Harrolds.Blogspot.com
From: gg Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2009 Some things to think about! GG
Interesting statistics.
A recent "Investor's Business Daily" article provided very interesting statistics from a
survey by the United Nations International Health Organization. (+ see 2nd article below)
Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:
U.S. 65%
England 46%
Canada 42%
Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
U.S. 93%
England 15%
Canada 43%
Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
U.S. 90%
England 15%
Canada 43%
Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:
U.S. 77%
England 40%
Canada 43%
Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
U.S. 71
England 14
Canada 18
Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in "excellent health":
U.S. 12%
England 2%
Canada 6%
I don't know about you, but I don't want "Universal Healthcare" comparable to England or Canada .
Moreover, it was Sen. Harry Reid who said, "Elderly Americans must learn to accept the inconveniences of old age."
Ship his butt TO CANADA OR ENGLAND !
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2009
US Healthcare vs Canada's and the MVNHS©: The Truth Hurts [UPDATED & BUMPED]
As we noted earlier this week, there's an email floating around purporting to show how much better our system is than, say the MVNHS© or that of our Neighbors to the North. It references an Investor's Business Daily report, but doesn't include a link, or even a date. Since we pride ourselves on doing everything we can to vet such information, I spent time at the IBD site trying to find the source. Coming up empty, I dropped them an email, to which IBD's Kerry Jackson kindly (and promptly!) responded.
The information in the email is apparently distilled from a May, 2009 IBD article which itself is based on information from Rep Mark Kirk (R-IL), which his office compiled from a variety of valid sources.
The information in the email is apparently distilled from a May, 2009 IBD article which itself is based on information from Rep Mark Kirk (R-IL), which his office compiled from a variety of valid sources.
■ ""Medical Rights Act" will prevent health care rationing seen in UK , Canada
It is a devastating rebuttal to those who believe that our system is inferior to, and needs to be made more like, nationalized systems:
■ "In the U.S., only 26 percent of sick adults waited more than four weeks to see a specialist. In Canada and the UK, more than twice as many citizens wait longer than a month to receive the care they need."
■ "In America, doctors use 27 MRI machines per million people. In Canada and Britain, it is less than a fifth of that at approximately five MRI machines per million people."
■ "American women's survival rate is 61 percent, compared to 58 percent in Canada. American men's survival rate is 57 percent, and 53 percent in Canada."
The IBD article has more:
■ "In the U.S., only 26 percent of sick adults waited more than four weeks to see a specialist. In Canada and the UK, more than twice as many citizens wait longer than a month to receive the care they need."
■ "In America, doctors use 27 MRI machines per million people. In Canada and Britain, it is less than a fifth of that at approximately five MRI machines per million people."
■ "American women's survival rate is 61 percent, compared to 58 percent in Canada. American men's survival rate is 57 percent, and 53 percent in Canada."
The IBD article has more:
[Graph courtesy Kerry Jackson, IBD. No direct link available yet]
Why would we purposefully jettison the clearly superior level of health care available to our citizens?
A close examination of government-run health care in Canada and the United Kingdom shows sharp contrasts in the quality of medical services:
• Delay is denial of care. In the U.S., only 26 percent of sick adults waited more than four weeks to see a specialist. In Canada and the UK, more than twice as many citizens wait longer than a month to receive the care they need (60 percent and 58 percent, respectively). Source: 2008 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of Sicker Adults.
• The sickest patients need intensive care. In Britain, government hospitals maintain nine intensive care unit beds per 100,000 people. In America, we have three times that number at 31 per 100,000. Source: High-Priced Pain: What to expect from a Single-Payer Health Care System, Heritage Foundation, 9/22/2006.
• U.S. Care for infants outpaces UK and Canada. In the U.S., we have over six neonatologists per 10,000 live births. In Canada, they have fewer than four and in Britain fewer than three. In the U.S., we have over three neonatal intensive care beds per 10,000 births, just 2.6 in Canada and less than one in Britain. Source: High-Priced Pain: What to expect from a Single-Payer Health Care System, Heritage Foundation, 9/22/2006.
• Long waits increase pain and morbidity. In the U.S., over 90 percent of seniors receive a hip replacement within six months. In Canada, less than half of patients are treated in the same time (43 percent) with many waiting over a year. In the UK, only 15 percent of patients are treated within six months. Source: Doing Your Own Health Care Thing: American Seniors vs. Canadian Citizens, Heritage Foundation, 7/1/2005.
• New technology finds cancer quicker. In America, doctors use 27 MRI machines per million people. In Canada and Britain, it is less than a fifth of that at approximately five MRI machines per million people. Source: Health Status, Health Care and Inequality: Canada vs. the U.S., National Bureau of Economic Research, September 2007.
• Americans take advantage of preventative care. Nearly 90 percent of American women age 40 – 69 have had a mammogram, while only 72 percent of Canadian women have had a screening. Likewise, 96 percent of American women age 20 - 69 have had a Pap smear, with 88 percent of Canadian women undergoing the test for cervical cancer. Source: Health Status, Health Care and Inequality: Canada vs. the U.S., National Bureau of Economic Research, September 2007.
• Cancer survival rates higher in the U.S. One study puts the five-year cancer survivability rate for American women at 63 percent, but only 56 percent for European women. For men, the difference is starker with 66 percent survivability for Americans and only 47 percent for Europeans. A separate comparison of U.S. and Canadian citizens shows similar results. American women's survival rate is 61 percent, compared to 58 percent in Canada. American men's survival rate is 57 percent, and 53 percent in Canada. Sources: Lancet Oncology, 2007, No. 8; Health Status, Health Care and Inequality: Canada vs. the U.S., National Bureau of Economic Research, September 2007.
Data collection: Harris Interactive, Inc.
Source: 2008 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of Sicker Adults.
Stories of poor care under a government-run system are common in Britain. Last February, the Daily Mail reported on Mrs. Dorothy Simpson, 61, who had an irregular heartbeat. Officials at the National Health Service (NHS) denied her care and told her she was "too old." The Guardian reported in June 2007 that one in eight NHS hospital patients wait more than a year for treatment. In Brief: Congress should guarantee the right of every American to make their privately-funded health care decisions with their doctor.
• Delay is denial of care. In the U.S., only 26 percent of sick adults waited more than four weeks to see a specialist. In Canada and the UK, more than twice as many citizens wait longer than a month to receive the care they need (60 percent and 58 percent, respectively). Source: 2008 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of Sicker Adults.
• The sickest patients need intensive care. In Britain, government hospitals maintain nine intensive care unit beds per 100,000 people. In America, we have three times that number at 31 per 100,000. Source: High-Priced Pain: What to expect from a Single-Payer Health Care System, Heritage Foundation, 9/22/2006.
• U.S. Care for infants outpaces UK and Canada. In the U.S., we have over six neonatologists per 10,000 live births. In Canada, they have fewer than four and in Britain fewer than three. In the U.S., we have over three neonatal intensive care beds per 10,000 births, just 2.6 in Canada and less than one in Britain. Source: High-Priced Pain: What to expect from a Single-Payer Health Care System, Heritage Foundation, 9/22/2006.
• Long waits increase pain and morbidity. In the U.S., over 90 percent of seniors receive a hip replacement within six months. In Canada, less than half of patients are treated in the same time (43 percent) with many waiting over a year. In the UK, only 15 percent of patients are treated within six months. Source: Doing Your Own Health Care Thing: American Seniors vs. Canadian Citizens, Heritage Foundation, 7/1/2005.
• New technology finds cancer quicker. In America, doctors use 27 MRI machines per million people. In Canada and Britain, it is less than a fifth of that at approximately five MRI machines per million people. Source: Health Status, Health Care and Inequality: Canada vs. the U.S., National Bureau of Economic Research, September 2007.
• Americans take advantage of preventative care. Nearly 90 percent of American women age 40 – 69 have had a mammogram, while only 72 percent of Canadian women have had a screening. Likewise, 96 percent of American women age 20 - 69 have had a Pap smear, with 88 percent of Canadian women undergoing the test for cervical cancer. Source: Health Status, Health Care and Inequality: Canada vs. the U.S., National Bureau of Economic Research, September 2007.
• Cancer survival rates higher in the U.S. One study puts the five-year cancer survivability rate for American women at 63 percent, but only 56 percent for European women. For men, the difference is starker with 66 percent survivability for Americans and only 47 percent for Europeans. A separate comparison of U.S. and Canadian citizens shows similar results. American women's survival rate is 61 percent, compared to 58 percent in Canada. American men's survival rate is 57 percent, and 53 percent in Canada. Sources: Lancet Oncology, 2007, No. 8; Health Status, Health Care and Inequality: Canada vs. the U.S., National Bureau of Economic Research, September 2007.
Source: 2008 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of Sicker Adults.
Stories of poor care under a government-run system are common in Britain. Last February, the Daily Mail reported on Mrs. Dorothy Simpson, 61, who had an irregular heartbeat. Officials at the National Health Service (NHS) denied her care and told her she was "too old." The Guardian reported in June 2007 that one in eight NHS hospital patients wait more than a year for treatment. In Brief: Congress should guarantee the right of every American to make their privately-funded health care decisions with their doctor.
In the UK, cancer patients who were denied cancer-fighting drugs by the National Health Service (the UK's universal government health care system) and bought the drugs themselves were later denied health care by the "universal" health care system because they bought – and paid for – their own cancer-fighting drugs.
Even in the U.S., if a Medicare patient pays a doctor for a service that would otherwise be covered by Medicare, the doctor is suspended from participating in Medicare for two years. This substantially restricts the ability of Medicare patients to pay on their own if Medicare decides they are ineligible for a particular service normally covered by the program. A doctor who provides a single service to a single Medicare patient outside the scope of the Medicare program, even without asking Medicare to pay, gives up the right to get paid for any Medicare services for any Medicare patient for two years. Not many doctors are willing to take that penalty, so this substantially (if indirectly) restricts the right of seniors and the disabled to access the health care of their choice.
Even in the U.S., if a Medicare patient pays a doctor for a service that would otherwise be covered by Medicare, the doctor is suspended from participating in Medicare for two years. This substantially restricts the ability of Medicare patients to pay on their own if Medicare decides they are ineligible for a particular service normally covered by the program. A doctor who provides a single service to a single Medicare patient outside the scope of the Medicare program, even without asking Medicare to pay, gives up the right to get paid for any Medicare services for any Medicare patient for two years. Not many doctors are willing to take that penalty, so this substantially (if indirectly) restricts the right of seniors and the disabled to access the health care of their choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please, avoid posting advertisements. Content comments are welcomed, including anonymous. Posts with profanity will not be published.