What should be cut?

[Liberty1]

Wrong, read carefully.

I believe that attitudes exist, somewhat universally, where people wil not change their lifestyle with the hope that it may prolong their life expectancy.

But if you're starting with a worse lifestyle in the first place, you'll get the same worse results.

[Scooter]

So where is your evidence that Americans have a worse lifestyle than Europeans? Europeans smoke a great deal more, so that can't factor into such a claim, to say nothing of the copious amounts of animal fats the French, the Dutch, etc. consume in the form of cheese and cream.

[Liberty1]

Well I don't think smoking is as bad as the politically correct crowd make it out to be. My grandpa dipped and smoked since he was 13, lived to be 96.

AndI don't think a high fat diet is necessarily bad either, he ate eggs and sausage or bacon every morinig of his life.

I think it's the high calorie, sedentary, high stress lifestyle many mericans have, by their own choice.

[Scooter]

And the evidence that such a lifestyle is worse than that of Europeans, etc. would be...

[oldr_n_wsr]

I would guess (and it's just a guess) that given most of Europes 6 weeks gvoernment sponsored vacation (if not most of eurpoe then at least in Germany) would be a start. I know of very few here in the states that get 6 weeks and even fewer who actually take those 6 weeks. Heck, most don't even take the 4 weeks that many "seasoned" workers get. I iknow I didn't until they (the company) forced us too.

Also I believe food portion sizes are much larger here in the states. I don't know the nutritional value comparison, but all of my relatives that have visited here (mostly from Germany but a couple from Sweden) always comment on how much food one gets at our resturants.

[Liberty1]

Some people just have to be spoon fed everything.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_o ... th-obesity

[oldr_n_wsr]

Also, most people in the USA do have some kind of health insurance and most plans do cover preventive care (yearly physicals, ect) but most people do not avail themselves of this. I know myself I didn't start going to the doctor regularly (aka yearly physicals) until I reached my late 40's. Even then I only went because my wife insisted. You can lead a horse to water.........


ETA
Speaking of what should be cut, how much money was wasted spent on changing the food pyramid to a plate? Like that needed to be done.

[Scooter]

For Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, figures are based on health examinations, rather than self-reported information. Obesity estimates derived from health examinations are generally higher and more reliable than those coming from self-reports, because they preclude any misreporting of people's height and weight. However, health examinations are only conducted regularly in a few countries (OECD).

IOW, for most countries other than the U.S., the data is based on self-reporting rather than medical examinations. Meaning that for the most part you are comparing results based on medical exams (more accurate) to self-reports (almost certainly underestimated).

Thus any comparison of the data is meaningless.

But do keep trying.

[Liberty1]

Come up with something better instead of just spouting bull-shit.

[Scooter]

Apparently posting a disclaimer about the accuracy of the data verbatim from your own source constitutes bullshit.

I don't have the burden of proving your unsubstantiated assertions (speaking of spouting bullshit...)

Not my problem that you can't face up to the fact that U.S. health care does a shitty job of taking care of its people when compared to more civilized countries.

Oh yeah and obesity, also a function of insufficient preventive health care. So if those numbers are right, you've helped prove my point. Thanks.

[Liberty1]

I haven't made the argument that the US healthcare doesn't do a shitty job. Never said it. You have.

I've said life expectancy has more to do with lifestyle.

Whether or not life expectancy has anything to do with healthcare, not proven either.

[Scooter]

I've said life expectancy has more to do with lifestyle.

Which you haven't proven.

Whether or not life expectancy has anything to do with healthcare, not proven either.

Of course not. Clearly there is absolutely no link between advance in medical science and increases in life expectancy. Just as clearly, those who are unable to be treated for their illnesses are just as likely to survive them as those who have access to a cure.

[Liberty1]

Not my problem that you can't face up to the fact that U.S. health care does a shitty job of taking care of its people when compared to more civilized countries

Which you haven't proven.

Clearly there is absolutely no link between advance in medical science and increases in life expectancy. Just as clearly, those who are unable to be treated for their illnesses are just as likely to survive them as those who have access to a cure.

Sure it's part of the equation, but so is diet (in all respects), stress, culture, attitude, environment, personal habits and hygiene, genetics, education, morality, urban/rural, smoking, drugs, high risk activities, income and I'm sure a myriad of others I haven't thought of.

[Scooter]

Not my problem that you can't face up to the fact that U.S. health care does a shitty job of taking care of its people when compared to more civilized countries

Which you haven't proven.

Proven by health care outcomes, which are far worse in the U.S. than in most other developed countries.

Clearly there is absolutely no link between advance in medical science and increases in life expectancy. Just as clearly, those who are unable to be treated for their illnesses are just as likely to survive them as those who have access to a cure.

Sure it's part of the equation, but so is diet (in all respects), stress, culture, attitude, environment, personal habits and hygiene, genetics, education, morality, urban/rural, smoking, drugs, high risk activities, income and I'm sure a myriad of others I haven't thought of.[/quote]
And since the U.S. is one of the richest countries in the world....
And since the U.S. has one of the most educated populations in the world...
And since I am sure you are not going to argue that Americans are less hygenic, less moral, more genetically defective, etc. than most of the rest of the developed world, once again we are back to health care.

[quaddriver]

go away for 5 days and nothing has changed.

so let me get this straight...

first it is suggested the US should limit the amount of diagnostic equipment since other countries dont have as much (and this stuff costs money) and instead we should institute wellness programs - which the US has ad nauseum for FREE - because it will make us eat healthier?

Did Gob address the fact that heart disease victims live longer in the US than anywhere else? no.
Did Gob address the fact that cancer victims live longer in the US than anywhere else? no.
Did he address the fact the the US has a slightly lower life expectancy? somewhat - he blamed it on the medical system, even when questioned, instead of recognizing the facts that our people much younger than the average (44 and under) tend to die from things not related to disease or medical issues. Why it fell upon my shoulders to point these facts out is bewildering. Oh wait, no its not, its another one of those simplistic 'the USA is so bad because...' posts he makes a half dozen times a day. To wit I reply: 'On behalf of our nation, stay away'

And now we have morphed into lack of healthcare? take about vapor ware argument.

The issue in the US (wont speak for the minds of our 'stralians) is not lack of health care - everyone has it and at limits unheard of in other countries. Even people without insurance. Hence: The issue is the COST. The us spends far more per capita than any other nation. As was also strangely pointed out by Gob. (which again makes his entire circle of arguments null, as everything he claims, cannot possibly coexist.)

People like Gob believe the govt should pay the bill. But studies have shown that when they do, they ration it. Such as in europe, Oz, canada etc. If the issue boils down to WHO should pay for it, it ceases to be a moral issue and becomes one of responsibility.

Fortunately for Gob, he lives in a nation that wont give him a bill of rights, but it will absolve him of responsibility for his life needs. Nice work if you can get it. I prefer this way. And apparently, so do most other people as evidenced by their tendency to COME. HERE. AND. LIVE.

[Gob]

So having embarrassed himself by not realising that "productivity" when referring to medical research means "producing new drugs/treatments/procedures", and that Europe leads the US in it, and claiming cures for cancer are only available in the US Quadiot again tries to divert attention.

first it is suggested the US should limit the amount of diagnostic equipment since other countries don’t[sic] have as much (and this stuff costs money) and instead we should institute wellness programs - which the US has ad nauseum for FREE - because it will make us eat healthier?

No one suggest that, that is what we call a "lie."

Did Gob address the fact that heart disease victims live longer in the US than anywhere else? no.

I never denied they do, as no one was debating that point.

Did Gob address the fact that cancer victims live longer in the US than anywhere else? no.

I never denied they do, as no one was debating that point

Did he address the fact the the[sic] US has a slightly lower life expectancy? somewhat - he blamed it on the medical system, even when questioned, instead of recognizing the facts that our people much younger than the average (44 and under) tend to die from things not related to disease or medical issues.

Well if you do introduce strawmen, you should be prepared to be called on them.

Why it fell upon my shoulders to point these facts out is bewildering.

Only you would be so stupid enough to think that your lies on the subject would not be seen through.

Oh wait, no its not, its another one of those simplistic 'the USA is so bad because...' posts he makes a half dozen times a day.

That's funny, the only Xenophobic posts here seem to come from the moron who makes statements like;

To wit I reply: 'On behalf of our nation, stay away'

The issue in the US (wont speak for the minds of our 'stralians) is not lack of health care - everyone has it and at limits unheard of in other countries. Even people without insurance. Hence: The issue is the COST. The us spends far more per capita than any other nation. As was also strangely pointed out by Gob. (which again makes his entire circle of arguments null, as everything he claims, cannot possibly coexist.)

Yes, I made that point. Well spotted, then some fuckwitted moron called Quadiot came up with a whole bunch of strawmen arguments about anything other than that point. God, you're so fucking stupid it defies belief!

People like Gob believe the govt should pay the bill. But studies have shown that when they do, they ration it. Such as in europe[sic], Oz, canada[sic] etc. If the issue boils down to WHO should pay for it, it ceases to be a moral issue and becomes one of responsibility.

Let’s see now, the US government, and hence the US tax payer, foots a larger bill per capita, and funds less treatment for its citizens than all other first world countries, and the Quaddiot thinks we've got it wrong? How fucking dumb is he?

Fortunately for Gob, he lives in a nation that wont give him a bill of rights, but it will absolve him of responsibility for his life needs. Nice work if you can get it. I prefer this way. And apparently, so do most other people as evidenced by their tendency to COME. HERE. AND. LIVE.

Quaddiot needs his government to give him a bill of rights so he can have feeling of security, poor soul...

[oldr_n_wsr]

As I said before, a large majority of people in the USA do have health insurance, most health insurance plans do cover regular checkups. The only difference is who pays for it (employer mostly and employe)e and how much. Yes, we in the USA do pay higher than other countries and it is open for debate who has the better and faster care. I know I nor my wife nor others who have had major medical problem wait to get treated, nor have they had to declare bancruptsy after getting that care. But nor do I deny those that have had those problems.
Seems people do need to read their policy a little more closely to determine the correct coverage for their situation. I know when my wife was pregnant and even today (as my daughter is still on my policy), I paid extra to get the "out of network" coverage that might have been needed. My son was "smaller" than any of his peers while growing up and I wanted the extra caverage that might have been needed. It was more out of my paycheck, but extra coverage for anything (home, car, business) always is.

Many companies have "opted in" to the healthy lifestyle mantra and promote excersize and living healthy and subsidize gym memberships and sponsor healthy activities of thier employees. Many USA citizens do not opt in to these initiatives especially the young'uns in the work force. I know I did not "opt in" to any kind of healthy initiatives for the first 40-something years of my life. All I needed was access and coverage for my ER visits for the occasional broken bone or stitching of a gash. Then again, I did need the services of ob-gyns and others for my wife, but that was covered.

Again, you can lead a horse to water........

[dgs49]

For the kinds of diseases and injuries over which medical care can have a significant effect (cancer, heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, liver disease), there is no place better in the world for treatment than the U.S. No better outcomes.

Other countries have healthier lifestyles and to some extent healthier populations, but when you get sick, there is no better place to be than the U.S.

We Americans tend to do things that result in medical problems and occasionally an early death. We eat too much, sit around too much, and don't even do minimal forms of exercise. People in the lower economic echelons tend to have children when they are too young, and don't take appropriate precautions when pregnant. A lot of us still smoke (I never have). These all make for bad numbers, but they have nothing to do with the quality of our healthcare system. Indeed, you can see some heroic medical efforts to save premature babies born to Medicaid recipients in our inner cities. It's a good thing I'm not Emperor of the U.S.

Although there are some circumstances where we have to wait a long time for a first visit to a particular specialist, this is an anomaly. If you just want to see a specialist, there is usually no wait at all. If you are sick or in urgent need of care, there is basically no wait.

There is minimal wait for elective surgeries.

The vast majority of the population is covered by comprehensive health insurance, and those who are not covered are not turned away when they need treatment.

The biggest problem with the American medical system is NOT a lack or unavailability of treatment, it is a lack of restraint on the part of providers, particularly when the patient has good health insurance. My uncle is now in Mercy Hospital in Pittsburgh. He is 84 years old and not feeling well. The reason he is not feeling well is because he is 84 years old, had a stroke ten years ago and has been living in a bed and wheelchair ever since. There is absolutely nothing wrong with him, other than a need for some attention.

He will depart the hospital tomorrow with a six-figure invoice trailing down his back. His out-of-pocket cost will be essentially zero, as he is retired from a City of Pittsburgh job, and the city can afford it (Ha, ha). They have done a score of diagnostic tests and procedures on him, all concluding that he is "normal" for him, and in no danger of anything. Would this happen in England? In Canada?

I injured my knee a few weeks ago playing tennis, and thought yesterday that I ought to do something about it. I called the local sports medicine clinic and got an appointment with their knee guy this morning. I'm having an MRI on Thursday morning - which will confirm his diagnosis of a lateral meniscus tear. If I were not going on vacation on 8/19, I am certain that the surgery would be complete before the end of the month. My total out of pocket might be a couple hundred dollars. Maybe less.

Would this happen in England? Canada? Germany?

There are those who will seek out any opportunity, cite any available statistic, to bad-mouth the United States.

Many of such people post (prolifically) on this BBS.

Written flatulence.

[Liberty1]

There are those who will seek out any opportunity, cite any available statistic, to bad-mouth the United States.

Many of such people post (prolifically) on this BBS.

And some live in the White House

[Scooter]

For the kinds of diseases and injuries over which medical care can have a significant effect (cancer, heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, liver disease), there is no place better in the world for treatment than the U.S. No better outcomes.

If you have the means to pay for it. Otherwise you die.

Other countries have healthier lifestyles and to some extent healthier populations, but when you get sick, there is no better place to be than the U.S.

If you have the means to pay for it. Otherwise you die.

We Americans tend to do things that result in medical problems and occasionally an early death.

Like not getting treatment because you can't afford it:

51% of U.S. adults surveyed did not visit a doctor, get a needed test, or fill a prescription within the past two years because of cost. No other country came close to that percentage.

link

Over ONE HALF of Americans are foregoing necessary medical care BECAUSE THEY CAN"T AFFORD IT, and somehow that means Americans are getting the best health care in the world? How high would that number have to be before you acknowledge there to be a problem? 60%? 75%? 99.99999%?

Although there are some circumstances where we have to wait a long time for a first visit to a particular specialist, this is an anomaly. If you just want to see a specialist, there is usually no wait at all.

Hmmm.

The Commonwealth study was one of very few to compare wait times in the U.S. to other nations, but several other surveys have compared the difficulty in getting to see a specialist in different regions in the U.S., and found that some cities perform very poorly on that score. For example, a 2004 survey by medical recruitment firm Merritt Hawkins & Assoc. looked at wait times for appointments with four different specialists in 15 metropolitan areas. The researchers found that average waits for a heart checkup with a cardiologist can range from 37 days in Boston to nine days in Seattle, while patients with a knee injury who want to see an orthopedic surgeon can wait an average of 43 days in Los Angeles, or eight days in Atlanta.

In the UCSF study published last year, the researchers set out to determine how long it would take to get an appointment in 12 cities to examine a face mole that had changed color, a common warning sign of skin cancer. They found a range of mean wait times according to geography, from 20 days in Little Rock to 73 days in Boston. The researchers pointed out that the wait in rural areas, where dermatologists are scarcer, are likely much longer.

No wait times, eh? And once again, those are averages, meaning that a significant number are waiting substantially longer.

There is minimal wait for elective surgeries.

This much is true:

the U.S. had shorter wait times than every country except Germany when it came to getting an appointment with a specialist for nonemergency elective surgery

Of course, the reason for this is rarely stated: that elective surgeries in areas such as orthopedics have huge profit margins which hospitals churn out assembly line fashion in order to rake in the bucks. Once again, money takes precedence over medical priority.

The vast majority of the population is covered by comprehensive health insurance,...

The vast majority of the population is covered by insurance, yes. Comprehensive? Would half of all bankruptcies be attributable to unmanageable health care costs if that were true?

...and those who are not covered are not turned away when they need treatment.

Once again, complete bullshit. If you are brought into an ER bleeding out, you will be treated to save your life in the immediate term. If, however, they discover you have a tumor or a heart condition which is treatable but which you can't afford, you will be patted on the head and sent home to die once your wounds are stitched up.

My uncle is now in Mercy Hospital in Pittsburgh. He is 84 years old and not feeling well. The reason he is not feeling well is because he is 84 years old, had a stroke ten years ago and has been living in a bed and wheelchair ever since. There is absolutely nothing wrong with him, other than a need for some attention.

He will depart the hospital tomorrow with a six-figure invoice trailing down his back. His out-of-pocket cost will be essentially zero, as he is retired from a City of Pittsburgh job, and the city can afford it (Ha, ha). They have done a score of diagnostic tests and procedures on him, all concluding that he is "normal" for him, and in no danger of anything. Would this happen in England? In Canada?

Yes. We don't toss our elderly out into the street without being sure they are ok. Unlike what has been known to happen at some U.S. hospitals, when patients have been plopped into a cab because they weren't insured and had conditions which were complex to treat, only to end up in another hospital's ER or found dead in the street.

I injured my knee a few weeks ago playing tennis, and thought yesterday that I ought to do something about it. I called the local sports medicine clinic and got an appointment with their knee guy this morning. I'm having an MRI on Thursday morning - which will confirm his diagnosis of a lateral meniscus tear. If I were not going on vacation on 8/19, I am certain that the surgery would be complete before the end of the month. My total out of pocket might be a couple hundred dollars. Maybe less.

Would this happen in England? Canada? Germany?

It certainly wouldn't happen in Canada.

The part about being out of pocket a couple of hundred dollars, that is.