Comments (27) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   motivemagus said, about 1 month ago

   Yep.

2. 

   fennec said, about 1 month ago

   And I just found out about the Medicare Advantage rip-off! From legislation passed in 1997 and 2003…costing us a bundle for less “advantage”. Part of the attempt to “privatize” Medicare…Arrrrghhh!

3. 

   scottfreitas said, about 1 month ago

   Only a child could be dumb enough to think “single-payer” aka “The Demoncrat Party in charge of every person’s life, health, and well-being” is actually a SOLUTION.

4. 

   believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

   fennec, I keep sayin’ !!

   but 2003 was especially egregious. Companies offered MediCare+Choice, singed folks up an then started dropping out of the market, claiming they couldn’t make a profit and making the govt the bad guy. (Unbelievable how that works when they have their hand in the public trough.) I was working as a reporter and in my area alone, ALL of the insurers offering Medicare+Choice dropped out of the market in a new short months in late 2001.

   This was repeated across the country, and, lo and behold, Medicare Advantage is created with compensation rates from 120 to 150 percent of medical costs of traditional Medicare.

   And some say govt is inefficient!

5. 

   donbeco said, about 1 month ago

   Single payer works in many countries it can work here. We need to put competent people into management not political hacks. Large corporations are political that’s one of reasons we have so many problems now.

6. 

   cdward said, about 1 month ago

   YES!

7. 

   cabrobst said, about 1 month ago

   Medicare for everyone who wants it.

8. 

   charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

   IS OVERSEAS CARE REALLY BETTER?

   “In the Sept. 2007 edition of Lancet Oncology, survival rates for Americans and Europeans were compared. For all cancers, 66% of American men and 64% of women survived for five years, while in Europe the figures are 47% and 55%. Again, 99% of men with prostate cancer in the US survived five years compared to 77% in Europe. For those with colon or rectal cancer, survival rates were 65% in the US and 56% in Europe. For breast cancer it was 90% for Americans and 79% for Europeans.

   Looked at from a different angle, mortality for breast cancer is 52% higher in Germany than in America and 88% higher in the United Kingdom. Compared to the US, prostate cancer mortality is 600% higher in the UK and 460% higher in Norway, while colon-rectal cancer deaths in both sexes of UK citizens are 40% higher. In Canada, breast cancer mortality is only 9% higher than in the US, but prostate cancer is 184% and colon cancer 10% higher.”

   From A CLOSER LOOK at the Healthcare Situation
   By J. C. Willke, MD

   http://www.lifeissues.org/ Search keyword: a closer look at the healthcare

9. 

   Tigger said, about 1 month ago

   Kid, It aint that simple.

   If the Government takes over, watch how many people will be deined needed Health Care because the Government does not think your life is worth saving.

   Why do Countiries with ‘Free’ Health Care come here for Treatment? (Oh, when they come here,It’s no longer Free, they pay out their backside)

10. 

    believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

    I do support single payor, but we’re not going to get it. We’ll be fortunate if we get a public option.

    I was just reading an article that insurance cos. are exempt from anti-trust laws. Didn’t know that, but explains a lot. Time to get rid of that little free pass for the insurance lobby.

11. 

    deadheadzan said, about 1 month ago

    That is the word, Anti-trust exemption. I saw Barney Frank on tv 2 days ago and there is legislation to make insurance industry subject to the usual anti-trust laws. This has been a long time coming and I hope it arrives soon.

12. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    And in case anyone confuses charlie555’s numbers for real statistics, all this came from a right-wing fundamentalist religious group that “did their own research” as opposed to looking at published stats, and found things that no one else in the world ever managed to find.

13. 

    fennec said, about 1 month ago

    WOULD YOU RIGHTY DINGBATS kindly look at the Wikipedia entry for Medicare and note the deviations from the “government-run” single-payer of the early days with what is there now? BCS has been pointing this out for ages, and we still have the same drivel from ANandy who hasn’t a clue. ARRRGH!!!

14. 

    ahab said, about 1 month ago

    Tigger, many Americans are going overseas to have knee and hip replacements because the are too expensive here. Many are hobbling around and making do without surgery.

15. 

    donbeco said, about 1 month ago

    Crossing borders for health care happens but many are US citizens saving money and/or accessing procedures not available in the U.S. Through research they are not endangering their lives but bettering them. Meanwhile compare basic mortality rates for men, women and infants in the U.S. to the industrialized & medically socialized countries… we can’t be the best just by saying we are.

16. 

    believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

    Inanity, your information on Medicare is erroneous.

17. 

    4uk4ata said, about 1 month ago

    @ ANandy:

    Medicare is hard up for money, but one should look at the details. First, Medicare services the elderly - the MOST expensive segment of the population in terms of healthcare. This segment, as far as I know, has been increasing steadily in numbers, so costs grow higher still. Of course taking care of my 88-year old grandpa will most likely cost more than taking care of my 23-year old sister.

    One interesting thing - the percentage of administrative expenses of Medicare tends to be much lower than in the private companies that service the same population, in fact often several TIMES lower. This means Medicare, however it costs, is more efficient than its private analogs.

18. 

    charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

    Dr Canuck

    If you are going to accuse people of lying, it would be nice to provide proof. I’ll be the first to recant if my source is proven wrong.

19. 

    believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

    When Ross Perot ran in 1992, he said some things that made perfect sense, including that Medicare should be available on a sliding scale based upon income. He pointed out correctly that why should he and his wife, with all their wealth, pay the same medicare premium as people on limited incomes. Eventually, I think we’re going to have do that and it will cause an uproar I’m sure.

20. 

    charlie555 said, about 1 month ago

    ^It makes perfect sense for those who want government to take care of health care, but not for those who believe it belongs in the private sector.

    It’s about socialism.

21. 

    fennec said, about 1 month ago

    charlie555, a more recent study. Please note the conclusions about methodology of previous studies compared with this one.

    Lancet Oncol. 2008 Aug;9(8):730-56. Epub 2008 Jul 17.Click here to read Links
    Cancer survival in five continents: a worldwide population-based study (CONCORD).

    Cancer Research UK Cancer Survival Group, Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. michel.coleman@lshtm.ac.uk

    BACKGROUND: Cancer survival varies widely between countries. The CONCORD study provides survival estimates for 1.9 million adults (aged 15-99 years) diagnosed with a first, primary, invasive cancer of the breast (women), colon, rectum, or prostate during 1990-94 and followed up to 1999, by use of individual tumour records from 101 population-based cancer registries in 31 countries on five continents. This is, to our knowledge, the first worldwide analysis of cancer survival, with standard quality-control procedures and identical analytic methods for all datasets.
    METHODS: To compensate for wide international differences in general population (background) mortality by age, sex, country, region, calendar period, and (in the USA) ethnic origin, we estimated relative survival, the ratio of survival noted in the patients with cancer, and the survival that would have been expected had they been subject only to the background mortality rates. 2800 life tables were constructed. Survival estimates were also adjusted for differences in the age structure of populations of patients with cancer.

    FINDINGS: Global variation in cancer survival was very wide. 5-year relative survival for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer was generally higher in North America, Australia, Japan, and northern, western, and southern Europe, and lower in Algeria, Brazil, and eastern Europe. CONCORD has provided the first opportunity to estimate cancer survival in 11 states in USA covered by the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR), and the study covers 42% of the US population, four-fold more than previously available. Cancer survival in black men and women was systematically and substantially lower than in white men and women in all 16 states and six metropolitan areas included. Relative survival for all ethnicities combined was 2-4% lower in states covered by NPCR than in areas covered by the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program. Age-standardised relative survival by use of the appropriate race-specific and state-specific life tables was up to 2% lower for breast cancer and up to 5% lower for prostate cancer than with the census-derived national life tables used by the SEER Program. These differences in population coverage and analytical method have both contributed to the survival deficit noted between Europe and the USA, from which only SEER data have been available until now.
    INTERPRETATION: Until now, direct comparisons of cancer survival between high-income and low-income countries have not generally been available. The information provided here might therefore be a useful stimulus for change. The findings should eventually facilitate joint assessment of international trends in incidence, survival, and mortality as indicators of cancer control.

22. 

    comYics said, about 1 month ago

    Your “single payor’ comment fits your picture. lol

23. 

    believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

    Your thinking process fits your avatar (?)

24. 

    comYics said, about 1 month ago

    Its not my avatar.

25. 

    believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

    It’s not a thinking process either.

26. 

    comYics said, about 1 month ago

    Actually I can picture a monkey typing the way you did on that comment. Monkeyman.

27. 

    believecommonsense said, about 1 month ago

    oh you’re so clever, I just can’t think of a comeback.