Wyden's vision for health care reform begins with making sure everyone is covered

[DeadPoolX 9]

I'm not entirely against a single-payer system (i.e. socialized health care), but my concern is the government handling itself. I know private insurers can be real bastards, but there's at least an incentive -- no matter how small -- to compete with one another. If the government has sole control, it can do whatever it wants and people are forced to comply. In addition, the government seems to mess up whatever it touches.

In Canada, health care is left up to the provincial government. In other words, what health care covers in Alberta may differ from British Columbia or Ontario. While that's better than giving all control to the federal government, it still rests health care in the hands of government. Canada's problem is that health care is underfunded. It's not unusual to see money ripped away from health care for other pursuits, not the least of which is building new sports stadiums. Apparently, hockey is more important than treating illness.

Even with provincial health care, it only covers doctor visits and essential medical issues. What's considered "essential" is up to the province. Medication isn't covered under provincial health care, either. So if the government deems your procedure as "non-essential" or you need drugs, you'll have to acquire private insurance or pay for it out of your own pocket.

If health care was left up to the states -- instead of Washington DC -- I could maybe see some merit in it. However, I have trouble believing that moving to socialized health care would relieve the U.S. of its health care issues. Canada has had a single-payer system for a long time (with higher taxation) and even so, it still manages to screw it up where funding is concerned.

I know some Canadians will disagree with me. That's fine. No health care system is perfect and anyone who believes such -- whether they're American, Canadian, French, German or whoever -- is simply delusional.

[mawilson 2,133]

I seriously cannot wrap my hands across the notion that universal care is going to save the country money.

It won't. It will be a net cost.

All countries that have universal coverage for all its citizens, spend less than what we spend per capita. Those facts are hard to ignore.

Other countries spend less because

1) they pay their hospitals and doctors less than we do

2) their doctors don't use state-of-the-art equipment (even MRI machines) as much as we do

3) their healthcare is generally crappier, hence it costs less

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Socialized Medicine on Display

Latest news in the exciting saga of Britain's socialized medicine is that a nurse, Margaret Haywood, aged 58, has been struck off for the crime of exposing neglect and mistreatment of elderly patients at the Royal Sussex Hospital on a television program. It was found that because of this: "It would not be in the public interest for her to be able to practise as a nurse."

Linda Read, chair of the panel responsible, said: "Although the conditions on the ward were dreadful, it was not necessary to breach confidentiality to seek to improve them by the method chosen."

After a decade of New Labour, much of Britain's hospital system is coming to defy description. Not even Cancer Ward, Solzhenitsyn's harrowing description of hospital treatment in Stalinist Russia, had quite such refinements of socialized medicine. And woe betide would-be whistle-blowers!

In March 2008, Lord Mancroft, a Tory peer who has held responsible positions in the public health area, claimed it was a miracle he was still alive after a stay in a filthy British public hospital with uncollected infected waste in the wards and dirty, drunken and sluttish nurses.

Instead of investigating Lord Mancroft's allegations, the leaders of both major parties turned on him. Tory leader David Cameron said he was "very cross" that Lord Mancroft had spoken like this. He had, he said, "told him in no uncertain terms" that his views did not represent the Tory Party, and that he "should think more carefully before opening his mouth."

The Labour government was of course more than happy to attack Lord Mancroft also. Health minister Ann Keen said: "I am appalled at his comments and I'm sure the rest of the British public is too. The entire country holds nurses in the highest regard. People will want to know what action David Cameron is taking on this matter or if David Cameron shares his views."

The hospital's chief executive, James Scott, said: "I believe it is wrong to make allegations like this without putting any evidence before us or giving us the opportunity to respond."

He continued with righteous indignation that "I hope Lord Mancroft will now reflect on the damage he has done to the general reputation and moral standing of the nursing profession and the impact this has had on the 1,600 nursing staff at the RUH who are extremely distressed and upset at his comments."

Dr. Peter Carter, chief executive of the Royal College of Nursing, accused him of making "sweeping generalisations about nurses and sexist insults about the behaviour of British women."

It had already been established that filthy conditions in British hospitals have been the cause of many deaths. The Daily Telegraph wrote in 2007 that in the hospitals run by the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells National Health Service Trust staff told patients suffering from diarrhea to "go in their beds." Between 2004 and 2006, 90 patients there died from Clostridium difficile, and the disease was a factor in the death of a further 241: "Were it not for bad nursing, bad medical attention and bad administration, none of these patients need have died. Indeed, they would not have contracted C. diff. at all unless they had gone into hospital. So, after 150 years' advance of education, technology, prosperity and science, we have lost what Florence Nightingale taught [about cleanliness]."

Recently, at Eastbourne General hospital in East Sussex, another 13 patients died after an outbreak of Clostridium diff. Several wards have now been closed for cleaning. Others have died in the East Sussex Hospital. "Hospital care for the elderly has been given a very low priority," says Sarah Harman, a solicitor representing families of several victims.

A senior Conservative MP, Nigel Evans, demanded an inquiry into "shocking" failures of care after his elderly mother died of C. diff. He demanded to know why she had not been tested sooner and he criticized doctors for the off-hand way in which they told the family she had died.

"First of all this infection can and should be prevented, and secondly it can be treated if it's diagnosed in time," he said. "Neither of these things happened. There are thousands of families up and down the country grieving for the same reason."

Mr. Evans's sister said: "We were told to leave the room and a doctor came and asked us whether we'd discussed resuscitation. When we looked shocked, he said: 'I can tell you weren't expecting this.' It was only then that we realized she was dying." She said she had found patches of grime in the corners of bathrooms at the hospital as well as under beds. "The whole thing was like a horror film."

Deaths involving C. diff. in England and Wales doubled from 3,757 in 2005 to 8,324 in 2007, the vast majority of them elderly people, before a decline last year. It appears that while restaurants are prosecuted for unsanitary conditions, hospitals are not.

(more)

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/04/20/s...icine-on-modern

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Socialized Medicine on Display

Latest news in the exciting saga of Britain's socialized medicine is that a nurse, Margaret Haywood, aged 58, has been struck off for the crime of exposing neglect and mistreatment of elderly patients at the Royal Sussex Hospital on a television program. It was found that because of this: "It would not be in the public interest for her to be able to practise as a nurse."

Linda Read, chair of the panel responsible, said: "Although the conditions on the ward were dreadful, it was not necessary to breach confidentiality to seek to improve them by the method chosen."

After a decade of New Labour, much of Britain's hospital system is coming to defy description. Not even Cancer Ward, Solzhenitsyn's harrowing description of hospital treatment in Stalinist Russia, had quite such refinements of socialized medicine. And woe betide would-be whistle-blowers!

In March 2008, Lord Mancroft, a Tory peer who has held responsible positions in the public health area, claimed it was a miracle he was still alive after a stay in a filthy British public hospital with uncollected infected waste in the wards and dirty, drunken and sluttish nurses.

Instead of investigating Lord Mancroft's allegations, the leaders of both major parties turned on him. Tory leader David Cameron said he was "very cross" that Lord Mancroft had spoken like this. He had, he said, "told him in no uncertain terms" that his views did not represent the Tory Party, and that he "should think more carefully before opening his mouth."

The Labour government was of course more than happy to attack Lord Mancroft also. Health minister Ann Keen said: "I am appalled at his comments and I'm sure the rest of the British public is too. The entire country holds nurses in the highest regard. People will want to know what action David Cameron is taking on this matter or if David Cameron shares his views."

The hospital's chief executive, James Scott, said: "I believe it is wrong to make allegations like this without putting any evidence before us or giving us the opportunity to respond."

He continued with righteous indignation that "I hope Lord Mancroft will now reflect on the damage he has done to the general reputation and moral standing of the nursing profession and the impact this has had on the 1,600 nursing staff at the RUH who are extremely distressed and upset at his comments."

Dr. Peter Carter, chief executive of the Royal College of Nursing, accused him of making "sweeping generalisations about nurses and sexist insults about the behaviour of British women."

It had already been established that filthy conditions in British hospitals have been the cause of many deaths. The Daily Telegraph wrote in 2007 that in the hospitals run by the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells National Health Service Trust staff told patients suffering from diarrhea to "go in their beds." Between 2004 and 2006, 90 patients there died from Clostridium difficile, and the disease was a factor in the death of a further 241: "Were it not for bad nursing, bad medical attention and bad administration, none of these patients need have died. Indeed, they would not have contracted C. diff. at all unless they had gone into hospital. So, after 150 years' advance of education, technology, prosperity and science, we have lost what Florence Nightingale taught [about cleanliness]."

Recently, at Eastbourne General hospital in East Sussex, another 13 patients died after an outbreak of Clostridium diff. Several wards have now been closed for cleaning. Others have died in the East Sussex Hospital. "Hospital care for the elderly has been given a very low priority," says Sarah Harman, a solicitor representing families of several victims.

A senior Conservative MP, Nigel Evans, demanded an inquiry into "shocking" failures of care after his elderly mother died of C. diff. He demanded to know why she had not been tested sooner and he criticized doctors for the off-hand way in which they told the family she had died.

"First of all this infection can and should be prevented, and secondly it can be treated if it's diagnosed in time," he said. "Neither of these things happened. There are thousands of families up and down the country grieving for the same reason."

Mr. Evans's sister said: "We were told to leave the room and a doctor came and asked us whether we'd discussed resuscitation. When we looked shocked, he said: 'I can tell you weren't expecting this.' It was only then that we realized she was dying." She said she had found patches of grime in the corners of bathrooms at the hospital as well as under beds. "The whole thing was like a horror film."

Deaths involving C. diff. in England and Wales doubled from 3,757 in 2005 to 8,324 in 2007, the vast majority of them elderly people, before a decline last year. It appears that while restaurants are prosecuted for unsanitary conditions, hospitals are not.

(more)

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/04/20/s...icine-on-modern

I think all this proves is that if you want to - you can find horror stories to validate whatever you want to believe.

A relative of my wife's family (in this country) died after the surgeon who opened his chest for some reason or other was unable to finish the operation on his own, and the poor ####### was left in the OR with his lungs resting on his chest while they waited for another doctor.

Point is - all these things are terrible and should be addressed, and not be used for the purpose of propagandising the issue.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I seriously cannot wrap my hands across the notion that universal care is going to save the country money.

It won't. It will be a net cost.

All countries that have universal coverage for all its citizens, spend less than what we spend per capita. Those facts are hard to ignore.

Other countries spend less because

1) they pay their hospitals and doctors less than we do

2) their doctors don't use state-of-the-art equipment (even MRI machines) as much as we do

3) their healthcare is generally crappier, hence it costs less

All this may well be true - but it underscores the fundamental dodginess of the current system.

If you accept that people on middle incomes have been experiencing dramatic increases in the cost of living while their wages remain static - then it surely stands to reason that a health system that benefits the rich is failing the majority of people in this country.

We might well have the best equipment, doctors, treatments in the world - but if you can't afford them when you need them, there really isn't a lot of point.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I oppose cost as the primary focus. I believe cost should be secondary to quality.

In real world application, I don't see how you can separate the two. Even under our current system, private insurance companies have to way cost factors with the level of care. For example, if my doctor prescribes medicine that is not covered by my insurance, I have to pay for it. That's the reality of health care, no matter what system we have.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I oppose cost as the primary focus. I believe cost should be secondary to quality.

In real world application, I don't see how you can separate the two. Even under our current system, private insurance companies have to way cost factors with the level of care. For example, if my doctor prescribes medicine that is not covered by my insurance, I have to pay for it. That's the reality of health care, no matter what system we have.

In "socialized" systems - you have that option too... For those who are as rich as Croesus you can also purchase supplementary private insurance. Who knew.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I oppose cost as the primary focus. I believe cost should be secondary to quality.

In real world application, I don't see how you can separate the two. Even under our current system, private insurance companies have to way cost factors with the level of care. For example, if my doctor prescribes medicine that is not covered by my insurance, I have to pay for it. That's the reality of health care, no matter what system we have.

Funny, you never struck me as a defeatist.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Health outcomes often better in Canada than U.S.: review

The death and disease rates for patients in Canada are the same or lower than those for people with similar diagnoses treated in the United States — even though per capita health-care spending is higher south of the border, a study suggests.

The findings — from Canadian and U.S. researchers who crunched data from 38 studies — were published in the inaugural edition of Open Medicine. The online medical journal launched Wednesday in the aftermath of a rift last year between some editors and the publisher of the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

"In looking at patients in Canada with a specific diagnosis compared to Americans with the same diagnosis, in Canada patients had at least as good an outcome as their American counterparts — and in many situations, a better health outcome," said one of the 17 authors, Dr. P.J. Devereaux, a cardiologist and clinical epidemiologist at McMaster University in Hamilton.

"And that is important because in the United States, they're currently spending a little over $7,100 per individual on health care annually, whereas in Canada we're spending a little over $2,900 per individual annually," he said in a telephone interview from Brantford, Ont.

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/04/18/...-canada-us.html

Edited April 21, 2009 by Col. 'Bat' Guano

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

In "socialized" systems - you have that option too... For those who are as rich as Croesus you can also purchase supplementary private insurance. Who knew.

Private insurance was illegal in Quebec until about 2007. It's legal now but no one seems interested

Monday, March 30, 2009

More than two years after Quebec legalized private medical coverage for select surgeries, the insurance industry says it has not sold a single policy.

...

The provincial goverment was forced to allow private insurance for some surgery after a ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada.

The court ruled that the Quebec government could not prevent people from paying for private insurance for procedures covered under medicare if it is unable to provide timely access to health care.

As a result, the government ammended its health act to allow Quebecers to buy private insurance for three surgical procedures with the longest waiting lists: knee- and hip-replacement surgery, and cataract surgery.

Health outcomes often better in Canada than U.S.: review

And in the end, this is what matters - patient outcomes. Good post, Steven.

[Ban Hammer 13,364]

In March 2008, Lord Mancroft, a Tory peer who has held responsible positions in the public health area, claimed it was a miracle he was still alive after a stay in a filthy British public hospital with uncollected infected waste in the wards and dirty, drunken and sluttish nurses.

almaty, road trip!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There's no reason to outlaw private insurance - we have it in the UK for things like chiropodists, opthalmic surgery and dentistry.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I oppose cost as the primary focus. I believe cost should be secondary to quality.

In real world application, I don't see how you can separate the two. Even under our current system, private insurance companies have to way cost factors with the level of care. For example, if my doctor prescribes medicine that is not covered by my insurance, I have to pay for it. That's the reality of health care, no matter what system we have.

Funny, you never struck me as a defeatist.

What I'm saying is - you can demand quality healthcare while managing the costs. You manage those costs by insuring everyone, first and foremost.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

In March 2008, Lord Mancroft, a Tory peer who has held responsible positions in the public health area, claimed it was a miracle he was still alive after a stay in a filthy British public hospital with uncollected infected waste in the wards and dirty, drunken and sluttish nurses.

almaty, road trip!

Take a lifejacket.

You manage those costs by insuring everyone, first and foremost.

If you insure everyone but screw them on coverage, then that's not change we can believe in

[Ban Hammer 13,364]

In March 2008, Lord Mancroft, a Tory peer who has held responsible positions in the public health area, claimed it was a miracle he was still alive after a stay in a filthy British public hospital with uncollected infected waste in the wards and dirty, drunken and sluttish nurses.

almaty, road trip!

Take a lifejacket.

road trip - in a manner of speaking