Are you Volunteer or Paid?

[Miss Xina]

ok, that's it, I give up. Maybe it's the language barrier. maybe its your reading comprehension. maybe you are delusional. or maybe you aren't even responding to my post.

either way, I'm totally lost in what you are talking about, where you are getting your information, or why you seem to think that I said anything about healthcare in the US being any better than anywhere else.

So I walk away, you win. I'm lost

The American reputation on a global scale is that Americans believe that they are the superior country in the world and MUST, just GOTTA be considered the best over everything else.

Your reputation has improved since Obama has been elected, but the way the American media represents the american culture is that it is rather arrogant and prideful.

That is probably what he is referring to. The American news always refers to the US health care as being the best in the world, but realistically, when you look at the WHO website, you will find it's not number one. Don't worry, the UK isn't either.

I think he was just referring to American culture needing to feel that it's the best.

I could be wrong though

 

[resq330]

The American reputation on a global scale is that Americans believe that they are the superior country in the world and MUST, just GOTTA be considered the best over everything else.

Your reputation has improved since Obama has been elected, but the way the American media represents the american culture is that it is rather arrogant and prideful.

That is probably what he is referring to. The American news always refers to the US health care as being the best in the world, but realistically, when you look at the WHO website, you will find it's not number one. Don't worry, the UK isn't either.

I think he was just referring to American culture needing to feel that it's the best.

I could be wrong though

I thought this thread was about being volly or paid? :unsure:

 

[Miss Xina]

There's a major problem with that. State X has socialized health care. Well, if I don't have health care, I can just move their and get covered under their system. On the other hand, such systems requires funding and who's going to pay? The rich, also known as the people with the best means to move. New York State just increased their top tax rates and their tax receipts are falling because the rich are moving out of the state. There have been cases in the past where states have put luxury taxes on items such as yachts where the end result was the collapse of the ship building industry in that state.


1. VA hospitals are generally not nice places.

2. The government can print money. Ask the Weimar Republic how printing money to cover debts worked.

3. I akin the military to a very large company that provides health insurance to their workers. In essence, soldiers are workers for the US military. It's like saying if Kaiser can provide their employees health coverage than every company should be able to.

Last time I checked, the public education system for primary and secondary education is pretty weak compared to other countries. Not all fire departments are government run. Also the police via powers of arrest can't really be compared to the other emergency services. Outside of universities and railroads (which are special circumstances) you don't really see private police forces with full police powers in the US.

Thank you for your in-depth response.

And you're right. if one state has universal healthcare and the one next door doesn't then that will happen. But that's why they all should have tax funded healthcare.

And everyone pays for healthcare. the way it works in the UK is that it is taken from your wages in National Insurance... much like Social Security, and extra tax is added on to food, cigarettes etc Just like it is in Illinois.

They recently increased the tax on Sugar items like candy, soda, tea, etc but not in MO.

I fully support this move. it might stop parents from feeding their kids crap and it will help fund the healthcare system with obesity problems.

Everyone pays for healthcare when it is taxed. And it is done by a % scale. So everyone pays the same % of what they earn.

In France, they have semi socialized and semi private insurance. So, you pay for treatment with your tax money and then you can pay for luxuries with private.

I think that's a good way to go.

I also think that if you smoke then you should have to pay for your treatment for lung related issues, if you eat a poor diet which results in diabetes, then you should pay.

People should have access to healthcare BUT they should also be penalized if they poison themselves with crap by having to subsidize their treatments.

And the education system here is pretty good. Better than some other countries!

Oh, and I go to VA hospitals. I'm a military spouse. I am NOT complaining about it at all. You guys don't appreciate what you have!!

I really worry about having children in this country. I would fear my children's lives if we had children and my husband got out of the military.

And that's what puts me off having kids. I wouldn't want to have to become bankrupt if they ever got sick...

 

[Miss Xina]

I thought this thread was about being volly or paid? :unsure:

It is I was merely translating

 

[resq330]

It is I was merely translating

Just pickin

 

[downunderwunda]

Well translated Miss Xina!!!!!!

 

[Miss Xina]

Well translated Miss Xina!!!!!!

I have the privilege of being an immigrant in the US of A. I love it. I have more patriotism for the US of A than some Americans!!!

And that is why I am so passionate about American politics, health care, you name it, I am passionate about it!

Still gotta represent England though, cos it is the motherland, but I do love America more.

 

[DrParasite]

The American reputation on a global scale is that Americans believe that they are the superior country in the world and MUST, just GOTTA be considered the best over everything else.

Your reputation has improved since Obama has been elected, but the way the American media represents the american culture is that it is rather arrogant and prideful.

That is probably what he is referring to. The American news always refers to the US health care as being the best in the world, but realistically, when you look at the WHO website, you will find it's not number one. Don't worry, the UK isn't either.

I think he was just referring to American culture needing to feel that it's the best.

I could be wrong though

while I don't disagree with what you are saying, I still have no idea where I mentioned anything remotely related to it in an early post. all I said was that non-profit companies do bill. and he went off on something totally unrelated.

and for the record, Obama has been the worst thing for the US in a long time. and I am pretty sure he won't we reelected. he talks a good game, but make a lot of promises and actually following through are two very different tasks. but that's a different topic.

and if healthcare is so good elsewhere, why do so many people come from UK and Europe an elsewhere to the US to have procedures done?

 

[Miss Xina]

while I don't disagree with what you are saying, I still have no idea where I mentioned anything remotely related to it in an early post. all I said was that non-profit companies do bill. and he went off on something totally unrelated.

and for the record, Obama has been the worst thing for the US in a long time. and I am pretty sure he won't we reelected. he talks a good game, but make a lot of promises and actually following through are two very different tasks. but that's a different topic.

and if healthcare is so good elsewhere, why do so many people come from UK and Europe an elsewhere to the US to have procedures done?

Because we don't give away plastic surgery. And I don't know one person who has chosen to come to america for treatment.

And, Obama worst thing ever? Come on.. he's been in less than a year and you're saying he's WORSE than bush?

I really hope you're not one of those people that think he's a muslim immigrant that has been planted by some people to become president LOL

Give him a chance, he's only human! Although I feel bad for him. No matter what he does, he'll fail. Supporters have put him on such a high pedestal that he can never fulfil their expectations and the opposition are quick to jump on his back over.. what? anything and everything.

I do not envy him!

 

[DrParasite]

ok, now we are really getting off topic but...

And, Obama worst thing ever? Come on.. he's been in less than a year and you're saying he's WORSE than bush?

Bust was an idiot. still is. Obama isn't stupid. But are we really in a better position now than we were last year? if you read the news reports, you will find much of the same problem, as well as some problems that our kids and grand kids will have to deal with.

I really hope you're not one of those people that think he's a muslim immigrant that has been planted by some people to become president LOL

absolutely not. but I am also not one of the ignorant voters who only voted for him because he was black. and if you think certain people only voted for him because he was black, well, then I have a bridge to sell you....

Give him a chance, he's only human! Although I feel bad for him. No matter what he does, he'll fail. Supporters have put him on such a high pedestal that he can never fulfil their expectations and the opposition are quick to jump on his back over.. what? anything and everything.

the man decided he was running for president after being a US senator for under a year. he has no executive experience in politics. he has minimal political experience. he is an amazing orator, very charismatic, and made a lot of big promises, many that he isn't going to be able to keep. his supporters didn't' put him on a high pedestal. he wanted to be on it, and made sure everyone knew he was standing on this pedestal. That was how he got elected, as the voice of change, as the hero, as the man with all the answers, as the man who would save the day.

I have always said, getting elected president is easy. anyone can do it, assuming you have enough money and make a lot of promises.

the trick is to get relected, after you have made all those promises, after the public sees if you can actually put your money where your mouth is. personally, I don't think obama will be reeleced for that simple reason. and if he does, well, I guess I will owe my old partner a steak dinner.

but waaaay off topic, if you want to discuss politics, and the healthcare systems worldwide, might be a better idea to start a new thread.

 

[karaya]

This thread is way, way off topic and from my point has run it's course. I hoping a mod will shut this one down.

 

[scottyb]

This thread is way, way off topic and from my point has run it's course. I hoping a mod will shut this one down.

I agree that this thread is way off topic, but I am still interested in seeing the full poll results. There are a lot of members that haven't voted, only 59. I guess if we have gotten a representative sample, we are about even.

 

[Dwindlin]

I love it when people try to compare health care systems with the WHO statistics. They are meaningless. You want to compare health care systems? Compare treatment of disease processes that are similar no matter the county (cancer for example). You can't compare US to any other county in infant mortality because we attempt to resuscitate babies we probably shouldn't, skews the numbers in a negative way. Same with life expectancy. We have the worst lifestyle in the world (which isn't considered in the WHO statistics) its a miracle our life expectancy is where it's at period. Altering the health care system may correct the infant mortality rate (though in reality the same number of babies would be dieing they just wouldn't get included in the numbers like other countries), but more access to health care is not going to correct lifestyle. People change because they want to, not because a doctor tells them too (anyone care to look at successful number of smoking cessation because the doctor says to? it isn't a good number).

 

[downunderwunda]

I love it when people try to compare health care systems with the WHO statistics. They are meaningless. You want to compare health care systems? Compare treatment of disease processes that are similar no matter the county (cancer for example). You can't compare US to any other county in infant mortality because we attempt to resuscitate babies we probably shouldn't, skews the numbers in a negative way. Same with life expectancy. We have the worst lifestyle in the world (which isn't considered in the WHO statistics) its a miracle our life expectancy is where it's at period. Altering the health care system may correct the infant mortality rate (though in reality the same number of babies would be dieing they just wouldn't get included in the numbers like other countries), but more access to health care is not going to correct lifestyle. People change because they want to, not because a doctor tells them too (anyone care to look at successful number of smoking cessation because the doctor says to? it isn't a good number).

Are you for real? lets just break down what you have said here for a minute.

I love it when people try to compare health care systems with the WHO statistics. They are meaningless.

They are only meaningless because they do not fit your argument.

You want to compare health care systems? Compare treatment of disease processes that are similar no matter the county (cancer for example).

I think you will find the process for disease treatment to be very similar in all first world countries & the US does not have a monopoly on the provision of expertise in the treatment of patients, there are many leaders in their field in countries such as England (and the broader UK) Scandinavia, Australia, South Africa, The UAE, Israel, just to name a few. (Interestingly much of the research & practice for trauma is based on studies from Israel).

You can't compare US to any other county in infant mortality because we attempt to resuscitate babies we probably shouldn't, skews the numbers in a negative way.

The US isnt a martyr in this area. All first world countries try when it isnt realistic. But to make a statment as rediculous as this, when the statistics include US stats.

Same with life expectancy. We have the worst lifestyle in the world (which isn't considered in the WHO statistics) its a miracle our life expectancy is where it's at period. Altering the health care system may correct the infant mortality rate (though in reality the same number of babies would be dieing they just wouldn't get included in the numbers like other countries), but more access to health care is not going to correct lifestyle. People change because they want to, not because a doctor tells them too (anyone care to look at successful number of smoking cessation because the doctor says to? it isn't a good number).

Consideration of lifestyle is not relevant in raw statistics. What it tells us is that there are trends in some countries, not others, further analyisis of these numbers show lifestyle issues as the root cause.

Lifestyle is similar acress the free world. The problems the US have are Obesity, smoking etc, the same as the UK, Europe, Australia etc.

The information provided by WHO is an acurate record, because all countries report on the same thing.

There would be concers if, on analysis of the data they found that 45% of child mortality in the US came from malnutrition, but this number from a country such as Sudan, where they are currently again in famine, is not unrealistic.

Stop pretending the US is a special case for everything. It isnt. Just because you want to think that you should be above WHO reporting so it doesnt offend you, so you can think you are superior (

You can't compare US to any other county in infant mortality because we attempt to resuscitate babies we probably shouldn't, skews the numbers in a negative way.

I, & my colleagues worldwide have all worked on many that we probably shouldnt have, but, we do it so we can say we tried & gave it every opportunity).

Grow up.

 

[VentMedic]

You can't compare US to any other county in infant mortality because we attempt to resuscitate babies we probably shouldn't, skews the numbers in a negative way.

Have you ever actually looked up for a fact what WHO compares for infant mortality?

What neonatal experience do you have that makes you an expert on neonates? How much do you know about neonatal resuscitation in this country and others? Do you know where the U.S. actually gets some of its own guidelines? Which babies would you like to see die first? How about all born in the field? How about all born to those that you don't believe should have babies?

People change because they want to, not because a doctor tells them too (anyone care to look at successful number of smoking cessation because the doctor says to? it isn't a good number).

And, how much do you know about smoking cessation? Do you have any training in it? Are you qualified to counsel patients? Hust being a smoker or once smoked to look cool in high school doesn't count. Can you prove what numbers you are suggesting?

Put up some scientific data to backup your claims.

 

[Dwindlin]

Are you for real? lets just break down what you have said here for a minute.



They are only meaningless because they do not fit your argument.

They are meaningless because you are comparing apples to oranges. To be meaningful you would have to compare systems with populations similar in health status

I think you will find the process for disease treatment to be very similar in all first world countries & the US does not have a monopoly on the provision of expertise in the treatment of patients, there are many leaders in their field in countries such as England (and the broader UK) Scandinavia, Australia, South Africa, The UAE, Israel, just to name a few. (Interestingly much of the research & practice for trauma is based on studies from Israel).


US has the best cancer survival rate in the world. Why? We spend more money and allow newer more expensive treatments that other countries block because of expense. I used cancer because many types of cancer are fairly independent of lifestyle (Lung cancers a notable exception) thus the successful treatment of cancer is a better indication of a health systems effectiveness as it relies very little on the patient (ie. no real change of lifestyle necessary).

The US isnt a martyr in this area. All first world countries try when it isnt realistic. But to make a statment as rediculous as this, when the statistics include US stats.

Again, the statics DO NOT compare the same things. US is one of the few (maybe only) country in the world that attempts resuscitation on neonates less than 26 weeks and under 1 kg. The infant mortality statistics include infants that are born and resuscitation attempted. If none is attempted then the infant is considered still born and doesn't go into consideration for infant mortality. So yes, attempting to resuscitate more infants (especially ones that have little chance) leads to a skewing of the overall rate.

Consideration of lifestyle is not relevant in raw statistics. What it tells us is that there are trends in some countries, not others, further analyisis of these numbers show lifestyle issues as the root cause.

Lifestyle is similar acress the free world. The problems the US have are Obesity, smoking etc, the same as the UK, Europe, Australia etc.

The information provided by WHO is an acurate record, because all countries report on the same thing.

Again, its not a fair comparison. It would mean more if the populations were normalized, the results mean little as they are not. Saying the populations are similar is a joke. This goes for comparing any country not just US vs. whoever.

There would be concers if, on analysis of the data they found that 45% of child mortality in the US came from malnutrition, but this number from a country such as Sudan, where they are currently again in famine, is not unrealistic.

Stop pretending the US is a special case for everything. It isnt. Just because you want to think that you should be above WHO reporting so it doesnt offend you, so you can think you are superior ( I, & my colleagues worldwide have all worked on many that we probably shouldnt have, but, we do it so we can say we tried & gave it every opportunity).

Grow up.

My responses are bolded. Also more generally my post may have been misleading as I didn't mean to make the US a special case (but as the US health care system was the shifting topic why would I talk about others?). I think the WHO statics are poor for comparisons of any country (they are good for seeing progress in that country). When comparing the effectiveness of medical care you have to be on even playing ground (how seriously would you take medical research that didn't have a similar patient base?), I used cancer because as I said it eliminates some of the lifestyle factors. Three of top five causes of death in the US are lifestyle induced for the most part. Do you really not believe this alters life expectancy figures? No where did I mention that the US is superior to anyone, my only point was that the effectiveness of US health care is not as bad as the WHO stats make it out to be. This all becomes a problem when people try to make the case for a national health care system by comparing us to the rest of world using WHO stats because what works there may not work here.

 

[VentMedic]

No where did I mention that the US is superior to anyone, my only point was that the effectiveness of US health care is not as bad as the WHO stats make it out to be.

Have you actually looked at the factors and the statistics?

Have you actually looked at the statistics for the people in this country that do not have insurance and in some places little to no sources for health and dental care of any type?

Open your eyes to what is happening in your country and not just in your own cozy little living room.

 

[Dwindlin]

Have you actually looked at the factors and the statistics?

Have you actually looked at the statistics for the people in this country that do not have insurance and in some places little to no sources for health and dental care of any type?

Open your eyes to what is happening in your country and not just in your own cozy little living room.

Access to health care and effectiveness of said health care are 2 entirely separate issues. No where did I mention access.

 

[Dwindlin]

Have you ever actually looked up for a fact what WHO compares for infant mortality?

What neonatal experience do you have that makes you an expert on neonates? How much do you know about neonatal resuscitation in this country and others? Do you know where the U.S. actually gets some of its own guidelines? Which babies would you like to see die first? How about all born in the field? How about all born to those that you don't believe should have babies?


And, how much do you know about smoking cessation? Do you have any training in it? Are you qualified to counsel patients? Hust being a smoker or once smoked to look cool in high school doesn't count. Can you prove what numbers you are suggesting?

Put up some scientific data to backup your claims.

Not sure what your getting at in your first paragraph. I said nothing about any of this. I'm talking about what countries currently do. I'm at home and don't have access to the online journals right now (I refuse to pay for them, and I get them free from school). So if you want my actual sources PM me and I'll be more than happy to PM or e-mail you PDF copies. For now The Journal of Medical Ethics in 2006 had an article about IMR reporting worldwide, and not everyone reported based on the WHO standards. Example if an infant born in Germany has a birth weight less than 500 grams and doesn't survive 24 hours this was recorded as still birth and does not count against them in IMR. Other countries had similar policies with gestation age (France and Belgium).

Smoking cessation rates based on physician encouragement were in the single digits (from Journal of Family medicine). People who ultimately decide to quit smoking typically have other motives. Does this mean physicians can't help? Of course it doesn't. But what it does mean is that unless that person truly wants to change they probably won't. The same can be said for weight loss.

Edit: Admittedly the data I have on IMR reporting is 3 years old, I tried a MESH and google search but didn't find anything more recent. If someone has something more recent please post it (or PM/e-mail me) and I will of course yield.

 

[Dwindlin]

As an aside to the mods, instead of just closing this as this has went off topic admittedly. Any chance posts relavent to health care debate be moved? Thanks.

And on that note if anyone wants to further discuss this, by all means make a thread. But (as others have said as well) if we continue here it will likely get locked.