You see a lot of propaganda these days in the MSM touting the Euro nationalized health systems as providing better care than the US. This is all a build up to support a grandiose new health system, which will come with a grandiose price tag. But are those stories telling the real story? We all know the 'trick' in those systems to keep costs down is to ration care. We see that happening already in Mass with RomneyCare, way over budget and now holding care back to cut costs. If care is kept away from the needy, how do these systems really perform?
Well, it appears they do well for routine problems, and fall way short for serious problems.
UPDATE 8/22: a recent study shows some surprising results. Here is a chart on cancer survival rates, where the US is much higher than Europe.
Consider also this snippet courtesy of John Mauldin from Dennis Gartman's eponymous letter. It should give all of those who favor a nationalized healthcare system pause, before they jump right in. Quoting Dennis:
"Canada is a wonderful place to have a nasty gash on one's forehead stitched, or to break one's nose in a game of pick-up baseball; but have cancer, or need eye surgery, or want an MRI, and the business of medicine in Canada and/or the UK breaks down badly in favour of medical care here in the US. For example... and we wish to thank The Investor's Business Daily for the data noted here this morning...
"... here in the US men and women survived cancer at an average of just a bit better than 65%. In England only 46% survive. In the US, 93% of those diagnosed with diabetes receive treatment within six months; in Canada only 43% do, and in the UK only 15% do! For those seniors needing a hip replacement and getting one within six months, 15% get it done in the UK; 43% get it done in Canada ... and in the US 90% do! For those waiting to see a medical specialist, 23% of those in the US get in within four weeks, while 57% in Canada have not yet done so, and in the UK 60% are still waiting after four weeks.
"When it comes to proper medical equipment, in the US there are 71 MRI or CT scanners available per million people. In Canada there are but 18, and in the UK there are only 14! Ah, but the best figure of all is this: 11.7% of those 'seniors' in the US with 'low incomes' say they are in excellent health, which in and of itself sounds rather low ... rather disconcerting ... and an indictment of the system itself, doesn't it? But in Canada only 5.8% do!
More here at the IBD original article, which quotes from a National Center for Policy Analysis study: "10 Surprising Facts About American Health Care."
UPDATE 8/26: Perhaps the best capstone on this point is to compare systems for health issues not overall mortality. In the US, we have higher rates of homicide and car accidents. A little reporting at the Chicago Tribune concluded: "We are 12 times more likely than the Japanese to be murdered and nearly twice as likely to be killed in auto wrecks." So where would the US rank of accidents and homicides were removed? According to "The Business of Health" by economists Robert L. Ohsfeldt and John E. Schneider:
Where [would] the U.S. would rank in life span among developed nations if homicides and accidents are factored out. Their answer? First place.
As the Tribune concluded: "our health-care system is doing a poor job of preventing shootouts and drunk driving but a good job of healing the sick."
Comments