Your splitting of hairs, which you imply is significant with these minor differences, doesn’t work either since life expectancy ranges world wide from 84 to 31 years. These numbers are median world wide and certainly within range of demographics causing the difference. Both the UK and Canada don’t have near the influx of people groups from less developed countries bringing their health problems with them—especially since a lot of them are illegal and not screened until they show up needing help.

The fact that they are close probably relates to the level of scientific medical progress at which these countries operate vis a vis less developed countries more than anything else. But, they are not apples and apples.

I’d suspect US healthcare effectiveness, were it possible to compare demographically equal populations, would be actually higher than the UK and Canada especially since both populations find it necessary to leave the country for better care than is available at home as this link shows need. Very, very few Americans leave the country for “better” care—though admittedly some do for unapproved cutting edge stuff.

http://www.canada.com/travel/canada/Cancer+rate+increases+StatsCan/1402276/story.html

Report comment to moderator

But it has! In three important categories (infant and child mortality and life expectancy) which measure the results of health care, the US ranks between 30 and 35. Canada and the UK are both higher than this.
Life expectancy: Canada 10, UK 26 and USA 30 (CIA Factbook)
Infant mortality: UK 21, Canada 22, and USA 32
Child mortality: Canada 20, UK 21 and USA 34

Of course the Scandinavians are on the top.

Report comment to moderator

With government offering the only plan, all other options for the common man are off the table. When government needs more money for this program, as it will without question, taxes will go up and no one will have any option but to pay.”

Report comment to moderator

No, I didn’t misspeak because I’ve never known or heard of anyone who had health insurance problems anywhere near the magnitude deemed “catastrophic” by those pushing this monstrous change onto the medical system. If and when anyone says anything, it’s just minor grumbling about their most recent increase in insurance “costs”, but yet no one is anywhere near canceling anything or making any changes. They simply

And no one has any problem with their personal doctor or the level of care that their insurance provides—in fact, just the opposite occurred with my brother-in-law dealing with a massive case of shingles who had nothing but praise for the care he was receiving through various efforts to control/manage his pain.

Steve/HRW,

If this whole thing can be pulled off for LESS MONEY without ANY REDUCTION in the QUALITY or LEVEL of CARE PATIENTS RECEIVE why hasn’t it been done in the UK and Canada? Do they have an intelligence deficiency of some sort or what—or maybe is it just an Obama plan deficiency you feverishly choose to ignore while swallowing whole his lies?

When was the last time government provided more of anything for less? Answer: It never has.

Government can’t provide anything without a bottom line, overall cost increase because government bureaucracy, waste, graft and ineptitude ALWAYS requires additional cost on top of whatever cost is required to deliver the service in the first place.

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

According to Morris, there is a 4-month wait for a colonoscopy. However, cancer care Ontario published the 2008 wait times and the median wait time is approx 7 weeks or less than 2 months.

http://www.cancercare.on.ca/cms/one.aspx?pageId=41101

Interestingly Morris never gives equilivant US stats. Admittedly this is an old article but it suggests wait times are similar in the US depending on region

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/08/us/50-and-ready-for-colonoscopy-doctors-say-wait-is-often-long.html?pagewanted=all

Report comment to moderator

According to the Conference Board of Canada (a right wing business thinktank) Canada and the US have similar cancer mortality rates. Sweden garnered the best grade while Denmark was the worst. It appears the type of health care system is not an important difference in cancer care.

http://www.conferenceboard.ca/HCP/Details/health/mortality-cancer.aspx

Report comment to moderator

If you look at my previous posts you will note it comes from the CIA factbook and is a measurement of very specific stats not the universality or access of health just the results of each system.

Xion — you reference a book called Catastrophe by Dick Morris.
Morris claims doctors’ salaries are lower in Canada to control costs. However, comparing gross salaries does not take into account overhead costs, malpractice insurance etc. The following indicates the salaries are not much different and in some specialties physicians make more in Canada.

http://student.pnhp.org/content/what_about_physician_salaries.php

Report comment to moderator

If you look at my previous posts you will note it comes from the CIA factbook and is a measurement of very specific stats not the universality or access of health just the results of each system.

Xion — you reference a book called Catastrophe by Dick Morris.
Morris claims doctors’ salaries are lower in Canada to control costs. However, comparing gross salaries does not take into account overhead costs, malpractice insurance etc. The following indicates the salaries are not much different and in some specialties physicians make more in Canada.

http://student.pnhp.org/content/what_about_physician_salaries.php

According to the Conference Board of Canada (a right wing business thinktank) Canada and the US have similar cancer mortality rates. Sweden garnered the best grade while Denmark was the worst. It appears the type of health care system is not an important difference in cancer care.

http://www.conferenceboard.ca/HCP/Details/health/mortality-cancer.aspx

According to Morris, there is a 4-month wait for a colonoscopy. However, cancer care Ontario published the 2008 wait times and the median wait time is approx 7 weeks or less than 2 months.

http://www.cancercare.on.ca/cms/one.aspx?pageId=41101

Interestingly Morris never gives equilivant US stats. Admittedly this is an old article but it suggests wait times are similar in the US depending on region

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/08/us/50-and-ready-for-colonoscopy-doctors-say-wait-is-often-long.html?pagewanted=all

Report comment to moderator

I also agree with you that there needs to be something in place for long-term care, surgeries and some non-emergency needs but the problem is not the insurance, the problem is the cost. Doing something about insuring the millions uninsured is putting a band-aid on a problem that needs surgery. If you look at the history of health care before large tort law suits were allowed to pass without any controls or regulations placed on them, health care was affordable for nearly all. In talking with my grandpa, he said that for long-term care and other needs the community used to take care of people (of course this is a farming community in Kansas and not a community in NYC).

I guess my biggest frustration with all of this is that we have lawyers in Congress and The Senate who are not willing to control or regulate their fellow lawyers and to me the problem is that lawyers sue for everything and that is what has driven health care expenses so high.

So, if Obama began to push tort reform for health care, malpractice and other things then I would stand behind him in a heart beat. But there is no way I want to see my tax money go down a black hole and that is what health care will be if the government takes over.

So, we agree on a lot of things. Let’s see if we can come closer on the solution to health care. Let’s see if we can agree as to what has caused health care to get so expensive.

Report comment to moderator