Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In my province in Canada, nobody pays, except through taxes. Once one combines the average tax rate and healthcare premium, deductible and co-pay, in most states (not Florida where there is no state income tax) it ends up being cheaper in Canada.
33% cheaper as a percentage of GDP. With better outcomes.
The CONCORD Study funded by the US Centers for Disease Control, the British National Health Service and the Lancet prove you wrong.
Source: CONCORD Study funded by the US Centers for Disease Control and the British National Health System.
The last straw appears to have been the death of Diane Gorsuch, 58, who died in February after spending more than 2 years awaiting surgery. Thirteen days after she died, the review was announced.
The last straw appears to have been the death of Diane Gorsuch, 58, who died in February after spending more than 2 years awaiting surgery. Thirteen days after she died, the review was announced.
I'm sure I can find as many anecdotal stories for the USA; in fact, I know some of my friends who have told of some recent horror stories.
Your chart deals with one issue, I am referring to life expectancy, which certainly means that if a population live longer, it has a better out come.
In the WHO analysis, Canada is 9th in the world for longevity, versus the USA 34th.
In the UN analysis, Canada is 12th in the world for longevity, versus the USA 40th.
Canadians live longer, while spending about 33% of their GDP less than the US does. That equates to a better outcome. You can look at the charts on this page, and the CIA and OECD show similar results.
I'm sure I can find as many anecdotal stories for the USA; in fact, I know some of my friends who have told of some recent horror stories.
Your chart deals with one issue, I am referring to life expectancy, which certainly means that if a population live longer, it has a better out come.
In the WHO analysis, Canada is 9th in the world for longevity, versus the USA 34th.
In the UN analysis, Canada is 12th in the world for longevity, versus the USA 40th.
Canadians live longer, while spending about 33% of their GDP less than the US does. That equates to a better outcome. You can look at the charts on this page, and the CIA and OECD show similar results.
Behind these stats is the fact, which I have pointed out repeatedly, that America deals with a huge poverty-stricken third-world population which crosses our borders with impunity seeking, among other things, medical attention -- often on an emergency basis, and in the absence of preventive care in their home country.
Were Canada required to service such a huge and needy population (equal to 33% of Canada's TOTAL population), the WHO figures would be dramatically different.
America's medical system is not inferior to Canada's. It is our geographic location and absurd immigration system which is at fault.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,935,402 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf
Behind these stats is the fact, which I have pointed out repeatedly, that America deals with a huge poverty-stricken third-world population which crosses our borders with impunity seeking, among other things, medical attention -- often on an emergency basis, and in the absence of preventive care in their home country.
Were Canada required to service such a huge and needy population (equal to 33% of Canada's TOTAL population), the WHO figures would be dramatically different.
America's medical system is not inferior to Canada's. It is our geographic location and absurd immigration system which is at fault.
The amount of money spent in the US is obscene, especially when one measures the results. Every doctor needs billing and collection staff, every insurance company has staff that tries not to pay, one needs preapproval for normal procedures, co-pays, deductibles and limits. So many $$ get spend on non-medical issues which do not enhance the outcomes at all.
But blame it on illegal immigrants. They make a great scapegoat. Of course, scapegoating is what countries always do when they want to attach blame elsewhere.
Behind these stats is the fact, which I have pointed out repeatedly, that America deals with a huge poverty-stricken third-world population which crosses our borders with impunity seeking, among other things, medical attention -- often on an emergency basis, and in the absence of preventive care in their home country.
Were Canada required to service such a huge and needy population (equal to 33% of Canada's TOTAL population), the WHO figures would be dramatically different.
America's medical system is not inferior to Canada's. It is our geographic location and absurd immigration system which is at fault.
I'm sorry, but your information is completely inaccurate.
First of all, the data that supports those rankings is not compiled the way you seem to think it is. It's not just an average of how old every single human being who dies in that country happens to be on the day of their death - it's an estimate meant to determine how long an infant who is born in that country can be expected to live. Immigrants are counted differently in the studies Cupper cited.
Second, if they were counted the way you think they are, that alone would get your whole case thrown out of court - because immigrants in the United States have a longer life expectancy than natural-born American citizens, by a wide margin. I believe it was 82 years to 77 years last time I read the data. Natural born Americans tend to outlive Asian immigrants, but Latino, Black, and other white immigrants outlive native Americans by a very wide margin - people fleeing the poverty stricken, third world hellholes because of the poor medical care.
So, even if immigrants were included in life expectancy charts, they would elevate the United States in the rankings, not lower it.
Last edited by Mr. In-Between; 04-19-2016 at 11:16 PM..
The amount of money spent in the US is obscene, especially when one measures the results. Every doctor needs billing and collection staff, every insurance company has staff that tries not to pay, one needs preapproval for normal procedures, co-pays, deductibles and limits. So many $$ get spend on non-medical issues which do not enhance the outcomes at all.
But blame it on illegal immigrants. They make a great scapegoat. Of course, scapegoating is what countries always do when they want to attach blame elsewhere.
I am not blaming it all on illegal immigrants. Nor am I scapegoating. I am simply pointing out that Canada's medical system does not have to bear the burdens of America's. Surely you do not deny this.
BTW, you are 100% correct about the overhead incurred by medical caregivers in the U.S. It is truly obscene, and apparently insoluble, since both sides (corporate and governmental) have a stake in preserving the status quo.
I'm sorry, but your information is completely inaccurate.
First of all, the data that supports those rankings is not compiled the way you seem to think it is. It's not just an average of how old every single human being who dies in that country happens to be on the day of their death - it's an estimate meant to determine how long an infant who is born in that country can be expected to live. Immigrants are counted differently in the studies Cupper cited.
Second, if they were counted the way you think they are, that alone would get your whole case thrown out of court - because immigrants in the United States have a longer life expectancy than natural-born American citizens, by a wide margin. I believe it was 82 years to 77 years last time I read the data. Natural born Americans tend to outlive Asian immigrants, but Latino, Black, and other white immigrants outlive native Americans by a very wide margin - people fleeing the poverty stricken, third world hellholes because of the poor medical care.
So, even if immigrants were included in life expectancy charts, they would elevate the United States in the rankings, not lower it.
Even conceding that what you say is true (and in the absence of factual data it remains open to debate; for example, do these figures include the millions of undocumented people?), surely you cannot claim that millions of impoverished illegals residing in the United States do not negatively impact the overall cost and efficiency of medical care in such an immense and diverse nation. Regardless of their legal status, these people need to be taken care of, often in emergency care facilities. The burden that this places on American medical facilities were unlike those borne by any other developed country -- until the recent influx of destitute refugees fleeing the various Mideast wars for havens in Europe.
If the AMA lobbyists have anything to do w/ this (and they do), we'll get one just about the same time that hell freezes over.
More than the small percentage of undocumented immigrants here, it's the legal majority's unhealthy lives that are straining the medical system. if I had my way, those folks would have to pay triple for their health care for their dumb eating and living habits that have spiked obesity, diabetes, cancer, and all the other diseases and illnesses caused by unhealthy lifestyles. Unfortunately, you can't legislate out stupidity.
It is time but the Republicans don't want it, anything that keeps the rich from getting richer they are against, It will happen eventually as they get older and die off and a more rational generation emerges.
The CONCORD Study funded by the US Centers for Disease Control, the British National Health Service and the Lancet prove you wrong.
I don't think you get the whole story just by posting the Concord Study, a major problem in relation to Cancer is it effects the elderly and those over 70 much more than younger people, and complications relating to age are often a factor. Furthermore if you look at Cancer Survival Rates among Teens and Young Adults in the UK, it's over 84%, which by international standards is very good.
A further factor is what percentage of the population suffer from cancer in the UK for instance, and I am just using the UK as an example, in 2011 there were 330,000 Diagnosis of Cancer which represents 396 people per 100,000, the figure in the US is 451 per 100,000, meaning the US has a far higher Cancer rate of cancer diagnosis.
There is currently a debate going on over the Overdiagnosis in the American System, when compared to some other nations, as it seems if you overdiagnose cases, then of course your going to have a higher survival rate and better cancer outcomes, than countries which are less prone to diagnose.
There are other issues as well, such as how mortality figures are collected, if the persons death certificate states cancer or states a death by something related to the cancer. Then there's type of Cancer, sometimes a non specific and generic term cancer is just used rather than a specific type.
Then you have factors such as risk factors, for instance in hot climates there are more cases of skin cancer or other factors such as diet, smoking, alcohol, obesity etc etc.
Canadians for instance, might suffer much lower rates of Skin Cancer than people living in Florida or other sunny areas, however the smaller number of individuals who actually suffer skin cancer in Canada may have a very different mortality rate to Florida.
So International Cancer Studies whilst welcome, have to be treat with some caution in relation to a wide range of issues and this needs to be taken in to consideration when looking at such figures.
Last edited by Brave New World; 04-21-2016 at 07:29 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
