• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Health Rankings: Of 17 Nations, U.S. Is Dead Last

Re: We're Number......LAST

buck said:
I agree. This is a ranking of health, not of the health care system. Our health is bad due to decisions we make - we eat a lot of processed foods, we smoke, we eat less fish, we drive a lot and walk less, we have more guns.
Click to expand...

This is certainly an issue, but hardly the only one. Our system is pretty lousy. It costs too much, devotes too much energy towards profit over care, and does not include nearly enough preventative or preliminary care. Not to mention the over emphasis on pharmacology. This is a healthcare system that refuses to take a stance on homeopathic "medicine" and inform the populace that it does nothing and they should stop paying charlatans for it.

iguanaman said:
They should have thought of that years ago when the employer based system was set up complete with tax breaks for companies that provided it. The Govt. should have taken over then instead but it was "Communism" and the sky would fall so this is what we got stuck with.
Click to expand...

So let's do it now before the employer based system makes things even worse. The facts are obvious. The United States has amazing medical technology and some of the most effective medical treatments in the world. But we make the whole process so expensive that the people of this country end up paying exorbitant costs for worse care than the rest of the industrialized world. Let's stop making excuses and fix it. We have the evidence all around us that the for-profit healthcare system is inferior to a single payer one. We need to stop living in denial and join the rest of the world, so we can enjoy the benefits of a healthy population like they do.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Tigger said:
How about the ones whose names are on the bottom of the ORIGINAL document.
Click to expand...

How about them? Are you saying they all agreed to the meaning of the text? Did you ask? (in fact they had lots of recorded disagreements on the meaning of the text). And how about the legislators from eleven states that ratified -- there were hundreds? Are you going to channel them and take a vote.

Originalism is silly.

Sorry, but that's not the way I see it and never will be the way I see it. You know what the Constitution means to me at this point?.... It's a piece of used toilet paper. That's what we've turned it into over the last 150 years. How's that sit with you?
Click to expand...

Yeah, see that's why Americans reject conservatism. It's stupid. Meanwhile, we'll keep progressing and adapting this wonderful documents to our lives, as we have for 230 years. Conservatism has no future.

NOBODY has a right to health care. The rich have an easier time affording the privilege of health care but nobody has a right to it.
Click to expand...

So it's OK for parents to let their sick children die. No rights violated, so no crime committed. Got it.

[Psssst: like taking candy from a baby]
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

head of joaquin said:
We have the most expensive system in the advanced world, with some of the worst health outcomes. That's because our for profit pay for service model is totally and completely maladapted for health care -- for well known reasons, the most obvious being lack of price elasticity.

It's time for single payer. End of story. Our rationing of health care by income has failed.
Click to expand...

I think it has alot to do qwith the price of mal-practice insurance.

Imaging, in your work, that one mistake can ruin your life, and that is after years and years of school.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Mason66 said:
I think it has alot to do qwith the price of mal-practice insurance.

Imaging, in your work, that one mistake can ruin your life, and that is after years and years of school.
Click to expand...

No, the facts don't support this claim. Every study made has shown that malpractice insurance/lawsuits adds a de minimus amount to health care inflation, less than 1%.

Morever most malpractice suits are brought against a small group of physicians, who keep causing harm, but who remain in practice because the AMA has trouble policing itself. Something like 5% of doctors are responsible for about 90% of malpractice claims. If the AMA would do a better job weeding out bad doctors, we wouldn't have this problem.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Catawba said:
Why would you be opposed to better outcomes at lower costs?
Click to expand...

I can think of two answers to your question:

1) we might not believe, in the system you're proposing, that the result will be either better outcome or lower costs.
2) we might not be willing to sacrifice the last shreds of our liberty for even more security.
 
Last edited:
Re: We're Number......LAST

head of joaquin said:
No, the facts don't support this claim. Every study made has shown that malpractice insurance/lawsuits adds a de minimus amount to health care inflation, less than 1%.

Morever most malpractice suits are brought against a small group of physicians, who keep causing harm, but who remain in practice because the AMA has trouble policing itself. Something like 5% of doctors are responsible for about 90% of malpractice claims. If the AMA would do a better job weeding out bad doctors, we wouldn't have this problem.
Click to expand...

Better check those stats before you go hanging an argument on them.

Related Medical Malpractice Statistics•$4 billion dollars paid by insurers for malpractice in the USA 1999 (When Good Doctors Get Sued, 2001)
•Estimated 25% of practicing physicians sued annually (When Good Doctors Get Sued, 2001)
•Estimated 50-65% physicians sued at least once during their career (When Good Doctors Get Sued, 2001)
•Estimated 10-20% of malpractice claims reach trial phase (When Good Doctors Get Sued, 2001)
•Majority of malpractice cases involve misdiagnoses, diagnostic errors or delayed diagnosis (When Good Doctors Get Sued, 2001)
•Medical malpractice payment reports by frequency:
◦86,057 physicians had 1 medical malpractice payment report against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
◦24,731 physicians had 2 medical malpractice payment reports against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
◦8,078 physicians had 3 medical malpractice payment reports against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
◦3,340 physicians had 4 medical malpractice payment reports against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
◦1,459 physicians had 5 medical malpractice payment reports against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
◦746 physicians had 6 medical malpractice payment reports against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
◦372 physicians had 7 medical malpractice payment reports against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
◦224 physicians had 8 medical malpractice payment reports against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
◦142 physicians had 9 medical malpractice payment reports against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
◦386 physicians had more than 10 medical malpractice payment reports against them in the US 1990-2003 (2003 Annual Report, National Practitioner Data Bank, US DHHS)
Click to expand...

Source

Medical liability: By late career, 61% of doctors have been sued
An AMA report on medical liability lawsuits illustrates the need for federal and state reforms, the Association says.
By Carolyne Krupa, amednews staff. Posted Aug. 16, 2010.

Six out of 10 physicians 55 and older have been sued, according to a new American Medical Association study.

More at source
Click to expand...
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

clownboy said:
I can think of two answers to your question:

1) we might not believe, in the system you're proposing, that the result will be either better outcome or lower costs.
2) we might not be willing to sacrifice the last shreds of our liberty for even more security.
Click to expand...

or:
3) answer the question
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

sangha said:
or:
3) answer the question
Click to expand...

The answers were posted. Your ability to comprehend and accept those answers are your own issue.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

sangha said:
The # of doctors sued is irrelevant. The # of doctors who are successfully sued is
Click to expand...

Now, try reading the links. Btw, the number of doctors IS listed. And you seem to have missed the very first line:

$4 billion dollars paid by insurers for malpractice in the USA 1999
Click to expand...
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

sangha said:
You didn't answer the question
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in childish "No, you didn't", "Yes I did" games. Many conservatives do not believe a single payer system of healthcare delivers either or both better outcomes or lower costs. So your transparent and weak attempt at a "when did you stop beating your wife" question was answered. You just can't accept the answers.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

clownboy said:
Better check those stats before you go hanging an argument on them.



Source
Click to expand...

Since the AMAs the problem, no serious person uses its statistics on this.

Here read this and report back in, a sadder but wiser man.

Malpractice a Tiny Percentage of Health Care Costs


The CBO has reaffirmed its earlier findings that tort reform does not lower health care costs. In 2008, the agency found that “the effect [of tort limits] would be relatively small— less than 0.5 percent of total health care spending.”- Budget Options Volume 1 Health Care, Congressional Budget Office, December 2008.

Would Tort Reform Lower Costs? - NYTimes.com

ome academics who study the system are less certain [about tort reform]. One critic is Tom Baker, a professor of law and health sciences at the University of Pennsylvania School of Law and author of “The Medical Malpractice Myth,” who believes that making the legal system less receptive to medical malpractice lawsuits will not significantly affect the costs of medical care. He spoke with the freelance writer Anne Underwood.

Q.

A lot of people seem to have taken up the cause of tort reform. Why isn’t it included in the health care legislation pending on Capitol Hill?

A.

Because it’s a red herring. It’s become a talking point for those who want to obstruct change. But [tort reform] doesn’t accomplish the goal of bringing down costs.

Q.

Why not?

A.

As the cost of health care goes up, the medical liability component of it has stayed fairly constant. That means it’s part of the medical price inflation system, but it’s not driving it. The number of claims is small relative to actual cases of medical malpractice.

But wait, there's more!

http://www.medmalfacts.com/facts-and-myths/
 
Last edited:
Re: We're Number......LAST

Londoner said:
Um... aren't the figures adjusted for population?
Click to expand...

It's listed as deaths per 100,000, which is completely useless. Frankly, I've seen more reliable statistics compiled by community college students. DABASSE is a politically driven organization, not a scientific one. Their goal is to push policy.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

head of joaquin said:
Since the AMAs the problem, no serious person uses its statistics on this.

Here read this and report back in, a sadder but wiser man.

Malpractice a Tiny Percentage of Health Care Costs


The CBO has reaffirmed its earlier findings that tort reform does not lower health care costs. In 2008, the agency found that “the effect [of tort limits] would be relatively small— less than 0.5 percent of total health care spending.”- Budget Options Volume 1 Health Care, Congressional Budget Office, December 2008.

Would Tort Reform Lower Costs? - NYTimes.com

But some academics who study the system are less certain. One critic is Tom Baker, a professor of law and health sciences at the University of Pennsylvania School of Law and author of “The Medical Malpractice Myth,” who believes that making the legal system less receptive to medical malpractice lawsuits will not significantly affect the costs of medical care. He spoke with the freelance writer Anne Underwood.

Q.

A lot of people seem to have taken up the cause of tort reform. Why isn’t it included in the health care legislation pending on Capitol Hill?

A.

Because it’s a red herring. It’s become a talking point for those who want to obstruct change. But [tort reform] doesn’t accomplish the goal of bringing down costs.

Q.

Why not?

A.

As the cost of health care goes up, the medical liability component of it has stayed fairly constant. That means it’s part of the medical price inflation system, but it’s not driving it. The number of claims is small relative to actual cases of medical malpractice.

But wait, there's more!

http://www.medmalfacts.com/facts-and-myths/
Click to expand...

Okay, you posted a bunch of unsourced nonsense about the amount of doctors affected by malpractice, I then showed you, with sources, what a mountain of claptrap it was. Now you think we won't notice your justifications are dealing, not with the amount of doctors affected by malpractice, but that limiting tort reform won't have much of an impact.

Nice movement on the goal posts there. That aside, what the CBO and the Justice Law blog doesn't tell us is that limiting tort reform, even though it doesn't save much percentage wise, would still save us millions. That means it's not the only answer by itself, but in combination with other merasures it is significant.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

clownboy said:
I can think of two answers to your question:

1) we might not believe, in the system you're proposing, that the result will be either better outcome or lower costs.
2) we might not be willing to sacrifice the last shreds of our liberty for even more security.
Click to expand...

You choose denial of the results for the rest of the industrialized world, and the liberty to pay higher costs for poorer outcomes. I don't think you will find many wishing to go down that path with you!
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

clownboy said:
Okay, you posted a bunch of unsourced nonsense about the amount of doctors affected by malpractice,.
Click to expand...

The CBO is unsourced?

BWHHAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

I love the smell of conservative desperation in the morning.

No independent study -- not one - has found tort reform has any significant impact on health care costs. Deal with it.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

clownboy said:
I'm not interested in childish "No, you didn't", "Yes I did" games. Many conservatives do not believe a single payer system of healthcare delivers either or both better outcomes or lower costs. So your transparent and weak attempt at a "when did you stop beating your wife" question was answered. You just can't accept the answers.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know that in spite of the fact that every advanced nation with a SP system has better healthcare at a lower cost, rightwingers (there are no "conservatives") wont believe it

That's because for the right, beliefs trump fact
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Okay I found an example of government screwing up health care:

Low-income women in the Dallas area will find little help looking for a doctor on a state-generated list for the new Texas Women's Health Program, research by The Dallas Morning News shows. The state has touted that it found plenty of doctors for its new program now Comments Dallasnews.com is now using... FULL ARTICLE AT THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS
Women's Health Program doctors list for Dallas area is full of errors, The News finds

Thank Gov Perry for screwing up what was a well established program because of your ideological numbskullery
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

head of joaquin said:
I love how conservatives are constantly having to deny statistical and scientific reality to support their delusions.
Click to expand...

I'm not conservative.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

ecofarm said:
I'm not conservative.
Click to expand...


You are very conservative, or did you mean you don't call yourself conservative?
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Catawba said:
You are very conservative, or did you mean you don't call yourself conservative?
Click to expand...

head of joaquin said:
That's what they all say. Even conservatives realize the term has become a laughingstock.
Click to expand...

I'm a pro-life (mild), green (market based and personal), hawk (DemPeaceTheory) libertarian (liberal socially and economically, except as noted). See signature.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

ecofarm said:
I'm a pro-life (mild), green (market based and personal), hawk (DemPeaceTheory) libertarian (liberal socially and economically, except as noted). See signature.
Click to expand...


We know you are conservative about this topic, US health care, as you have opposed an upgrade to UHC as every other industrialized country has done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom