What is wrong with the American health care system?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ May 7 2006, 11:24 PM) [snapback]251286[/snapback]</div>

Who is managing your health care system? Who will pay for research and development of the next generation of new procedures, drugs, and physicians? Who will pay for infrastructure - hospitals, equipment, staffing, insurance? Who will make the decisions as where to allocate resources - towards research, new hospitals, how many physicians we are training and supporting, insurance rates? Who is going to decide how to allocate these resources in terms of patients and disease processes - who is going to decide who gets an organ transplant and who doesn't; of who if anyone gets experimental chemotherapy...?

Can't be the government I am assuming - I hope you don't think that they could possibly handle this type of complex decision making. Heck, they can't even manage Medicare or Medicaid much less the mail (i hear the price of stamp is going up another 10% next year), Social Security and you would not want to add ANOTHER level of complexity to what is already a very full and mismanaged plate - would you?

You do have part of it right. Americans must pay for some part of their health care. They must be held responsible for how they care for themselves. And if they choose not to have health insurance, they must be responsible for that decision (by some reports over half of the 40 million "uninsured" are such willingly - and the other half gets free health care).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ May 8 2006, 08:53 AM) [snapback]251472[/snapback]</div>

This is rubbish. Please cite sources for both claims.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman @ May 8 2006, 07:40 AM) [snapback]251429[/snapback]</div>

Since when is paying market rates "freeloading", Mr. Conservative?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ghostofjk @ May 8 2006, 04:42 PM) [snapback]251679[/snapback]</div>

I would have the same trouble of citing sources as you would. I can tell you that in my office 2/3 of our employees willingly do not have coverage in favor of more take home pay.

Why do you resort to labeling people "Mr. Conservative"?

This is actually a very important debate - some believe in single payer systems although not one model exists that is successful in terms of providing leading edge health care to its populous - much less one as complex as would be needed here to cover a hetergenous population of 300 million people.

Others favor a market based solution - I would start simply. Make medical malpractice no fault, expand HSA's to all, remove tax advantages from employer based health care benefits, and make medicare needs based. All easy to do - the first makes availalbe a minimum of $50-100 Billion available to society to invest back into taking care of patients - although the trial lawyers will undoubtedly shoot it down with their Democratic puppets. Still would like to know why a lawyer gets 42% of all med mal claims - totally a waste.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ May 8 2006, 08:53 AM) [snapback]251472[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ghostofjk @ May 8 2006, 01:42 PM) [snapback]251679[/snapback]</div>

Calling a post "rubbish" and asking for sources - without posting your own contradicting source - is, well, um, RUBBISH!
While I don't necessarily agree with dbermanmd's numbers - heck even the CPS can't agree with itself - to dismiss his post like you did is, dare I say, a sign of ignorance. :mellow:

Another problem with the CPS was noted in an April 26, 2005 Los Angeles Times article: The survey may count some individuals as uninsured even though they are covered by Medicaid. Experts who have examined Census Bureau figures estimate 10 to 14 million individuals who are counted as uninsured likely qualified for Medicaid or S-CHIP coverage.

Good Health, Less Incentive

A common assumption is that most uninsured Americans simply cannot afford the cost of coverage, but this is surely not always the case. As with any good or service, the purchase of health insurance has a lot to do with preferences and priorities. Many people may not wish to divert scarce cash from their budget to pay for insurance--especially if they do not expect to need extensive care.

Most of the uninsured realize they can obtain care when needed. After all, routine physician visits can be paid out of pocket.

It’s also true that many people do not buy health insurance simply because they are young and healthy. According to the Census Bureau, 42 percent of the uninsured (18.8 million) are between the ages of 18 and 34. Households headed by people in that age group spend about three times more on alcohol, tobacco, dining out, and entertainment than they do for out-of-pocket spending on health care. If they have unmet health needs, they would likely shift more of this discretionary spending toward health care.
http://cdhc.ncpa.org/commentaries/few-amer...health-coverage


What percent of that 40 million are illegal immigrants without health insurance?
And how many of the rich also don't bother because they self-insure?

The subject of Lack of Health Insurance Coverage is made into a much bigger problem when political points can be made. <_<

 

Almost everything
Lack of insurance for about 17% of population
Insurance companies controling medical care
Over medication with high priced drugs
Too many medical specialists
Not enought GP's
We are far too litigenous
Not enought attention paid to prevention

and this is just the beginning of the list....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jared2 @ May 8 2006, 09:58 AM) [snapback]251441[/snapback]</div>

The Canadian government regulates and subsidizes many of the prices for medical services and can also demand steep discounts, as they are a "single source" purchaser/provider. There are some interesting web sites that go into this:

http://www.canadadrugtalk.com/2004/08/

http://califmedicineman.blogspot.com/2005/...ks-to-hugh.html

http://seniordrugconnection.org/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1246755/posts

http://www.sunsetbeacon.com/archives/richm...andrugscol.html

http://mediwire.skyscape.com/main/Default....ArticleID=26967

However, I'd like to clear up one misconception: not ALL drugs are "free" under Canadian public health care plans. Many are subject to deductibles of $500-$2,000 per year:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/idol...harmacare021125

The one thing I don't buy is the bullshit that American drug companies must charge the price they do to fund "research." Please. The drug companies freeload off University research teams then get all the credit and all the profit.

On the topic of prescription drug coverage, I pay into private insurance as I'm a contract worker. On a per-annum basis this costs me $1,400, which is a legitimate claim on my personal income tax.

On the topic of those horrific Canadian "waiting lines" I really have to wonder how that compares to the typical HMO/PPO? I will agree the emphasis here is on preventative measures, not drastic cures after the fact. For example, they will actually treat diabetes instead of waiting for a leg to be hacksawed off.

Canadians with resources will go to some clinics in the U.S. for faster diagnostic imaging or for certain procedures. For example, many Canadians would like to go to the Mayo Clinic, and I imagine so would most Americans if their HMO/PPO covered it. Otherwise - and I speak from personal experience here - you need at least $6,000 for them to say "Hello" to you.

My folks have gone to the Mayo Clinic for decades now, as they have the resources to do so. I'm not sure if they're any healthier as a result: my Mom passed away Christmas of 2005 from a massive stroke, but she was in her late 70's. I suppose it bought them peace of mind, so it was worth it to them.

Many Canadians find it ironic that Americans are streaming across the border to get their meds - especially senior citizens - while Canadians are getting CT scans done at the Mayo Clinic or at specialized diagnostic imaging clinics in ND.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ghostofjk @ May 8 2006, 02:30 AM) [snapback]251351[/snapback]</div>

Because your paradigm is that the Canadian system is better than ours...PERIOD. It may have some better parts...but it is NOT better overall.

Oh, the system??? We already have it...it is the annual tax return.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ May 8 2006, 11:53 AM) [snapback]251472[/snapback]</div>

Uh, how did what I say change what health care is available....did I miss something?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jared2 @ May 8 2006, 11:58 AM) [snapback]251474[/snapback]</div>

And YOU did not continue on with my next paragraph where I defined what US citizens THINK UHC is.

See, we are STUCK in this paradigm.