Continuing on with this discussion of health care, I think it should boggle every American that, while many consider the USA the greatest nation on the face of the planet, we lag so far behind in most categories having to do with health (according to the World Health Organization's 2008 report). In far too many categories, we aren't number one. We aren't in the top 5. We don't crack the top 10 or top 20. Heck, we're not even in the top 25!
In terms of life expectancy (78 years for the US), there are 30 nations ahead of us, some by as much as 5 years! I realize that some folks may think 5 years is statistically insignificant, but I beg to differ. If someone told you that you had a choice between dying today or living for another 5 years, I think most people would opt for the latter and, in this light, 5 years would seem mighty significant!
The US neonatal mortality rate is also bettered by 30 other nations and our maternal mortality rate is bettered by 32 other countries. About the ONLY category in which the US reaches as high as #2 -- We were edged out by the Marshall Islands. Drats! -- is in total expenditures on health as a percentage of GDP. In other words, we seem to spend far more money than the rest of the world, but we're not receiving much of a bang for the buck.
According to The Commonwealth Fund,
The previously cited article from The Commonwealth Fund backs up this contention. In a lot of cases, this supposition is true. My response to this is: So what? It seems rather obvious that waiting a bit longer isn't showing an impact on a nation's overall health indicators as at least 30 of these nations far outshine us. Yes, their citizens may have to wait a bit longer than us, but they are still healthier and enjoy a higher life expectancy.
In the final analysis, the US is lagging far behind almost every other industrialized democracy when it comes to health and health care. Shouldn't that tell us something? Shouldn't that inform us that, maybe, our health care system ain't as good as we like to think?
In terms of life expectancy (78 years for the US), there are 30 nations ahead of us, some by as much as 5 years! I realize that some folks may think 5 years is statistically insignificant, but I beg to differ. If someone told you that you had a choice between dying today or living for another 5 years, I think most people would opt for the latter and, in this light, 5 years would seem mighty significant!
The US neonatal mortality rate is also bettered by 30 other nations and our maternal mortality rate is bettered by 32 other countries. About the ONLY category in which the US reaches as high as #2 -- We were edged out by the Marshall Islands. Drats! -- is in total expenditures on health as a percentage of GDP. In other words, we seem to spend far more money than the rest of the world, but we're not receiving much of a bang for the buck.
According to The Commonwealth Fund,
Despite having the most costly health system in the world, the United States consistently under performs on most dimensions of performance, relative to other countries. This report—an update to two earlier editions—includes data from surveys of patients, as well as information from primary care physicians about their medical practices and views of their countries' health systems. Compared with five other nations — Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom — the U.S. health care system ranks last or next-to-last on five dimensions of a high performance health system: quality, access, efficiency, equity, and healthy lives. The U.S. is the only country in the study without universal health insurance coverage, partly accounting for its poor performance on access, equity, and health outcomes. The inclusion of physician survey data also shows the U.S. lagging in adoption of information technology and use of nurses to improve care coordination for the chronically ill.Despite a mountain of damning statistics and studies, far too many still believe that the US system is the best and that other national systems only pale in comparison. One complaint that gets trotted out each time Congress even pretends to look at the issue is patient wait times. Opponents of universal coverage declare that citizens who live in countries with a type of universal coverage often have to wait longer than their US counterparts for critical treatment and operations.
The previously cited article from The Commonwealth Fund backs up this contention. In a lot of cases, this supposition is true. My response to this is: So what? It seems rather obvious that waiting a bit longer isn't showing an impact on a nation's overall health indicators as at least 30 of these nations far outshine us. Yes, their citizens may have to wait a bit longer than us, but they are still healthier and enjoy a higher life expectancy.
In the final analysis, the US is lagging far behind almost every other industrialized democracy when it comes to health and health care. Shouldn't that tell us something? Shouldn't that inform us that, maybe, our health care system ain't as good as we like to think?
Hi R T
ReplyDeleteExcellent overview of the mess we are in regaarding health care. Did I tell you that my M S medication cost $4500.00 a month, 4 prefilled syringes cost FOUR THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS A MONTH!!!!!!!
WTF??????
AND ALSO, thank you for your wise and well stated comments on my latest post.
Love to you and Della
Gail
peace.....
WTF indeed!!! That's simply downright vulgar. It might be one thing if some argued that you had engaged in risky behavior and your MS was a direct result of it, but MS is not the result of anyone's behavior. So why the hell should you be penalized for something you have absolutely no control over?
ReplyDeleteA much better system would allow you to get your pre-filled syringes each month for nothing or, at worst, a minimal cost. That's the humane approach.
R T -
ReplyDeleteI do have insurance though - phew. although it was 'touch and go' around pre-existing conditions etc. so I pay a co-pay of $40.00 a month. I still cannot fathom how the medication cost $4500.00, regardless. Ya know?
love ya
Let’s face it: the US health system is not run for the benefit of the patient or the doctors, it is a for-profit system run for the benefit of the insurance companies and the pharmaceutical companies and their shareholders. Health Management Organizations were only created as another layer of profit for investors at the insurance level. What do insurance companies provide besides profit for their investors as gamblers betting on people’s health? Pharmaceutical companies now spend more money on marketing (free samples, conferences, etc) than they do on research. The Obama health care plan is a drastic change, but it's needed badly. And whoever opposes this plan is obviously a part of the profit making giant that the current system is. A system where profit is more important than the patient life will never achieve better stats and numbers than any other working system.
ReplyDeleteTake care, Lorne