Nothing wrong with US Health Care

[Timefortruth]

Received this spam from my sister-in-law. She also believes in Death Panels. The obvious answer is that these statistics (if they are even true) pull from only insured Americans.

Does anyone know of a response spam? I really want to reply to this.



Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
U.S. 93%
England 15%
Canada 43%

Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
U.S. 90%
England 15%
Canada 43%

Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:
U.S. 77%
England 40%
Canada 43%

Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
U.S. 71%
England 14%
Canada 18%

Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in "excellent health":
U.S. 12%
England 2%
Canada 6%

You want "Universal Healthcare" comparable to England or Canada?
Moreover, it was Sen. Harry Reid who said, "Elderly Americans must learn to accept the inconveniences of old age."

SHIP HIM TO CANADA OR ENGLAND!

He is "elderly" himself, but his health insurance is different from yours, as Congress has their own high- end coverage! He will never have to learn to accept "inconveniences"!

[Vickers]

1. Percentage of people who are covered by health care:

England: 100%
Canada: 100%
USA: 80% (and many can't "afford" to actually use it)

[tabatha]

2. Send it to Snopes to debunk.

[BlueState]

6. Percentage of bankruptcies due to excessive medical bills

U.S 60%
U.K 0%
Canada 0%



http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-05/health/bankruptcy.medical.bills_1_medical-bills-bankruptcies-health-insurance?_s=PM:HEALTH

[w8liftinglady]

3. I would first want a reference to stats. The Census Bureau and AMA say otherwise

no reference to anyone under 65 without insurance.(which describes 1/4 of Texas,btw)

The Kaiser Family Foundation has a copious amount of research on this
http://www.kff.org/

[bemildred]

4. "Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:"

"U.S. 71%"

Does not compute.

[the redcoat]

16. Hah, that one stopped me for a few seconds too. Debunk:

The closest sense I can make of it is 71 scanners per 100 insured people. That's the only way 71% would make any sense, and it would mean over 150 million scanners, or 25000 scanners per hospital.

And to make it better, according to http://www.numberof.net/number%C2%A0of%C2%A0mri%C2%A0machines%C2%A0in%C2%A0the-us/, the real number is about 8000. 8000 per 250 million people comes out to .0032%


So, yeah, total bullshit. Total bullshit because a percent makes no sense in answering "Number of MRI scanners per million people," and total bullshit because even if it did make sense in answering that question, the numerical results are hilariously untrue.



EDIT: for some reason the link won't work when I click on it. Go to www.numberof.net and type in "MRI machines" in the search

EDIT NUMBER 2: It seems obvious to me now, but perhaps, without a percent sign, it's just meant to say "71 scanners per 1000000 people." That's still untrue, as it comes out to over 17000 scanners. the real number is closer to 30.

[ixion]

5. Response: The US health 'care' system is a rigged playing field

and is really more about turning a profit than providing 'care'.

[YOY]

7. Well then she must love Bob Dol...I mean President Obama's solution!

n/t

[sinkingfeeling]

8. Dozens of RW bloggers and sites have this list of 'statistics'. Most carry this at the top:

"Article from the "Investor's Business Daily." It provides some very
interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations International
Health Organization."


First, none have a link to the IBD article to check for sources. And secondly, there is no such organization as the UN International Health Organization to have done the survey.

[Sal Minella]

11. Are you trying to insinuate these statistics are less than accurate?

And here I was all reassured that MRI scanners are 71%.

[Octafish]

9. US Health Care works fine.

It works to make Big Money for insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and for-profit hospitals. Rich doctors love it, too.

As for the paying customers, I mean "patients" who don't have insurance and need surgery: It's cash up front.

[jillan]

10. Show him these annoying facts -

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

The US is behind both England and Canada in ranking.

And there's this - preventable deaths -
http://www.allcountries.org/ranks/preventable_deaths_country_ranks_1997-1998_2002-2003_2008.html


And finally here is the list of which countries spend the largest % of their GDP on healthcare
http://www.photius.com/rankings/total_health_expenditure_as_pecent_of_gdp_2000_to_2005.html


Hope that helps!

[Timefortruth]

12. Thank you. nt

[IndyPragmatist]

14. With the exception of the MRI stat...

Those seem like legit numbers. Why is it so hard to believe that in some instances we are still great? Yes, overall our healthcare isn't great, but there are some aspects.

When it comes to high tech medical procedures, we are without question the best in the world. If you have coverage, our medical system is far superior than anywhere else. But the issue is that everyone doesn't have coverage.

It seems many are taking a Rush Limbaugh approach to this. Find one aspect of something that is sub par, and then claim the entire system has failed. Our healthcare system hasnt failed. Access to it has. We still have the best doctors, best equipment, and best facilities in the world. I've had a broken jaw in Denmark, and a sprained ankle in Germany (which hurt so bad, I thought it was a torn tendon). It was great that both nations were able to give me treatment, but the Danish doctor told me "Do you have good insurance in America?" I said yes, I have great insurance, and he told me "good, broken bones in the face are very difficult. Find a specialist in your city and they will ensure you dont have any problems." The world knows we have the best doctors and technology, and this doctor, realizing that I have money and insurance, knew that I would get amazing care in America.

Again, the Rush Limbaugh tactic was used on these stats, don't do the same trying to debunk them. Rush will tell you nothing is wrong with out system because we have such great doctors and technology, which is 100% true. He just doesn't mention how that isn't available to everyone. So don't be Rush, don't act as if our lack of access to healthcare makes our system terrible. I would much rather have a treatment done in the United States than I would in any other nation, of course, thats assuming I have insurance and can pay for it.

[Timefortruth]

18. The reason the source is falsified

is because the original author of the email didn't want people reading the survey where the numbers were reported.

Please read this report from the Commonwealth Fund:

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Surveys/2008/2008-Commonwealth-Fund-International-Health-Policy-Survey-of-Sicker-Adults.aspx


The 2008 survey of 7,500 chronically ill patients in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States included adults who had a diagnosis of at least one of seven chronic conditions.

.....
Only one-quarter (26%) of U.S. and Canadian patients reported same-day access to doctors when they were sick—and one-fourth or more reported long waits. In contrast, about half or more of Dutch (60%), New Zealand (54%), and U.K. (48%) patients were able to get a same-day appointment.
•
U.S. patients were the most likely to find it very difficult to get after-hours care without going to an emergency room: 40 percent said it was very difficult, compared with only 15 percent in the Netherlands and Germany, the lowest rates of any country on this measure.
•
In the past two years, 59 percent of U.S. patients visited an emergency room; only Canada had higher rates (64%). In both countries, one in five said they went to the ER for a condition that could have been cared for by a regular doctor if one had been available.
•
In contrast to long waits for primary care, U.S. patients reported short waits for specialists. Three-quarters of patients in the U.S., as well as more than two-thirds in the Netherlands and Germany, were able to get an appointment with a specialist within a month. Waits for specialists were longest in Canada, New Zealand, and the U.K.
Errors, Poor Care Coordination, and Perceptions of Wasteful or Inefficient Care

One-third of U.S. patients —more than in any other country—reported either being given the wrong medication or dosage, experiencing a medical error, receiving incorrect test results, or facing delays in hearing about abnormal test results. Patient reports of any error were lowest in the Netherlands (17%), France (18%), and Germany (19%). Indicating inadequate tracking systems, U.S. error rates were particularly high for delays in patients getting abnormal test results.
2
U.S. patient experiences indicate often poorly organized, duplicate, or wasteful care:
•
One third of U.S. patients (34%) experienced a time when either test results or medical records were not available or tests were duplicated, significantly higher than all other countries and more than double the coordination gaps reported in the Netherlands (14%).

[slipslidingaway]

19. Link - 2010 report ...

http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/abstract/hlthaff.2010.0862

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2010/november/international-comparisons-its-the-insurance-stupid

Consumers and Insurance: Experiences In Eleven Countries
By Chris Fleming
Health Affairs Blog
November 18, 2010

"As the United States begins implementing health reform, how does the U.S. experience compare with that of other high-income countries? To answer that question, The Commonwealth Fund conducted its thirteenth annual health policy survey, this year focusing on access, cost, and care experiences. The survey findings were published today in a Health Affairs Web First article by Commonwealth Fund Senior Vice President Cathy Schoen and coauthors.

Overall, the survey identified significant differences between countries and found that US adults — even when insured — were the most likely to incur high medical expenses, spend more time on paperwork, and have more claims denied.

The countries surveyed were Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States..."

[Gormy Cuss]

13. There's an old discussion on the snopes message board about this spam

(and there are no percent signs after the number of MRIs, LOL)
http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=54884

Dig through it and you should find enough to derail her email. You could also just ask her for the sources of those stats -- I'm pretty sure it would be easy to refute whatever 'source' she cites.

[hunter]

15. There's a glaring fallacy in all these health care discussions

It's that the most expensive health care is the best care.

People with good insurance or thick wallets often get inappropriate care in the USA and end up in worse shape than they would have had they lived in someplace like Canada, England, or even Cuba.

In many cases a generic prescription that costs 4 cents a pill is more effective and has fewer side effects than the "latest and greatest" $4-a-pill offering of the pharmaceutical corporations. Often the best treatment doesn't require any medicine or expensive equipment at all.

There are physical limits to the amount of health and happiness one can buy. The medical industry in the USA promises the moon for a very high price but often drops you off in the same place you might have been had you received more appropriate and much less expensive care. And sometimes the system kills and maims people who would have been okay if they hadn't had the "good" insurance or the fat wallet.

[cap]

17. look up life expectancies and infant mortality statistics

at the end of the day, Death is what counts.

We are far behind most developed countries.