Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-03-2010, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Cincinnati
3,336 posts, read 6,916,594 times
Reputation: 2084

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
In this case we're looking for root causes to better understand the reason. For example from the same dataset we could determine another factor is because the US has a abnormally high amount of premature births compared to other nations. What's the reason for that?

I'll have to correct myself because I was going from memory with my original post it's not just poor African Americans but African American infants in general.

Sorry if the facts aren't PC, they are what they are. If you want to talk about statistics you need to understand how you arrive at them.
What facts aren't PC? You're the one wanting to exclude blacks from the dataset, not me. Unlike you, I consider blacks to be my fellow Americans. Hell, they have been here longer than my family, and we go back quite a ways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-03-2010, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Florida
76,947 posts, read 47,255,988 times
Reputation: 14756
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee View Post
High babysterfte possible by midwives

UTRECHT- The high number of babies that in Netherlands dies during pregnancy or childbirth, may have to do with the fact that a lot of work with midwives. The number of babies that in Netherlands during childbirth, is one of the highest in Europe.
Photo: Getty Images
That is apparent from examination of the UMC Utrecht that Wednesday in the journal bmj is published. Volkskrant and NRC Next wrote about the research. Pregnant women are twice as likely that their baby dies as they begin their birth with a midwife instead of a gynecologist. That chance is even almost four times as high as the wife during a home delivery to the hospital must or is transferred to the gynecologist.

During Prinsjesdag was already known that the Ministry of health in the coming year 24 million euro funding to tackle the babysterfte. That amount must for 2012 and beyond reach 38 million euros.

www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/8104770/__Hoge_babysterfte_mogelijk_door_verloskundigen__. html?p=2,1 - Translator

I can tell you life experience of our own children being born over there....no painkillers, a midwife waiting and waiting for over 24 hours after the water was broken and risking a lot....

Second child was born in the hospital after they want to sent us home, but we insisted to stay there since we had a medical indication...only after an almost complete delivery but the baby got stuck an emergency C-section took place and the baby was born with an Apcar score of 2!

Very scary but luckily both kids are doing very well and are straight A honor students but it was within seconds of being a complete different life for all of us.

Please repeal health care!
You should have looked at the infant mortality rate we have here in US. In Holland (Netherlands) the rate is high in European standards, but low in US standards.

That is the worst possible argument you can make to repeal health care. Basically you are asking us to maintain high infant mortalist rates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2010, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Texas
44,256 posts, read 64,099,601 times
Reputation: 73913
Quote:
Originally Posted by progmac View Post
You should be careful spewing these trash talking points around people who actually know stuff! This isn't your cousin Eddie's house on a Friday night. I know i can't change your mind, and studies show that the conservatives entrench further when presented with opposing facts, but hopefully this debate will change the mind of some people who are on the fence.

"Fiscal diversity" - is that referring to our shrinking middle class and growingly enormous gap between rich and poor? Closing that gap is part of the point of health care reform and something a lot of us care about.

You painted 32 diverse countries with a single brush stroke. You inferred that japan had a population of 5-10 million!!!!

Are some racially homogeneous? Yes. Are they all? I don't think so.

Consider though, that Australia has a 30% foreign-born population compared with about 11% in the United states. Consider that the czech republic has a GDP per capita of $15,000, about 1/3 that of the united states. So the argument that our diversity and poverty excuse our high infant mortality rate is invalid. It's off-the-cuff rambling that sounds good casually or on talk radio but makes no sense when you look at the data.

If you want to make this a debate about data, that would be great. But the facts tends to have a liberal bias.
A. I was discussing countries that are always brought up - Norway, Sweden - both countries with tiny populations, France, Germany...all of which were doing fine and were great to hold up as 'models' until they, too, started to feel the pain of being overrun with immigration they didn't want (Germany in particular).

B. A lot of those countries' healthcare systems are falling apart and unsustainable - why doesn't anyone want to talk about that? About the HUGE private market that is springing up? Or about the fact that care MUST be rationed in order for this model to stand a chance?

C. None of the 30-odd countries comes close to ours in terms of population - or even half (Japan coming closest with 127 million and then Germany with 82 million). The entire European union is about 400 million people.

D. Unless YOU work very closely or in healthcare, it is you who does not have all the facts in hand to realize that our government is absolutely horrendously inefficient and poor at doling out health care.

E. And it's clear you never read the whole health care bill, because if you did, you would realize that it solves NOTHING. It does not improve access to care, it does not improve costs, it does not create any accountability...all it does is cost money we can't afford.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2010, 01:00 PM
 
Location: Texas
44,256 posts, read 64,099,601 times
Reputation: 73913
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
You should have looked at the infant mortality rate we have here in US. In Holland (Netherlands) the rate is high in European standards, but low in US standards.

That is the worst possible argument you can make to repeal health care. Basically you are asking us to maintain high infant mortalist rates.
I'm sorry...how did anyone make the giant leap between comparing birth complications and somehow using it to paint a picture of our entire health care system?

What about social factors?
Financial factors?
Cultural factors?
Parental habits and choices?

If we're allowed to judge entire systems based on one piece of data...hmmmm...let me choose one:

I can order and get an MRI for my patient within seconds of just asking for one. Day or night, 24/7. No one else can. And that is NOT special in our health care system. So we must be #1!!!! YAY!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2010, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,259,082 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by progmac View Post
This is the stupidest thing I have ever read. Why on earth would you remove poor people from our infant mortality rate? Just because you ignore them doesn't mean they don't exist. Fortunately the vast majority of my generation (people under 35) actually believe in providing decent health care to all americans and not creating mythical statistics that ignore demographic groups other than one's own.
I agree. I have never understood that reasoning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jm31828 View Post
Why would we remove them from the equation? They are Americans as well! And if poor people are having worse statistics here, I wonder if it could be lack of medical insurance or money to pay for proper care during/after giving birth?? That is an issue people don't have in these European nations.
Agreed. Some people need to read the book "How to Lie With Statistics".

Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
No. What's stupid is comparing countries with populations of 5 or 10 million with that of 300,000,000.
What's more stupid is comparing countries with relatively homogeneous populations to that of a huge melting pot of huge demographic and fiscal diversity.
The population size I agree with a little. You'll see more variation in a large group than a small group. However, if you look at the countries that have lower infant mortality, they encompass all ethnic groups, so it's not our ethnic diversity that's dragging the stats down. What's dragging our stats down is the lack of access to health care by some groups, some of which are ethnic minorities and some of which are economically disadvantaged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2010, 01:04 PM
 
Location: Florida
76,947 posts, read 47,255,988 times
Reputation: 14756
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
A. I was discussing countries that are always brought up - Norway, Sweden - both countries with tiny populations, France, Germany...all of which were doing fine and were great to hold up as 'models' until they, too, started to feel the pain of being overrun with immigration they didn't want (Germany in particular).

B. A lot of those countries' healthcare systems are falling apart and unsustainable - why doesn't anyone want to talk about that? About the HUGE private market that is springing up? Or about the fact that care MUST be rationed in order for this model to stand a chance?

C. None of the 30-odd countries comes close to ours in terms of population - or even half (Japan coming closest with 127 million and then Germany with 82 million). The entire European union is about 400 million people.

D. Unless YOU work very closely or in healthcare, it is you who does not have all the facts in hand to realize that our government is absolutely horrendously inefficient and poor at doling out health care.

E. And it's clear you never read the whole health care bill, because if you did, you would realize that it solves NOTHING. It does not improve access to care, it does not improve costs, it does not create any accountability...all it does is cost money we can't afford.
The size of the population doesn't really have anything to do with it. As you mention the EU is larger than US.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2010, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Florida
76,947 posts, read 47,255,988 times
Reputation: 14756
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
I'm sorry...how did anyone make the giant leap between comparing birth complications and somehow using it to paint a picture of our entire health care system?
Read the OP

Quote:
I can order and get an MRI for my patient within seconds of just asking for one. Day or night, 24/7. No one else can. And that is NOT special in our health care system. So we must be #1!!!! YAY!
Well, that's nice. My wife waited for MRI three days in a hospital corridor in Florida. The bill was $15 000.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2010, 01:09 PM
 
16,579 posts, read 20,618,921 times
Reputation: 26860
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee View Post
High babysterfte possible by midwives

UTRECHT- The high number of babies that in Netherlands dies during pregnancy or childbirth, may have to do with the fact that a lot of work with midwives. The number of babies that in Netherlands during childbirth, is one of the highest in Europe.
Photo: Getty Images
That is apparent from examination of the UMC Utrecht that Wednesday in the journal bmj is published. Volkskrant and NRC Next wrote about the research. Pregnant women are twice as likely that their baby dies as they begin their birth with a midwife instead of a gynecologist. That chance is even almost four times as high as the wife during a home delivery to the hospital must or is transferred to the gynecologist.

During Prinsjesdag was already known that the Ministry of health in the coming year 24 million euro funding to tackle the babysterfte. That amount must for 2012 and beyond reach 38 million euros.

www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/8104770/__Hoge_babysterfte_mogelijk_door_verloskundigen__. html?p=2,1 - Translator

I can tell you life experience of our own children being born over there....no painkillers, a midwife waiting and waiting for over 24 hours after the water was broken and risking a lot....

Second child was born in the hospital after they want to sent us home, but we insisted to stay there since we had a medical indication...only after an almost complete delivery but the baby got stuck an emergency C-section took place and the baby was born with an Apcar score of 2!

Very scary but luckily both kids are doing very well and are straight A honor students but it was within seconds of being a complete different life for all of us.

Please repeal health care!
Does the healthcare reform law mandate midwife deliveries?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2010, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,259,082 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
I can order and get an MRI for my patient within seconds of just asking for one. Day or night, 24/7. No one else can. And that is NOT special in our health care system. So we must be #1!!!! YAY!
We had a kid in our practice who had a head injury from a trampoline accident. We were supposed to get a prior auth for the MRI. Finally the dr said just do it and he'd fight with the insurance company later. It's not as cut and dried as above, not every time anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2010, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Yorkshire, England
5,586 posts, read 10,597,382 times
Reputation: 3105
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspiesmom View Post
oh brother, my mother had a fabulous experience in UK with their universal healthcare in 1973 when she had an infected toe, and we were tourists! We walked out of their clinic with no charge
It's not like that now unless you're a resident here or a European citizen. Never been in your position myself but now I'm pretty sure they'd charge you something against your travel insurance. Fair enough if you're just here as a tourist, really.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top