGHT. WTF? Is my Sis a research candidate? No fekin way is she going. I said NO. Called my doc friend at the Mayo and she was astounded. NO, she said! My Sis weighs 80 pounds, has metastisized cancer, about a month to live, and they wanna operate? Fekin heathens. She'd die on the table so they could take notes.
Here's another: My ex had quadruple bypass surgery last week and they took him off morphine and gave him ASPIRIN for pain on an empty stomach after two days; then kicked him out of the hospital coz they needed his bed after a week.
What a fekin joke. According to Mayo docs, Canadians are going to the States for healthcare, not vice versa.
I have to pay $50 a month for this "free Canadian healthcare" so it ain't free, is it?
...Quote:
Originally Posted by blackgang
So you are equating US medical care to oats of a lesser quality that have already been through a horse but are really expensive? :confused:
Because the point of the article is that the US is last of 19 industrialised nations. And further to that, it's one of if not the most expensive.
Capitalism in a nutsack, you pay for high quality oats but get nothing but shit..Quote:
Originally Posted by AntRobertson
^ I'd say largely because of malpratice suits.
A national and global embarrassment of epic proportions. Time for real reform on this issue.
Ahh, the bitter fruit of a litigous society. Certainly doesn't help but I think the problem runs deeper than that, it's that the whole system seems to be an exercise in money making for large corporations. The actual health of the people/paitents being almost entirely incidental to the bottom line of profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon
^I think Ant is getting closer to the truth. Litigation is a large part of it, but many states have instituted litigation reform capping the amount of awards for medical malpractice.
The problem runs much deeper and is institutional.
I originally read the thread in an involuntarily interested way - I mean the possibilities are endless!
As it goes, was a little boring...
Are you a brain surgeon? Cardiologist? How is it you know better than qualified doctors?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon
There isn't a cure for cancer, last time I checked, and quadruple bypass surgery is caused by obesity, but somehow everything is the fault of the Canadian system.
Much of it paid for by Canada, btw:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon
Meanwhile, Americans, in their hundreds of thousands, use the Canadian system fraudulently and for free. For instance, in Ontario alone, in just a six-month period in 1992-93:Quote:
Ambulance stopped at border
U.S. guards force victim to identify himself
WINDSOR, ONT.
An ambulance rushing a heart-attack victim to Detroit from a Windsor hospital ill-equipped to perform life-saving surgery was stopped for secondary inspection Monday by United States Customs, despite the fact it carried a man fighting for his life.
Rick Laporte, 49 - who twice had been brought back to life with defibrillators -was being rushed across the border when a U.S. guard ignored protocol at the Detroit portion of the tunnel and forced the ambulance - with sirens and lights flashing - to pull over.
"If I'm that person in the booth and there is an ambulance coming with a critically injured person, I'm not stopping the damn thing," said Kat Lauzon, Laporte's girlfriend. "I'm irate. I can't figure it out. He could have died and I would have blamed that person for murder."
U.S. Customs officers at the secondary inspection site told the ambulance driver to go in the office to produce identification, said Larry Amlin, of Windsor Essex EMS.
Other guards told the paramedic crew to open the back doors of the ambulance, then asked Laporte to verbally confirm his identify, said Lauzon. She learned afterwards of the incident from Laporte, who survived his life-saving emergency angioplasty surgery at Detroit's Henry Ford Hospital.
Laporte, a Canadian Auto Workers Union executive, remained in the cardiac-care unit yesterday in serious condition.
"This was a life-saving procedure," said Lauzon yesterday, still furious. "What if it was one of their mothers in the ambulance? Would they pull it in? No damn way."
Chief Ron Smith of U.S. Customs and Border Protection in Detroit could not be reached yesterday.
Amlin said the ambulance, according to well-established protocol, received a police escort to the tunnel entrance with several intersections blocked off to help speed the trip. Tunnel traffic was shut down and, after the ambulance arrived at the border crossing, a tunnel-company pickup truck with flashing lights led it to a designated U.S. Customs lane, where it was supposed to be waved through.
"We have a system set up. We are to be pre-cleared and no problems," Amlin said.
Last weekend, a Quebec fire truck responding to an emergency request for assistance in upstate New York was delayed at the U.S. border despite having lights and sirens activated.
"This is the second time that emergency personal responding to life-threatening situations have been stopped on our northern border," said Bennie G. Thompson, chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, in Washington yesterday. "Current policies and procedures must be immediately reviewed to ensure that first responders on both sides of the border can continue to save lives."
Thompson plans to send a letter Monday to U.S. Customs and Border Protection asking for full explanation on both the Detroit and New York incidents.
Canada and the U.S. "have a long-standing tradition of helping one another in times of emergency," said Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, who also expressed concern in a statement from his office yesterday about the Detroit border incident.17/11/07Halifax, The Daily News: News | Ambulance stopped at border
Quote:
"The total number of improper claims in Ontario was estimated at 600,000."
Americans Filching Free Health Care in Canada - New York Times
Do you really think you get free brain/heart surgery in the US for $50 a month? :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon
Or should Canada and the US just join Blue Cross en masse? Quick! Someone tell the US candidates! We have a solution!
Babies at risk: Memphis confronts infant mortality
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2008/01/368.jpg http://i.usatoday.net/images/clear.gif
This baby in the newborn intensive care unit of the Regional Medical Center at Memphis has an abnormal heart. A 2002 federal report found that Memphis had an infant mortality rate more than twice the national average.
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2008/01/369.jpg http://i.usatoday.net/_common/_images/clear.gif
Dr. Sheldon Korones started the newborn intensive care unit at the Regional Center at Memphis in 1968 and still roams it day and night.
http://images.usatoday.com/_common/_images/clear.gifhttp://images.usatoday.com/_common/_images/clear.gifhttp://images.usatoday.com/_common/_images/clear.gif
The rate at which infants die in the United States has dropped substantially over the past half-century, but broad disparities remain among racial groups, and the country stacks up poorly next to other industrialized nations.
In 2004, the most recent year for which statistics are available, roughly seven babies died for every 1,000 live births before reaching their first birthday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says. That was down from about 26 in 1960.
Babies born to black mothers died at two and a half times the rate of those born to white mothers, according to the CDC figures.
The United States ranks near the bottom for infant survival rates among modernized nations. A Save the Children report last year placed the United States ahead of only Latvia, and tied with Hungary, Malta, Poland and Slovakia.
The same report noted the United States had more neonatologists and newborn intensive care beds per person than Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom but still had a higher rate of infant mortality than any of those nations.
Doctors and analysts blame broad disparities in access to health care among racial and income groups in the United States.
more at: Babies at risk: Memphis confronts infant mortality - USATODAY.com
It's for the US people to decide if the current system is adequate, or if it should be improved for the average person. It comes down to tax dollars, or the allocation thereof. If I were American, I would be asking why my country needs to spend over half the worlds military expenditure- funded by the public- when the publig health care system is the worst in the developed world. Maybe spend, say, 45% of the worlds total military budget and allocate the money saved to health care and education. :rolleyes:
To a non American westerner, it seems quite ironic that the same rich country that has the worlds most advanced medical technology, and facilities like Johns Hopkins and the Mayo Clinic, also has some of the highest rates of infant mortality in the developed world, and indeed a lower life expectancy than most other advanced nations. :confused:
Whilst it never got off the ground, I have to say Hillary's attempts at intiating a reform of the health care system seem a good idea.
I new I'd lure Hootad into this.:)
Nope. I decided to pursue a different career path. But, I am smart enough to question the treatment and get second or third opinions. And I don't need to be a brain surgeon to know that you do not do brain surgery without a few days prep on a patient, and you do not do surgery like that on a patient in the last stages of terminal cancer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootad Binky
555555 So, you are the research expert and doc now, Hootad? FYI, my ex is probably underweight by any standards, does not smoke, rarely drinks, and eats healthy foods, because he's a Chinese acupuncturist and herbalist. Must be that toxic Canadian city air that caused it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootad Binky
Why was this guy going to the States for treatment if it's free in Canada?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootad Binky
Is that why the system in Canada is shite? Let non-taxpayers use it for free? Thought you needed a healthcare card to get service.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootad Binky
Why not? Then docs and nurses in Canada would get paid what they deserve and patients would get better service. Also, why not force the fat, lazy Canadians who abuse the system to join a fitness centre.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootad Binky
When you read that alongside the fact of the billion's spent annually on 'defence' that's simply appalling.Quote:
...The United States ranks near the bottom for infant survival rates among modernized nations. A Save the Children report last year placed the United States ahead of only Latvia, and tied with Hungary, Malta, Poland and Slovakia...
Yes, I'd say that's mixed up priorities.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntRobertson
Americans rarely take notice, though. Military Offense spending, and "keeping us safe from the bad guys." Yeah, right.
With regard to infant mortality rates in the US, race unfortunately is a factor.
This may mean (I don't know) that there are two types of medical systems in the US. Much like the legal system. If you can afford a Dream Team of lawyers you can more likely get off, or get a lessor penalty. Same with health care, and preventative care.
$Money$
Yep, valid point. The sad reality of it all I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Milkman
"A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." - Ghandi
Not to dismiss the data in the news story, but of those countries included in the study, the variance is likely quite small. I wonder why they didn't include the data? Is it because differences are statistically insignificant? Just wondering.
A few opinions:
Most Americans are not displeased with healthcare provided, Gallup polls continually show this.
Most Americans have decent health insurance that covers a large majority of their costs.
Many of the worlds top health care facilities and university research centers are located in the US.
If I was dying, or had to be sliced open, there's no operating room in the world I'd rather be in than a top regional medical center in the US.
The problem lies with a high number of people either unwilling or unable to cover themselves. If an indigent shows up to a hospital emergency room, they cannot, by law, refuse treatment.
Health insurance for old, poor folks is beyond affordable.
Many poor immigrants (legal or illegal) aren't interested in paying a hundred dollars a month (or more) for a service they rarely use. They also know if the shit hits the fan, they'll be cared for, albeit grudgingly, by a hospital that has to eat the cost.
US is in need of health system reform. (notice I didn't say health care)
This study looked at death rates in subjects younger than 75 that could have been prevented by timely and effective medical care -- just one indicator of health system performance.
Except for when I was born, and a few dental fillings and a sprained ankle, I've never personally been a recipient of the US health care machine, only witnessed it through family.
Finally, a fact that is routinely ignored in this debate is scale. You can't expect a behemoth like the US to operate with the same efficiency as a gnats like Ireland or Finland. (Ireland x 75 = US) The sheer scale makes these sort of comparisons suspect. Of course the number of complaints will be higher. Naturally the mistakes, misdiagnosis and unhappy patients will be higher. This is compounded by the fact that people are genuinely paying for the care, rather than having it given to them. Wouldn't a comparison ofhealth care among like-sized patient populations be more useful? Nah, didn't think so ... The number of absolutely satisfied, couldn't-be-happier, euphoric health care recipients in the US is probably larger than the entire population of most other countries in the comparison.
Japan -- 128,000,000
Germany -- 82,000,000
France -- 64,000,000
UK -- 60,000,000
Italy -- 59,000,000
Spain -- 45,000,000
Canada -- 33,000,000
Australia -- 21,000,000
Netherlands -- 16,000,000
Greece -- 11,000,000
Portugal -- 10,000,000
Sweden -- 9,000,000
Austria -- 8,000,000
Norway -- 5,000,000
Denmark -- 5,000,000
Finland -- 5,000,000
Ireland -- 4,000,000
New Zealand -- 4,000,000
United States -- 303,000,000
I don't really think that's a valid point of contention. As you've pointed out the study itself isn't linked to (I'd also like to see it myself, I'm curious exactly what the diseases are they looked at) but it's a fair guess to say that it was conducted per capita (the quoted figures are in percentages). Likewise it would be safe to assume teh researchers who compiled it used a statistically valid method.Quote:
Originally Posted by Texpat
Besides all of which, if you're going to use that as a factor then you also have to account for the fact that the US is wealthier as well.
It might be valid. :)Quote:
written by researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who derive no greater pleasure in life than to make themselves feel superior to others, especially Americans.
Point taken but the other side of the behemoth coin is close to 50,000,000 Americans have no health coverage what so ever. Exceeding the entire population of Spain, Canada, Australia or Netherlands and the combined population of Portugal, Sweden, Austria, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Ireland and New Zealand. There is absolutely no excuse for a system which excludes 50,000,000 of it's citizens in a country with the vast financial resources of the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by Texpat