Talking point: Life expectancy/Healthcare rebuttal

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Because if you think the insurance companies are not doing exactly what you are accusing "gvmt burrocrats" of doing then you are either numb or haven't really had any type of recent major healthcare issue.

I'm not sure about the rest of your post, but that point is a good one. One thing that some are leaving out of the debate is that health insurance companies are bureacratic. They have to approve procedures and tests. To some extent, insurance companies ration and restrict health care currently. There doesn't seem to be much outrage about that though.

[Esther]

Originally Posted by MikeinAR

I'm not sure about the rest of your post, but that point is a good one. One thing that some are leaving out of the debate is that health insurance companies are bureacratic. They have to approve procedures and tests. To some extent, insurance companies ration and restrict health care currently. There doesn't seem to be much outrage about that though.

You are right that the insurance companies have been rationing health care, but you are wrong about there not being an outrage about it. That is why this whole thing is on the table, there has been much outrage.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Esther

[/B]

You are right that the insurance companies have been rationing health care, but you are wrong about there not being an outrage about it. That is why this whole thing is on the table, there has been much outrage.

Esther when was there any outrage while the last administration was in power? Please give us the source to confirm your post!!

[MikeinAR]

Originally Posted by Light

Esther when was there any outrage while the last administration was in power? Please give us the source to confirm your post!!

Ditto. Where was the outcry from all of these people who are now showing up and screaming and yelling at these meetings when the Bush administration and Republican Congress sat on their collective duff the last 8 years and did NOTHING to fix health care?

Now that a President is trying to suggest solutions and have a debate, they've all decided to freak out, protest, scream and cry.

Patients like Nataline Sarkysian didn't have time to wait for reform. It's time to stop procastinating and just saying, "no" to everything.

[Ferd]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

I am a little busy and have to go to work. I know that you think that your "white already insured" viewpoint reflects the entire nation. Since you are quickly becoming the minority you need to sit back and think about what you just said. Because if you think the insurance companies are not doing exactly what you are accusing "gvmt burrocrats" of doing then you are either numb or haven't really had any type of recent major healthcare issue.

When I get back, Ima kick this one out of the ballpark.

They ALL have longer lifespans Ferd. All of them. You are going to tell me that all of this this data is somehow skewed? What defines results, opinions or actual outcome?

First, I have not said that there is no need for reform in America. There certainly is a need for it.

but I clearly proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you cannot make a one to one link between government run healthcare and life expectancy.

which seems to still be your view point. wierd...


and what the pelosi are you talking about with that "white already insured" viewpoint comment?

Are you some kind of racist?

[Walks_in_islam]

I have been busy. So do allow me to take the time to answer your comments 1x1. First, your assumption that I am in any way, shape, or form a liberal is hooey. I am…hmmmm...lol a capitalist I guess. Here is your answer from someone who does not accept the current system and has decided that being paid for the value of your work, being responsible for your own retirement, and taking care of your own family is one's personal responsibility

I also did not say "America needs healthcare reform because the Brits live longer than us". I did note that on a statistical basis America, with the "best healthcare system in the world" ranks nearly dead last among industrialized nations. I also noted that the difference between America and these nations is that they have public healthcare systems. These are statistical facts and worthy of note.

Sure Healthcare is one factor in a nation’s life expectancy.

It is kind of you to admit that. Statistics show, time and again, between neighbors, in the same city and the same state, same foods, same lifestyles, that access to basic, routine healthcare makes a difference in both the length and quality of life. Residents of the countries mentioned have the same lifestyles, same bad habits, same or in case more (lol) access to "alternate" substances, that Americans do. Yet there is a marked difference. In some cases not months, but years of difference in how long they live. Healthcare access can and does make a difference. Swaziland is not a viable basis for comparison. Australia, Canada, the UK, and western Europe is. I do not deny or question that there are reporting discrepencies in things like "infant mortality". Healthcare is about people who are already born and living. You, Coadie, and the rest of your excuses for being on the bottom of the list do not compute. You have either never been to Europe or Australia or don't know anyone from Europe or Australia or if you have been there you sure did not mingle with those people lol. I dunno about Canada. Never mingled with them. Funny how the border is packed with our retirees who go there for their medications.

Now, about comparison. A real (as opposed to made up) tale of (2) surgeries.

Patient 1 and Patient 2. Patient 1 lives in Houston. Blew out a knee doing "young people stuff". Patient 2 lives in the UK. (2) years age difference. Did same thing. Exactly same injury.

Healthcare costs: Patient 2 was paying 15% tax for the public system. Patient 1 was paying $460/month which was 20% of plan costs with employer ponying up another $1840 per month. For the policy. Patient 1 made a lot of money that year. The cost of employee/employer equaled 14.8% of patient 1's salary. Had patient 1 been making average median income for that year the cost of health coverage would have been a whopping 55%.

Patient 1 was covered by a good policy with UHC. Patient 2 was covered under the public healthcare system in the UK.

(1) Appointment. Patient 1's brother is an orthopedic surgeon in Tn. With help patient 1 identified an orthopedic doctor who was on his plan. Said doctor was president of the Texas orthopedic association and thus considered excellent. Appointment was made for (4) days later. MRI scan was done next day. Patient 2 contacted his public administrator. Appointment was made 6 days later and MRI done next day.

(2) Surgery. Both patients scheduled for surgery. Patient (1) was done 5 days later. Patient (2) was done (1) week later. Both patients were in physical therapy and walking (3) days after surgery.

Here's the fun part:

Patient (2)'s experience was complete. Patient (1) paid the doctor his (plan discounted) 20%. Ditto for the MRI and the anestheologist. Then: Patient 1 discovered that though the doctor was part of his insurance plan, the outpatient facility (with the same name) was not. Hit with a $600 deductible then 30%. Next discovery: Neither was the anestheologist. Another 30% but the deductible at least was paid. Patient 1 paid an additional $3000 on top of health insurance costs. Patient 2 payed nothing on top of the 15% he was already paying.

WHO HAD THE BETTER HEALTHCARE SYSTEM?

Both patients are currently under another public health plan in another country. There is no out of pocket charge for anything.

You think patient 1, who was already paying 15% of his salary ANYWAY, cares if it gets reduced to 12% and coverted to a tax if that caps the cost? You think patient 1 and every single American who is lucky enough to get healthcare is not ALREADY paying for those who need and get critical care and pay nothing now?

In the UK if you need a hip replacement you might wait, but you get it. In America if you need a hip replacement AND YOU DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO INSURANCE they do not get the hip replacement at all. Nor do they get treatment for things like heart conditions (until they end up in the emergency room then if you think the paying patients aren't covering that too I will re-comment that you are numb). Ditto for a host of other chronic health problems that build into major issues and cost us anyway. THAT's why healthcare reform is needed.

I will brief you on some other things as well. The world is a big place. Healthcare is big business. Are you fooled like Coadie in that patients from other countries who need major treatment go to the US to get it? When is the last time you saw an actual AMERICAN specialist? LOL Healthcare (cancer treatment, spine surgery, heart surgery, etc) like the rest of your jobs has moved overseas and the cost is a fraction of what is paid in the US. Capitalism at work my friend. Research this and get back to me. If you need them I will provide you charts of the cost of major medical procedures in other countries vs the US.

I made a backhand remark about "white insured" as a joke. That seems to be the loudest demographic against reform. I guess I should be included in that as well. The conclusions that I see drawn are only true from that standpoint or viewpoint. It would have been nice for that demographic to have recognized this and addressed this problem when they were in charge. Especially when they inherited a relatively robust economy and an annual budget surplus. Instead, they steered us into wars, record deficits, and re-instituited the greed culture (aka the culture of something for nothing invention of paper value with no building of real business value) while ignoring issues that truly threaten us as a country. As more and more lose access to healthcare and the public system that is in place becomes overwhelmed the necessity to do something has become acute. I do not think the right is capable of this. The chance to do it has come and passed. Meanwhile, the US is slipping further and further behind.

[Walks_in_islam]

Your words: In Swaziland, such a large portion of the adult population has AIDS that their life expectancy as a nation is below 32 years. This is less about the healthcare system than it is about a nation of people who have a culture that is rife with dangerous sexual behavior. It is killing that nation!


The words of real healthcare professionals:

"Today, I can tell my patients with HIV that they can have a normal life expectancy," said Stefano Vella, director of drug research and evaluation at the Institute Superiore di Sanita in Rome

"The ability to hold the virus at bay for years now has doctors looking far forward in treating patients because 70 percent of patients infected with HIV will die of something other than AIDS", said Eric Daar, chief of HIV medicine at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles.


You still want to make that "lifestyle" and "dangerous sexual behavior" claim or that "healthcare does not make a difference?" You need some more examples or do you have any more specific deseases you need to discuss or right-wing myths you need de-bunked?

[Pressing-On]

Intrade is bidding the gov't health plan contract at 38 cents. Down from 50 cents in July.

Share prices of the big private insurers have rallied.

United Healthcare - up 13%
Humana - up 12.4%
Aetna - up, almost, 10%

These firms would be decimated if the health-plan passes - Investors are predicting that it won't.

[Ferd]

Walks, Anticdotal eveidence is no evidence at all.

facts are that TODAY in America a hip replacement wait is 16 days. in Britian it is 6 months or more.

we can both provide micro examples where healthcare in britan is as good or better.

you cannot however provide any macro evidence of such.

NOR have I suggested that the American system is fine as is. In fact I have said in this thread that it needs serious reform because there are serious problems.

YOU made the connection between Government Single Payer systems and life expectancy. YOU have done nothing to challenge my answer that Single Payer systems are the actual reaoson for life expectancy in an actual country! geez.

[Walks_in_islam]

Don't geeze me. You start this discussion with and about me get right out here and finish it. Lifespan IS a macro indicator. You saying I offered anecdotal evidence? (2) actual cases. Same time. Same thing. Same quality. (1) shows the dodging between the insurance companies and providers, each trying to maximize their profits. The other is the simple straightforward "if you pay for this these are the benefits" of a public health system. The note that the public health system had a lower overall cost to the CONSUMER was a bonus.

facts are that TODAY in America a hip replacement wait is 16 days if you have money or insurance. If you are umemployed, have no insurance, and do not have $30-$50k in the bank, then the wait is forever. You get no hip replacement at all. Forever is a lot longer than 6 months or more. But...you probably do not get out much among the poor or uninsured or unemployed - the ever growing group who your hip replacement example does not apply to at all. Jesus did get out among that group. Consider being like Jesus sometime lol and you may just learn some things and you certainly may learn that there are a lot of different people in different situations around you and that your conclusions drawn simply from your (probably employed and insured) point of view may not apply to the system as a whole. Which puzzles me because you and your company pay anyway. Me and mine did.

You can and will not see the words "single payer" in any post of mine. I will ask you not to put words in my mouth. You will and do see universal access and universal coverage in my posts. I contend that there is a clear relation between access to healthcare and lifespan. Even for the HIV positive which was your and not my silly example. You must not know that HIV is now classified as merely another chronic disease. To those who have healthcare for it. LOL You probably do not visit the sick. Jesus visited the sick. Perhaps you should consider being like Jesus.

Facts are public information and as such easy to confirm or refute. The facts show the connection between countries with public healthcare and lifespan. Since all the countries in the top of the list have the longest lifespans. LOL Pointing out the data does not mean "I made the connection" Connections are made by connecting dots between data points.

I know this: The unquestioned fact is that the US is at the bottom of the "developed country" list and tied or below a lot of the undeveloped countries. One other thing is dead certain. Neither you nor your buddies with your theoretical "hip replacement" and "HIV" example can explain why the US is at the bottom. Not at all. Nor do you owe me an explanation. I do not live there and currently have no vested interest. You owe it to yourselves to figure it out. You have the "best" and spend the most but are at the bottom. Your silly examples don't come close to brushing the surface of evidence of a reason.

Originally Posted by Ferd

Walks, Anticdotal eveidence is no evidence at all.

facts are that TODAY in America a hip replacement wait is 16 days. in Britian it is 6 months or more.

we can both provide micro examples where healthcare in britan is as good or better.

you cannot however provide any macro evidence of such.

NOR have I suggested that the American system is fine as is. In fact I have said in this thread that it needs serious reform because there are serious problems.

YOU made the connection between Government Single Payer systems and life expectancy. YOU have done nothing to challenge my answer that Single Payer systems are the actual reaoson for life expectancy in an actual country! geez.