Thread: U.S. Scrambling to Ease Shortage of Vital Medicine

Originally Posted by C-B-M

It's interesting how you and CowboyTed are trying to restrict the debate to the one issue you want. Does America spend more on healthcare than other nations? Sure. But that's all you want to discuss and that "proves" some point about socialized healthcare systems to you. You don't ask why it spends more on healthcare. Or, on the flip side, why other countries spend less. You guys present "studies" that show that American healthcare performs worse than other countries. Except they turn out to be surveys, not anything quantifiable, and even the surveys are about "equality" and "fairness" of healthcare, not actual quality measures. And you just view things in terms of "America and everyone else." It doesn't interest you that Oman beats out European countries? What's Oman got on Europe? LOL.

See, that's why it's obvious that this isn't actually about healthcare. If you were actually interested in healthcare, you'd say "well, we're beating America ...but Southern Moldova is beating us ...gee, something is strange here. Maybe I should think about this." But you don't think. You just google for "American healthcare the most expensive" or something and start shooting out articles that you cut-and-pasted blindly. That's over 99% of Internet argumentation, or arguing the lazy way.

To soot: I didn't mean to say that you can not have a good experience at a VA hospital. Of course you can, and I'm glad you did. However, VA hospitals most certainly do not provide the best healthcare in America and are generally viewed as providing fairly poor care. I can discuss it via PM if you'd like.

Thanks for proving my point Oman has complete universal coverage and one of the lowest private healthcare systems in the world. By the way you are comparing Oman to European Country (Oman has a GDP of $11k per captia a year) these countries are very different in lifestyle (Alcohol, Drugs, Smoking, Eating habits.....

For the nascent private health sector, competing with government infrastructure is an uphill task. Al Shatti Hospital, one of the oldest private hospitals, is yet to break even.

There are also have a healthy population and a system which is encouraged heavilly invested in primary and preventive government healthcare.

Want the the hard facts look at Infant Mortality Rates, US is ranked 44th. The US has the same life-expectancy of Chile at 7 times the cost. The medical profession says it is broken it costs a fortune. What number are you looking for? IMR is usually a good indicator but lets get a few more.

The reason equaity comes into the equation is because it is very easy to have a great health system if you only have to treat the healthy people. That why it is important. one in every six people in the US have no insurance, this would be a higher risk group.

So why are we talking about the US health system. Well! IT doesn't say Oman Politics Online and the subject is not about Oman health system.

About me copying or pasting, I am backing up my arguement with facts, something which you have not done since the start of this thread. I would normally find it insulting to say I was Lazy but I am starting to see you cannot back up anything you are saying so you don't back up your statements..
The 'quality measures' have come to you in IMR, Life expectancy, doctor ratios... but you have choosen to ignore them. We have shown it to you in the lack of investment in Healthcare IT but you choose to ignore it...
In healthcare I use figures from WHO, Commonwealth Fund, OECD, Work Bank, Lancet... Where is anything backing up what you are saying?

But the thing you don't seem to get is that I don't have to say the more socialized healthcare system is better then less socialized healthcare system. I have already shown that with costs, it is 50% cheaper. Less socialized healthcare or more Private care is not better and in cases we have shown it to be worst.


Still going strong here.
US is running a total healthcare costs about 5% of GDP above the every other country in the world.
Can some one point it out to me a proper size first world country where a more socialized healthcare system is cheaper then less socialized healthcare system...

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

What? Rival bodies do not withhold patient medical records. Medical information is shared in peer-reviewed journals it's not kept by secret enclaves.

The nature of Competition doesn't keep prices high, in case you were unaware of this competition normally drives prices down.

What caused American healthcare prices to soar was the availability of health insurance "paid by someone else". The consumer didn't keep their eyes on the bill diligently enough and costs grew unnaturally.

So hospitals share your personal medical records automatically.

I have always noticed while in hospitals patients arguing with doctors about the need for treatement..
Like the doctors comes down and say you have cancer the patient says it is the flu and blames the doctor for just hiking the bill, actually I never seen that happen. US like everywhere in the world trust there doctors when they get sick, they trust them that they will give them the best care possibilly and now you want to start arguing over the price of cancer treatment.

U.S. lag in terms of using IT to receive computerized alerts or prompts about potential problems with drug doses or interactions, with scores markedly below inter- national leaders

I love your competition arguement but show me empirical data of a country which introduced competition across it's whole healthcare system and reduced costs... That was the question I have been asking but I am getting no answer.

A lot of ye guys are coming out with competition GOOD and government BAD but none of ye have any actual figures to back it up...

Goober and myself have shown it in every which way at his stage that a socialised care is cheaper than less socialised care without compromising quality.

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

oh yes, the superior winning argument: "Only the enlightened are capable of understanding and drawing the correct conclusions."

Well enlightened people usually look for empirical data to back up there hypothiesis. We can't find data to back up the less socialized model while the more socialized has an overwhealming amount of empirical data to make its case (shown in how much data I am able to produce).

So is this is a case of 'enlightened' seeing facts and realism while the less socialised side are driven by idealology and either ignorant of the facts or choose to ignore them.

Originally Posted by C-B-M

This is another example of how CowboyTed is wrong. Go ahead and actually read this thread and see where he's told to "go away because of his nationality." He's referring to my post where I ask why it is that liberal Europeans are always so interested in telling America what it should do when Americans don't care about how they run their countries. That's how he argues. He just says whatever he wants and repeats it endlessly. Notice how all his posts are degenerating into "so I have proven ..." Essentially, it's now just a thread where he's talking to himself about how he's right. Read my post just above this one and notice that he ignores every single point made there and just repeats "so nobody can point out a single flaw with anything I've said ..."

CBM you did question my interest in US healthcare system considering I was Irish. I have not told any American how to run there healthcare system, I have just asked questions, ones which have failed to be answered.

I have proven that the more socialized a health care system the cheaper it is... Do you remeber the correlation sheet. So I have asked does anyone want to question my findings. I have defended my postition using some of the most respect healthcare publication sources in the world as verification of my arguement.

CBM you have attempted to trash the arguement without one bit of evidence. Have you a one piece of empircal data to back up your answer this question:

US is running a total healthcare costs about 5% of GDP above the every other country in the world.
Can some one point it out to me a proper size first world country where where a more socialized healthcare system is cheaper then less socialized healthcare system...

If you can't the summary of this discuss it that more socialized healthcare systems are cheaper than less socialized healthcare systems.

To qualify 'cheaper' I mean more efficient get more or the same for less.

CBM I know you are trying to say that I am stating things as fact but if you see I have not said things which are untrue, I got to a situation by proof... You have still to answer that question...

To soot: I didn't mean to say that you can not have a good experience at a VA hospital. Of course you can, and I'm glad you did. However, VA hospitals most certainly do not provide the best healthcare in America and are generally viewed as providing fairly poor care. I can discuss it via PM if you'd like.

But this is a quote to you which is actually been proven to be wrong.
VA Health System Shines in Quality-of-Care Study - Public and Intergovernmental Affairs

The only reason it could be viewed as providing fairly poor care is because people who don't know the facts have been going around and saying it's bad. But the facts seem to be different...

Originally Posted by CowboyTed

Well enlightened people usually look for empirical data to back up there hypothiesis. We can't find data to back up the less socialized model while the more socialized has an overwhealming amount of empirical data to make its case (shown in how much data I am able to produce).

So is this is a case of 'enlightened' seeing facts and realism while the less socialised side are driven by idealology and either ignorant of the facts or choose to ignore them.

Thanks for adding to my point.

Originally Posted by CowboyTed

So hospitals share your personal medical records automatically.

They share them with other doctors and hospitals. I can't imagine why you think they don't. You can also get them for your own personal records (and should).

I have always noticed while in hospitals patients arguing with doctors about the need for treatement..
Like the doctors comes down and say you have cancer the patient says it is the flu and blames the doctor for just hiking the bill, actually I never seen that happen. US like everywhere in the world trust there doctors when they get sick, they trust them that they will give them the best care possibilly and now you want to start arguing over the price of cancer treatment.

I have and do discuss less expensive treatments with the doctor and have in fact asked for another doctors opinion. Why wouldn't you?

I love your competition arguement but show me empirical data of a country which introduced competition across it's whole healthcare system and reduced costs...

I can go to about a dozen hospitals in easy reach. I get to pick based on quality and cost.

A lot of ye guys are coming out with competition GOOD and government BAD but none of ye have any actual figures to back it up...

Goober and myself have shown it in every which way at his stage that a socialised care is cheaper than less socialised care without compromising quality.

You and goober have argued that when the government takes people's money the government get to decide where it's spent.

I've seen men who stared death in the face plead and beg not to go to a VA hospital. Sure some are better now, they were horrible before and there is no reason to imagine they will not backslide in the future.

Originally Posted by C-B-M

It's interesting how you and CowboyTed are trying to restrict the debate to the one issue you want. Does America spend more on healthcare than other nations? Sure. But that's all you want to discuss and that "proves" some point about socialized healthcare systems to you. You don't ask why it spends more on healthcare. Or, on the flip side, why other countries spend less. You guys present "studies" that show that American healthcare performs worse than other countries. Except they turn out to be surveys, not anything quantifiable, and even the surveys are about "equality" and "fairness" of healthcare, not actual quality measures. And you just view things in terms of "America and everyone else." It doesn't interest you that Oman beats out European countries? What's Oman got on Europe? LOL.

See, that's why it's obvious that this isn't actually about healthcare. If you were actually interested in healthcare, you'd say "well, we're beating America ...but Southern Moldova is beating us ...gee, something is strange here. Maybe I should think about this." But you don't think. You just google for "American healthcare the most expensive" or something and start shooting out articles that you cut-and-pasted blindly. That's over 99% of Internet argumentation, or arguing the lazy way.

To soot: I didn't mean to say that you can not have a good experience at a VA hospital. Of course you can, and I'm glad you did. However, VA hospitals most certainly do not provide the best healthcare in America and are generally viewed as providing fairly poor care. I can discuss it via PM if you'd like.

The point I made was that in the US, there are three health care systems, private, single payer and government run.
That the single payer system costs less than the private system, and that the government run system is the least expensive, and that this reduction of cost does not come with a reduction of quality.

Then you go on to ignore the literature and say

However, VA hospitals most certainly do not provide the best healthcare in America and are generally viewed as providing fairly poor care

When I had linked to literature that indicate the VA had better outcomes for medical procedures, and the same outcomes for surgical procedures as the private system.

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

oh yes, the superior winning argument: "Only the enlightened are capable of understanding and drawing the correct conclusions."

Well, look at this thread, and draw your own conclusions.

Anytime we get on healthcare you get the same facts presented.
The actual data showing that socialized systems provide better care at a lower cost, and on the other side an anecdote about a waiting line unsupported by data.

Address the data, not the poster, and make an argument why paying more for the same thing, or something of lower quality, makes sense.

Would you support the government doing away with VA hospitals, and just paying for the cost of treating veterans in the private system?
Would you be willing to pay higher taxes to make this possible?

Originally Posted by goober

Address the data, not the poster, and make an argument why paying more for the same thing, or something of lower quality, makes sense.

The very definition of Quality is what many people argue with here. If quality is defined as "more socialized" then the pro socialized medicine crowd has the deck stacked in their favor with a manipulated data set. If politics are already in the calculations of "quality care" there is no unbiased data.

Would you support the government doing away with VA hospitals, and just paying for the cost of treating veterans in the private system?
Would you be willing to pay higher taxes to make this possible?

Why would prices go up? We already have the government pay for many non-veterans medical care and you claim this is a price benefit, let me know why expenses would go up if veteran's were in a similar environment.

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

They share them with other doctors and hospitals. I can't imagine why you think they don't. You can also get them for your own personal records (and should).



I have and do discuss less expensive treatments with the doctor and have in fact asked for another doctors opinion. Why wouldn't you?



I can go to about a dozen hospitals in easy reach. I get to pick based on quality and cost.




You and goober have argued that when the government takes people's money the government get to decide where it's spent.

I've seen men who stared death in the face plead and beg not to go to a VA hospital. Sure some are better now, they were horrible before and there is no reason to imagine they will not backslide in the future.

On your first point, does your local hospital and local doctors have access to your whole life medical history. If they do how did they get it...

It is not from you because doctors don't have to share all there information with you. If the information they have could be harmful to by giving it to you then they don't have to share.

I never have or has anyone I know compromised my care due to cost. I ask for the best care, doctors can give many solutions to a problem if you bring cost into the equation your playing russian roulette considering your not a trained medical professional(I think).

Here is a very true story, My sister discovered she got cancer about 2 years back. She was told it was rare but she was in one of the best private hospitals in Ireland. We asked for a second opinion, doctors in Ireland have to consent. After her first treatment and two days before her seconf the doctor agreed.
My sister went a large public hospital. They ran tests and told her that if she continue with the private treatment she prbably be dead in 10 years. The treatment was too light for this agressive form of Cancer.
The public doctor in conjuction with doctors around the world (a conference call which included at least on American doctor) agree on a more agressive treatment (which by the way would be more expensive).
She is fine now.

The think is the public hospital didn't treat her like a number in a factory process. They took time, put her on there weekly team based treatment call where doctors talk about there cases. This take time and money to do but saves money and lives.

Originally Posted by CowboyTed

On your first point, does your local hospital and local doctors have access to your whole life medical history. If they do how did they get it...

Because it was sent to them on my request or their request.

It is not from you because doctors don't have to share all there information with you.

You are completely incorrect in that regard, Doctors in the U.S. are required by law to share all medical records with patients (and other medical professionals) upon request. They may charge for time and reproduction costs but the information must be provided.
They generally share the information with each other at no cost as a matter of professional courtesy.

If the information they have could be harmful to by giving it to you then they don't have to share.

Wrong.

I never have or has anyone I know compromised my care due to cost.

So how are costs kept down and best practices established? You claim no one is making (or has made) a decision based on costs and I claim you are simply ignorant of the facts.

Here is a very true story, My sister ...
She is fine now.

Good for your sister, your story outlined the advantage of choice not the superiority of one model over another.

Originally Posted by C-B-M

This is another example of how CowboyTed is wrong. Go ahead and actually read this thread and see where he's told to "go away because of his nationality." He's referring to my post where I ask why it is that liberal Europeans are always so interested in telling America what it should do when Americans don't care about how they run their countries. That's how he argues. He just says whatever he wants and repeats it endlessly. Notice how all his posts are degenerating into "so I have proven ..." Essentially, it's now just a thread where he's talking to himself about how he's right. Read my post just above this one and notice that he ignores every single point made there and just repeats "so nobody can point out a single flaw with anything I've said ..."

All good points and I have often wondered why posters from other nations on this forum are so interested in American politics. I guess their own countries are so boring and insignificant they have to come here.

Folks, please stick to the topic and don't get personal with each other. The topic is:

U.S. Scrambling to Ease Shortage of Vital Medicine