U.K. Cancer Death Rate Is 38% Higher Than In U.S.
by Dick MorrisAs the Congress prepared to vote to let us enter the world of waits for doctors, waits for specialists, waits for testing and waits for surgery, radiation and chemo, we should pause to consider the relative records of the private medical care system in the United States with the socialized system in the U.K.
In 2008, Britain had a cancer death rate 0.25% while the United States had a rate of only 0.18%. The UK cancer death rate was 38% higher than in the United States.
The Guardian, the UK’s left wing daily, estimated that “up to 10,000 people” are dying each year of cancer “because their condition is diagnosed too late, according to research by the government’s director of cancer services.” While many people die because of late detection due to their own negligence, there is no reason to believe this self-neglect is more common in the UK than in the US.
In Canada, the cancer death rate is 16% higher than in the United States.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
229 Comments
But Obama says we spend more but do not get better results.
Certainly the heath care system itself is not the only variable involved?
This article leaves me with more questions than answers.
This surprises anyone? The USA has the best health care system in the world. One would not know that if they listened to the news as of late. All you hear is horror fringe stories. My father has coronary artery disease and has sustained two MI's (heart attacks). My mother is currently undergoing treatment for breast cancer. They both are under Anthem BCBS. They have never, ever been stiffed or lampooned by their insurance company. I wonder why we don't hear these stores?
of course the system is not the ONLY variable…it is however the MAJOR variable and the primary reason why cancer death rate is lower in the US.
And tell me why again the United States needs socialized health care? It seems to work SO well in the U.K. and Canada.
And Obama would be a liar. Both about that and everything else that comes out of his mouth.
Well, to heck with that! I won't be satisfied until OUR cancer death rate is higher than their's! GO OBAMACARE!
Canada also has a higher death rate from cancer. The only difference between UK, Canada and USA, is government run system, with RATIONED health care. Delaying diagnosis, treatment makes the difference! Shortage of physicians, shortage of diagnostic equipment and you can't even PAY if you want too.
Member of Canadian Parliament, proponent of their government run system was diagnosed with breast cancer. Where did she go for treatment? CALIFORNIA! She paid out of pocket, too!
Socialist health care is only as strong as the weakes component.
My mother in-law has no insurance and has just finished her second round of cancer treatment even though she has no financial ability to pay for it. The fact is there are programs to help the uninsured poor if they are willing to look! The only out of pocket she had to pay was for the doctors office visits which was very minimal.
remember these ARE eugenicists…
Many of them are openly contemptuous of their fellow citizens. 'Useless eaters' is the term they use. Why would anyone think Gaia worshippers are concerned with health care for central Wisconsin? Or Western Georgia?
They don't, plain and simple. They will ration because they WANT to have less people with shorter life spans, or at least not 'reward' meat eaters with expensive late life care.
That's the plain and simple truth…
There's TOO many idiots in charge here!
I still can't believe OUR GOVERNMENT is telling women NOT to do self exams… Incredible.
Ther has to be a document somewhere by NObama or Pelosi where they identify an acceptable loss thresshold, and they use this to justify the increase in deaths we will get in the new Health Care plan.
There are a lot of things about our health care system that we can correct without going to socialized medicine. why don't we take one issue at a time and work on things logically.
This is old news. Years ago I met an orthopaedic surgeon from the U.K. He had earnings less over there than his physical therapist earns in the states. His pay had been roughly equal to what we pay school teachers in America.
Make that a "dithering liar".
Take a look at their death rates for H1N1 vs. those of the US. You will be appalled. Canada's look pretty bad too.
only depressed suicidal americans are lined up for free gov healthcare. take care of the graft crud and coruption and things will work their way out.
logically speaking obdumbo would be job hunting and not potus. he told the world what his intentions were and the ghetto dwellers elected him over the buzz word free. don't think there is logic to be found.
I think this is where the phrase "you get what you pay for" comes in
Who is John Galt?
Next we'll find out that global warming is a hoax.
I am John Galt!
My bumper sticker! http://www.RightWingInc.com
Canada's heath care system is abysmal. Born and raised there with all my family still living there (I escaped to the US years ago) I know from personal experience how MUCH BETTER CARE IS IN THE USA.
Anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant of the facts or not being truthful.
I can't wait until walking into my doctor's office is just like walking into the D.M.V. Same sort of crowd will be in line in front of me if you know what I mean.
http://www.RightWingInc.com
Anti-Obama Bumper Stickers
THIS WILL BE IGNORED BY ALL THOSE RADICAL LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC WACKOS THAT THINK JUST BECAUSE EVERY OTHER COUNTRY HAD SOCIALIZED MEDICINE…. WE SHOULD, ALSO. STUPID.
But, Dick! You’re using facts with liberals, a pointless exercise. They love their Barry and want their “free” stuff. Keep plugging away, maybe, just maybe you can get through, …doubtful.
And why are we in such a hurry to emulate the Europeans as many dems want to? It seems like we do a lot of things better
[...] From: BigGovernment.com [...]
what? too soon?
You folks realize that most of the people who get/die from cancer in the US are over 65 which means that they are covered by Medicare, right? So unless you isolate rates for under 65, you are not using clean statistical analysis, just cherry picking numbers to suit your opinion. But I wouldn't really expect many here to actually understand statistics.
Where are those polls that say that the medical systems in other countries are better than ours. With all the waiting lists and poor treatment found similar countries (UK, Canada, France) the system in the United States is the best. All that the health care bill does is give the Dems and big gov groups more power. It is all about power stemming from corruption that is already there.
I am watching http://www.americanparchment.com who is doing the “31 Corrupt Politicians in 31 Day” Program. I guess it’s a preview of a larger program they will be doing before the 2010 election. Today they are starting with our friend Rep. Barney Frank. Wow is this man dirty, and yet he always blames others and gets away with it.
Where are those polls that say that the medical systems in other countries are better than ours. With all the waiting lists and poor treatment found similar countries (UK, Canada, France) the system in the United States is the best. All that the health care bill does is give the Dems and big gov groups more power. It is all about power stemming from corruption that is already there.
I am watching http://www.americanparchment.com who is doing the “31 Corrupt Politicians in 31 Day” Program. I guess it’s a preview of a larger program they will be doing before the 2010 election. Today they are starting with our friend Rep. Barney Frank. Wow is this man dirty, and yet he always blames others and gets away with it.
Where are those polls that say that the medical systems in other countries are better than ours. With all the waiting lists and poor treatment found similar countries (UK, Canada, France) the system in the United States is the best. All that the health care bill does is give the Dems and big gov groups more power. It is all about power stemming from corruption that is already there.
I am watching http://www.americanparchment.com who is doing the “31 Corrupt Politicians in 31 Day” Program. I guess it’s a preview of a larger program they will be doing before the 2010 election. Today they are starting with our friend Rep. Barney Frank. Wow is this man dirty, and yet he always blames others and gets away with it.
How does .25%-.18%=.07% become 38%?
What happened to all the polls that told about the medical systems of foreign countries being better? When the US is compared to similar countries (UK, Canada, and France) our system has less waiting times, more surgical success rates, less infection, less cancer, etc. The only thing the health care bill does is give power to the Dems and big gov groups. This power stems from corruption of these groups.
I am watching http://www.americanparchment.com who is doing the “31 Corrupt Politicians in 31 Day” Program. I guess it’s a preview of a larger program they will be doing before the 2010 election. Today they are starting with our friend Rep. Barney Frank. Wow is this man dirty, and yet he always blames others and gets away with it.
I agree! Lets also put pictures of people missing their throats and dead babies on cigarette packs here as well….. that clearly helps people not smoke and reduces the cancer rate in the UK…. Oooooh better idea, how about a picture of Rosie O'Donnell on condoms so to reduce the risk of STD's.
If Canadian health care is so bad why is life expectancy in Canada three years longer than in the US? (Check CIA statistics on line) In Britain the article claims 10 000 diagnoses were delayed, but in the US where 120million people don’t have health care are you saying none of those people have delays?
Ok, I'll type this s-l-o-w-l-y for your benefit. Their system results in MORE DEAD BODIES than our (admittedly imperfect) system does. This is b-a-d (at least in many people's opinion).
Shall I repeat this? Why not just keep reading it over and over until you get it? MORE DEAD BODIES.
PS The comment above about the Canadian MP coming to California for her own treatment when she developed breast cancer is absolutely true. I have treated patients from Canada and Britaan (and many other countries) but can't recall a single US patient going to another country to get a treatment that was available here.
Dudes, you get what you pay for…
There’s a reason our hospital bills are so high on this side of the pond. We better get something for it!
Watch this, we'll have fun with statistics: In the UK 99.75% people don't die of cancer, while in the US its 99.82% Therefore, the US is .0007% better than the UK. See what fun you can have with numbers, boys and girls? To the author: please redo this article isolating people on private insurance in the US vs. Medicare/Medicaid. Lets get some real analysis, not fluff based on opinion. Or or you afraid to present real statistical analysis to your "sheep"?
John – 38% higher means that .25% is 38% more than .18%. .18*1.38=.25 (approx)
Realityseeker – there are many factors contributing to ‘life expectancy’ besides health care. Does Canada have as many drug-war related deaths? And ‘120 million people don’t have health care’ – my goodness, that’s almost half the population of this country. And you believe that? 120 million people ‘don’t have health care’ – meaning they have no access to doctors, hospitals, and medicines – ya might wanna doublecheck your figures…
John,
He says the rate is 38% higher. That means the difference between the two rates divided by our rate. (.25-.18)/.18 = 38%. I’d comment on government schools, but that would only reinforce why the feds shouldn’t run our health care…
To Guest
What difference does Medicare make in this discussion? The technology to cure the cancers is created by for profit corporations funded by our (employed people's) spending on health care. Government reimbursement rates are not enough to cover the costs of most treatments, let alone high tech treatments. Statistically challenged?? How about logic/intellectual honesty challenged.
John
The author is not claiming the rate of death is 38 percentage points higher. He is claiming the rate of death in the UK compared to that of the US is greater by a factor of 1.38. You can’t stop with .25 – .18 = .07 as that only gives the percentage point difference between the two. You have to go one more step to get the relative percentage increase of the .225 over the .18. .07 / .18 = .38. Thus .25 is a 38% higher number relative to the .18.
Just look mat the writings of Cass Sunstein and Dr. Ezekial "mengele" Emanuel, obamas advisors. They both believe in population control throught the death of the elderly, (refuse treatment, their not worth it), and surreptitsiously planting sterilants in the water supply, and as many abotions as they can fund. They are murderers, all, including THE ONE, who voted three times to let newborns die untreated. If you do some research, this is easy to find.
Ron Reale
realetybytes@yahoo.com
realetybytes.townhall.com
Supporting evidence please. Only 2 of the 8 people that I know that has died of cancer has been over 65. Please provided your evidence.
where do you think the cuts will come from to pay for socialized medicine? Medicare for one … per our president, so yes it will have a huge effect on the cancer death rate. nice try though
This is the one thing Britain can do better than us. I will not only allow it, but I will celebrate it.
You didn't do so well in the math classes aye. LMGDFAO. Stupid liberal.
Offhand I would think that had to do with Canada being cold and miserable and people staying indoors, while here we are afflicted with too many people doing Stupid Things outdoors. I don't think there has been a single week during our "warm season" when the local news didn't report at least one young person killed in a car wreck, for example.
Thankfully global warming will soon take care of that difference. Although down in the southern part of the country we will soon have to issue government-supplied mosquito nets to keep the malaria at bay.
If you can explain why all of the leaders of the world come to America for treatment, and why the drugs we develop to save lives, (which they won't use under OBAMADEATHCARE), make this an awful system, I would appreciate it.
The only reason our system has problems is because of the BILLIONS being spent on criminal illegals, forcing California into bankruptcy.
Kill the truely awful illegals, and our system, which by law treats everyone, would be fine.
If you can look at all the research out there and decide ours is not the best system, you are lying to yourself. There is no country you can site that has a better system overall, or does more for the world through research.
Do you hate all American values, or just capitalism?
CAPITALISM, THE PROFESSION OF THE FREE!
Ron Reale
realetybytes@yahoo.com
realetybytes.townhall.com
where do you get 120 million???? even the government's estimate is 49 million
John – December 2nd, 2009 at 12:08 pm
How does .25%-.18%=.07% become 38%?
John,
.07% is the differential between .18% and .25%. Take .07 and divide it by .18 and you get 38%. Therefore .18 to .25 is a 38% increase.
You do not hear any good stories such as you mention because they do not fit the dismal picture and lies that the Left wants to paint in its never ending quest for power.
I think what Obama considers "better results" would be a HIGHER death rate so the health care system isn't strained by cancer treatment costs!
LMGDFAO. You didn't do too well in the maths, aye? Liberals, can't even do BASIC math.
LOOKS like the SS Libtanic just took ANOTHER hit below the waterline. First Climategate and now this?
The death of liberalism nears.
http://noliberalspin.blogtownhall.com/2009/12/02/...
The Anti Liberal Zone
LOOKS like the SS Libtanic just took ANOTHER hit below the waterline. First Climategate and now this?
The death of liberalism nears.
http://noliberalspin.blogtownhall.com/2009/12/02/...
The Anti Liberal Zone
Really, you think the quality of care is determined having Medicare or private insurance? I have great insurance and just finish almost 2 years of cancer treatment (about $700,000). My mother-in-law has Medicare and has the same physicians that I do. My sister-in-law went through surgery for ovarian cancer then CHEMO, yet she had no job, money or insurance and she received the same treatment I did (with NO wait). If I didn't have insurance I would have to pay back the money, but I could not have been refused (like my sister-in-law). I'd rather pay out of pocket for the rest of my life, then have to wait or received less quality care. I value my life. Ignorance does cause death and it seems that most people for Socialized health care are truly ignorant of the facts or just drinking coolaid.
Yup and those 500,000 people of which is representative of your percentage are obvioulsy not significant aye? unless it was your son maybe.
Davis, I'll have you know President Obama can do both! He IS ignorant of the facts and isn't truthful! And he does both very well!
Because that would be too easy. Elections happen every November and the politicians want to save their jobs.
1) Those statistic are 10 years old
2) More people die in the US from violence, car crashes and obesity, so it skews the percentages in their favor.
The proper formula would exclude those factors.
This article claiming the USA medical system performs well is receiving much applause. It conveniently neglects the OECD data showing that the USA has significantly lower life expectancy than the UK and Canada, while the USA spends twice as much on its system as these single-payer nations. Please see this chart using OECD data: http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/tabfig/2008/...
"Among its 19 peer nations the U.S. scores last in infant mortality," reports the Economic Policy Institute.
By the way, Obama's plan, which will keep the private insurance companies in business and their executives living the high life, is unlikely to challenge the misguided priorities of market-driven medicine.
There's a big difference in providing government healthcare for some sixty million people (UK) versus 300 million people (USA), not including illegal immigrants …. it won't work.
how many brits have fled to the US, got their treatment, survived, went back to the UK, and then counted as a UK cancer survivor?
Ok, lets clear up some myths. First, lack of insurance does not mean lack of health care. EVERYBODY in the USA has access to the best health care. If you have no job, insurance or money you still have access to the best care. The issue is if you do have a job or money, but no insurance. In that case you will have to pay for it, even if it is in payments over a long period. I just finished almost 2 years of cancer treatment for Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma, a very aggressive cancer. If I did not receive the immediate CAT scan and then biopsy, I would have died. I couldn't wait 30 days which is the MINIMUM waiting period for GB and Canada (unless your a pet). If I was in GB or Canada, I would have died. My sister-in-law was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. She had no job and no insurance, yet within a couple weeks of first seeing the Dr., she had gone through surgery and began CHEMO. My sister-in-law received the same quality care I did. My mother-in-law has Medicare, yet she has the same physician that I do. How about we stop the MYTHS and just battle the ignorance, it would be a lot cheaper then the proposed trillions. That's not to say we don't need change, but we need to first start with allowing insurance to be sold across state lines (competition) and implement tort reform.
If most people who die of cancer are already under a government plan (medicare), why would you want everyone else on the same system? Am I missing something here?
One problem with those infant mortality rates is that the Europeans count live births before the 7 month as miscarriages while we count them as dead babies. There are many other problems such as the Europeans not counting illegals in any of their health stats, while we do.
Don't forget the population of the
U.S. is 300,000,000 X 0.18% = 540,000 deaths
Canada is 35,000,000 X 0.21% = 73,500
UK is 65,000,000 X 0.25% = 162,500
USA WINS! WE'RE #1
It probably isn't the only factor. The smoking rate is higher, for one thing. But their system sucks, and everybody knows it. You won't be diagnosed until later, and you wont' get the treatment you need until it's approved by distant committees. Socialism isn't about individuals. It's about the collective. All the rules and procedures are designed with that in mind. Socialism doesn't care about keeping you alive for your own sake. The degree to which it's interested in keeping you alive depends upon your calculated value to the collective. It's to be expected that the cancer death rate is higher: Cancer is an efficient way of eliminating surplus population. Stalin took it a big step further and simply starved his excess population to death.
Give me one name of someone in the USA that doesn't have health care. ONLY ONE. Lets see you lie. If you are here illegally, you have health care. Now 40+ million may not have health insurance, but they have the best health care in the world. If I broke my arm ( or have cancer etc.) and I went to the University Medical Center here in town, they CANNOT turn me away and I wouldn't have the wait like GB or Canada. If I was homeless or here illegally would I have to pay? Of course not. If I have some money, I'd have to pay what I could. Get you facts straight, or how about REALITY for the realityseeker.
Go look up "amenable mortality" and then try to defend the U.S. healthcare system.
[...] here to see the original: Big Government » Blog Archive » U.K. Cancer Death Rate Is 38 … By admin | category: care health private uk | tags: dems, france, give-power, [...]
The governement's reason for telling the women not to do self exams has a dark motive. Bill Clinton wants to do it for them. He has already started a clinic, called Hands On Health. It's a free clinic. Every woman gets a free breast exam, performed by and compliments of Bill.
Ha, and the reason that Canada’s death rate is lower than GB’s is that they can come to the U.S. for treatment and drugs that they wouldn’t be allowed in Canada or GB. They can get tests here that would take weeks and months over there.
RealitySeeker, “trying to evaluate the quality of a nation’s health care by looking at life expectancy is like trying to estimate the birthrate by counting the number of flowers bought on Valentine’s Day. (Or estimating future pregnancies of women with low self-esteem by adding up the total number of U.S. cities on a Bobby Brown tour and then multiplying by 2.)
There are lots of ways to get pregnant that don’t require flowers or a backstage pass to a Bobby Brown concert, just as there are lots of ways to die that don’t require setting foot inside a doctor’s offfice.
For example, more Americans are murdered with guns than in any other industrialized country. According to a 1997 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the homicide rate with firearms alone was 16 times higher in the U.S. than in 25 other industrialized countries combined.
That will tend to reduce the U.S.’s “life expectancy” numbers, while telling us absolutely nothing about the country’s medical care. (I promise that if you make it to a hospital alive, you are more likely to survive a gunshot wound in the U.S. than any place else in the world.)”
http://anncoulter.com/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=331
It's the old tax scheme of the left. This time it's …..'we spend more than the rest of the world on health care'. You have to read into what this means. It means that the left doesn't want you to spend your money for health care. The left wants to take your money, instead and redistribute it. They gain voters who don't contribute to the Treasury in terms of tax revenue and they get to decide on who, how, what, and where you ……the tax payer has to recieve it. I do not plan on retiring in the U.S. anymore. I intend to become an ex-patriot and retire overseas. It is the beginning of the end of a once great nation. History will prove that the demise of the U.S. came as the Soviets predicted years ago. From within. The irony is that the leftists don't see that they are killing the cow while they are figuring out ways to milk it.
Sort of like why we didn't hear about dissenting opinions on the Global Warming hoax??
Well excepting the ones running to Mexico for fringe treatments I am supposing?
One really should be careful about stats a person is using to make a point. I wonder why the writer of this article didn't mention any other countries that have nationalized (please stop saying "socialized!!!) healthcare systems? Some of them do work. This country does have very good quality technical medical stuff because it and its citizens have been able to afford it for a long time. Now this country is not such a big shot on the financial stage anymore. There is getting to be a larger gap between those who have and those who do not have and as history has shown, the next step is revolution unless something is done. If the something should be nationalized healthcare, I don't know, but there are a lot of people in this country suffering who can't afford proper healthcare and some insurance companies who are ripping people off. As far as immigrants (not illegal, necessarily) let them get some healthcare too! Does anyone remember what is written on the Statue of Liberty? Does anyone care? What does it mean to be American? I challenge someone to answer that because I don't know and from what I read from some of these posts I get discouraged by what it might be.
We’ll be at those rates if BO and his lefties get their way. One way to hold down cost is to let people die and that is the master scheme here. Don’t let anyone tell you different
( .25% / .18% ) – 1 = 38.888%
The UK's rate is the US's rate increased by 38% of what it is now.
But But But!!!! If we just deal in facts how can we SCARE everyone???????
Where there does appear to be differences in health indexes between countries )and the US looks worse), check out how we as a country are counting and how other countries are counting. Infant mortality rates are a good example.
What good is living 3 years longer, if your quality of life is factorially suckier? Personally, I would rather live BETTER than longer. asshat.
[...] cancer death rate in UK 38% higher that US. this is until hussein passes government healthcare. Big Government Blog Archive U.K. Cancer Death Rate Is 38% Higher Than In U.S. [...]
We may spend more in actual dollars, but that doesn't really say much. We are pretty much in the average ballpark as a percentage of GDP.
Anyway, this argument always amazes me. Americans will spend $800k on average over 30 years for a home but get pissed off about spending ~400K over the same period for health? Why should health care be free? It takes money and resources to run health care. There is a real cost, but you bitch about paying. But don't complain about paying ridiculous interest for a home?
I don't understand the logic. Healthcare is important, too bad you would rather use your money to buy chinese trinkets than spend it on YOUR health.
Actually Dick Morris is correct the cancer death rate is higher in UK than USA. This is becasue of one simple reason we live longer in UK, and as you get older the risk of cancer dramatically increases. We live longer in the UK because our healthcare system is far better than the one in USA, having lived and worked in the USA trust me the UK system is light years ahead. Admittedly you want the high end experiemntal treatment that less than 2% of the population actually needs then USA is better but for the basic healthcare to keep 98% of the population healthy the UK does it better.
realityseeker – December 2nd, 2009 at 12:12 pm
If Canadian health care is so bad why is life expectancy in Canada three years longer than in the US? (Check CIA statistics on line) In Britain the article claims 10 000 diagnoses were delayed, but in the US where 120million people don’t have health care are you saying none of those people have delays?
The reason is because we count longevity differently than other countries. For instance any baby born alive after 26 weeks is counted as a live birth in the US and incorporated into longevity statistics. In most other countries babies who die within 24 hours or birth are counted as stillborns. Additionally, we drive more miles per capita than everyone else, thus we suffer more fatal automobile accidents per capita. Both of these things impact the longevity statistics of the US but have nothing to do with availability (or lack thereof) of healthcare. Ann Coulter’s article here summarizes it very well. http://bit.ly/1Nmwl9.
BTW the estimate of AMERICAN citizens who don’t have healthcare insurance is only about 38 million, and most of them still get treated, they just go in debt to stay alive.
You do not hear of this because this is how it is supposed to work. No credit for doing what you are paid for. Only when you take money and then abuse your customers is it necessary. Of course, when one gets exemplary service, it is worthy of mention, but that is due your doctor or hospital. The private insurance companies add 'zero' value and yet amass tremendous profits. And I am a physician that is in this field.
Oh wait, don't look at Finland Sweden Greece and Switzerland all of which have public healthcare and also lower rates than the US in 2005 from the OECD data. Just cherrypick where you need to.
To Guest:
What don't you understand about good people being murdered by bureaucrats.
This is the elephant in the room.
My brother lost his job and insurance. Then his aorta exploded. He was rushed into emergency surgery just in time (immediately) to receive leading edge medicine that saved his life. He had an artificial aorta attached. The bill was hundreds of thousands. He was unemployed and uninsured, yet he was able to negociate the bill down to about 100 grand. He makes minimum payments per month (I dont know the actual amount). HIS LIFESTYLE DID NOT CHANGE ONE LITTLE BIT! He still has his 2 acre, 3 bed ranch on the lake. Still has cars and a boat. NO ONE IS TAKING HIS FORUNE OR HOME! He simply owes a bill which he makes payments on. This is NORMAL! It is better than being dead at age 40 with children. Fortunately he did get his job back.
Its people like you who try to skew statistic data. Showing a percentage is the only way to judge the danger of something in a population. Its absolutely unfair to say "The US has more cancer deaths and is therefore worse!" when the system is obviously helping more of the people who come to them than the UK or Canadian counterparts.
It's George Bush's fault…..
AMEN, BROTHER! Competition and tort reform would not increase the deficit one cent!!! Of course the trial lawyer's lobby and the insurance company's lobby wont hear it!
Common sense should tell us that the record of any government run program will be more expensive and only do half of what it is intended to do……… Lets not kid ourselves in to a false sense of security when it comes to health care we need more of it and better which is the opposite of what Uncle Sam will give us.
How do you come up with THAT conclusion? How does Dick Morris know? Where's his back-up data?
[...] Dick Morris: “In 2008, Britain had a cancer death rate 0.25% while the United States had a rate of only [...]
I'd blame Bush for this, seems to work.
Did you ever actually talk to a real person from Canada or the UK? They think their health care system is just fine.They laugh at how gullible we are about the "horror stories" of their health care systems. They cannot believe that a person in the richest country on earth can face bankruptcy because they get sick.It's unheard of in the UK and in Canada. Ask ANY of them if they would trade their health care system for ours. You;ll always get the same NO answer.
Insurance company profit margins are below 6%. Where are these tremendous profits of which you speak? Yea, I know, it's all the fault of these evil insurance companies. Medical practitioners share non of the blame for the high costs of service? When I went to the emergency room recently my total bill was $15K for about 2 hours of treatment. My insurance covered $14.5K. And yet, the insurance company is the villian?
Wow. That is very misleading math. If I get a 1% on a test and you get a 2% on a test, did you do 1% better or 100% better? This author is saying you did 100% better. Taking the percentage difference of percentages has it's place, but not in this case. The results, in reality, are statistically insignificant and it is scary to see all the people trumpeting this as a fact to use in the healthcare debate. It's a stupid article and doesn't help support the many valid arguments against socialized medicine.
Every day liberals prove how stupid and ignorant they are–ignore facts, lie, cheat, steal…. and feel good about it. 2010 is coming and they will get their just reward—minority status for years!
Dear John:
.07 divided by .18 equals 38.9%.
I’m beginning to understand who voted for Obama more each day.
the "one" will simply with a wave of his hand cure all that ails you….after all he is the messiah….choke choke, gag gag
That's because all the people who experienced the poor service are dead lol!
Talk about lazy, you didnt even fill in a name?
Ah, yes, your a Progressive, you do as little as possible except in the complaina and beg departments, my bad, carry on.
The current legislation in Congress has nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with power and control ever the masses. Even with all the uninsured and underinsured we have a lower cancer deathrate than the countries with socialized madicine. The left never does anything for the "good" of the people. It only does things for the good of itself. The lefts "good" is power and control of other people. Always has been, and always will be.
Whether it is socialized or nationalized, it doesn't matter because freedom is gone and you are at the mercy of the government. In this case they mean just about the same thing, and neither are Constitutional (read that in addition to the Statue of Liberty) The original article was by a British, left-wing paper so they were concentrating on Britain. Other people brought up other countries, but they all are worse for the main reason that there is no freedom.
Regarding the Statue of Liberty, we all know what it says, but it doesn't say we have to support the tired, hungry masses. It means, come here, be free and work to better yourself. Don't expect a welfare state handout from the rest of us who are working just because you came here. Hard work, freedom, and the rule of law are what makes people succeed, not expecting a handout from people who do work.
Regarding a "gap" and "revolution" it is called the rule of law which is one thing that made this country great – work hard and you do well and your work is protected by the rule of law. Sit on your butt and you don't do as well. It is freedom to make your own way, good or bad, not expect someone else to support you. Revolution to take from the people who worked and created will work ONCE. Then it will be too late and you will have killed the goose that laid the golden eggs and we'll all be screwed.
"Let them get some healthcare too" – no one is stopping them from getting health care. Anyone can go to a Dr and most will treat you for a reasonable price, particularly if you can't afford to it or don't have insurance. And ANYONE in an emergency situation will be treated. Health insurance does not imply that your health is ensured.
From the time I found a lump in my breast, to the time I had surgery was only 3 1/2 weeks. During that 3 1/2 weeks I had 4 appointments with three different doctors, a mammogram, ultrasound, biopsy and MRI. How long would that have taken if I lived in Britain or Canada? I am grateful for the current U.S. healthcare system and the very speedy treatment I received. I don’t want the government involved in deciding if or when I’ll get treatment.
I wonder if Obama's Health Care covers liberal brain washing.
Largely thanks to government propaganda telling them their shit healthcare system is just great. They also get fed nothing but lies about the US system.
I lived in the UK for 8 years and can testify first hand about government health care. When she found the lump, she had to go to her local doctor who put her on a waiting list to get an appointment at the breast care clinic. After a NINE MONTH wait, they did no mammogram or imaging, just a quick needle biopsy and sent her home. Two years later, her local doctor got her in to see a private doctor who diagnosed her cancer. She had to wait several months for a slot in an NHS hospital to have her surgery. Of course by then she had to have a mastectomy. She got no follow up chemo or radiation, both of which would be standard in the US. She also got no reconstructive surgery.
Another friend was diagnosed with skin cancer on her face and ended up having to pay for surgery herself rather than wait 9 months for NHS treatment. Her surgeon told her if she had waited even a few more weeks she would have had a huge scar.
All of the idiots who think socialized medicine is a good thing ought to go experience it for themselves before they speak. They don't know what they are talking about.
You are supposed to die, Fool! So we can shrink the demand on Social Security, Medicare and etc. (Insert evil laughter).
If the proposed healthcare system is to be so good, then why are the politicians going to keep the coverage they have now?
I thought the Magna Carta and the subsequent U.S. Constitiution did away with the divine rights of kings.
"Constitution"? We don' need no steenkeng Constitution! (Insert eveil laughter again).
Good job in voting for Big O guys- can’t say the right did not warn you. Get ready for doctor unions, more nursing unions and community hospitals closing. Many of the older docs will retire leaving us where? Excellent- get in line…
"Oooooh better idea, how about a picture of Rosie O'Donnell on condoms so to reduce the risk of STD's."
LMMFAO!!!!!
i certainly hope so – us expenditure on heathcare vs the uk is almost double. 38% benefit for 100% more isn't great…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:International_C...
Face it, some folks do not get it.
BHO, and HIS agenda, is to cut cost's, and rid the USA of as many SERIOUSLY ill people as possible.
Treatments be damned.
You have to remember, the BULK of his CZARAGE are SO far left, and into the SAVE THE EARTH doobage, they WANT people to die………..esp if your not a worker bee any longer.
This serves a dual purpose.
Depopulation, and $$$$$$$$$$$$.
Genocide by fiat………………….
"And I am a physician that is in this field. " I doubt it given your redundant sentence. What other field are you in?
God help your patients.
100% FAIL – First my wife is British and your completely full of Shite, now on to your troll.
0.25 death rate vs 0.18 death rate, that's called survivability
1 out of 4 die in the UK, 1 out of 5.5 in the US. Thats who GET CANCER, NOT HOW MANY, BUT HOW MANY OF THIS THAT HAVE IT, GET IT? That means that our system saves more people, regardless of how many get cancer.
As to who has more case per capita well looks like the US not the UK
UK 458 per 100,000
US 411 per 100,000
As to life expectancy, way more about lifestyle and genetics, and population mix than treatment, but just how much longer do brits live on average?
11 MONTHS! So even if you bothered to read the article correctly your point is pretty basless, the highest rates of cancer are in people 60-79, since Americans live to 78, vs the astounding 79 in the UK again you have no point.
Avergage Life Expectancy
—————————————-
UK79.01
US78.11
On what?
Google "Cancer Incidence Death Rates UK US" and have fun, the stats are correct
1 out of 4 die in the UK, 1 out of 5.5 in the US. Thats who GET CANCER SURIVE, NOT HOW MANY HAVE IT.
That means that our system saves more people, regardless of how many get cancer but to anwer the question they have fewer cases but more deaths.
Case per capita
UK 411 per 100,000
US 458 per 100,000
As to life expectancy, way more about lifestyle and genetics, and population mix than treatment, but just how much longer do brits live on average?
Avergage Life Expectancy
—————————————-
UK 79.01 – WOW HOW DO THEY DO IT?
US 78.11
You can go to any emergency room for treatement so quit whining.
You want a better life? Earn it.
As to that stat's check the WHO database, I am not going to do your home work for you.
Well said!
Guys,
Let's be real. The medical system is good, maybe even the best in the world. The problem is that it's prohibitively expensive. I run a medium- size business and offer HMO to my employees. The double digit annual premium increases are the norm! This year I had to lay people off and it wasn't because of the economy. It was purely a result of yet another 12% increase in insurance premiums. Something has to give!
Lifestyle and genetics is going to determing how well you live, that has nothign to do with you getting more loot from your political allies stealing it from those that earn it.
Disasters such as cancer etc. go to any ER they have to treat you.
You want a better life? EARN IT.
I wasn't refering to the original article, I was referring to the one that is published on this site. If this is published by a "British left wing paper" then they did a very good job of making it look American right wing. Also I know that the poor, sick, etc. are not supposed to come here expecting handouts–this is supposed to be the land of opportunity, right? But what are they going to do while they are too poor to afford healthcare while they are too sick too work and not citizens yet to medicaid or medicare, legally at least? There are plenty of people who are citizens who are healthy enough to work who are taking advantage of the current welfare system. I dare say they are not working because of lack of jobs. A person can get a job digging ditches if he/she needs to work bad enough. I certainly agree that a person should be able to keep what they earn through hard work, but the inevitable claws of greed come in eventually. The more a person gets, the more a person wants and the less likely they want to give any of it to anyone. If some of the 1% or so of the owners of the nation's wealth were willing to pay fair wages instead of use slave labor (for example Wal Mart and various other places that pay wages that are illegal in the US to poorer countries) and hire locally maybe that would fix a lot of problems and healthcare would be the least of our worries. But that's capitalism, right? That's what made this country great, right? I wonder when was the last time you purchased anything that said "made in America" on it. Also, I wonder what it was and how much it cost.
I am tired of hearing how great your health care system is when so many people in the u.s go without ANY care.
Canada covers everybody in the country. Wait till you in the u.s start covering the poor and working poor that do not now have any coverage and typically use the highest cost care which is the emergency wards as their primary health care. We in canada already cover everyone whether they have millions or pennies. Our outcomes and overall care are still pretty darn good in spite of this fact.
How many doctors will become overworked and perhaps leave the system in the u.s.
Canadians in general have a longer life expentancy than in the u.s. and don't have to stress about their health care even if we do wait for some tests and surgeries that are non emergency.
What do you think your system will look like after your president gets his universal health care and he will? What happens when so many millions enter your existing health care system.
So please, Mr. Morris, you are fear mongering, and comparing apples to oranges. Wait till your system is fully loaded with all americans and you loose doctors and stretch your facilities to the limits. Then you can compare your system to the canadian system.
Breast lesions (cancer) is not readily detected in scans of young females breast and therefore these scans are not performed as they produce a high false positive rate. The best diagnosis of a problem is self screening by the individual. So its not just a matter of rationing, but more an appreciation of the poor accuracy of these scans in young women.
I'll trust the WHO on this, 78.11 vs. 79.01 is significant? That's 1.1%
Expectancy has far more to do with lifestyle, genetics, and population mix than treatment.
There is no "Treatment" for old age, prevention is the only extender outide of genetics
Stupid progressive, thinking is for Adults why don't you just leave it to us and feast on your government cheese.
That is interesting. How many years ago would this be? I'm sure we can verify those figures?
Today UK surgeons doing not massive amounts of work likely to be earning 150K+ Sterling.
GPs (General Practitioners – family doctors) average salary over 100K Sterling.
You can do the conversions.
You pay your teachers that do you? I'm curious.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/nov/29/lat...
This is the link to the Guardian article that provides the claim that “up to 10,000 people” are dying each year of cancer. I heartily agree with others that the figure of 38% is grossly misleading and Dick Morris should cite his sources for the "death rates" in the US, UK and Canada. Without references (even better, links) to the relevant sources, this article is just words, with a "take it from me" attitude.
Scott_Z is that you? Sounds like it, start with a really big lie and then get walked back from the edge of the cliff.
120 Millions HA HA HA
As to expectancy, that has to do with lifestyle, genetics, population mix way way way more than treatment. There is no treatment for old age other than how you treated your body before you got there.
There is no doubt that that candian cattle are more prone to excercise and discouraged from abusing they systems via taxes etc. If I lived in Canada I would take damn good care of myself as well
It's called math
The Obama answer is that people will be inspired by HIS greatness to do great things, even if paid $0.10 per hour.
Dumb ass
Cance Death Rate
US 1 in 5.5
UK 1 in 4.0
Which group do you want to be in?
Average Life Expectency
US falls beneath UK & Canada
CN ranks 11th
UK ranks 22nd
US ranks 38th
(France ranks 10th)
You probably steal the cherries instead of pick them.
That is because American's die of obesity related heart disease and gun shot wounds before they can die from cancer.
Try 5 year surviability
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/5-yr-cancer-s...
Try 5 year surviability
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/5-yr-cancer-s...
Help us out, kill yourself, that should cut down on the cost
Not really, try 5 year surviability
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/5-yr-cancer-s...
My wife was a Brit, your right, all the people on here who are saying "Im a brit and it's great" are either American liars or birt progressives, which means they are brit liars
No one is saying containg costs is bad, we are saying letting government take it over and dictate term such as coverage, treatment options etc. is bad.
They can't even run the post office wihtout going into debt, the health care bill is not about cutting costs, it's about wealth re-distribution and power.
Your post is bizzare, are you a natural english speaker becasue your drivel is rather rambling and pointless.
Why would a Candian care a whit about what goes on in the US?
TROLL
How about putting it another way. If the cancer death rate in the U.K. was reduced to that of the U.S., the life expectancy in the U.K. would increase by over 10 years. Sure it's the difference in small fractions, but they have huge implications.
We do a lot of dumb things in the U.S. to shorten our life expectancies, but our superior health care is what keeps us alive. However, it is expensive because we eat too much, smoke too much, exercise too little, …
The death rate is 1 divided by the life expectancy. Life expectancy in the U.K. is about 79. Subtract the difference in death rates from cancer. Then take the inverse and that is your new life expectancy. It's a little more complicated than that but it's a good simple estimate.
If you think 10 years of life expectancy resulting from our superior cancer treatment is quite small, you are out of your mind. Especially considering that we almost certainly have a higher cancer rate because of life style differences. Our system is incredible. Don't mess with success.
Small focused changes and not grand sweeping changes is the only safe approach to improving a flawed, but still highly effective albeit expensive system.
Infant Rates – Not much to do with care ( RETARD ) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/health/04infant...
Expectancy – Most countries dont count infants that die prior to 24 months into average expectancy, that's part of it, the other part is lifestyle, genetics, and population mix. Americans for the most part don't live healthy lives, and adult immigrants for very poor countries (Mexico?) blah blah blah, like you would care about the truth
There is no treatment for old age it's how you treat your body before you get there.
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
Treatment only contributes when a terminal illness is encountered http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/5-yr-cancer-s...
How about 5 year survivablity then
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/5-yr-cancer-s...
quick correction its only 5 years and not 10, but that is a big impact on life expectancy.
That sure will save a huge amount of money since dead people do not collect social security and medicare.
Gov’t run health care programs rarely deliver what was promised. There is only so much money to be spent and ultimately those deemed too sick to treat are shown the door to hospice….if that. We will soon see the same trends here in the U.S. if the new healthcare plan passes.
you are a fucking idiot… the US is 10 times the size of that little terd country called the UK!!!
and let me guess, you voted for Obama also
Expectancy – Most countries dont count infants that die prior to 24 months into average expectancy, that's part of it, the other part is lifestyle, genetics, and population mix. Americans for the most part don't live healthy lives, and adult immigrants from very poor countries (Mexico?) blah blah blah, like you would care about the truth
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
2000-2002, our survival rates are even better now…
Cancer 5-year survival rate (%)— US —-Europe . Delta
Prostate ——————————— 99.30 77.50 … 21.80
Skin melanoma ———————– 92.30 86.10 … 06.20
Breast ———————————— 90.10 79.00 …11.10
Corpus uteri —————————- 82.30 78.00 … 04.30
Colon rectum ————————— 65.50 56.20 … 09.30
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma ———— 62.00 54.60 … 07.40
Stomach ——————————— 25.00 24.90 … 00.10
Lung ————————————– 15.70 10.90 … 04.80
Avergage Life Expectancy
—————————————-
UK 79.01 – WOW HOW DO THEY DO IT?
US 78.11
Expectancy – Most countries dont count infants that die prior to 24 months into average expectancy, that's part of it, the other part is lifestyle, genetics, and population mix. Americans for the most part don't live healthy lives, and adult immigrants from very poor countries (Mexico?) blah blah blah, like you would care about the truth
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
2000-2002, our survival rates are even better now…
Cancer 5-year survival rate (%)— US —-Europe . Delta
Prostate ——————————— 99.30 77.50 … 21.80
Skin melanoma ———————– 92.30 86.10 … 06.20
Breast ———————————— 90.10 79.00 …11.10
Corpus uteri —————————- 82.30 78.00 … 04.30
Colon rectum ————————— 65.50 56.20 … 09.30
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma ———— 62.00 54.60 … 07.40
Stomach ——————————— 25.00 24.90 … 00.10
Lung ————————————– 15.70 10.90 … 04.80
Avergage Life Expectancy
—————————————-
UK 79.01 – WOW HOW DO THEY DO IT?
US 78.11
Deaths in the USA per thousand for those between 15 and 60 are 108 (World health Association)
Deaths in the UK per thousand for those between 15 and 60 are 86 (World health Association)
The UK government spends half as much on health per person as the USA
It is a "No Brainer"
Is that supposed to be the percentage of the total population, or just the percentage of those who have cancer who die?
Do whatever you want to make things better, that's called freedom of choice.
When you reach into my back pocket that's called theft.
Age, general health at the time of contraction, type of cancer etc. This is all averaged anyway older but more detailed stats
Cancer 5-year survival rate (%)— US —-Europe . Delta
Prostate ——————————— 99.30 77.50 … 21.80
Skin melanoma ———————– 92.30 86.10 … 06.20
Breast ———————————— 90.10 79.00 …11.10
Corpus uteri —————————- 82.30 78.00 … 04.30
Colon rectum ————————— 65.50 56.20 … 09.30
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma ———— 62.00 54.60 … 07.40
Stomach ——————————— 25.00 24.90 … 00.10
Lung ————————————– 15.70 10.90 … 04.80
Avergage Life Expectancy
—————————————-
UK 79.01 – WOW HOW DO THEY DO IT?
US 78.11
Deaths in the USA per thousand for those between 15 and 60 are 108 (World Health Association)
Deaths in the UK per thousand for those between 15 and 60 are 86 (World Health Association)
The UK spends half what USA spends on healthcare per head of population.
Looks like a no brainer
If they did something that worked and did not require massive government growth then what would we need them for?
Deaths in USA are higher because they include our higher murder rate, from a health care standpoint it is a meaningless statistic.
–sigh–
Sorry, forgot to type "expenditure by GDP". I assume you checked the data link to point this out to me? Thanks for the correction. Also, I'll vote for the government that can prove value for my tax dollars – and neither side can do that.
I agree you have no Brain
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
I agree you have no brain
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
Oh don't confuse the trolls with facts
More questions here is one for you. If the Government comes out a says you did not need routine breast examines until later in life how is early detection possible? Are these people guilty of negligence because they follow the government suggestions. Mr. Guest wake up and realize that this is call rationing!
Cheers for the data – shows that health care is a huge priority for America and changing it needlessly is a very bad idea.
The early detection of cancer is really essential to prevent the cancer. But there are too many types of cancer. What types of screening that we should always do? Is there any screening technique that can detect all types of cancer?
Be very careful when someone trots out percentage risks, which can look inflated when compared to actual risk. The real spread between death rates is quite small, yet it is presented as a "larger" percentage difference. This sort of statistical inflation is no reason to sucker in for our truly awful US health care system.
For one reason only: Your talking heads like Morris keep referring to the Canadian system with contempt and misinformation and I just wanted to take the opportunity to inject some perspective into the conversation.
You are most welcome, and I really don't give a shi$ about you or your health careless system.
"natural english speaker" Geez, some of you folks are pretty touchy. Next time, I will type more slowly so you might be able to grasp the essence of what is being stated.
The real issue here is government control of our lives. Stay healthy people.
Isn't health insurance intrinsically socialized… basically a system whereby the collective pay for a few. I think the best and most un-socialized form of healthcare would be one where there is no health insurance per se. If you get sick, you pay completely for your own treatment. That way you are treated for only as much as you can afford. I'm sure that would bring a lot of costs down. Each man for himself. Govt won't need to interfere.
I'm so tired of paying for other people's million dollar cancer treatment…
Ah your feelings were hurt, here is a tip; don't read it then you can live in LA LA Land and not be bothered by us you Canadian Progressive leech. It's none of your Damn business what we do in our country, so thanks for the advice and all but PISS OFF we have our own imbecile progressives we dont need imports.
As to your messages, don't type more slowly just more clearly, try and complete a thought before moving on to another, that kind of thing. Once you figure that out try using spaces between paragraphs, capitalize countries etc.
As to your "wonderful" system I experienced it first hand with my unborn daughter, stupid bastards misdiagnosed her with Down syndrome and tried to get us to abort (cost savings you know) since my wife was living in Canada at the time that was primary care (Canadian Health Care = Oxymoron)
I brought her to the US, doctors here figured it all out in about 30 minutes with a 3D ultra (you know a real one, not a 1983 model used to cut costs that you bought from us at a Garage sale)
Stop whining and do something about what you're whining about. You sound like a typical spoiled American. No wonder the rest of the world is mad at this country. Americans could probably stand to be knocked down from the pedestal they put themselves on. A little humility never hurt anyone.
Health care and Insurance are two different things dimwit
Ask 100 Progressive whether they would rather pay or live of the effort of others 100% polled agree that they would rather live of the lives of others!
Astounding!
Voluntary Risk Pooling vs. Coreced Redistribution, sorry not the same at all.
If you want costs to go down, really, then require catastrophic, and make people pay for the other stuff, that would truly drive prices down.
Hey folks?
That is .07% higher, not 38% higher.
That's .07%, not 38%
Cherry picking. I just finished almost 2 years of cancer treatment for Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma. A very aggressive cancer. If I did not receive the immediate CAT scan and then biopsy, I would have died. I couldn't wait 30 days which is the MINIMUM waiting period for GB and Canada (unless your a pet). If I was in GB or Canada, I would have died. My sister-in-law was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. She had no job and no insurance, yet within a couple weeks of first seeing the Dr., she had gone through surgery and began CHEMO. EVERYBODY in USA has access to the best healthcare. The only diff is if you don't have insurance and do have a job, you'll be making payments for a long time, but I'd rather be alive and making payments then dead.
The NonCitizen wouldn't give a rat's a-word for the humans that will be impacted by his mad grab for more and more control. Truth, history and common-sense cannot be used by His Eternal Obama-ness and his pie-eyed worshippers; all three are directly opposed to all of their promises, claims and bold-faced lies. If you voted to put the NonCitizen into the office of the president – well, thanks so much for that. Your kids will suffer along with ours as our economy dies.
Have you ever talked to any one who actually has an illness or disease? The "well" people LOVE it, of course. You go see the doctor, you don't pay and you go home. Great. But what if you need to see a specialist? Or have additional tests? And you have to wait and wait and wait. Who have you talked to?
percentages for dummies: a percentage is a ratio. It equals the difference between the US and UK rates divided by the UK rate. I know 0.07% more deaths seems like a tiny number but its equivalent to approximately 215,000 additional lives lost each year.
Enjoy your new health care system. It's coming.
Glad yout daughter is okay. That's the most important outcome.
Phil
But Obama lies
How many Brits get cancer in the first place? If the rates of developing cancer were the same, I would say this is something of significance. However, without that piece of information, the weight of this statistic is indeterminate. It may be the UK system prevents more cancers and only the more deadly cases remain, for example. As always, more info can only help Senators make a more constructive decision on this bill.
All Progressive Systems Check
America Hater – Check
Tax Leech – Check
Phony Sob Story – Check
Enemy Ass Kisser – Check
All systems go, houston we have a Progressive Troll! Who could have seen that coming, I mean other than 99.9% of 1st grade graduates, which excludes you.
Spoiled is what you are nitwit, your a leech that lives off the leavings of others, crow in the world of men, but that's an insult to crows becasue at least they look for their own food, you have your government cheese delivered.
Progressives are bums that have audacity to complain that not getting enough free stuff.
I and the other conservatives/liberatarians on this site do something you have never been exposed to "Real Work" try it sometime you never know you just might enjoy it.
As far as humble that word means power under control, not ass kissing foriegn leaders like your Lord and Savior Obama.
We are coming for you and your ilk in 2010 boy, get ready for a political ass whipping (not the kind that you get all hot and sweaty over either)
Um, citation maybe?
It might be coming, Progressives have control, until 2011.
it will be attacked constitutionally and from a states perspective
In 2011 it will be repealled, the "No start until 2014" clause will bite our progressives in the ass.
Despite our diametrically opposed views I Hope your family fairs well also
Cherry picking! get your finger out of your nose. statistics are statistics. the death rate would include both.
I'm a physician and am not in favor of socialized medicine by any means. However, the statistics in this article are very misleading. Its the same trick that drug companies often use when touting a new drug. The difference between 0.25% and 0.18% may be a relative change of 38%, but the absolute difference is only 0.07%. (0.25 – 0.18). Which is statistically insignificant. In 10,000 people there would be a difference of 7 people. It matters to those 7 people obviously, but to say there is a 38% difference between the two countries is intentionally misleading.
From Wikipedia, sourced.
The U.S. government spends more on health care than on Social Security and national defense combined, according to the Brookings Institution.[26]
a total of 40% of Americans ages 18–64 have inadequate access to health care, according to the Consumer Reports study.[37]
it is now clear that medical debt is the principle cause of bankruptcy in the United States.
Best in the world. For sure.
simple fix to the healthcare problem get rid of the "a.m.a"
allow more doctors to be educated
its a real simple fix
Check out men's prostate cancer survival rates. It's way better than twice as likely you'll live in America than in Britain. That's way beyond environmental or genetic reasons.
Check the stroke rates following TIA's in UK vs US.
After my mother's first TIA, I stumbled upon a UK site talking about the very long wait (3 months – 6 months or more vs mere weeks in the US) for TIA patients to be seen for follow-up. In the UK, the death rate from a full stroke following TIA is higher than in the US, *becasue* of the delay in follow-up.
But if the patient dies, the health system doesn't have to pay for them.
And Dr's in the UK have better working conditions, and make more, than in Germany. German Dr's are leaving in droves.
Any system has it's good and bad. It's how these weigh in in the end. In Canada today you may be subjected to waits that impair health. You have no recourse but to leave Canada If you can. Even if you are diagnosed with cancer in the U.S., or any other country, you still must go through the red tape to recieve treatment in
Canada or Great Britain. You are more likely to die of heart failure in Engand than in the U.S.
Yes, people don't go bankrupt in Canada and England but more die what we consider premature deaths in the U.S Wealthy and dead? I'd rather be bankrupt and alive.
Here's some Infant Mortality data from the CIA World Factbook. Looks like Canada and the UK are doing a good deal better than our U.S. system on this one. Heck, even Cuba is beating us on this one. The statistics are per 1000 live births:
Faroe Islands – 6.32 – 2009 est.
United States – 6.26 – 2009 est.
Cuba – 5.82 – 2009 est.
European Union – 5.72 – 2009 est.
Italy- 5.51 – 2009 est.
Isle of Man – 5.37 – 2009 est.
Taiwan – 5.35 – 2009 est.
San Marino – 5.34 – 2009 est.
Greece – 5.16 – 2009 est.
Ireland – 5.05 – 2009 est.
Canada – 5.04 – 2009 est.
Wallis and Futuna – 5.02 – 2009 est.
Monaco – 5.00 – 2009 est.
New Zealand – 4.92 – 2009 est.
United Kingdom – 4.85 – 2009 est.
And here's the link to the page with Life Expectancies:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worl...
Hmmmmm, seems people live longer in the UK and Canada as well.
Not sure what this says about the cherry picked cancer statistic.
[...] original here: Big Government » Blog Archive » U.K. Cancer Death Rate Is 38 … By admin | category: cheap insurance life uk | tags: challenge-the-misguided, executives, [...]
I didn't think I was whining. Some things ERs aren't sufficient enough to treat. Believe me, Thinking Man, I am working to earn my position and I have been doing that against odds for quite a while. It isn't easy to do things in the world (this country at least) with epilepsy. Medications are very expensive, thanks to capitalism, Doctors are very expensive, thanks to capitalism. However, as a writer, which is pretty much about all I can do because I can't really hold a regular job, I can sell my writings, thanks to capitalism. I'm not whining at all, but if it is possible for things to be better, at least give it a shot. You can always go back. What is there to lose in the long run by trying to make this a better country–even world–for everyone? Will nationalized healthcare do that? As I said, I don't know. But what would it hurt to try? As I said, if it doesn't work, you can always go back.
Here is a poll about how happy individuals in different countries are with their health insurance. If we have the best health insurance coverage in the world, why are we the least satisfied with it?
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N0743817...
[...] is the original post: Big Government » Blog Archive » U.K. Cancer Death Rate Is 38 … By admin | category: cheap insurance life uk | tags: challenge-the-misguided, [...]
This is less about rationing and costs, it is more about population control.
"Hack Them before They Hack You"
Doctors have a higher profit margin than Insurers in general
Hmmm. Why are we comparing the government system to the private system? Why not compare UK private healthcare to US private healthcare or US medicare to UK NHS. You know like with like?
And why not look at UN rankings of the US vs. UK systems when looking at All variables, such as infant mortality, overall care, care to the most deprived within society etc…
The UK Healthcare system is in complete dissarray and costs up to 20% MORE every 5 years. In other words, 2.2 Trillion times +20% equals @$800 Billion MORE every 5 Years…..
National Health is a money black hole.
They do it because they don't have young men killing each other on the streets in the same quantities that we do.
[...] here to see the original: Big Government » Blog Archive » U.K. Cancer Death Rate Is 38 … By admin | category: insurance medical uk | tags: best-health, cruise-boards, feature, [...]
http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2009/08/1...
How many of those people who are dying of cancer in the US have health insurance as compared to the number of people dying of cancer in the US that don't have health insurance? Anyone check out the price tag for treatment lately? Some people have to choose between food, heat and home, over health. No one should have to do that.
Exactly.
Nancy,
you have got it in one.
I’m from the UK – I’ve had cancer (surgery, chemo the works!)- the care I received post diagnosis was fast, efficient and fortunately I’m still here 3 years later to tell the tale! It did not cost me a penny.
Don't forget, this is just the stats for Cancer, not any other thing that needs medical attention. Yes, a socialized system does have delays, but it is free, which is what is important. I would definitely prefer a 38% higher risk of cancer, and get the benefits of free healthcare, for that and anything else, than having to pay huge amounts when an insurance company just says no. Watch the documentary, "Sicko" on this, it is very good. However it does swing more towards the socialized system, it definitely shows things how they are if you see through the bias.
[...] the original: Big Government » Blog Archive » U.K. Cancer Death Rate Is 38 … By admin | category: insurance life term uk | tags: assets, executives, from-directly, [...]
The comparison, to me is wrong, the author is saying the percentage difference of the death rate is 38% between US and UK. But actually, according to the same stats, the number of deaths are 7% higher in UK than the US. Its the same statistics but different comparison. The author is comparing the DIFFERENCE of death rate between UK and US which is 38%, however one should be looking at the difference in number of deaths itself.
Also what is the source of these stats? Guardian reporting 10000 deaths does not mean 25% death rate.
[...] the original: Big Government » Blog Archive » U.K. Cancer Death Rate Is 38 … By admin | category: health insurance, health insurance private uk | tags: archive, [...]
2800+ deaths in the USA, 300+ deaths in Canada as of November 15, 2009.
USA is ten times the population of Canada.
The rates are practically the same.
Complete and total BS.
Americans spend a buttload of money each year on health travel to other countries, typically because they are uninsured in the US, and they can find the treatments CHEAPER in other countries.
cuz Americans do not deserve the best – just ask obozo, the America basher
Thank You. We are not all that different as we want what is best for our families and Country.
G-d bless.
Phil
I am an Md PhD so let me correct you. Pay attention and you may learn something. Life expectancy in UK is 80.2 in US it is 77.9, is it is years not 11 months (I know the american education system is not as good as in UK but come on basic math). It is survivability yes and if you get cancer when you are older you have a LOWER chance of surviving. Life expectancy is mainly down to HEALTHCARE by the way. I suggest you change your blog name thinking is something you don't do. US is ranked 37th in the world for healthcare, UK is ranked 18th I liked the USA when i lived there but please accept your healthcare system is useless, when you have charities providing health care to people of the only superpower in the world you know you have a problem. Oh and the fact you resorted to insults suggest you know my post was right, don't let politics blind you.
kill thatnig gerobama
" But Obama says we spend more but do not get better results."
And that is unfortunately truth. You spend three times more in healthcare than we do and you have more people dying in cancer than we do. I know it sad, like it is true.
The United States does not have the best system in the world. There are two issues and not just one. The United States has available to anyone who can pay for it the most advanced medicine and medical technology in the world. The fact is that not even everyone in the United States has access to the best medical services available in this country. Not everyone in the United States can afford the "best" the United States has to offer. There are people who die in this country because they do not have access to the care they need because they cannot pay for it. There are people who die or have reduced quality of life in this country because their health insurance refuses to pay for recommended treatments, refuses to pay for second opinions, or refuses to pay at all for many things. As is indicated in this documentary http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroun... we can learn things from other countries just as they can from us. Contrary to what most people believe we do have a segment of socialized medicine in the country; medicare and medicaid. There have been cries of outrage about ever changing medicare. I don't think we need a single payer system, but we do need to look at various systems and improve ours. The quality of care available in the United States is great, but the fact that many millions do not have access to it isn't. As previously stated, two separate issues.
I do have a question regarding American Parchment. Do they intend to show corrupt politicians from all political backgrounds (moderate, conservative, liberal, democrat, republican, independent, etc.) or is this just a slanted view of things? Special interest groups and lobbyists have their hands in lots of pockets. If anyone believes only one group or another of politicians has corruption issues to address then they are burying their heads in the sand.
[...] [...]
I have spoken to a variety of British and Canadian citizens regarding their healthcare. Some are defensive, others are clearly lying while saying they like it just fine. A handful seem sincerely satisfied. Most have a story of one or more loved ones that died in their fifties or sixties instead of their seventies or eighties, waiting to be diagnosed.
Facts such as????? That death rates are .02 and .07% percent higher based on what? I think as usual the conservatives have no facts just scare tactics, amazing you people haven't caught on to this yet. This is what Fox News and their chronies like Dick Morris do, they inflame people by twisting the truth. He contradicts himself in his own article, are more people dying because of the health care system or because they are getting diagnosed too late? Are they getting diagnosed too late because of the health care system or because most people don't run off to the doctor everyday? Is it their own negligance or the health care systems negligance, seems pretty cloudy??
I would like to know the answer to that too….I have had BCBS for many years and I think it is the best. My husband and I are now on Medicare and still have BCBS for our supplement and we are well cared for.
[...] more here: » U.K. Cancer Death Rate Is 38% Higher Than In U.S. – Big Government tags: archive, are-incapable, best-health, carlos, demand-public, government, health [...]